The Alaska Legislature, meeting in special session, has overridden Gov. Mike Dunleavy鈥檚 veto of more than $50 million in public school funding.

The vote was 45-14. At least 45 of 60 legislators are needed to override an Alaska governor鈥檚 budget veto.

The override eliminates a 5.6% year-over-year cut to public school funding, leaving districts with a small funding increase. Since July 1, the start of the state鈥檚 fiscal year, oil prices have significantly exceeded the state鈥檚 spring forecast, and if that trend continues, the state would have more than enough revenue to pay for the revived spending.

It鈥檚 the first time since 1987 that Alaska lawmakers have overridden an appropriations veto by a sitting governor.

鈥淭his is a remarkable day,鈥� said Senate President Gary Stevens, R-Kodiak. 鈥淚t was quite eventful and really unprecedented in my experience in the Legislature, and I鈥檓 very proud of how the House and Senate worked together and how we stood up and did the right thing.鈥�

Lawmakers also voted to override Dunleavy鈥檚 veto of , a measure that would require the Alaska Department of Revenue to provide lawmakers with a report on oil tax settlements. Sen Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, has said that could reveal the state has been settling tax disputes for much less than their stated value.

The vote on that override was 43-16. Forty votes were needed for that override because it was a policy bill and not one involving appropriations.

Sen. Mike Shower, R-Wasilla, was excused absent from both votes.

Legislators declined to accept an executive order from Dunleavy that sought to create an Alaska Department of Agriculture, calling the order unconstitutional. The governor disputes that assessment, and the issue could be headed to the courts.

Governor and legislators have different perspectives on fixing state schools

School district superintendents said before Saturday鈥檚 education vote that if lawmakers were able to override the governor, school districts would be able to .

Dunleavy called the special session in order to pressure lawmakers into considering a variety of education policies intended to increase the availability of alternatives to traditional public schools.

Alaska on a national standardized test intended to rate states鈥� public education performance.

鈥淭here鈥檚 50 states, and we鈥檙e 51st in the nation. It鈥檚 a moral imperative to fix that,鈥� he said.

Legislators approved some policies this spring when they approved a compromise bill that also raised the core of the state鈥檚 per-student funding formula, the base student allocation.

Dunleavy called that bill inadequate and vetoed it. Lawmakers overrode that veto.

Dunleavy then vetoed funding needed to pay for the increased formula, and he called a special session for Aug. 2, at a time when some lawmakers were thought to be unavailable, forcing an early vote on a possible override and increasing the odds that his veto would stand.

A successful veto could have forced lawmakers into further compromises with the governor on policies they have previously opposed.

Instead, legislators made extraordinary efforts to attend the special session. Sen. Forrest Dunbar, D-Anchorage, obtained special leave from military service in Europe. Sen. James Kaufman, R-Anchorage, flew to Juneau from Vietnam. Other lawmakers canceled family events and postponed trips for business and to the National Conference of State Legislatures..

As late as Saturday morning, no one in the Capitol was sure whether the governor鈥檚 veto would be overridden or sustained.

鈥淲e actually thought we were going to be short,鈥� said Senate Majority Leader Cathy Giessel, R-Anchorage.

In the end, the veto was overridden by the exact tally needed.

Dunleavy said afterward that he doesn鈥檛 think it was a mistake to call the special session.

鈥淭his gives the people of Alaska a chance to see where people stand on these votes,鈥� he said.

He said that policy changes and education funding represent two sides of a coin, and without both halves, 鈥渋t鈥檚 not much of a currency.鈥�

The vote also allows Alaskans to see whether legislators are serious about addressing policy changes now, he said. The special session is open for 30 days, and legislators could meet and discuss the issues.

Legislators have created an education task force to address policy, but that group isn鈥檛 expected to meet until Aug. 25 and will work on its own schedule outside of special session.

鈥淭he bottom line is they either act or they don鈥檛. This is like the world capital of talk, this place is, in Juneau,鈥� Dunleavy said.

House Minority Leader Mia Costello, R-Anchorage, was the only legislator to vote in favor of but changed her vote against Saturday鈥檚 override.

She said afterward that she thought the prior bill had good policies 鈥� a partial ban on cellphones in public schools, for one 鈥� and she wanted to see more policy work.

Sen. Shelley Hughes, R-Palmer and a candidate for governor in next year鈥檚 elections, also voted against the override, noting that legislation proposed by Dunleavy for the special session actually included funding increases that were greater than the amount vetoed from the budget.

But those comments didn鈥檛 represent the views of a majority of lawmakers, who said after the vote that they were concerned about the direct and indirect impacts of the governor鈥檚 veto within their district.

Ahead of the vote, Rep. Jeremy Bynum, R-Ketchikan, said that sustaining the veto would encourage local governments to make up the funding gap by increasing their local contribution, increasing the burden on local property taxpayers. Bynum, who voted in favor of May鈥檚 veto override, also voted in favor of an override on Saturday.

The House and Senate adjourned their joint session immediately after considering both vetoes and lawmakers were greeted by applause from pro-override protesters who demonstrated in the Capitol鈥檚 hallways and outside the building before the vote.

The special session will technically stay ongoing, but legislators said they do not expect to meet again before Aug. 19.

Special session started late because of lawmaker鈥檚 missed flight

Saturday鈥檚 special session was scheduled to begin at 10 a.m., with the House and Senate meeting together at 10:15 a.m., but the joint session didn鈥檛 start until 1:31 p.m. because Rep. Robyn Burke, D-Utqiagvik, missed the morning flight from Anchorage to Juneau.

Burke said her mistake was partially due to a family member鈥檚 surgery, which ran late into the night before the flight.

