Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah Senate rejects alternative-education tax credit amid voucher debate
Summary
Senators debated SB 242, a refundable tax credit for parents who disenroll children from public schools and enroll them in private or home-school settings during extraordinary circumstances; opponents said it looked like a voucher and raised constitutional and public-funding concerns; the bill failed 12–14 with 3 absent.
The Utah Senate extensively debated Senate Bill 242, a measure to create a refundable tax credit for parents who disenroll children from public schools and enroll them in private or home-school programs, and ultimately voted to file the bill after a close roll-call vote.
Sponsor Senator Johnson described SB 242 as a narrowly targeted response to “extraordinary circumstances” that forced parents to seek alternatives to public schooling. "They would actually have to disenroll from public education and enroll in private education or home school," Johnson said, noting there is an enrollment process for home schooling and the bill functions as a tax credit to reimburse parents for out-of-pocket costs.
Opponents challenged whether the credit operated as a voucher and whether it used taxpayer dollars in practice. Senator Kitchen said, "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a duck," and announced his no vote. Senator Davis raised a constitutional objection: "We fund a public education system in the state of Utah... That does not include private schools," he said, arguing a tax credit effectively directs public resources to private education. Senator Fillmore asked for clarification whether the credit would send money to private schools; the sponsor responded that the credit would be provided to parents, not paid directly to schools.
Lawmakers also questioned retroactivity and enrollment mechanics for parents who had been home-schooling during the pandemic and whether the state could ensure funds would not flow to private institutions directly. Senator Reedy and Senator Eby pressed the sponsor on enrollment rules and constitutional concerns. The roll-call vote under suspension of rules recorded 12 ayes, 14 nays and 3 absent; the clerk announced that SB 242 "shall be filed."
Because the measure raises constitutional and funding questions, further consideration or a refiled bill could appear in a future session; for now SB 242 will not move forward in this Legislature.
