H.B. 521 Public Education Economic Stabilization Restricted Account Amendments

What this bill does

H.B. 521 would move about $350 million from the public education economic stabilization account into a permanent public education trust or endowment. The stabilization account would stay available for recessions, and the trust funds could later support ongoing education spending.

Plain-English summary written by AI from the official description. Check the official text below.

Your legislators on this bill

Enter your address to see what your own representative and senator did on this bill.

Quotes come from the official recordings' automatic captions, which can mishear words. Speakers and summaries are identified by AI and can be wrong. Use the ▶ links to check the recording.

Take action

This bill's session is over, but your legislators still want to hear from you. Ideas that died often come back next year.

Enter your address to get your legislators' contact information and a ready-to-send message about this bill.

Every vote

• 10 yes, 0 no, 5 absentHouse Education Committee: vote to change the bill · Feb 24, 2026Who voted how
• 10 yes, 0 no, 5 absentHouse Education Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 24, 2026Who voted how
• 66 yes, 1 no, 8 absentFinal House vote · Feb 27, 2026Who voted how

Hearings and debates

• Feb 24, 2026 House Education Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (29 turns)

  1. Chair Defay (presiding)2:27:54

     to Representative Faye, and we'll move to House Bill 5 21.

  2. Unknown speaker2:27:59speaker not certain

     Good question. He didn't even remember always time. Thank you.

  3. Rep. R. Neil Walter2:28:34

     All right. To our good chairman. All right. Thank you. Uh, members of the committee, um, I passed out a little handout that, uh, uh, provides some data, uh, related to, uh, the house Bill 5 21, public education, economic stabilization, restricted account amendments. Um, we created the economic, the public education economic stabilization account so that if there were a recession like there was in 2008, and that recession, um, created a dip in education, uh, funds, um, that there would be a short term way to backfill those funds, uh, that are committed to ongoing expenses, uh, until we work through the economic cycle. Um, that process, uh, has worked, uh, very effectively at, uh, building the stabilization feature. But as many of you know, that, uh, the stabilization account has grown, uh, tremendously and, uh, uh, between, uh, 450 and $500 million, it's grown tremendously. Now, the thing that is not surprising is as those uh, dollars have, uh, accumulated in the stabilization account, the public education appropriations, RFA requests have grown proportionally. And so what's happening is we have a giant, uh, pool of one-time money that we historically didn't have. And that one time money has, it has to be spent on one time things per the requirements in the stabilization account. And so, uh, the, the one time requests have, uh, have grown in, in the, uh, public education, uh, uh, appropriation subcommittee has, uh, gone from just for example, in 2019 and 28 RFA requests to the 2026, uh, 2026 year 40 request, uh, RFA requests. Um, so what my bill proposes to do is to think about how we can, uh, preserve those dollars for, uh, public education. They're already committed. They're, they are required to be spent on public education. So it, it seeks to contemplate how we can, uh, retain those public education dollars, um, and essentially convert them into one time, excuse me, convert the one-time spending into ongoing funds over time, um, and retain the, uh, economic stabilization account feature. So, um, uh, the ability to accommodate during recession, um, while simultaneously, uh, not, while not putting any kind of a, uh, limit on the number of requests that could be run or the, the, uh, the things that a legislator could ask for, but actually to limit the amount of dollars that are available for distribution in the public education economic stabilization account. So the way that that mechanism works is each year, uh, that there was not a need for the stabilization feature. Uh, this bill proposes sweeping, um, a, a proposed dollar amount. In this case, it's a very large amount, 350 million into a, a permanent trust or an endowment for public education. Those funds would be education funds. If you want to think about what that looks like, it looks something like, uh, what we have with Sit Foe, where Sit l the School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration, um, uh, through the management of lands that were set, that were set aside at statehood, uh, generates revenues for the school for, uh, a number of beneficiaries, the largest of which is the schools. And that money sits in the sit for account. Right now we're to 4 billion and we're adding about $120 million a year. And, uh, that allows for a, um, uh, that allows for funds that in this particular, in that particular case, go through the community councils to the schools. I'm proposing setting up a parallel, uh, uh, fund or endowment trust fund or endowment, which the idea would be we could grow it much faster, frankly, than they're growing sit, sit fo because our contributions could be larger and, uh, we can, we can over time, it will take time, but, but we'll catch up to sit fo very quickly. And then we can convert those funds from one time expenditures to ongoing expenditures. Uh, uh, for this, the State of Utah, one of the comments that I've made that I think is, it's, it's something that I do believe is that in the long run, not in the short run, but in the long run, we can both have, um, long run structural support for education spending, and at the same time we can have, uh, lower income tax rates. I think those are not mutually exclusive if we do this the right way. So, uh, that's the summary of the proposal, and I'm open to questions from the committee.