The delay caused some members of the House Republican minority caucus to razz members of the majority, of which Burke is a member. The minority Republicans noted that they were present and ready to work on time, and the majority was not.

Dunleavy from the first five days of the special session in order to improve the odds that his vetoes would be sustained. When it comes to overriding a veto, an absent lawmaker is equivalent to one voting no.

Members of the majority called that request dirty politics, and Dunleavy later changed his position, asking lawmakers to be ready to hold committee hearings on Sunday. Republican lawmakers who had promised to stay away from the special session also changed their positions and chose to attend.

On Friday, Rep. Sara Hannan, D-Juneau, wheeled a wagon full of fresh peonies through the Capitol for staff and legislators. The flowers came from in Fairbanks, she said, because its owner had heard that the governor was encouraging lawmakers to stay away from the special session, and the flower-grower wanted to thank legislators for showing up.

Before lawmakers convened, Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom walked through the Capitol鈥檚 second floor.

鈥淲hat鈥檚 the energy of today?鈥� asked Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage, of Dahlstrom.

鈥淚t鈥檚 electric, it鈥檚 electric,鈥� she said.

Around them, lawmakers and staff maneuvered through a hallway lined with sign-carrying protesters urging an override. Behind them, in the Capitol鈥檚 stairway, Department of Education commissioner Deena Bishop walked downstairs from the third floor, home to the office of the governor. Next to her was Jordan Shilling, the governor鈥檚 legislative director, with his ear to a cellphone.

According to compiled by the Legislative Affairs Agency, Saturday鈥檚 vote marked the first time since 2009 that lawmakers have overridden an appropriations veto.

That override involved an action by Gov. Sarah Palin, who had left office by the time of the override. Lawmakers haven鈥檛 overridden an appropriations veto by a sitting governor since Gov. Steve Cowper in 1987, according to the LAA list.

Legislature and governor disagree on Department of Agriculture

As the session opened, Dunleavy of an executive order creating a cabinet-level Alaska Department of Agriculture.

Lawmakers rejected the governor鈥檚 first executive order and introduced broader legislation instead.

The presiding officers of the House and Senate responded to the second order with , saying that the governor鈥檚 order is unconstitutional and that they will not accept it.

鈥淚鈥檝e talked to him about it, told him about a couple days ago, and I think he can do whatever he wants, but if it鈥檚 pretty clear that we鈥檙e on good legal standing not to deal with it in this session,鈥� said Senate President Gary Stevens, R-Kodiak.

Hours later, the governor saying that he believes the Legislature must vote to disapprove his order. Barring that vote, 鈥淚 will treat this attempt by the Legislature to circumvent the constitutionally mandated process to be legally ineffective. Unless the Legislature convenes in a joint session to disapprove the Executive Order 鈥� I will consider it to have become law at the close of the special session and proceed accordingly.鈥�

Giessel and other members of the House and Senate said afterward that they don鈥檛 know whether the issue will be resolved in the courts, but they feel that the topic is better addressed through legislation, and a bill has already received three hearings in the Senate Resources Committee.

School officials and education advocates react to veto override

Before the education veto override, dozens of people rallied outside the Capitol and in the building鈥檚 hallways, pleading with legislators to vote yes.

Following the override vote, demonstrators clapped and cheered, thanking lawmakers as they left the joint session.

Several district officials reacted Saturday afternoon with thanks to legislators and applauded the override vote.

鈥淲e鈥檙e extremely excited. A lot of our administrators were texting and very excited about getting it overturned today, so that made Valdez very happy,鈥� said that city鈥檚 school superintendent, Jason Weber, by phone on Saturday. He said the funding will go toward previously cut positions, like an elementary school math specialist, as determined by the school board.

Fairbanks North Star Borough School District Superintendent Luke Meinert congratulated lawmakers by phone on Saturday.

鈥淚t鈥檚 been a long time coming that we haven鈥檛 had adequate funding, and this is one step forward providing stability for our public schools. So just a huge thank you to them,鈥� Meinert said.

He said funds will go to support classrooms, reduce class sizes, and restore some previous cuts, but because the money is arriving so close to the start of the school year, changes will come at the last minute.

鈥淲ith the class size discussion, it is a tough time of year to hire teachers, given our school starts here in a couple weeks. So we鈥檒l see what we鈥檙e going to do with it, but it definitely helps stabilize our funding for the school year. We鈥檙e also underfunded in transportation 鈥� and so that might be one place that it鈥檚 able to help us.鈥�

Officials with the Anchorage School District, the state鈥檚 largest by student population serving over 43,000 students, also thanked legislators. 鈥淭he Anchorage School District is grateful to the 45 lawmakers who voted to put students first,鈥� said MJ Thim, the district鈥檚 chief of communications, in an emailed statement.

鈥淩estoring $50 million in public school funding means more stability in classrooms, more certainty for families, and stronger support for educators working every day to help students succeed. This funding was already approved with broad legislative support. Overriding the veto ensures that commitment is honored.鈥�

NEA-Alaska, the state鈥檚 largest teachers union, expressed support for the education veto override.

鈥淓very dollar invested in public education helps an Alaska student learn. Helps find their passion for science, math, reading, and the arts. Helps keep the lights on and schools warm. And helps our phenomenal Alaska educators successfully do their job,鈥� said NEA-Alaska President Laura Capelle, in a written statement. 鈥淭his funding is a step in the right direction, but it is not yet enough. We must continue to invest 鈥� in real dollars and collaborative solutions 鈥� to support the highest quality public education in Alaska.鈥�

Education funding advocate Caroline Storm, said she was uncertain about the outcome of the vote, but happy with the override.

