[{"_1":2,"_98":-5,"_99":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":55,"_73":55},"mediaId",7320229,"mediaKeyId","2157074-a48ffa24b56d75d44faa2f1cb0c40efc","parentId",2157074,"title","Committee Seeks Clarification on Student Information System Request, Emphasizes Local Control and Reporting","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",624000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2157074-a48ffa24b56d75d44faa2f1cb0c40efc&start=624&end=624","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2157074-a48ffa24b56d75d44faa2f1cb0c40efc/thumbnail_624000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/7320229/Utah/Committee-Seeks-Clarification-on-Student-Information-System-Request-Emphasizes-Local-Control-and-Reporting","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/7320229-9f0d37d1d2d618e8c31b631ff78f98da/orig.mp4?Expires=1770447637&Signature=BAhlcYdXCxPF6RekOrmm2Dems8CxsQtItZQmdVLt2d7Y9TbTYr7INIIzmXHtiQPy1Ef3B7yvawcOqToEOWftwoUqxqQaeLI~C~w6PjFDzbswHlpu2q1EG3eb9ZzJBax95CCL1MsukoGTb-6JdjuNWls1eEHyXgVd~9bfM4UTOfIQRnBPIidLMWPZqDJyVbsmVIgj72J87X~EiEtANBCmchThj9MGn7zz19wKreW03swgl-fbxWcGfM00yUer7P4gq7ASV-MnvYkLEIY2A-mO5S-qx3aNfoP0Xc5agtCjjFqPsjYXL0SPW~pJS2J~iit9vz6hn2vcYRyVXWPM3vE5AQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-01-28T00:00:00Z","article","Members of the Utah Legislature Education Subcommittee questioned a funding request for student information system (SIS) reporting and sought clearer cost and savings estimates.

Representative White asked whether the request concerned the student information system; a staff member responded, “It is.” Representatives and board members then disputed whether the dollar figure under consideration was $38,000,000 or $35,000,000. Member Cindy Davis said, referring to a prior board motion, that “Member Davis made a motion to reduce that to $35,000,000 over 5 years. The board, I believe, voted unanimously, to do that to make it just an easy $7,000,000 per year as as we work to, get this figured out.” A later comment in the meeting noted the earlier claim of unanimity “may not have been unanimous,” and that would be clarified later.

Committee members pressed staff on how the proposal would affect local districts. A staff speaker said the goal is interoperability rather than a required single system: “we're trying to find that middle ground of saying, let's work together. Let's get our systems to work together so that we can get accurate information where it needs to be.” Members repeatedly emphasized preserving local control over SIS choices while improving reporting.

Representative Thompson, citing concerns from his local districts about administrative and reporting costs, asked for a concrete follow‑up: he requested the subcommittee be given a report estimating the administrative-cost reductions the investment would likely produce, rather than “a hope or a hypothetical.” The staff response was conciliatory: “we'll do what we can,” and Committee leadership agreed to have the requester temporarily step aside and return later with recommendations.

Where matters stand: the presentation discussed an SIS reporting request with at least two different dollar figures referenced in the meeting transcript (38,000,000 and 35,000,000). A prior motion to set the amount at $35,000,000 over five years (characterized in the meeting as $7,000,000 per year) was described by a participant as having been voted on, but later the speaker indicated the record on unanimity would be checked.

