University of Wyoming Lab School bill squeaks through committee
CHEYENNE — A bill to keep open the University of Wyoming Laboratory School, which exists on the UW campus and has operated since at least 2008 in partnership with Albany County School District 1, has narrowly passed 3-2 in the Senate Education Committee.
Senate File 126, 'Establishment of a K-8 public lab school,' comes after a set of 'unfortunate circumstances' between UW and ACSD1. A rupture over how to operate the school, which had been guided by a memorandum of understanding between the two bodies, led to a 'unilateral decision' by the UW Trustees, and a subsequent later announcement by the ACSD1 school board, to close the lab school at the end of this academic year, bill co-sponsor Sen. Chris Rothfuss, D-Laramie, explained to the committee.
But for over a century prior, the UW Lab school operated as a K-8 public school, offering practicum and observational experiences for pre-service teachers and other UW students.
'This had been a good working relationship governed by an MOU (between UW and ACSD1),' Rothfuss said.
However, as priorities changed, the school began operating less as a lab school and more like a public school on campus, he continued. Ultimately, that led the university to announce closure of the school.
Sen. Chris Rothfuss, D-Laramie, on Senate floor
Sen. Chris Rothfuss, D-Laramie, speaks during the morning session of the 68th Wyoming Legislature on Tuesday in the Senate chamber.
'The local delegation tried to reconcile, but that was unsuccessful,' Rothfuss said.
Nearly everyone who testified in committee Wednesday agreed that it was a sad decision to close the UW Lab School, but school district officials questioned who would foot the bill to keep the school open, and whether the school could be reorganized and kept open in time for next fall.
No one from the university or ACSD1 spoke in favor of SF 126 Wednesday. Tristan Green, chief financial officer for ACSD1 said that as written, the bill would require $2.5 million in district funding to keep the school open.
'You want this lab school to serve a state mission. If it's to serve a state mission, then why is one district being required to pay for it?' Green asked. 'Why not put it under the state, and allow the state to make this what it wants, not at the cost of one district?'
David Hardesty, ACSD1 assistant superintendent, asked for additional clarification on resource allocation, because as it stands, the district has already made the 'very difficult decision' to close the lab school, bringing its students into existing ACSD1 schools.
Decisions about the MOU governing the UW Lab School, he said, had at times forced the school district to 'funnel resources at a higher rate' into it than other schools, he continued. When faced with such challenges, the district ultimately decided to incorporate lab school students into its existing facilities.
'We do have the capacity to provide for those students in our current schools,' Hardesty said.
Mike Smith, vice president for Governmental Affairs and Community Engagement at UW, told the committee that he wanted to address the idea that UW made a 'rash decision' to close the lab school. Rather than being a rash decision, he said the university determined that the lab school was not contributing to the university's mission.
'We felt it was time to move on,' Smith said, adding that the UW College of Education has over 200 locations across the state where it can provide other practicum experience.
Nate Martin, an ACSD1 trustee, told the committee that many people in the community were upset when the university decided to close the lab school, and a 'Save the Lab School' movement did try to do just that.
'We tried to approach the university, and they have their reasons for not wanting to move forward. But in the intervening months, as the process continued, it became clear that whatever we did, whatever resulted, was not going to be the lab school anymore,' Martin said.
Martin called SF 126 a 'Save the Lab School' bill, but said that simply can't be done.
'You can't save the lab school because you can't turn back the clock,' he said.
ACSD1 Trustee Emily Siegel-Stanton said that she had concerns over how SF 126 would affect the district, and primarily, its funding.
'It's with grief in my heart that I provide this testimony, and ask this committee to vote no on this bill today,' Siegel-Stanton said. 'We're living in a new era regarding ... education funding.'
However, former UW Lab School student Adian O'Connor told the committee that the school profoundly impacted her education, upbringing and commitment to Wyoming.
'The lab school provided an environment of compassionate educators, UW student teachers and peers, offering opportunities I wouldn't have had elsewhere,' she said.
O'Connor continued that she has represented the lab school and state, federal and international capacities, from advocating for funding for the local Head Start to traveling Croatia to present at a National Youth Leadership Summit.
'My passion for service was fostered by both my Wyoming upbringing, and by the philosophy of the UW Lab School,' O'Connor said.
Several former teachers also gave impassioned pleas to keep the school open.
Sen. Charles Scott, R-Casper (2025)
Sen. Charles Scott, R-Casper
Sen. Charles Scott, R-Casper, said tough decisions were made regarding the lab school, but that he would vote in favor of SF 126.