鈥淚 knew it was going to be very close,鈥� said Storm, who is executive director of the nonprofit Coalition for Education Equity. 鈥淚 was disappointed to see that (Rep. Mia) Costello flipped her vote, and I鈥檓 grateful to see that (Rep. David) Nelson did not. So those were two people we were concerned about.鈥�

Other bills not taken up

After the joint session, the House and Senate passed resolutions that permit them to keep the special session open without additional meetings.

That likely means that several other Dunleavy vetoes will stand. The governor , including money for school maintenance and for . Legislators did not take up those vetoes.

Legislators also did not vote on bills pertaining to , , , and .

Stevens said that after lawmakers had two successful overrides, 鈥渨e were pleased that we got those two through, and there was some question about the others.鈥�

House Majority Leader Chuck Kopp, R-Anchorage, said lawmakers saw an 鈥渙verwhelming鈥� amount of consensus on the two successful overrides, and there wasn鈥檛 the same consensus on the others, even though they were discussed.

Dunbar was the sponsor of the payday loan bill.

鈥淚 didn鈥檛 believe the votes were there this time, and I felt that a failed veto override would diminish the chance that the bill would pass in the future, particularly because it should be a bipartisan, uncontroversial bill,鈥� Dunbar said, 鈥渁nd I think we can revisit it in a year or two when the advocates have had a chance to better explain some of the specifics.鈥�

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alaska Beacon maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Andrew Kitchenman for questions: info@alaskabeacon.com.

After a court ruling that , members of the state Legislature have proposed a constitutional amendment that would allow public money to go to private and religious schools.

is scheduled for hearings Wednesday and Friday next week in the House Judiciary Committee.

If approved by two-thirds of the House, two-thirds of the Senate and voters this fall, HJR 28 would remove the part of Article VII, Section 1, that says, 鈥渘o money shall be paid from public funds for the direct benefit of any religious or other private educational institution.鈥�

That clause was specifically flagged by Superior Court Judge Adolf Zeman when he struck down a law dealing with payments to the parents of children in the state鈥檚 correspondence programs.

Some parents had been using the money to pay for tuition at private schools, and Zeman concluded that the law had been deliberately written to allow the practice, making it unconstitutional.

HJR 28 also proposes to change Article IX, Section 6, which prohibits spending public money except for public purposes. The proposed amendment would add a clause saying that the section doesn鈥檛 prevent payments 鈥渇or the direct educational benefit of students as provided by law.鈥�

In a statement accompanying the release of the draft amendment, Rep. Sarah Vance, R-Homer and chair of the judiciary committee, said that 鈥渂y allowing public funds to benefit all Alaskans seeking educational opportunities, this amendment promotes fairness and empowers choice in education.鈥�

Rep. Jamie Allard, R-Eagle River and a member of the judiciary committee, said that a public vote 鈥� required of any constitutional amendment 鈥� would empower voters and 鈥渆nsures that all Alaskans have a voice in shaping the future of education in Alaska.鈥�

While large numbers of state legislators and Gov. Mike Dunleavy have expressed alarm about the legal decision on correspondence programs, many have said they intend to postpone action until after the Alaska Supreme Court addresses the topic.

Talking to reporters on Tuesday, several members of the supermajority caucus in charge of the Alaska Senate said they would be unlikely to support a constitutional amendment eliminating the prohibition on public funds for private schools.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alaska Beacon maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Andrew Kitchenman for questions: info@alaskabeacon.com. Follow Alaska Beacon on and .

Missouri Senate Democrats ended their filibuster Tuesday of a bill that seeks to expand the state鈥檚 K-12 tax-credit scholarship program 鈥� agreeing to let the legislation come to a vote after Republicans added provisions boosting public school funding and teacher retention efforts.

receiving first-round approval by a 20-13 vote in the Senate Tuesday evening is the second version to come to the floor this week. The original 12-page bill ballooned to 76 pages before expanding to 153 pages Tuesday after negotiations.

鈥淭here are plenty of things (in the bill) that I dislike,鈥� Sen. Lauren Arthur, a Kansas City Democrat, told the bill鈥檚 sponsor, Sen. Andrew Koenig.

Koenig, a Republican from Manchester, acknowledged the compromise.

鈥淭hat makes two of us,鈥� he said.

鈥淚 know that there are things you wish you could change, and there are things that I wish I could change. At the end of the day, I think we鈥檝e gotten to that right balance,鈥� Arthur said.

Republican Sens. Justin Brown of Rolla, Mike Moon of Ash Grove and Elaine Gannon of DeSoto joined Democrats voting against the bill.

Gannon has spoken against the bill at the committee level and told The Independent that she fears tax-credit scholarships pull money from public schools.

鈥淚f you want choice, pay for it. If they鈥檙e not happy, there鈥檚 other options out there, like charter schools and private schools.鈥� she said.

On the Senate floor Monday evening, she spoke about six counties who removed tax-credit scholarships from their local Republican Party platform.

鈥淭hese six counties feel if they take public dollars, the government鈥檚 going to come in and regulate those parochial schools and private schools,鈥� she said.

Currently only available in charter counties and cities with at least 30,000 residents, the legislation that won initial approval Tuesday would open the state鈥檚 K-12 tax-credit scholarship program, MOScholars, statewide.

It would also increase the salary one can make to qualify for the program as low-income from 200% of the amount used to determine reduced lunch to 300%. The income cap, for a family of four, would be $166,500, under this school year鈥檚 reduced lunch eligibility.

The bill would additionally increase the amount awarded to those with limited English proficiency, those who qualify for free or reduced lunch and students with individualized education plans.

