Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
District lobbyist warns of significant K–12 budget pressure as lawmakers pick revenue forecast
Loading...
Summary
Amy Atwood briefed the board on two competing state revenue forecasts and the risk of K–12 cuts; she highlighted Senate Bill 135, a proposal to send a TABOR-related ballot measure that would dedicate up to $200 million annually to K–12 for 10 years if voters approve.
Amy Atwood, a contract lobbyist for Mesa County Valley School District No. 51, told the board March 24 that the legislature is operating with two revenue forecasts and that differences between the governor’s office and legislative council staff have created uncertainty for K–12 budgeting.
Atwood said the office of state planning and budget’s forecast leaves a projected budget gap of roughly $750–$800 million, while legislative council staff projected a larger gap near $1.4 billion. The joint budget committee chose to base its work on the more generous forecast, Atwood said, which reduces the depth of immediate cuts but leaves uncertainty later in the fiscal cycle.
"It looks like . . . the gap that needs to be filled is 750 to 800,000,000, which is what we were planning on," Atwood said. She explained that differences between forecasts stem from assumptions about reserves and revenue growth.
Atwood alerted the board to Senate Bill 135, short-titled State Public K–12 Education Funding, introduced to propose a ballot measure allowing the state to retain and spend excess TABOR refunds; up to $200 million annually would be allocated to K–12 for a 10‑year period if the measure reaches the ballot and voters approve it. Atwood cautioned the board that the bill would need a two‑thirds vote to place the measure on the ballot and observed that the legislature’s partisan make-up makes the required supermajority uncertain.
Board members asked technical questions about forecasting, TABOR mechanics and potential program cuts. Atwood said the joint budget committee expects to introduce the budget the following week and that by mid–April the district should have a better idea of state allocations for K–12. She also noted proposals under consideration that could reduce funding for homeschool counts, TREP and P‑TECH programs, and other line items under negotiation.
The board did not take a formal position on SB 135 during the meeting. Members discussed whether a district-level advocacy position or a future board discussion about taking a position should be scheduled.
Next procedural steps: Atwood said staff will continue to track budget developments and the district will monitor language in the school finance act and the joint budget committee’s proposal as it advances through the legislature.
