Finance Committee advances expansion of Education Freedom Accounts after heated debate, 14-11

The Finance Committee voted 14 to 11 to advance Senate Bill 295 as amended, a measure that alters enrollment rules for Education Freedom Accounts and creates a rolling cap mechanism for growth.

The committee considered a replace-all amendment (No. 2271) that the sponsor said clarifies the bill’s mechanics. Under the amended bill, the EFA program would cap total enrollment at 10,000 students for the 2025–26 school year and allow the cap to increase by 25% in a subsequent year only if prior-year enrollment exceeded 90% of that year’s cap. The amendment also stipulates that current EFA students, siblings of current students, students with disabilities and students from households at or below 350% of the federal poverty guideline would be exempt from the cap and always eligible for enrollment.

Supporters argued the amendment manages program growth and clarifies administrative procedures. Representative Popovici Miller (State Representative) told the committee the cap “exists as a way to manage the growth of the program to address complaints,” and described the amendment as a more fiscally controlled alternative to the version some members favor.

Opponents said the change nonetheless represents a sizable, unbudgeted expansion. A committee member identified in debate as the ranking Democrat on the Education Funding Committee (listed in committee discussion) presented fiscal estimates during committee debate: he said the current program enrolls roughly 5,300 students and costs about $30 million a year; increasing enrollment to about 10,000 would add roughly $30 million, creating a $60 million program in the first budget year, with subsequent increases of roughly $15 million per year if the cap is repeatedly met and raised. Opponents repeatedly raised concerns that the committee was advancing a bill that increases spending after crossover and without a plan to offset the added cost.

Committee members also cited public feedback. Representative Luna told the committee several towns passed resolutions opposing expansion; she cited one town vote of 1,232 to 567 opposing expansion as evidence of local resistance.

Supporters replied that past projections of runaway enrollment have not matched experience elsewhere and that the amendment’s prioritization rules would temper growth. Representative Popovici (State Representative) said the amendment “clarifies all of this” and that the changes make the bill easier to understand and administer.

After a motion to move the question, the committee adopted amendment 2271 by roll call (14–11) and then advanced the bill as amended by the same margin. The committee’s motion to report the bill “ought to pass as amended” passed 14–11; the bill will be placed on the regular calendar. A minority report will be filed.

Votes at the committee were sharply divided along fiscal and policy lines, with members who emphasized budget constraints and the timing after crossover opposed and members arguing for expanded access and clarified administration in favor.

Ending

The committee recorded that a minority report would be prepared by Representative Murray; supporters on the majority report included several division chairs and members who argued the amendment reduced fiscal uncertainty compared with an uncapped expansion. The bill now proceeds to the next stage of the floor process.