MOScholars currently has a ceiling of $50 million in tax credits, which it has not reached in its first couple years of the program. The bill seeks to raise the cap to $75 million, with an adjustment tied to the 鈥減ercent increase or decrease in the amount of state aid distributed to school districts.鈥�

Koenig has launched a campaign for State Treasurer, the office that oversees the MOScholars program.

The bill also would permit charter schools to open in Boone County. Currently, charter schools are only allowed in Kansas City and St. Louis.

Senate President Pro Tem Caleb Rowden, who is in his last year in the Senate, spoke in favor of adding a charter in his home county.

鈥淲e鈥檙e just trying to give another option for Columbia,鈥� Rowden, a Republican from Columbia, said on the Senate floor.

These provisions were in place as Senate Democrats led a filibuster lasting roughly four hours before the chamber adjourned at 8 p.m. Monday. After closed-door negotiations, Koenig鈥檚 bill was amended to impact 24 additional sections of state law.

The changes include incentives for school districts in charter counties or cities with 30,000 or more residents to have instruction five days a week, changes to the state formula that funds public schools and boosting the minimum teacher salary to $40,000.

The foundation formula, which currently has a multiplier of student attendance, would shift to enrollment in its place. A commissioned by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education last year.

鈥淚t is well understood that average daily attendance rates tend to be lower (relative to enrolled, eligible pupils) in districts that are higher in child poverty and in minority concentrations. As such, when state aid is calculated based on average daily attendance, that aid is systematically reduced in higher poverty, higher minority concentration districts,鈥� Baker wrote.

A fiscal note has not been completed for the current version. Koenig said the changes to the state-aid formula, which would be ushered in 10% increments, would cost $70 million for each 10%.

Also added to the bill is the proposed creation of a literacy fund that could receive up to $5 million from the state鈥檚 general fund to provide grants for weekly reading programs.

Other additions include a proposal to permit school districts to pay teachers more who fill roles in 鈥渉ard-to-staff鈥� schools and areas, a boost to the career ladder program and additional pathways to teaching certifications.

One piece of the bill discussed Tuesday would allow people with bachelor鈥檚 degrees to complete an 18-hour teacher training program for credentials to teach in Missouri private schools.

Public schools could get more teachers into classrooms through a provision giving bachelor鈥檚 degree recipients 鈥渟ubject-area certifications鈥� only for their areas of expertise. The bill also would strike an entrance exam to receive training in education.

Debate ended at 8:30 p.m. Tuesday, with Senate leadership promising to send the bill to fiscal oversight in the morning. It needs to be approved by the Senate one more time before being sent to the House.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: info@missouriindependent.com. Follow Missouri Independent on and .

During the height of the pandemic, states received nearly $122 billion in Elementary and Secondary Schools Emergency Relief (ESSER III) funds to address student academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs. North Carolina received $3.6 billion, on top of previous federal Covid relief dollars.

Now, districts must spend those funds by Sept. 30 鈥� a deadline coming to be known as 鈥渢he funding cliff.鈥� On Monday, officials from the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) presented a to state lawmakers at a House education reform meeting.

The toolkit seeks to help districts with “data-driven financial decision making for post-ESSER spending,” per DPI’s presentation.

“The toolkit is built to really support leaders in public schools as they think about the end of ESSER funding,” said Dr. Michael Maher, DPI’s deputy state superintendent. “The idea is we want districts to be able to have the toolkit to have really good conversations about how they spent their money, and whether those funds were effective or not.”

States received during the pandemic. The first round 鈥� roughly $13.2 billion 鈥� largely went toward personal protective equipment and devices for students to safely reopen schools. The second and third rounds 鈥� nearly $123 billion 鈥� were a little more flexible, but were intended to support academic and mental health at schools as they recovered from Covid.

DPI’s toolkit is specifically designed to help discussions between district leaders like the superintendent (or charter school leader), chief financial officer, and administrators with budgetary responsibilities. DPI presented the toolkit to superintendents across the state last month, Maher said, and is also hosting in February.

Districts should not include any one-time expenditures in their ROI discussions, per the presentation. Interventions that might be discussed in this process include high-dosage tutoring, summer learning initiatives, and robotics programs.

“The expectation is that the district now really has to make a decision about whether or not to continue an intervention,” Maher said. “In essence, this is what we’re trying to do, is give them the best available data that we can to help them drive themselves to the right decision for their given school, for their given context.”

Here are a few strategies the presentation identified for continuing initiatives currently funded through federal relief funds:

• Apply for specific grant funding, from private or federal sources.
• Request an increase in local funding from county commissioners.
• Use an innovative approach of “braiding” or overlapping federal funds.
• Identify funding from within current budget.

You can view DPI’s full presentation , and its full toolkit . Check out DPI’s dashboard’s for ESSER spending by school district .

More on remaining funds, cliff

In March 2021, State Superintendent Catherine Truitt created the Office of Learning Recovery and Acceleration to help find and make evidence-based decisions regarding recovery from lost instructional time during the start of the pandemic 鈥� with a large focus on how to spend ESSER funds well.

The state received roughly $6 billion total in federal Covid funds for K-12 education, Maher told lawmakers. Approximately $1.3 billion of North Carolina’s ESSER III funds remained to be allocated as of Oct. 31, according to

DPI’s toolkit includes a starting point for districts of last December through the end of this month. During this time, the presentation says, districts should convene a team to focus on evaluating ESSER spending. The toolkit presentation includes the following questions:

• What is the PSU鈥檚 risk for a dramatic fiscal cliff post-ESSER?
• What initiatives/programs/expenditures will different groups of stakeholders be most interested in sustaining post-ESSER?
• What are the PSU鈥檚 top 2-3 priorities and which expenditures most support those priorities?