  4. Chair Defay (presiding)2:33:24

     Thank you to the committee for questions. Representative Peck.

  5. Rep. Nicholeen P. Peck2:33:29

     Thank you, Madam Vice chair. I have two questions. The first question is, as this money goes back into education funding that's needed in the programs, is it going to be distributed with a particular priority or just generally as needed charter schools, public schools, just generally what's needed or is it going to be like earmarked in a certain way? That's my first question. And then I have one other follow up. So this bill doesn't contemplate, uh, how those funds will be spent, only that they have to be spent on education. Okay. At this point. Thank you. And then the second question I have, is the treasurer going to be overseeing these funds? I understand that would be his constitutional authority, but is that the Plan? Yes.

  6. Rep. R. Neil Walter2:34:18

     So I've spoken to the treasurer, uh, and we've discussed the proposal and, um, they feel very comfortable in their ability to, uh, manage the funds.

  7. Rep. Nicholeen P. Peck2:34:26

     Okay. Thank you.

  8. Chair Defay (presiding)2:34:29speaker not certain

     All right. Thank you Representative Miller. Thank you.

  9. Unknown speaker2:34:33speaker not certain

     Um, this is an, an intriguing idea. Um, couple questions. So the economic stabilization is there in case there is a rainy day. So if we're, if we're putting money into this account, is there still enough left for a rainy day or, or do you anticipate that this account grows enough that it will now produce enough money that we don't need a rainy day account?

  10. Rep. R. Neil Walter2:35:00

      That's a great question. If we have an event, so a recession that would, that would trigger the provisions that authorize us to use the public education stabilization account funds, you wouldn't sweep those funds would be available for the stabilization purpose. So, uh, that was one of the, that was one of the things that was really important, uh, to me in trying to figure out how to work through this, is if we have a need for the original purpose of the stabilization account, it's still there. It functions exactly in that capacity, and we haven't depleted those resources. Um, it's only in the case where we are not using the stabilization feature that the funds would be swept. And if you think about typical economic cycles, um, historically cycles were, you know, five to seven years and they were more frequent. If you go back 30 or 40 or 50 years, they were, they were more frequent. Um, as of late, our cycles have been longer. Um, the, uh, last expansion we went from the, the trough was in 2008. We Uintah 2020, so it was a 12 year cycle before we went into the COVID recession. We're now six years since the bottom of that recession. And, um, so the economic cycles are a little bit longer, which means we have longer periods of time where we don't need the stabilization, but, but when we need the stabilization feature, it's still there.

  11. Unknown speaker2:36:22speaker not certain

      Um, and then, so, and then it starts in 2028. And what was the reason for starting it that year? There's already a substantial process for, uh, commitments, uh, for the next fiscal year. And so we didn't want to try and, uh, intervene or get involved with the processes that have been involved in public education appropriations right now. So, um, we're in 2026, but uh, we're in the 20, we're actually budgeting for the 2027 year. So the 2027 year is already set. So the 2028 year would be the first year that is uncommitted. So that would be the next legislative session. Yes.

  12. Chair Defay (presiding)2:37:00speaker not certain

      Okay. Thank you. Great Questions. Thank you.

