A bill for an act relating to school districts that share the operational functions of a school resource officer, and including applicability provisions.(See HF 515.)
Summary
HF 122 would revise Iowa’s school funding formula for districts that share certain operational functions with a political subdivision or another school district. The bill specifically focuses on shared school resource officer services, increasing the supplementary weighting used to calculate state aid for that shared function from two pupils to four pupils, while leaving the existing weighting structure for other shared functions in place. It also preserves the broader framework that already rewards districts for sharing administrative and student-support services such as curriculum directors, social workers, special education directors, mental health professionals, college and career transition counselors, and school counselors.
The bill applies to school budget years beginning on or after July 1, 2025, and it clarifies that the shared-service arrangement does not need to be newly created to qualify for the weighting. In practical terms, this would increase state funding eligibility for districts that jointly employ or share a school resource officer with a city, county, or other political subdivision, with the stated policy goal of redirecting more resources to student programming and expanding student opportunities.
Impact
HF 122 would amend Iowa Code section 257.11 governing supplementary weighting for shared operational functions in school districts. The main legal change is the increase in the weighting assigned to a shared school resource officer from two pupils to four pupils, which would raise the amount of state aid generated by that shared arrangement. The bill would take effect for school budget years beginning July 1, 2025, and would apply to existing as well as new sharing arrangements. It would affect school districts, political subdivisions that partner with districts, and the state school funding formula by increasing the fiscal incentive to share SRO services.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was not controversial in committee: the House Committee on Economic Growth and Technology reported it unanimously, 22-0. There are no committee transcripts provided, so there is no recorded debate to indicate broader support or opposition. The bill was later withdrawn, which means it did not advance to enactment in the form introduced.
Contention
The bill’s likely point of contention is fiscal policy: increasing the supplementary weighting for school resource officers would cost the state more in school aid, and lawmakers may differ on whether SRO sharing should be prioritized over other school needs. Another possible issue is policy preference around school policing and the role of school resource officers in schools, though no direct objections are documented in the provided materials. The bill also sits within a broader shared-services funding structure, so any debate could involve whether SROs should receive a larger weighting than other shared operational functions.
Similar To
A bill for an act relating to school districts that share the operational functions of a school resource officer, and including applicability provisions.(Formerly HF 122.)
A bill for an act relating to school districts that share the operational functions of a school resource officer, and including applicability provisions.(Formerly HF 122.)
A bill for an act relating to school districts that share the operational functions of a school resource officer, and including applicability provisions.
A bill for an act relating to school districts that share the operational functions of a school resource officer, and including applicability provisions.(Formerly HF 122.)
A bill for an act relating to school districts that share the operational functions of a school resource officer, and including applicability provisions.