The committee did not take a final appropriations vote on the SIS proposal during this session; members directed staff to provide more concrete estimates tying the one‑time expense to likely ongoing administrative savings and to preserve local control in implementation.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Public Education Appropriations Subcommittee - January 28, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Lawmakers questioned whether a requested appropriation is for a student information system, debated whether the ask is $38 million or $35 million, and pressed staff for a follow‑up showing likely administrative-cost reductions while preserving local control.","taxTitle","2025 Utah Legislature, Utah Legislature, Utah Legislative Branch, Utah","taxId",78171,"location","Utah","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_46":80,"_48":81,"_50":82,"_52":83,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":84,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":85,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":55,"_73":55},7320225,"Legislators Hear Results from Student‑Teacher Stipend Pilot; One‑Time $12M Request Proposed, National Board Funding Also Discussed",261,209000,470000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2157074-a48ffa24b56d75d44faa2f1cb0c40efc&start=209&end=470","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2157074-a48ffa24b56d75d44faa2f1cb0c40efc/thumbnail_209000.jpg","/articles/7320225/Utah/Legislators-Hear-Results-from-StudentTeacher-Stipend-Pilot-OneTime-12M-Request-Proposed-National-Board-Funding-Also-Discussed","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/7320225-68d38d60fb1bf92ec5551f4def3ae72c/orig.mp4?Expires=1770447637&Signature=NCxlQ0vP~qUA~9BoUdBBEU70tQ~T4SemVe~j1D7nzTms-D6~6viCEs2WQctF0Shq80KxkgDz015kI7iZp-7cRpREANKGIlKkcwHdYv13SluB6URYaAf6iROlYC38Fbzrmqg~ETkW4tQgi5ZNnL3GHJFSSK8hpAmEPHnIGlOEYchDfSEClNxJeeym1IemUH9k34r8tgkDqIkLhOCLsnIqNzE2TzKrS0ESiCs1mMg6bhTUsqcF4sRIMnC1lX3Rx3rm4gA~Cqs~jTTRrDRDrecqlqz0IjDrLGsZ55dPGxoCgDU5j1jvMcehWU~bsUJp0HlPEjNXmswx7cGvz1noXLKYFw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Peterson presented an appropriation request tied to stipends for student teachers and summarized early results from a pilot created by prior legislation.

Peterson said last year’s legislation (House Bill 221) created the stipend program and that this year’s request—filed under an appropriation for the Future Educators grant program amendments (HB 204, as announced in the presentation)—is a one‑time ask of $12,000,000 to fund the remaining two years of a three‑year pilot. She described the stipend as a $6,000 payment “that teachers can get the semester that they do full time student teaching.” Peterson told the committee, “As of 2 weeks ago, over 1300 teachers had received the stipend for this school year and they range all across the state.” She said the request is set up as a one‑time expenditure drawn from stabilization funds for the next two years and that the program will be evaluated after year three to measure effectiveness and retention.

Sylvia Reed, associate dean at Utah State University’s College of Education and Human Services, testified about student experiences: students reported they “did not have to work, which increased their well‑being and allowed them to pay rent, buy groceries, pay for fuel for their commute, and pay for childcare.” Reed read student statements that the stipend “sent a tangible message that the state values my service” and allowed some student teachers to quit second jobs and better prepare lessons during evenings.

Policy rationale and retention data: Peterson cited retention concerns, saying there is “about a 50% chance that student teachers or teachers going into the profession will not be teaching in 5 years.” She said stronger induction and mentorship increase retention, citing an estimate that retention could rise to roughly 65% for those who receive better student‑teaching experiences. The deans will track recipients to see whether the stipend yields measurable retention gains.

National Board Certification: Member Cindy Davis also raised a separate, ongoing funding request for national board certification supports the Utah State Board of Education (USBE) has sought. Davis summarized program details as presented to the committee: she said becoming nationally board certified “costs a teacher $2,000” and “takes 2 years.” She said nationally board certified teachers show student achievement gains and that national participation is about 2% while “in our state we have point 1.” She noted the legislature has already begun providing contributions tied to certification and that teachers receive a $1,000 bonus; in some Title I settings the bonus was described in the discussion as larger. Committee members asked whether national board training could conflict with state law; Davis said state law would take precedence and that teachers are trained on Utah law. Senator Johnson and others urged the committee to look further into national board content around equity obligations.

Questions and next steps: Representative Thompson asked for concrete data tying the stipend to reduced administrative/reporting costs (this question was part of a related SIS discussion). Representative Auxier, Representative Miller and others asked about how national board certification compares with a master's degree and about salary‑schedule impacts; Davis said pay and schedule effects vary by local education agency. Peterson said she will provide data from the deans and that the pilot will offer richer retention information after year three.

