School finance amendments-4.
In one sentence
Not clearly identified in the stored source.
No additional limitations are listed.
Official record
Bill Summary Bill No.: HB0140 Effective : Multiple Dates LSO No.: 18LSO-0476 Enrolled Act No.: HEA No. 0068 Chapter No.: 137 Prime Sponsor: Northrup Catch Title: School finance amendments-4. Subject: Amendments to the school finance system Summary/Major Elements: This act would make assorted amendments to provisions relating to school finance. This act would require the funding model’s average daily membership (ADM) decision to be based at the district level, not the school level, using the greater of the three year ADM average or prior year ADM for all schools. Resulting funding reductions are phased-in over three years , by providing back two-thirds (2/3) of the reduction in FY 2019 and one-third of the reduction in FY 2020 This act requires s chool districts to participate in Department of Workforce Services programs that reduce school district worke r's compensation premiums. The act also provides that the worker's compensation extra-hazardous employment designation only applies to special education assistants, teachers, and related service providers when the employee is working directly with special education students. This act prohibits s chool districts from entering into a new lease for a school bus, though school districts would receive 100% reimbursement for a school bus purchase in the year following the purchase, rather than 20% reimbursement per year for five years, as provided under current law. Additionally, school districts could purchase a bus if the state or federal government would partially or fully fund the purchase under the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act or other similar program. This act limits statewide special education funding for reimbursements in the school years 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 to the special education reimbursements made in the 2018-2019 school year. The act appropriat e s two million dollars over this limit for out of district special education placement costs incurred by school districts and provides rulemaking authority to the Wyoming Department of Education to establish rules for distributions of these funds. This act provides school districts shall be resourced for groundskeeper positions for district-level sites in an amount equal to ten percent of the school-level sites . Resulting funding reductions are phased-in over three years , by providing back two-thirds of the reduction in FY 2019 and one-third of the reduction in FY 2020 This act repeals within the education resource block grant funding model funding for interim and formative assessments. This act requires the Wyoming Department of Education to review statutes and rules relating to special education and transportation and recommend changes to increase fiscal efficiencies. The act also requires the Wyoming Department of Education to establish special education staffing guidelines by January 1, 2019. This act provides that for school year 2018-2019 and each school year thereafter until the next recalibration, no school district with fewer than 243 students shall receive less than 97.5% of i ts foundation program amount fro m the previous year, not including expenses reimbursed pursuant to law. Comments: This act amends a major program. Th is act requires a report. The portion of th is act requiring the Wyoming Department of Education to review student transportation and special education efficiencies and promulgate special education staffing guidelines is effective immediately. The remain d e r of th is act is effective July 1, 2018. The above summary is not an official publication of the Wyoming Legislature and is not an official statement of legislative intent. While the Legislative Service Office endeavored to provide accurate information in this summary, it should not be relied upon as a comprehensive abstract of the bill .
Public statements
Last checked Aug 8, 8:09 PM
Why they voted this way
The speaker argues that the bill's language regarding special education was damaged during revisions and contains a phrasing error in an appropriation clause for out-of-district placements, which prevents access to $2 million.
S18
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports Amendment No. 1 because it serves as a necessary cleanup amendment provided by staff.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports Amendment No. 2 because the data demonstrates that actual education funding continues to increase despite changes to the model, countering claims of cuts.
R · S30
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because the data indicates that education is being treated well with steady funding increases, making it a responsible approach.
D · S09
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because eliminating the phase-in would cause immediate, dramatic financial damage to smaller districts that cannot adjust quickly enough.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes Division I because he prefers to leave corporate filing fees in the general fund so future legislators can decide how best to utilize those funds.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because experts have recommended using a comparable wage index for years to achieve justice by preventing school districts from being overpaid or underpaid based on their location.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because Wyoming's small population prevents the collection of reliable wage data without revealing private business information, making the approach unworkable despite its potential benefits for his district.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because removing the hedonic wage index and cost of living adjustments would disrupt a formula that has worked well for years despite existing disparities.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because it incorrectly compares educator wages to all community wages, including high-paying mining jobs with different training requirements, which would unfairly shift funding from large districts like Cheyenne and Natrona to Campbell County.
R · H34
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because small schools are vulnerable to being devastated by minor enrollment fluctuations, a phenomenon known as the cliff effect.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment to cap superintendent salaries at the funding model level because current payments exceed recommendations and this change is revenue neutral while allowing funds to be redirected toward student achievement.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because they believe penalizing efficient superintendents during a time of school cuts is inappropriate and constitutes unnecessary micromanagement.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment as a moderate approach to save $12 million by adjusting student-teacher ratios slightly while still remaining below recommended models.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because they believe schools must pay higher salaries to recruit teachers for small towns and that cutting funding will lead to devastating school closures.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because they believe sufficient funding is required to recruit quality teachers for small towns that are far from amenities, rather than focusing on class size numbers.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment based on personal experience as a trustee where raising salaries was necessary to fill open positions and attract needed staff in small towns.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because they believe students in block schedules are unfairly penalized for missing a single class, and that the current system forces difficult choices on families.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because they believe a lower attendance threshold is fairer for families and students trying to balance religious education or college classes with high school.
H31
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because they believe schools should not receive full funding for students who are out of school working or attending seminary without supervision.
R · H08
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the bill because placing funds in statute guarantees a revenue stream for education, avoiding annual budget battles to find money.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because he believes consolidating revenue sources into the general fund makes the funding process more transparent to the public.
R · H09
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because he believes it codifies a short-term fix as long-term policy before knowing if the approach works, making future corrections difficult.
R · H37
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the bill because it diversifies revenue streams for schools and increases public awareness of where funding comes from, despite transparency concerns.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because he believes returning funds to the general fund will lead them being spent on non-core government functions rather than schools.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker opposes the amendment because it creates a long-term dedicated funding stream for schools, which he believes is difficult to reverse later. He prefers keeping these revenue decisions in the annual budget process.
H36
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because it creates a safety net to cover expensive out-of-district placements for students with special needs.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because it provides necessary funding for high-need students requiring out-of-district placements.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the amendment because it provides additional funds for special education needs that helps districts meet maintenance of effort requirements better than previous measures.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the bill because it implements strategic cuts to school finance that evidence indicates are acceptable.
Wyoming roll calls
14 roll calls
Official activity
Changes
23 stored
Failed 2nd reading by Clem
Failed 2nd reading by Freeman
Failed 2nd reading by Clem
Adopted 2nd reading by Larsen
Adopted 2nd reading by Madden
Adopted 2nd reading by Harshman
Failed 2nd reading by Clem
Corrected, Corrected, Adopted 2nd reading by Lindholm
Failed 2nd reading by Stith
Failed 2nd reading by Winters
Failed 2nd reading by Clem
Failed 3rd reading by Zwonitzer
Divided 3rd reading by Bovee
Corrected, Adopted 3rd reading by Bovee
Corrected, Failed 3rd reading by Bovee
H Adopted, S Adopted Conference Committee
Adopted Standing Committee by HEducation
Adopted 2nd reading by Coe
Adopted 3rd reading by Coe
Withdrawn 3rd reading by Kinskey
Withdrawn Committee of the Whole by Coe
Adopted Standing Committee by SEducation
Withdrawn Standing Committee by SAppropriations