On Friday, lawmakers added at least $30 million to the school finance recalibration bill that will revamp government spending on public education if it passes this winter.
The bill started this week at $1.8 billion, a slight increase over current public ed spending levels, but well below the evidence-based model state consultants were recommending. That evidence-based model called for nearly $1.9 billion, and even Friday’s amendments won’t see the bill reach that price tag.
In addition to the bump in spending, the recalibration bill would cut hundreds of teaching positions across the state, increase class sizes, change the way enrollment is calculated for state funding distributions and push all school districts onto the state’s health insurance plan.
Sen. Tim Salazar, who co-chairs the Legislature’s Select Committee on School Finance Recalibration, said it represented a compromise between lawmakers looking to limit government spending and the school teachers, officials and advocates who have weighed in repeatedly with testimony and criticism.
“We had a lot of individual discussions. There was a lot of give and take. There was compromise,” Salazar said. “The battle for getting this across the finish line has only begun, but I think this committee can say that we have heard from the public [and] we are integrating those comments into this bill.”
The committee crafted its public ed funding proposal across several meetings last year. This week, they considered, amended and endorsed a bill draft that will now go before the full Legislature in February.
Teacher pay, teacher positions
The new funding model would set the average teacher salary at a little more than $70,000. School districts have regularly paid salaries at or near this level, but have previously been reimbursed by the state for much less, meaning they have had to pull dollars from other distributions to cover teacher pay.
At previous recalibration meetings, teachers have testified about working summer jobs to make ends meet, while public education advocates have called for a starting salary, not an average salary, of $70,000.
Testifying Friday, Albany County School District No. 1 Chief Financial Officer Trystin Green said the committee wasn’t getting “thank yous” for the salary bump because of the other changes included in the bill that will impact teachers and the schools they work in.
Green said changes to class size calculations, specifically, could cost her district dozens of positions.
“Those teachers aren't coming up here saying thank you for the 11% or whatever the raise ends up being, because they know, more than likely, they're going to lose some friends, they're going to have to work harder,” she said.
As originally drafted, the bill would have cut more than 600 core teaching positions across the state and upped the target class size for all grade levels, leaving teachers better paid but also doing more.
The committee amended language about both class sizes and minimum teacher counts before advancing the bill.
Current law puts target class sizes at:
- 16 students per class in grades K-5, and 21 students per class in middle and high school.
The initial bill draft upped class sizes, providing for targets of:
- 15 students per class in grades K-3, and 25 students per class in grades 4 and up.
An amendment from Sen. Wendy Schuler (R-Evanston) changed these to targets of:
- 16 students per class in grades K-3, 22 students per class in grades 4-5, and 25 students per class in middle and high school.
Currently, the state funds a certain number of teachers based on those target class sizes. So Schuler’s amendment reducing the class sizes also means more funding for more teachers.
“One of the areas I’ve probably beat the drum on the most this year is making sure we take care of our teachers not only with salary but also with class size,” Schuler said. “I think it will be an estimate of probably a statewide impact of about $10 million [increase]. It will be an increase of about 96 teachers.”
The state’s current funding model also sets a minimum number of teachers that small schools are reimbursed for.
An oversight in the original draft would have cratered the minimum number of teachers that small K-12 schools are entitled to. Even the consultants who originally proposed the new formula recommended the lawmakers amend it.
So a separate amendment from Speaker of the House Rep. Chip Neiman (R-Hulett) rectified the oversight. This would have the effect, Neiman estimated, of adding about $20.6 million and 198 teachers back into the bill.
Together, Schuler’s and Neiman’s amendments added back almost 300 teaching positions the original draft bill would have cut, at an estimated price tag of about $30 million.
At the direction of the committee, a fiscal note, incorporating these and the other 11 amendments lawmakers approved Friday, will be made available next week. A reworked version of the recalibration bill itself will be published sometime before the legislative session starts on Feb. 9.
Measuring enrollment, funding counselors
The recalibration bill would also alter how Wyoming calculates enrollment to decide distributions.
Currently, the state uses either last year’s enrollment or the average of the last three years, whichever is greater, to determine how much a school should receive. This has been a benefit to the districts themselves, especially those in small towns, which can see fluctuations year to year as families move into or out of the district.
The state’s consultants recommended keeping this in their evidence-based model, but the recalibration bill directs the state to consider only last year’s enrollment.
Responding to concerns from parents and school administrators that this change could result in steep “cliffs” from year to year for smaller schools, Rep. Ocean Andrew (R-Laramie) asked to “smooth” any fluctuations by limiting the change in the school’s calculated enrollment to five percent from the previous year. The amendment passed unanimously without discussion.
Hanging over the recalibration process for much of the last year was a court order directing the state to better fund counselors, nurses, school resources officers, school nutrition and more. That order is now being appealed before the Wyoming Supreme Court and has been temporarily halted.
While the Legislature still has a constitutional obligation to adequately fund public education, the specific details about how to do that outlined in the court order can be kicked to next year — and that’s what the committee intends to do.
Also included in the recalibration bill is a provision extending the committee’s own work into the 2026 interim that will follow this winter’s session.
“We’re deferring the additional topics until next interim, because we just don't want to put a Band-Aid on it,” Co-Chair Rep. Scott Heiner (R-Green River) said. “We just don't have a silver bullet to fix everything within one fell swoop, and it's going to take time to hear all the testimony, and do what's best for our state and for the children and state of Wyoming.”
But commenters urged the committee to take action on at least some of those topics within the scheduled session, stressing that mental health counselors, nurses and school nutrition are “not luxuries.”
Green, the Albany County business manager, challenged whether the topic was really too big for this session.
“I think another thing that’s a little bit hard for us to see is how we can pass a gun law in three months and allow guns in schools for kids, but we need 24 months to determine if we need extra counselors or SROs [school resource officers] or extra support staff to address our mental health issues,” she said.
Senate President Bo Biteman (R-Ranchester) brought an amendment to fund mental health counselors at the rate recommended by the evidence-based model and based on the court ruling. That would fund about one per school, starting in the 2027-2028 school year, unless the Legislature makes a different decision before then.
“We are going to study this in the interim because it is a big lift for us,” Biteman said. “If we hear something in our interim studies that dictates or mandates that we make a change from this course, we can do so.”