No appropriation vote occurred during the session; presenters concluded and committee members closed the item for further follow-up.","Representative Peterson and higher-education officials described a student‑teacher stipend pilot created by last year's legislation; they requested $12 million as a one‑time appropriation to fund the final two years of a three‑year pilot and said the state will evaluate retention impacts. The subcommittee also heard a separate request for ongoing—\"",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_46":92,"_48":93,"_50":94,"_52":95,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":96,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":97,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":55,"_73":55},7320221,"Committee Weighs $5M School‑Lunch Request as Members Raise Food‑Waste and Targeting Concerns",139,1247000,1386000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2157074-a48ffa24b56d75d44faa2f1cb0c40efc&start=1247&end=1386","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2157074-a48ffa24b56d75d44faa2f1cb0c40efc/thumbnail_1247000.jpg","/articles/7320221/Utah/Committee-Weighs-5M-SchoolLunch-Request-as-Members-Raise-FoodWaste-and-Targeting-Concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/7320221-ec0b3490c9f0bb8398dbe9c90cd6df67/orig.mp4?Expires=1770447637&Signature=HT6NxL6MupjoKXU9rPEvdVJrMWNQJ1-zGFJY29cs3dmthC7P5-q54sJbInUp0c~Da4lcB16UKZhTa8h3NAeOm3RfZAvev-G1iF9mKkJBCT~i7uDTiTzvd2eUJSTT50Iou8nTpCd9huQnol4IydoxQokfUjqzZI51PGex4WHBh~FNWQp6Cm~OYx1Vn8Vy8F5ic~rpVhl2n2EAibUzGEFwPyjYXBa-BnVJwVa9SxyIu~ST4vaJI76jeGluFBkARaBNdYswvJATZPQ3l~t77wP-stlzp6MVG10mOvXpUq0RMWDc~IrD1GV0EHQNS3mCg2ZHbbkpjgCo7HB~YEATuzS0Og__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Education Subcommittee discussed a request to expand state support for school lunch programs and reduce meal debt.

Presenter Member Cindy Davis described a request of “5,000,000 ongoing and a 55001 time” (the transcript rendered the one‑time figure ambiguously). She said the request is intended to reduce food insecurity and to address meal debt that accumulates when families cannot pay the reduced-price portion of school meals. “We have…parents saying, 'Can you please help?'” Davis said, adding that some local board members privately subsidize student lunches when districts cannot.

Representative McPherson raised food‑waste research, referencing a USDA 2019 study he said found “upwards of about 40% of school lunches were wasted.” He suggested that if a large share of additional funding were being thrown away, that would argue for careful targeting or complementary operational changes. Davis and other presenters agreed that food waste occurs, but cautioned the committee that available information does not identify which students discard food. “We cannot assume that that food waste is by students on reduced or free lunch,” Davis said.

Senator Johnson suggested a targeted grant program to allow schools to evaluate need on a case‑by‑case basis rather than a blanket ongoing appropriation. Representative Locks (as transcribed) and others pressed for operational changes that could reduce waste, including ensuring students have sufficient seat time to eat. One legislator cited the American Academy of Pediatrics guidance that students need about 20 minutes seated to consume a meal; a speaker said many students have less time because of line delays and scheduling.

Representative Moss described visiting schools and finding meals “appealing,” and encouraged investigation into causes of waste beyond food quality—stigma attached to receiving free or reduced lunch was mentioned by several members as a possible factor.

No appropriation vote was taken at the meeting. Committee members raised follow‑up questions about whether the request should be ongoing or more narrowly targeted, and whether operational changes (for example, scheduling to allow 20 minutes of seated eating time) should accompany any funding increase.","Presenters asked for $5,000,000 ongoing to reduce food insecurity and a one‑time amount noted in the presentation as \"55001 time\" (not specified). Lawmakers debated food‑waste research, stigma, and whether funds should be targeted or paired with operational changes such as increased lunch seat time.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee Seeks Clarification on Student Information System Request, Emphasizes Local Control and Reporting

Legislators Hear Results from Student‑Teacher Stipend Pilot; One‑Time $12M Request Proposed, National Board Funding Also Discussed

Committee Weighs $5M School‑Lunch Request as Members Raise Food‑Waste and Targeting Concerns