Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Lawmakers debate withholding $32 million in Educational Freedom Accounts funding; substitute to extract funds fails
Loading...
Summary
The Arkansas Legislative Council held extended debate on Educational Freedom Accounts funding. ADE said about 43,000 students participate (approx. 28,000 private, 17,500 homeschool); a motion to extract $32,000,000 for further investigation failed and the Pierce report (including a $7M Central Arkansas Water grant) was adopted by voice vote.
Lawmakers on the Arkansas Legislative Council devoted an extended portion of their meeting to questions, motions and competing substitute motions related to Educational Freedom Accounts (EFAs) and related subcommittee items.
Courtney Salas Ford of the Department of Education said the department’s data show approximately 43,000 students are participating in EFAs this year — roughly 28,000 private school students and about 17,500 homeschool students — and that every EFA participant must submit a nationally recognized norm-referenced standardized test annually to renew participation. Asked whether the department had separate accounting for students who were previously enrolled in private school, Salas Ford said the agency does not have that exact breakdown at the time but can provide additional data as enrollment expands.
Debate centered on a requested additional $32,000,000 appropriation. Members raised competing concerns: some, including Senator Davis and Representative Rose, argued that recent increases in adequacy funding and the Legislature’s historic investment in public schools protect districts from enrollment-driven losses; supporters of the EFA funding said the program delivers parental choice and is necessary to fulfill previously passed law. Opponents, including Representative Wootton and Senator Hickey, warned the EFA structure could be vulnerable to fraud and contended the program would divert taxpayer dollars away from public education.
Representative Wootton moved a substitute-to-the-substitute to extract $32,000,000 from the A1 and C1 line items for further investigation and to hold that funding. The chamber voted on that substitute-to-the-substitute; the transcript records the outcome as “Noes clearly have it,” indicating the motion to extract the $32,000,000 failed by voice vote (no roll-call tally was recorded in the excerpt).
Senator Dismang’s motion to adopt the Pierce subcommittee report — which included a $7,000,000 Department of Agriculture grant to Central Arkansas Water for watershed acquisitions (item G2) — was ultimately called and adopted; the transcript records the final outcome as “Ayes have it.” Several members urged follow-up oversight and data collection to monitor program administration and spending.
Quotes from the hearing capture the competing frames: "These funds are not coming from the public school fund," Courtney Salas Ford told members, adding that the general assembly sets adequacy funding levels. Representative Wootton said the program "is ripe for fraud" and moved to extract funds for further review. Senator Dismang and others emphasized the committee’s role in reviewing the subcommittee report and recommended adoption.
Next steps for members include potential requests for more detailed ADE data on program participants and continued oversight of fund distribution and fraud-prevention measures.