'It seems to me that the school has been very successful,' Scott said. 'Schools like that are precious, we need more of them. … It seems to me that what has happened is that both the university and the Albany County School District have found it bureaucratically inconvenient to work together.
'That's what has led to the problem, and the fact that they are destroying a good school doesn't seem to bother them,' Scott said.
It will be difficult to reconstruct and restart the lab school, but Scott said he would vote for the bill.
Rothfuss said that the concept of 'taking $2.5 million from the district is misleading,' because that funding is already being used by the lab school, and will continue if SF 126 is to pass.
'It's not taking, it's not diminishing the capacity of the district,' Rothfuss said. 'The reality is that this shift wouldn't change anything.'
Further, the clearest way to create a loss to the district would be to separate and isolate the two, instead of operating in partnership, Rothfuss said.
Sen. Wendy Schuler, R-Evanston (2025)
Sen. Wendy Schuler, R-Evanston
Sen. Wendy Schuler, R-Evanston, said that she was a student at UW and had good experiences in the lab school. However, because of concerns over decreased enrollment, she said she could not support SF 126.
'I have considered a lot about declining enrollment,' Schuler said. 'I do think that the local school boards need to make decisions on that.'
Sen. Jared Olsen, R-Cheyenne, said that he would not vote for the bill either, because the construct behind the lab school is problematic.
'There are two entities that do not want the school, and this bill tells those two entities, 'You will have the school',' Olsen said. 'Until all the platters are ready to play the game, I don't think it will work.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
43 minutes ago
- USA Today
Former Biden press secretary is ready to tell Americans the truth? Give me a break.
Former Biden press secretary is ready to tell Americans the truth? Give me a break. | Opinion The knives are now out inside the Democratic Party. And the party is bleeding, not only Americans' support and trust but also its last remaining drops of honesty and truth. Show Caption Hide Caption Karine Jean-Pierre talks exit from Democratic party in new book Former White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre talks about leaving the Democratic party in her upcoming book slated for release in October. The Democratic Party continues to self-destruct, and I am here for it. Former White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has teased a tell-all memoir about former President Joe Biden and the administration she served for nearly three years. 'Independent: A Look Inside a Broken White House, Outside the Party Lines' is stoking claims that Jean-Pierre is a grifter, profiting off her time in the administration by trashing the former president and the political party that gave her prominence. Knives are out among Democrats for one of their own who has now betrayed them. Like other books that have recently exposed details about Biden's poor health, Jean-Pierre's book raises questions about the White House cover-up that attempted to hide the president's mental and physical decline from voters. It also calls into question Jean-Pierre's honesty: Why did she wait until now, when she can profit from it, to tell the truth about the former commander in chief? Former White House colleagues turn on former Biden press secretary Democrats are now a minority party in America. The GOP controls the White House, the Senate and the U.S. House along with a majority of governor's offices and state legislatures. The Democratic Party has lost Americans' trust because of its leaders' penchant for gaslighting, not just about Biden's health but also on issues like immigration, border security and the economy. Jean-Pierre, who now claims to be an independent, certainly isn't helping her former colleagues rebuild that lost trust. Details from the book are still sketchy, but Jean-Pierre should provide readers with an inside look at what happened after Biden's disastrous debate with Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump a year ago this month. Jean-Pierre's coworkers have already reacted to the book with contempt. "Former colleagues expressed confusion at how Jean-Pierre seemingly intends to paint Biden as a victim while pinning her own decision to leave the party on his 'broken' White House," Politico reported, citing multiple former Biden administration officials who spoke on condition of anonymity. Opinion: Biden's cancer diagnosis raises the question: Was he ever in good enough health? Caitlin Legacki, a Democratic strategist who worked on the Commerce Department's communications team during Biden's presidency, took umbrage with Jean-Pierre's assertion that the Democratic Party betrayed Biden. 'Kamala Harris and the entire Biden/Harris campaign did hero's work to avoid losing 400 electoral votes and giving Republicans a supermajority in Congress, which is what would have happened if he stayed on the ticket,' Legacki told Politico. 'It's more productive to focus on that, and thank Biden for doing the responsible thing by stepping aside, than it is to pretend this was an unwarranted act of betrayal.' But party insiders continuing to squabble over whether a now former president was or was not betrayed by fellow Democrats entirely misses the larger point. Opinion: Guess who Americans want to run the economy? Hint − it's not Democrats. Far too many Democrats, Jean-Pierre included, worked hard to deceive Americans. Their willful lack of self-awareness about their gaslighting and dishonesty is why the party has shown no signs of recovering from the last disastrous election cycle. Karine Jean-Pierre's book about Biden isn't the first Jean-Pierre's book will be far from the first to address the deception at the heart of the Biden White House. On May 20, journalists Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson released "Original Sin," which describes in detail Biden's cognitive decline and the mind-boggling efforts with which his inner circle and the Democratic Party tried to hide the truth from Americans. Opinion: Texas woman's death would have been prevented if Biden had secured the border Conservatives had long been suspicious about Biden's health, but journalists with White House access failed to ask tough questions then. Now that it's too late to make a real difference, those who were silent when it mattered most are more than ready to profit from belated exposés about the former president's failing health. The knives are now out inside the Democratic Party. And the party is bleeding, not only Americans' support and trust but also its last remaining drops of honesty and truth. Nicole Russell is an opinion columnist with USA TODAY. She lives in Texas with her four kids. Sign up for her newsletter, The Right Track, and get it delivered to your inbox.