Districts should obligate all their funds by April or May of 2024, Maher said. This is to ensure no funds get reverted back to the federal government after the September deadline.

An  issued in March 2023 identified 15 states facing the most complex challenges with the cliff. North Carolina was one of them.

However, a recent FutureEd  found that North Carolina school districts — especially in rural regions — generally spent more of their ESSER funds on short-term staffing fixes than long-term personnel commitments. “This decision could potentially ease their fiscal pain when the funds run out,”

On Monday, , asked Maher about how DPI is approaching planning for the replacement of technologies funded in the last few years through ESSER dollars.

“The technology, after two or three years, it’s just outdated. And that’s my big concern with the direction we’re headed in right now,” Biggs said. “If we can’t keep up with our students and our parents, they’re gonna find somewhere where they can keep up.”

Last month, DPI also gave  to the education reform committee That report showed that 114 of 115 school districts currently have one device per student. This allows students to take devices home with them to help with studying and homework.

However, 89 of 115 districts have reported they do not currently have sufficient resources 鈥渢o sustain their refresh cycles for student devices beyond ESSER funding.鈥� That鈥檚 more than 77% of districts.

Maher said that “a large chunk” of ESSER funds have gone toward HVAC systems, technology hardware and infrastructure, and access to broadband. He said DPI is still discussing how districts can “replenish technology as it becomes, in essence, out of date.”

, said good data will be key to good decisions moving forward.

“We鈥檙e going into post-Covid and those monies are running out,” Torbett said. “Hopefully, we have worked procedures out to help those agencies that used that money. For one time purposes should be okay, but there were some that have used the money for recurring expenses that we’ll be probably be hearing about in the days and weeks to come.”

If you have additional questions about DPI’s toolkit, email Rachel Wright-Junio, director of the Office of Learning Recovery & Acceleration, or Dr. Andrew Smith, the assistant state superintendent of DPI’s Office of Innovation.

This first appeared on and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Attorneys for public school advocates said in oral arguments Tuesday before the Mississippi Supreme Court that the state constitutional provision that prevents public funds from going to private schools is 鈥渋ronclad.鈥�

Attorneys Rob McDuff and Will Bardwell, representing Parents for Public Schools, said at the time of the writing of the 1890 Mississippi Constitution that public funds were being spent on private schools and the framers of the constitution sought to prevent that from occurring. Section 208 of the constitution says, in part, that public funds shall not be provided to any school 鈥渘ot conducted as a free school.鈥�

The Parents for Public Schools organization filed a lawsuit in 2022 challenging the constitutionality of a $10 million state legislative appropriation made to the Midsouth Association of Independents Schools.

鈥淪ection 208 expresses a simple principle: public money shall go to public schools,鈥� McDuff told a three-justice panel of the nine-member Supreme Court on Tuesday.

Only justices Leslie King of the Central District, Robert Chamberlin of the Northern District and David Ishee of the Southern District heard the oral arguments, though it is possible that all nine justices will rule on the issue. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court by state Attorney General Lynn Fitch after Hinds County Chancellor Crystal Wise Mastin ruled the Legislature鈥檚 action was unconstitutional.

Justin Matheny of the Attorney General鈥檚 Office argued Tuesday that it was OK for the Legislature to appropriate the money to the state鈥檚 private schools for infrastructure repairs because the funds were not state money but were part of the more than $1 billion in federal funds provided to the state for COVID-19 relief.

Additionally, Matheny pointed out the funds were not directly appropriated to the private schools by the Legislature, but to the state Department of Finance and Administration with the instruction to send the money to the private schools in the form of grants. King of the Central District, who presided over the three-justice panel, told Matheny that it was the custom of the Legislature to appropriate most funds to state agencies with instructions to provide the money to the entity that the Legislature intended to receive the funds.

Matheny also argued that the Parents for Public Schools was not directly harmed by the Legislature鈥檚 action so the advocacy group did not have standing to bring the case. Bardwell argued that the group as taxpayers, including taxpaying parents of public school students, did have standing.

King asked Matheny if he was arguing that sometimes there is no one with standing to file a lawsuit challenging a legislative action as unconstitutional.

Matheny replied, 鈥淚t is possible and it should not bother anyone鈥� since no one was harmed by the legislative action. He said the appropriated money was not state funds reserved for public schools, so no one was harmed.

Chamberlin then posed a hypothetical to McDuff: If Congress earmarked money specifically for private schools, would the Mississippi Legislature be able to appropriate it to the private schools then? McDuff replied the Legislature would not under Section 208 of the state constitution. Of course, under Chamberlin’s hypothetical, Congress could bypass the Legislature and send money directly to the private schools just as it did to public schools as part of some of the COVID-19 relief funds.

The money the Legislature appropriated to the private schools in 2022 was part of a pot of federal discretionary funds that were sent to the states to be used in numerous areas, including on infrastructure improvements. But since the money was public, Bardwell and McDuff argued, in Mississippi it could not go to private schools.

Buck Dougherty of the Liberty Justice Center argued that the private schools should be allowed to intervene in the case. The private schools were not allowed to intervene in the lower Hinds County Chancery Court. Martin, the judge in the original case, ruled that the request to intervene was made too late.

In addition, Dougherty argued that Section 208 of the state constitution violates the U.S. Constitution. He said that constitutional provisions in various states prohibiting public money from going to private religious schools have been ruled as unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.

But Bardwell pointed out that the issue is not public money going to religious schools.

He said the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that 鈥渢he state is not obligated to fund private schools.鈥� But if a state is providing funds to a private school, it cannot discriminate against religious schools. The key difference, Bardwell said, is that Mississippi Constitution’s Section 208 prohibited public funds from going to all private schools.