  13. Chair Defay (presiding)2:37:03speaker not certain

      Alright, representative er Thank

  14. Unknown speaker2:37:06speaker not certain

      You Madam Vice chair. Um, this is a really, really in ingenious thing to do with the stabilization money. I've long thought that we have overtaxed to be collecting this much every single year and, and spending it on the pet projects that we see coming through. I, if we are going to be taxing and taking money. Um, yeah, I like the idea of saving this towards education and, and building, um, something that will last rather than just a bunch of one time favorite expenses. So, um, thanks for your work on this. Um, it's, it's really, really well done. Thank you.

  15. Chair Defay (presiding)2:37:47

      Alright, thank you. Any other questions? All right. We will go to the public for comment. Is anyone here from the public to comment? Do we have anyone online? Alright, then we will go back to the committee for action.

  16. Rep. Nicholeen P. Peck2:38:05

      There's a first sub. Okay. Representative Peck, I move that we adopt the first sub, first sub to HB 5 21. That motion is in order. Would you like to speak to that? Uh, no. I think we're good. Um, to the bill sponsor.

  17. Rep. R. Neil Walter2:38:27

      Thank you. Uh, I'll just mention the first sub clarifies that, um, the treasurer has the authorization to manage the fund, uh, along with a number of other exemptions to the Money Management Act. So it doesn't have to all just go into like, short term, uh, treasuries or other low risk investments. It allows them to invest like a, like for example, CIFO is a best example to think about. So that's what the first sub does. It's a clarification that was requested by the treasurer's office.

  18. Chair Defay (presiding)2:38:55

      Okay. Thank you. And to the committee for comment and back to the maker of the motion Waive. All right, we'll do a voice vote. All those in favor of adopting first sub HB 5 21. Please say a Aye Aye. I ruled out passes unanimously. Alright.

  19. Rep. Nicholeen P. Peck2:39:16

      Representative Peck, would you like to keep going? Yes, I would love to. I move that we recommend h we favorably recommend HB 5 21 as substituted.

  20. Chair Defay (presiding)2:39:27

      That motion is in order. Would you like to speak to that?

  21. Unknown speaker2:39:30speaker not certain

      Yeah, like has already been mentioned by other speakers. I really re I really appreciate the creativity of investment and just getting the most out of our money. This is a great move for the public. I like it.

  22. Chair Defay (presiding)2:39:43

      Great. And to the sponsor of the bill.

  23. Rep. R. Neil Walter2:39:45

      Thank you. Appreciate the committee's time. Uh, this was something that, uh, really did come out of, um, trying to figure out how to solve what is a, I think it's a fortunate problem that we have. Um, we've got some resources, um, we wanna make sure they get put to good use. And, um, and so anyway, I appreciate the committee's time and support.

  24. Chair Defay (presiding)2:40:04

      Right. And to the committee for any comments to the motion,

  25. Unknown speaker2:40:10speaker not certain

      We, I would just like to say that I appreciate the sponsor of the bill and Mr. Chairman, I wish I had a financial brain like you do. Um, and I think that we are fortunate and I, I hope that as we look back at this moment, it seems like it's happening so quickly, but I think it's probably something really wise that we're doing. Um, and so I just appreciate you having the, the foresight to do it. And, and I hope that it works out. So thank you. Thank You. I hope it works out also.

  26. Chair Defay (presiding)2:40:40

      All right. Back to the make motion, waive all, all those in favor? Uh, favorably recommending favor. H HB 5 21 sub one please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Alright, I rule that that passes unanimously. Good job. I

  27. Rep. R. Neil Walter2:40:58

      Move that we adjourn.

  28. Chair Defay (presiding)2:41:01

      That motion is in order. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. We are adjourned.

  29. Unknown speaker2:41:08speaker not certain

      There you go. Like that's a pretty.

• Feb 27, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (12 turns)

  1. Speaker (presiding)30:01

     Per substitute House Bill 5 21. Public Education, economic stabilization, restricted account amendments by Representative Walter. This bill was served in education with the voter 10 0 5 Representative Walter.

