Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Vouchers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Aberdeen School Board adopts resolution opposing proposed education savings accounts (school vouchers)
Summary
The Aberdeen School District 06-1 Board of Education voted Jan. 13 to approve a resolution opposing proposed state education savings accounts (commonly called vouchers). The superintendent briefed the board on the governor’s $4 million proposal and two House bills already filed; the motion passed on a voice vote.
The Aberdeen School District 06-1 Board of Education on Jan. 13 approved a resolution opposing proposed education savings accounts, commonly known as school vouchers, that would use state funds for private-school tuition or alternative education expenses.
Nut graf: The board acted after a district briefing that said Governor Nome’s budget address proposed a $4,000,000 set-aside for ongoing funding of education savings accounts and that two House bills, House Bill 1009 and House Bill 1020, had already been introduced addressing education savings mechanisms.
A district representative summarized the district’s concerns about accountability and the potential diversion of public funds. “This money does divert, all the funds into private sources, very little, you know, accountability,” the superintendent said, according to the meeting transcript.
Board member Holmes moved adoption of the resolution; Mark Murphy seconded. The motion passed on a voice vote with board members present signaling approval.
Discussion: Board members described the state budget as strained and urged legislators to review research and public-education perspectives before expanding voucher programs. One board member called on local and state legislators to “listen to school boards” and to the research cited by the Association of School Boards as they consider voucher proposals.
Ending: The resolution was approved and will appear on other school boards’ agendas around the state, the superintendent said; no further board action occurred at the Jan. 13 meeting regarding state legislation.