Numerous people on both sides of the issue attended the Tuesday oral arguments in downtown Jackson.

This first appeared on and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

TOPEKA 鈥� Rep. Kristey Williams and Sen. Renee Erickson agreed there was little value in convening a task force to study the state鈥檚 shortfall in funding public school special education programs because the financial issues were too complex and the only remedy suggested by education advocacy groups was too simplistic.

The lawmakers said it would be folly to hold hearings of the Special Education and Related Services Task Force with legislators, teachers, parents and other stakeholders to gather testimony and shape recommendations on a fix for the 2024 Legislature.

The goal of the task force, required by a bill approved by the 2023 Legislature, was to figure out how best to comply with an older statute mandating that state funding cover 92% of the extra cost of providing services to K-12 special education students statewide. Currently, state aid was sufficient to address 69% of school districts鈥� excess special education costs. The balance must be made up by local school districts.

鈥淭here is no way a funding task force could begin to crack that code,鈥� said Williams, an Augusta Republican.

Erickson, a Wichita Republican, said the Kansas State Board of Education and an assortment of public education organizations had offered one remedy to the 92% dilemma 鈥� appropriation of nearly $200 million annually to close the gap.

鈥淲e do not need a special education task force meeting to consider their position,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e have their input, which is just more money. We don鈥檛 need a task force to convene to discuss that part.鈥�

On Friday afternoon, however, Williams and Erickson were expected to sit down with others on the task force for their first and, perhaps, only meeting. The gathering might not have occurred had a six-person majority of task force members not invoked parliamentary procedure in November to force Williams鈥� hand. She relented and set the meeting for three days prior to start of the 2024 session.

Task force rebellion

Interim legislative meetings typically take place in summer and fall to give committee members time to write reports pulling together expert testimony and outlining reform proposals for review by lawmakers during the next legislative session.

Williams, who was placed in charge of the task force pending the members鈥� election of a chair, said a mere two hours would be dedicated to oral testimony of subject-matter experts and for task force deliberations. She said written testimony would be accepted by the task force comprised of five members of the House or Senate 鈥� four Republicans, one Democrat 鈥� and six people not in the Legislature.

The list of 13 given a chance to speak for five minutes each to the task force included people with the Kansas Association of School Boards, Kansas National Education Association, Kansas PTA, Game On for Kansas Schools as well as the Kansas State Department of Education and the Kansas Policy Institute. School administrators and a teacher will be given a turn at the microphone, but its not clear the task force could comprehensively take input, consider options and prepare recommendations for legislators in 120 minutes.

The first order of business must be to select a chairperson of the task force. Legislators, lobbyists and educators said that step became a flash point several months ago when it appeared Williams lacked votes among task force peers to retain the position of task force chair. In response, special education advocates said, Williams stonewalled and publicly expressed skepticism the task force was worthwhile.

In an interview in October, Louisburg GOP Sen. Molly Baumgardner, who chairs the Senate Education Committee, dismissed that theory. She said the delay wasn鈥檛 inspired by Williams鈥� unwillingness to give up narrative control of the task force.

鈥淎nytime you鈥檙e trying to schedule when we鈥檙e not in session, it is a real juggling match to get folks together,鈥� said Baumgardner, who is on the special education task force. 鈥淵ou鈥檙e trying to satisfy a variety of different schedules so that the largest number of folks can be there and participate and we鈥檝e had some problems with interim meetings, just scheduling times.鈥�

A majority of the task force made multiple requests of Williams to move ahead with the task force鈥檚 work before deploying a procedural maneuver to compel the meeting. Williams set the meeting for 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. Friday in Room 112-North of the Capitol.

鈥楴ot 鈥� going away鈥�

Kansas spends more than $500 million annually in federal, state and local funding on special education services in public schools, but hasn鈥檛 complied with the 92% requirement since 2011. However, the statute didn鈥檛 include enforcement mechanisms to compel the Legislature to meet the obligation.

The idea of convening a task force was viewed as an alternative to the 2023 Legislature dealing with a situation in which districts had to pull money from the general education budget to fill the special education gap. Instead of allocating $182 million to meet the statewide shortfall in the 2023-2024 school year, the Legislature agreed to increase appropriations for special education by $7.6 million for the year.

Gov. Laura Kelly, a Democrat, endorsed a plan to add $72 million in 2024 to initiate a five-year plan to surge special education aid to 92%. The state Board of Education preferred a four-year strategy that would infuse $82 million annually to reach that threshold.

Williams and other legislators rejected the phased concepts and endorsed appointment of a task force on special education. She also urged the Legislature to complete a rewrite of the state鈥檚 special education funding blueprint by 2027.

Rep. Adam Thomas, an Olathe Republican on the task force, said he was convinced the Legislature had to rework the state鈥檚 special education formula to correct inconsistencies in distribution of money to districts.

鈥淭he formula itself is confusing. There鈥檚 some flaws in statute,鈥� he said. 鈥淥bviously, we know after all these conversations about special ed, it鈥檚 not something that鈥檚 going to go away.鈥�

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Kansas Reflector maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sherman Smith for questions: info@kansasreflector.com. Follow Kansas Reflector on and .

Facing some of the highest property taxes in the nation, Texas voters could sign off on a in the Nov. 7 .

Early voting is under way for the slew of proposed amendments. Proposition 4 would allow the state to spend $18 billion on property tax cuts for homeowners and businesses, cut school districts鈥� tax rates and enact other tax changes.

Whether Texas can afford those tax cuts in the long term remains unanswered. Lawmakers tapped a record $33 billion surplus this year, fueled by the state鈥檚 robust economic growth and federal COVID-19 relief money, to cover an increase in the state鈥檚 contribution to public schools, a shared cost between the state and school districts.