  2. Rep. R. Neil Walter30:20

     Thank you Mr. Speaker. I, uh, had to take just a moment and wake up there. So, uh, let me speak to HB 5 21 Public Education Stabilization account. Um, this is a, uh, uh, policy that, uh, I've been thinking about for a little while. And as many of you're aware, uh, six or seven years ago, we created the Public Education stabilization account. What that the, the whole purpose of the public education stabilization account was to, uh, deal with a recessionary period so that we didn't have to have a impact on our public education. So, uh, in 2008, when we went through the Great Recession, it took a minute, but, uh, tax receipts, uh, income tax receipts, uh, slowed down tremendously. And in that, uh, process, it created a really difficult, uh, adjustment, uh, for public education. And so the Public Education stabilization account was created nearly a decade later to try and plan for and prepare for. So there'd be a safety, uh, release valve so that when we had another recession, which we will, uh, that there was a, uh, structural feature in state finance to allow us to, um, make sure that we could continue to fund public education. Uh, uh, through that process, uh, the public education stabilization accounts grown, uh, now to approximately $500 million of one-time money. It's one time money that has to be spent every year. And frankly, the of appropriations, um, uh, the Request for Appropriations process has grown proportionally. So in 2020, there were eight RFA requests in public education appropriations. Uh, this year there were 40 and no surprise their growth in public education appropriations request is proportional to the amount of dollars. I looked at this and said, Hey, how do we, how do we have, how do we create an opportunity to, uh, fund public education over the long term? Um, reduce the burden on residents, whether that's long, very long term property tax or income tax. And, uh, also, uh, uh, preserve these funds for public education. And that's where this bill comes into play. What we're proposing is to move, um, $350 million into a pub, into a public education trust or an endowment, um, so that each year it can grow very quickly. With that growth, we'll be able to have a long-term, long-term source of public education funding. These are already public education funds to begin with. And then in addition to that, um, we can maintain the stabilization feature. So if, if we come to a year where, uh, we need to use the stabilization feature because of a recession, we can still use the stabilization feature. The net impact of this would be, uh, some of you're familiar with our school and Institutional Trust Funds Office, cifo, which manages, uh, money and trust for the state. It's over, uh, for the school children primarily. There's other beneficiaries too. But that fund is over $4 billion. It's, it's growing at about $120 million a year. This will allow us to essentially grow these resources more quickly in an endowment for public education. Um, and it will, uh, allow us to both plan for the future while maintaining the stabilization, uh, concept and not frankly, have to chase a whole bunch of one-time project, uh, spending in public education appropriations. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That concludes my, uh, that concludes my presentation.

  3. Speaker (presiding)33:54

     Thank you Representative Walter discussion to the bill representative Corinne Peterson.

  4. Rep. Karen M. Peterson33:58

     Thank you. Um, I really appreciate the sponsor bringing this concept forward. And, and, um, you know, I was involved back when we, uh, negotiated Amendment G and part of the spirit of that compromise was, um, was understanding how do we continue to meet education's needs long term, provide flexibility when there's a lot of volatility, um, in the state budget. Um, and that's why we have the public education stabilization account, which has been really great, but on years when we don't need it, I, I have wondered, is there a better way to make sure those dollars benefit education in the long run instead of a lot of one-off projects? And, um, so I like this concept. I like this idea that we could turn one-time money into ongoing, um, opportunity, um, rather than fund a whole bunch of pilot programs. I think that's worth having a conversation about. Um, I also think we've seen success with this model, with the school and trust program. So the school and trust program is, is taking those one-time dollars that come off our school trust lands and turning them into ongoing, uh, funding for our schools through the dividends, um, that are, are that distributed. So while I know that, you know, probably this year we can't put the amount, uh, put in the bill towards this, I, I do think a vote today is more a vote in support of having the conversation about this concept and thinking about if we can, uh, better invest those dollars for long-term success, turn those one time dollars into ongoing funding, uh, to help us do other things that we might be interested in doing as a state, um, with the income tax dollars. So thank you.

  5. Speaker (presiding)35:37

     Thank you Representative Peterson. Further discussion to the bill Representative Whyte.

