Single Hearing Today.  Only one education-related hearing on the docket today and the House Education Funding Committee heard two bills.  The first of these--HF 292 (Frazier)--would allow school districts to renew expiring referendum levies provided there is no increase in the levy amount or the length of the levy beyond the amount and term originally approved by the voters.  While not spelled out on the SEE platform this year, SEE has supported this proposal in the past and I was more than happy to make the organization's stance known to the committee members.  Three witnesses testified in favor of the bill:  Robbinsdale Board Member John Vento, Mounds View Superintendent Chris Lennox, and Owatonna Superintendent (and MASA President) Jeff Elstad.  There was the usual pushback on the bill from committee members who believe that taxpayers should have a direct say on renewal of these levies.  It was pointed out by all the witnesses that the community does receive input from the school district during the truth-in-taxation process.  I would add to that with the following point.  All levies--even voter-approved levies--are discretionary to the extent the board wants to levy the entire amount for which they are authorized.  While districts have not under-levied to an appreciable extent in recent years, it wasn't that rare in the 1990s when many districts did not levy the entire amount they were allowed under the now-defunct special education levy.  I can also think of examples of more recent vintage where districts did not levy the full amount of their referendum or local option revenue allowances.  It's rare, but it is also prevalent enough to show that school boards are cognizant of the desires in their community and if they have to adjust their levies downward, they often do.

The other bill--HF 683 (Olson)--is a local bill for the Duluth school district that would adjust the special education base on a one-time basis.  The formula glitch due to charter school billing caused Duluth's special education base to erode, causing a considerable increase in the cross-subsidy.  The base adjustment would mitigate that issue.