Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bettendorf board debates 'Public Schools Strong' resolution and rejects motion 4–3
Summary
After more than a dozen residents urged adoption, the board debated an Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement 'Public Schools Strong' resolution; trustees split over authorship and scope and the motion failed on a 4–3 roll call vote.
The Bettendorf Community School District board considered an advocacy resolution proposed by Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement that would urge the governor and legislature to fully fund Iowa public schools, call for a minimum 5% annual increase in state supplemental aid and recommend phasing out ESA/voucher programs over five years.
Members of the public urged adoption. Chuck Collins, a retired math teacher, told trustees the resolution focused on funding and should be adopted without edits so it can add to a statewide movement. “It’s about funding,” Collins said, arguing that taxpayer dollars should not support religious programs.
During board discussion, one trustee (speaker 18) said the board should craft its own concise statement to avoid language crafted by an external organization that might complicate legislative reception. “I propose that this board, in partnership with district leadership, craft our own statement … free of any language that alienates different belief systems,” the trustee said.
Others said the resolution states basic facts about funding and public schools and should be adopted as written. A board member who reviewed the packet called the text “just facts” and urged the board not to reject the motion on that basis.
After debate the board took a roll call vote. Directors recorded as voting yes were Director Larkin, Director Witter and Director Burry; those voting no were Director Ingalls, Georgia Hansman, Director McPherson and Director Castro. The clerk announced: “Motion denied.”
Why it matters: Supporters framed the resolution as a concrete way for local leaders to press the legislature on predictable funding for public schools and to push back against diversion of public dollars to private options. Opponents focused on messaging and the resolution’s origin, saying a district-crafted statement would carry more weight with legislators.
What’s next: The board did not adopt the resolution in the recorded proceedings. Some trustees asked staff to consider drafting a district-specific statement to represent community priorities.