  6. Rep. Stephen L. Whyte35:42

     Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of this bill. One of the hallmarks of the state of Utah is forward looking and generational planning for the future. The current stabilization account has served a wonderful purpose and it'll continue to serve a wonderful purpose. And this proposal is really a long-term generational planning to ensure that we currently have that we'll have funding into the future. And so I'm supportive of this long-term visionary planning that will continue to help fund, uh, the needs and the opportunities of education in the state. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

  7. Speaker (presiding)36:20

     Thank you, Representative Whyte. Uh, back to Representative Walter for summation.

  8. Rep. R. Neil Walter36:25

     Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, I appreciate the opportunity to present today. Uh, I think this is an important policy. Uh, I think it's gonna help us with three specific things. Number one, it's gonna preserve this stabilization feature that we set up, uh, a number of years ago and, uh, uh, allow us to navigate, uh, recessions with our funding model. Number two, it's going to help us, uh, build a long-term revenue stream that again, over the longer term, will help us with our tax policy, whether that's income tax or property tax in the state of Utah. And number three, it will, uh, allow us to, uh, uh, I think be really fiscally responsible in our public education appropriations process. Um, not that we haven't funded a lot of great projects, but right now it is the largest source of one-time money, uh, in our state government. And, uh, this is a way for us to think more long term about that money and, and in over that long term converted into ongoing revenue for our public education, uh, uh, responsibilities as a state. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

  9. Speaker (presiding)37:26

     Thank you. Representative voting will now be open on first substitute HB 5 21, seeing all present head and voting. Voting is now closed. First substitute HB 5 21 passed this body with 66 yes votes, one no vote and will be sent to the Senate for its consideration.

  10. Speaker (presiding)39:55

      Representative Dunnigan.

  11. Rep. James A. Dunnigan39:58

      Thank you Mr. Speaker, I move to encircle first substitute house bill 4 57.

  12. Speaker (presiding)40:03

      Thank you, uh, representative. That motion is in order. We'll go and place the motion. The motion before is the house,

• Mar 4, 2026 Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (7 turns)

  1. Committee chair34:10

     First substitute public education, economic stabilization, restricted account amendments.

  2. Committee chair34:15

     Can you have a longer title on your bill, please? Representative?

  3. Rep. Neil Walter34:19

     I can, we, we can run an amendment to make it longer if you'd like. Actually, technically, that would have to be a substitute. So, uh, thank you, uh, Mr. Uh, Mr. Chair. Appreciate the opportunity. Um, I do have a brief hand, a handout that I'd like to provide. Can I, would I, yes. Can I bring that up to you? Staff will grab that and pass it out. Thank you. So, with all due respect to the committee's time, I'm gonna do this very quickly. A number of years ago, we created the public education stabilization, uh, economic stabilization restricted account. Uh, it's a, uh, very important tool to make sure that if we have a recession, that we can, um, continue to fund public education in the state of Utah. It's been interesting as we've created this very large pool of one-time money. The RFA requests have grown proportionally. You can see that in the charts. So what my bill did is it actually swept a large portion of the one-time money into a trust, and then that trust would be, um, able to, or an endowment so we could start to convert one time money into ongoing funds. Um, because this is a topic that there's a lot of discussion around, we've decided to move this to interim. And, and I am here to tell you it is okay. It, if you want to move to the next agenda item and make sure that, uh, to, to ensure that, uh, this bill does not inadvertently end up on any prioritization list in the Senate. And that concludes my presentation.

  4. Committee chair35:55

     Let me go to the committee. Senator Brammer? Yeah.

  5. Sen. Chris Brammer35:58

     Um, if you wanna take public comment, you can, but given the bill sponsor's request, I would request we move to the next agenda item.

  6. Committee chair36:05

     Okay. That's, that's appropriate. All in favor of the motion to move to the next item on the agenda? Say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? I will. That passes.

  7. Unknown speaker36:13speaker not certain

     Thank you. And we'll be working on, Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Members of the committee. Thank you for your Candor To the interim for this, uh, discussion on this one. Thank you. Thank you. Okay.