House Education hears hours of testimony on HB320 (MAPS), a privately funded school-choice tax-credit plan

Helena — Representative Lee Deming, sponsor of House Bill 320, told the House Education Committee that HB320 would create the Montana Academic Prosperity Program for Scholars (MAPS), a privately funded education-assistance program with two entry paths: donor-funded education-assistance accounts and an education tax-credit pathway that families could use for qualified educational expenses.

"MAPS allows for educational assistance up to about $7,000 annually," Deming said as he outlined program mechanics, including a per-entry donation cap of $4,000,000, an aggregate cap of $8,000,000, a 10% program-manager fee from donations, and eligibility for assistance accounts set at households at or below 500% of the federal poverty level. Deming stressed that participation would be voluntary and said MAPS would not draw from the state general fund.

The hearing drew a large, largely split turnout. Proponents — including state senators, parents, private-school leaders, scholarship organizations and policy groups — described MAPS as a way to expand choices for families who cannot afford alternatives to public school or whose children do not thrive in traditional classrooms.

Senator Sue Vinton, appearing in support, said MAPS would "offer all children all the educational options available in our state with funding and parity with the state's share of educating students," and argued the program follows established tax-credit scholarship pathways used elsewhere in Montana.

Trish Schreiber of the Frontier Institute, who provided a technical overview, described governance and oversight features written into the bill: a five-member MAPS council appointed by the governor, an annual reporting requirement to the legislature (section 12), and a lottery the program manager would use for fair allocation if demand exceeded supply. Schreiber said the bill includes statutory language intended to distinguish MAPS students from families who legally homeschool under existing Montana code.

Dozens of individual proponents — parents, private-school administrators, former students and nonprofit scholarship groups such as ACE Scholarships and Americans for Prosperity — testified that the proposal would make private, hybrid or micro-schooling options realistic for middle-income families and those in rural areas.

"This legislation would empower those middle-income families who are caught in the middle of school choice options right now," said Cheryl Tusken of EdNavigate MT, who described consulting with parents about affordability barriers.

Opponents — including the Montana School Boards Association, the Montana Quality Education Coalition, the Montana Society of CPAs, the Montana Federation of Public Employees, rural school advocates and the League of Women Voters of Montana — urged caution and asked the committee to wait for a fiscal note and consider amendments.

Lance Melton, representing the Montana School Boards Association, said the proposal "violates Espinosa" (the court precedent permitting some tax-credit scholarships) and argued the bill "discriminates" by excluding some groups and delegating substantial discretion over eligible expenses to a nonprofit MAPS council. He warned the program could expand beyond initial caps if demand triggered automatic increases.

Other opponents cited experience in states such as Arizona and West Virginia, where voucher or tax-credit programs grew beyond initial estimates. Bev Lewis of Save Our Schools Arizona cautioned that Arizona’s voucher expansion contributed to major budget strain and alleged widespread fraud and program misuse in that state’s experience.

Agency witnesses and technical experts flagged administrative and fiscal questions. Derek Bell of the Department of Revenue described the tax-credit mechanism as a nonrefundable credit that could carry forward up to three years and explained that validations and audits would be complex because program managers — not the revenue department — would issue initial certificates. Christian Barnard of the Reason Foundation provided a fiscal analysis to the committee but the formal fiscal note from the legislative budget office was not yet available.

Committee members pressed for specifics: what qualifies as an eligible expense, how the MAPS council would set and change the "living" list of qualifying educational expenses, how audit and verification would work, whether the program would incentivize partial public-school enrollment to preserve eligibility, and what income levels would be necessary for families or donors to make full use of the tax-credit path.

Deming closed by reiterating that MAPS is "not a voucher program" and that accountability exists through parental stewardship and statutory compliance with existing education code provisions. The committee adjourned without a vote; the bill remained pending while members awaited an amendment text and an official fiscal note.

What happens next: The committee requested the bill’s pending amendment language and a fiscal note before further action. No formal motion or vote occurred during the hearing.