Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vouchers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mentor board hears strong public push to join voucher lawsuit; members ask for more information
Summary
Multiple public speakers and several board members urged the Mentor board to join the "Vouchers Hurt Ohio" lawsuit after a failed levy, saying voucher expansion diverts state funds to private schools. Other trustees cautioned about timing, legal cost and optics; the issue will be on the May 26 work session agenda for further fact‑finding.
Dozens of community members urged the Mentor Exempted Village Board of Education on May 12 to join a statewide lawsuit challenging Ohio's expansion of school vouchers, which speakers said diverts money from public schools and increases pressure on local levies.
John Sanford opened public comment with an argument that state legislators who expand vouchers are "committed to the destruction of public schools," and he asked the district to join the litigation. "The vouchers are obviously designed to damage public education," said another commenter, Lin Mazika, citing per‑pupil funding differences between voucher awards and district state funding.
Why it matters: Public commenters and some board members framed the lawsuit as a way to defend the Ohio Constitution's requirement to fund a "thorough and efficient" system of common schools and to stop the transfer of public dollars into largely unaccountable private institutions.
Board reaction and practical questions: Several trustees expressed sympathy with the rationale but wanted more information about cost and timing. Mr. Hardesty, who leads legislative updates for the board, noted oral arguments in the appellate court had been heard and that the legislation and appeals process are still active. He also flagged new bills (for example HB671) that, if enacted, might withhold state funds from districts that join the suit.
Cost and timing: Public comment at the meeting cited a reported cost to a district of about the equivalent of two high‑school vouchers (one speaker estimated roughly $14,000) to join the coalition. Board members said they were concerned about pursuing litigation immediately after a failed levy and wanted to understand how funds would be used by the lawsuit's organizers and what legal and political risks the district might incur.
Next steps: The board did not vote to join the suit at the May 12 meeting but directed that the voucher lawsuit and related advocacy appear on the May 26 work session agenda for focused fact‑finding. That session will bring legal and financial details so trustees can decide whether to join or pursue alternative advocacy.
Context: More than 300 districts across Ohio have joined related litigation or are participating in broader advocacy about voucher expansion; the debate touches state budget priorities, school accountability standards and how much of the education budget is distributed to public vs private K‑12 providers.
Recent formal actions related to this topic: Administration indicated it will prepare scenarios and counsel will be asked to provide legal context for the May 26 work session; no board commitment to litigation was taken on May 12.
