Senate education committee reviews Hardy amendment on redistricting, limits on out‑of‑state tuition

The Senate Education Committee on May 22 reviewed an amendment to the House education bill that would create a school‑district redistricting task force and change rules for state tuition to approved independent schools.

Beth St. James, of the Office of Legislative Council, told the committee she was present “for whatever you need me for,” and walked members through the proposed changes in Senator Hardy’s amendment. She said the amendment adds a redistricting task force charged with proposing new school‑district boundaries and includes language to “maximize student access to public schools in all regions of the state and reduce reliance on tuitioning students to independent schools.”

The amendment would require the task force to propose “not fewer than three school district boundaries,” St. James said. She also described a lowered threshold in the draft — changing a previously cited 51 percent threshold to 40 percent — and said the amendment’s language does not permit state tuition payments to flow to an approved independent school located out of state “unless it’s a therapeutic” program.

Committee members asked how quickly provisions would take effect. St. James said the provision that would affect independent schools’ ability to set tuition is tied to the effective date of the foundation formula, and not immediate. “That’s tied to the effective date of the foundation formula,” she said when asked whether independent schools would immediately lose the ability to set tuition.

Members also asked whether the amendment addresses supervisory unions. St. James said the task force language in Senator Hardy’s draft “says nothing about supervisory unions.” She added the amendment “doesn’t say they can’t exist in the future, and it doesn’t say they must exist in the future,” explaining the measure focuses on school‑district boundaries rather than mandating supervisory‑union changes.

Several committee members raised concerns about litigation risk. St. James warned, “Anything you do, you’re opening yourself up for litigation,” when asked whether excluded private or secular schools could challenge limits on tuition eligibility.

Committee members discussed next steps rather than taking a vote. St. James noted the amendment could be debated on the Senate floor and that, if the Senate and House pass different versions, the measures would go to a conference committee. The committee did not take formal action on the amendment during the session recorded in the transcript.

The committee also discussed procedural issues, including that the task force language was not in the House version and that a so‑called “plan B” for redistricting is not required by the amendment. Members said they expect further amendments and coordination before any final action.