Republican tax-cut warriors have heralded the tax-cut package, which gained bipartisan support in both chambers of the Texas Legislature, as unprecedented tax relief for homeowners and business owners. Public education advocates, meanwhile, warn that the proposal could imperil public school funding and lead to future school budget cuts. And renters would see no direct tax relief should the constitutional amendment pass.

The entire property tax-cut package is $18 billion altogether, but it includes $5.3 billion in cuts lawmakers approved in prior years. If voters approve the constitutional amendment, the state would send $12.7 billion to school districts so they could pay for new cuts to their property tax collections, which make up the bulk of landowners鈥� property tax bills. Of that, $5.6 billion will go toward more than doubling Texas鈥� main tax break for homeowners 鈥� the state鈥檚 homestead exemption on school district taxes, or the chunk of a home鈥檚 value that can鈥檛 be taxed to pay for public schools. The constitutional amendment would raise the exemption from $40,000 to $100,000.

The rest of that money 鈥� some $7.1 billion 鈥� will go toward paying school districts to lower their tax rates by replacing local property tax dollars with state sales tax revenue, a tax-cut method lawmakers refer to as 鈥渃ompression.鈥� Doing that would lower the tax rate school districts use to pay for operating costs, like teacher salaries, by 10.7 cents per every $100 of property value.

Together, those measures will translate to major tax savings for Texas homeowners, proponents argue.

Had the ballot measure been in place last year, the owner of a home appraised at the state鈥檚 median sales price 鈥� $340,000 鈥� paying the average school tax rate would have spent about $940 less on their property tax bill, according to a Texas Tribune analysis. That comes out to a little less than $80 a month.

State Sen. , a Houston-area Republican and Lt. Gov. 鈥檚 chief lieutenant on property taxes, said homeowners can expect bigger savings in the next few years. The typical Texas homeowner could see more than $2,500 in tax savings the first two years, according to figures provided by his office.

鈥淚t鈥檚 their money coming back to them,鈥� Bettencourt said. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 what should happen when the government has a surplus.鈥�

Cutting Texans鈥� property taxes was a top priority this year for Republican lawmakers, who pledged to use a record state surplus to deliver relief to taxpayers. After months of GOP infighting over how to achieve those cuts, state lawmakers sent Gov. a $12.7 billion tax-cut proposal in July. Abbott signed the proposal into law, but voters have the final say in whether to cut their own taxes.

Public education advocates worry that, in the event of an economic downturn, sales tax dollars would dry up 鈥� leading to budget cuts at the state level and leaving school districts in the lurch.

鈥淭hat鈥檚 going to put our schools on a pogo stick that鈥檚 going to jump up and down with the economy and have no stability,鈥� said Chandra Villanueva, director of policy and advocacy at the left-leaning Every Texan.

Republican lawmakers are betting that the state鈥檚 massive economic growth will allow them to maintain the cuts for the time being. Texas Comptroller Glenn Hegar recently projected that Texas would avoid a recession and have an $18 billion surplus when lawmakers return to Austin in January 2025.

鈥淚鈥檓 quite confident that for the foreseeable future, we鈥檒l be fine,鈥� Bettencourt said.

But Bettencourt acknowledged that lawmakers would have to revisit the cuts if the Texas economy takes a turn for the worse 鈥� though the boost in the homestead exemption would have to remain, given that it would be written into the state鈥檚 constitution.

Beyond explicit tax cuts, the package includes other tax reforms.

For the first time, some businesses will see a limit on how much their appraised property values, a key factor in the equation of how property tax bills get calculated, can grow each year. Homeowners already benefit from a 10% cap on how much their taxable home value can grow each year. But businesses currently don鈥檛 have such a cap.

The new cap would apply to commercial, mineral and residential properties that don’t receive a homestead exemption 鈥� like rental homes and apartment buildings 鈥� that are appraised at less than $5 million. Should voters greenlight the proposition, appraisal districts could not raise the taxable value of those properties by more than 20% each year for the next three years. The cap would expire in 2026 unless lawmakers and voters decide to extend it.

Tax policy experts have doubted the effectiveness of such a cap. Property values surged in 2022 amid the state鈥檚 exploding population and job growth, according to figures provided by the comptroller鈥檚 office. But outside of 2022, that kind of value growth wasn鈥檛 typical for most types of properties, even as Texas boomed over the past decade. Owners of commercial properties in 2022 saw the market value of their holdings grow by 15% on average 鈥� short of the 20% cap.

If those property owners saw their values hit the 20% limit each year, local governments and school districts could just raise their tax rate to make up for revenue lost to lower property appraisals, said Lynn Krebs, a research economist at the Texas Real Estate Research Center at Texas A&M University 鈥� resulting in higher tax rates for all property owners.

鈥淲e tend to look at it just on face value and say, 鈥楬ey, we’re not going to make you pay tax on more than a 20% increase, isn’t that wonderful?鈥欌�� Krebs said. 鈥淲hat does that mean in reality for everybody else? It means that they鈥檙e going to have to pay more to make up for that loss in revenue. The revenue is going to come from somewhere.鈥�

The proposition would also exempt more businesses from having to pay the state’s franchise tax. If approved, the amendment would also allow voters to handpick three members to serve on their local appraisal district’s board of directors. Currently, people are appointed to those posts.

The tax-cut package before Texas voters notably leaves out a key class of Texas taxpayers: renters.

Renters make up more than one-third of the state鈥檚 households and pay one-quarter of the state鈥檚 school property taxes through their monthly rent, according to the comptroller鈥檚 office. With high rents across the state, tenants spend significantly more of their household income on keeping a roof over their heads than homeowners. Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have tax-cut programs aimed at providing property tax relief to renters, particularly seniors and low-income tenants.