an hour ago
Unsubstantiated 'chemtrail' conspiracy theories lead to legislation proposed in US statehouses
BATON ROUGE, La. -- As Louisiana Rep. Kimberly Landry Coates stood before her colleagues in the state's Legislature she warned that the bill she was presenting might 'seem strange' or even crazy. Some lawmakers laughed with disbelief and others listened intently, as Coates described situations that are often noted in discussions of 'chemtrails' — a decades-old conspiracy theory that posits the white lines left behind by aircraft in the sky are releasing chemicals for any number of reasons, some of them nefarious. As she urged lawmakers to ban the unsubstantiated practice, she told skeptics to 'start looking up' at the sky. 'I'm really worried about what is going on above us and what is happening, and we as Louisiana citizens did not give anyone the right to do this above us,' the Republican said. Louisiana is the latest state taking inspiration from a wide-ranging conspiratorial narrative, mixing it with facts, to create legislation. Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee signed a similar measure into law last year and one in Florida has passed both the House and the Senate. More than a dozen other states, from New York to Arizona, have introduced their own legislation. Such bills being crafted is indicative of how misinformation is moving beyond the online world and into public policy. Elevating unsubstantiated theories or outright falsehoods into the legislative arena not only erodes democratic processes, according to experts, it provides credibility where there is none and takes away resources from actual issues that need to be addressed. 'Every bill like this is kind of symbolic, or is introduced to appease a very vocal group, but it can still cause real harm by signaling that these conspiracies deserve this level of legal attention,' said Donnell Probst, interim executive director of the National Association for Media Literacy Education. Louisiana's bill, which is awaiting Republican Gov. Jeff Landry's signature, prohibits anyone from 'intentionally" injecting, releasing, applying or dispersing chemicals into the atmosphere with the purpose of affecting the 'temperature, weather, climate, or intensity of sunlight.' It also requires the Department of Environmental Quality to collect reports from anyone who believes they have observed such activities. While some lawmakers have targeted real weather modification techniques that are not widespread or still in their infancy, others have pointed to dubious evidence to support legislation. Discussion about weather control and banning 'chemtrails' has been hoisted into the spotlight by high-profile political officials, including Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. Recently, Marla Maples, the ex-wife of President Donald Trump, spoke in support of Florida's legislation. She said she was motivated to 'start digging' after seeing a rise in Alzheimer's. Asked jokingly by a Democratic state senator if she knew anyone in the federal government who could help on the issue, Maples smiled and said, 'I sure do.' Chemtrail conspiracy theories, which have been widely debunked and include a myriad of claims, are not new. The publication of a 1996 Air Force report on the possible future benefits of weather modification is often cited as an early driver of the narrative. Some say that evidence of the claims is happening right before the publics' eyes, alleging that the white streaks stretching behind aircrafts reveal chemicals being spread in the air, for everything from climate manipulation to mind control. Ken Leppert, an associate professor of atmospheric science at the University of Louisiana Monroe, said the streaks are actually primarily composed of water and that there is 'no malicious intent behind' the thin clouds. He says the streaks are formed as exhaust is emitted from aircrafts, when the humidity is high and air temperature is low, and that ship engines produce the same phenomenon. A fact sheet about contrails, published by multiple government agencies including NASA and the Environmental Protection Agency, explains that the streaks left behind by planes do not pose health risks to humans. However, the trails, which have been produced since the earliest days of jet aviation, do impact the cloudiness of Earth's atmosphere and can therefore affect atmospheric temperature and climate. Scientists have overwhelmingly agreed that data or evidence cited as proof of chemtrails 'could be explained through other factors, including well-understood physics and chemistry associated with aircraft contrails and atmospheric aerosols,' according to a 2016 survey published in the journal Environmental Research Letters. In the survey of 77 chemists and geochemists, 76 said they were not aware of evidence proving the existence of a secret large-scale atmospheric program. 'It's pure myth and conspiracy,' Leppert said. While many of the arguments lawmakers have used to support the chemtrails narrative are not based in fact, others misrepresent actual scientific endeavors, such as cloud seeding; a process by which an artificial material — usually silver iodide — is used to induce precipitation or to clear fog. 