But GOP lawmakers ultimately excluded any direct relief for renters when crafting the tax-cut package before Texas voters. Tax-cut proponents have occasionally argued that renters benefit from tax rate compression because their landlords won鈥檛 charge as much in rent if their taxes aren鈥檛 as high. Though property taxes make up about 20% of the rent bill, they鈥檙e not the only factor in determining rents 鈥� which are ultimately determined by the market.

鈥淟egislators, at this point, don鈥檛 feel enough pressure yet to provide solutions for renters,鈥� said Ben Martin, research director for Texas Housers, a housing advocacy group for low-income Texans. 鈥淯ntil legislators feel that pressure heat up to provide solutions for renters, it鈥檚 not surprising that they鈥檙e not going to do anything. But the data is really clear: That鈥檚 where the need is.鈥�

Disclosure: Every Texan and Texas A&M University have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete .

This article originally appeared in at .

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

With an expected special lawmaking session on public education on the horizon, a Texas House committee in August proposed a path forward to reach a compromise on school vouchers, one of the most polarizing issues the Texas Legislature debated this year.

The 15-member committee, composed of Republican and Democratic lawmakers, released a report that also made a number of recommendations on school finance, the teacher workforce and student outcomes.

The committee didn鈥檛 endorse outright the Legislature passing a school voucher program, which would let parents use taxpayer money to send their kids to private schools.

But if lawmakers were to approve such a program, the report said, it should be smaller in scale than the one proposed during this year鈥檚 regular legislative session and prioritize high-need students.

The committee also recommended that any voucher program approved by the Legislature should use money that is separate from the public education budget and be held accountable to taxpayers.

The report is a first glimpse at what might be the terms the House requires in order to get the chamber鈥檚 approval on a voucher program. House Democrats and rural Republicans, who have previously banded together against proposals they believe might hurt the state鈥檚 public education system, blocked vouchers during the regular session.

It remains to be seen whether the full House would agree with the committee鈥檚 recommendations for a more constrained voucher program and whether the Senate, which wanted a broader program during the regular session, would sign off on a scaled-back version. Gov. has also said he a more universal program and previously threatened to veto any diluted version.

The committee also recommended that lawmakers look into expanding educational choices that already exist within the state鈥檚 public education system, such as STEM academies, career and technical education and early-college high schools.

Committee vice chair Rep. , D-San Antonio, wrote that a school voucher program should include a sunset date to allow the Legislature to review its performance and decide whether it鈥檚 worth continuing.

鈥淲ithout accountability the Legislature is left without informational tools to monitor student progress,鈥� Gervin-Hawkins wrote.

Rep. , D-Austin, was the only committee member who didn鈥檛 add her signature to the report, writing that some of its recommendations would hurt public schools and instead included her own suggestions for giving public schools more funding for teacher pay and special education programs. Rep. , D-Houston, signed the report but wrote that he did not agree with creating any kind of voucher program.

Rep. , R-New Boston, wrote that the public education system already offers a plethora of choices for parents and students, and worried that school vouchers would open the door for public dollars to go to private institutions without any plans to ensure transparency or accountability.

鈥淎s we go forward, we cannot ignore either the right of parents to decide what is best for their children nor our constitutional mandate of maintaining 鈥榩ublic free schools,’ ” VanDeaver wrote. 鈥淚 look forward to a thorough debate and honest discussions.鈥�

House Speaker the committee in June to look into 鈥渆ducational opportunities鈥� for Texas鈥� schoolchildren ahead of an expected special session to revisit the discussion on vouchers. The committee was announced at a time when both Abbott, who has made vouchers one of his top priorities this year, and Phelan, who was mostly noncommittal on vouchers during the regular session, found rare common ground on property tax cuts.

The committee鈥檚 report comes months after the regular session ended in a between the House and Senate over , a voucher-like program that would allow parents access to a state-managed account to pay for private school tuition and other educational expenses.

Lawmakers in the House wanted nothing to do with them while the Senate tried every tactic to pass a voucher-like program, even tacking it on to the only the House advanced during the session. The lower chamber did not accept the Senate鈥檚 change and the session ended with neither a voucher-like program nor any new money for schools to pay for teacher raises and combat rising inflation.

Teacher and student outcomes

The committee report recommended that the Legislature raise the basic allotment, which is the base amount of money that school districts receive per student. Raising the allotment was a priority for cash-strapped schools going into the regular session.

The committee said raising the basic allotment will contribute to student achievement and let schools give raises to teachers, who were the only state employees not to receive a raise during the regular session.

The committee also recommended expanding the Teacher Incentive Allotment, a program that promises to pay teachers up to six-figure salaries if they meet certain performance requirements. It also recommends free pre-K for teachers鈥� children. In addition, it included recommendations to fund and establish Teacher Residency Programs, in which aspiring teachers are paired up with a teacher for a school year. Some school districts are already seeing , although they鈥檝e had to get creative on how to fund them without new funding from the state.

The report highlighted that about 1 in 3 teachers taught last year with no certification. To make the profession more accessible, the report recommended waiving certification costs for those wanting to be bilingual and special education teachers, and waiving certification costs for first-time teacher applicants.

The committee also recommended eliminating a charge school districts would incur if they hire retired teachers.

It recommended that lawmakers consider passing a policy that allows for rapid intervention when students show low proficiency in any school subjects and provide schools with tools to monitor students鈥� literacy development.

Most of these recommendations were previously made by a put together by Abbott earlier this year. Lawmakers were ready to make some of these changes with several bills during the regular session, but they also fell apart amid the debate over school vouchers.

This article originally appeared in at . The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.