'It's maybe really weak control of the weather, but it's not like we're going to move this cloud here, move this hurricane here, or anything like that,' Leppert said. Parker Cardwell, an employee of a California-based cloud seeding company called Rainmaker, testified before lawmakers in Louisiana and asked that an amendment be made to the legislation to avoid impacts to the industry. The practice is an imprecise undertaking with mixed results that isn't widely used, especially in Louisiana, which has significant natural rainfall. According to Louisiana's Department of Agriculture and Forestry, a cloud seeding permit or license has never been issued in the state. While presenting Louisiana's bill last week, Coates said her research found charts and graphics from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration on spraying the air with heavy metals to reflect sunlight back into space to cool the Earth. The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2022 directed the Office of Science and Technology Policy, with support from NOAA, to develop an initial governance framework and research plan related to solar radiation modification, or SRM. A resulting report, which Coates holds up in the House session, focuses on possible future actions and does not reflect decisions that had already been made. SRM 'refers to deliberate, large-scale actions intended to decrease global average surface temperatures by increasing the reflection of sunlight away from the Earth,' according to NOAA. It is a type of geoengineering. Research into the viability of many methods and potential unintended consequences is ongoing, but none have actually been deployed. In recent years, misinformation and conspiratorial narratives have become more common during the debates and committee testimonies that are a part of Louisiana's lawmaking process. And while legislators say Louisiana's new bill doesn't really have teeth, opponents say it still takes away time and focus from important work and more pressing topics. State Rep. Denise Marcelle, a Democrat who opposed Louisiana's bill, pointed to other issues ailing the state, which has some of the highest incarceration, poverty, crime, and maternal mortality rates. 'I just feel like we owe the people of Louisiana much more than to be talking about things that I don't see and that aren't real,' she said.
The Hill
6 hours ago
- The Hill
Rand Paul slams Graham's push for Russian sanctions as ‘self-defeating economic warfare'
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) slammed Sen. Lindsey Graham's (R-S.C.) push for Russian sanctions, calling his bill 'self-defeating economic warfare.' Graham's sanctions bill on Russia would impose a 500 percent tariff on imports from any country that buys Russian oil, gas, uranium and other products. The legislation has more than 80 co-sponsors in the Senate, potentially making it veto-proof. But GOP senators are waiting on President Trump to move ahead with the legislation, and Trump said this week he hasn't even looked at it. Trump has also said he doesn't want to undermine the chances of a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. Paul, in a series of posts on X on Saturday, said the bill would be ineffective and backfire against efforts to achieve peace, as the war between Russia and Ukraine continues in its fourth year. 'The Graham bill would derail President Trump's efforts to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine. Self-defeating economic warfare is no way to achieve peace,' Paul said on X. 'This bill won't force China or India to change behavior, but it will impose an effective embargo on ourselves that will hurt American families,' he said. Paul also argued that the bill could hurt U.S. allies and raise gas prices. 'The Graham bill could raise tariffs on allies like Israel and Taiwan to 500 percent and potentially even higher. Why are we punishing our friends while pretending it'll hold Russia accountable? This isn't strategy—it's economic self-sabotage,' he wrote. 'Cutting off Russian oil takes a major source of supply off the market, resulting in higher gas prices. Analysts warned that a U.S. ban on Russian oil could cause prices to hit $160–$200 a barrel. That's $5+ gas at the pump,' he said. Graham, this past week, sought to address some of those concerns by proposing a carveout for his bill to exempt countries that aid in Ukraine's defense. The carveout could help insulate countries in Europe that still import Russian gas and have provided military support for Ukraine, as well as other U.S. partners that have straddled the line between maintaining ties with Moscow and providing assistance to Kyiv. 'A lot of countries still buy Russian oil and gas but less. Some European countries still have relationships with Russia, but they've been very helpful to Ukraine. So I want to carve them out,' Graham told reporters Wednesday. 'I tell China, if you don't want to have a 500 percent tariff, help Ukraine.'
