As expected, the tug of war between school choice advocates and defenders of traditional public schools played out in Arkansas’s 91st General Assembly, which concluded its flurry of lawmaking last week.

In the wake of the 2017 legislative session, charter schools have gained the right to force school districts to sell or lease underutilized public school buildings. The Succeed Scholarship, a voucher program that uses public funds to pay private school tuition for a limited number of children with disabilities, was expanded to include foster children in group homes and to no longer require accreditation for participating private schools. The Succeed Scholarship also received a 62.5 percent increase in funding. Efforts by Democratic lawmakers to place a moratorium on new charter schools in districts under state control and to require charters to comply with the Freedom of Information Act failed in committee.

Although school choice advocates won most battles this session, they were unable to pass a bill that would have established savings accounts to be used at parents' discretion to pay for private school and other education costs. The bill had two iterations: Senate Bill 746 and House Bill 1222. Both failed in the House, with the Republican majority split on the issue. Critics said education savings accounts are a roundabout way of establishing a voucher program and that they

Rep. Mark Lowery (R-Maumelle), who was a co-sponsor of the House version of the education savings account bill, said its failure was a big loss.

“Legislators gave into the hysteria of superintendents over this program,” he said. “Many times local school districts fall into this lockstep acceptance of only doing things the way they have done them before, and there is the fear of the unknown that I think overshadows the fact that most legislators think that school choice is a positive choice in public education.”

“I think if we have that much power, that’s awesome,” said Richard Abernathy, executive director of the Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators, which represents superintendents. “Truth be known, it was poor public policy. That’s why the bill didn’t get through.”

Superintendents are perceived as having significant influence among legislators of both parties, especially in the House. In some rural House districts, public schools may be the largest employers in the community. Abernathy testified against the education savings account bill on behalf of superintendents, who view private schools as competitors. In Arkansas, education funding is tied to each student, so when students leave public school to attend private school, school districts lose money. In smaller districts, declining enrollment could also lead to the closing of schools.

Abernathy said superintendents were not the only group against the bill. SB 746 and HB 1222 had a long list of opponents, including the Arkansas Education Association (which represents public school teachers), the Arkansas School Boards Association, the Arkansas Rural Education Association and the Rural Community Alliance.

Sen. Alan Clark (R-Lonsdale) said that while the majority of people in Arkansas support school choice, “a lot of our legislators were scared to death because of superintendents and teachers. There is a very vocal element that does not support school choice.”

Clark said he worked behind the scenes with the lead sponsor of the Senate version of the bill, Sen. Blake Johnson (R-Corning), and the Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators to fix problems in the legislation, such as a lack of protection against racial discrimination in private schools.

“I dealt with every problem [the superintendents] had. Once we fixed the bill, they came up with more problems,” he said. “I think the opponents mostly worried that it would work.” Clark said he thinks school choice could be the big issue in the next election.

Tracey-Ann Nelson, the executive director of the Arkansas Education Association, said even though the education savings account bill failed, it’s not “dead forever.”

“We just get a breather,” she said adding that the next version will be “bigger, stronger, more peeling off of resources from kids.”

Clark, Lowery and House Education Committee chairman Rep. Bruce Cozart (R-Hot Springs) agreed that a bill that establishes education savings accounts will be back in future legislative sessions. The lead sponsor of the bill, Rep. Jim Dotson (R-Bentonville), said a better version of the bill will pass in a few years.

“I think we’ve started the discussion,” Dotson said. “Making K-12 education better is a continuous process. It’s not a one-time, end-all idea. This education savings account idea, it is something with broad support among parents. … Now it will just take some time for those parents to begin to have public demand for it.”

Dotson said education has developed into his “No. 1 passion.”

The contentious battles over school choice have led some lawmakers and advocates to urge Governor Hutchinson to start a comprehensive conversation on the future of education in Arkansas. Cozart and Rep. Kim Hammer (R-Benton) called on the governor to create a blue ribbon commission while speaking on the House floor against SB 746.

“If not a blue ribbon commission, then let’s put a task force together,” said Cozart during an interview. “What are we looking at in the future? Are we going to have brick-and-mortar schools? More charter schools? More private schools? More homeschoolers?”

It seems to be a bipartisan idea. “I think we are in a precarious position,” said Sen. Joyce Elliott (D-Little Rock), vice-chair of the Senate Education Committee. “We have no vision towards which we are working. We passed all kinds of disparate bills not connected to anything necessarily. That gives me a great deal of concern for what education will look like in the state in the long run.”

During the session, when asked about the possibility of creating a blue ribbon commission, Hutchinson pointed to work being done by ForwARd Arkansas — a collaboration between the Walton Family Foundation, the Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation and the Arkansas Department of Education — which is aimed at improving education in the state. Elliott, who is on the steering committee of ForwARd Arkansas, said the legislature should follow the lead of that initiative and work to create a “world class” education system in Arkansas.

State Commissioner of Education Johnny Key said he doesn’t know the likelihood of forming a blue ribbon commission on education. “That’s what adequacy does,” he said, referring to Act 57 of 2003, which requires the education committees to regularly study and make recommendations on Arkansas’s education system. Under the adequacy process, the legislature determines what level of funding the state must provide in order to offer an adequate education to all public school students.

“Before we make another blue ribbon commission, my suggestion would be to sit down before we start the adequacy review process and identify what evaluations need to happen that aren’t happening,” Key said.

Some legislators think the talk of creating a new commission was a delay tactic to avoid a difficult vote on HB 1222 and SB 746.

“I think the call for a blue ribbon commission was just an attempt to derail the education savings account debate,” Lowery said. “There is probably no area of public policy that is studied more than education.”

Dotson agreed. “I kind of view that as a delay tactic to try to stop this bill this session.  … I think we do that ad nauseam in the education committee.”

But Dotson also said he’d wholeheartedly welcome the opportunity to participate in such a committee. “If something spins out of it as a deeper look at education as a whole, I’m open to that, because education is one of those things that has the biggest impact on future generations.”

This reporting is courtesy of the Arkansas Nonprofit News Network, an independent, nonpartisan news project dedicated to producing journalism that matters to Arkansans.

Online companies that do not already collect sales tax in Arkansas will not be forced to do so by state law after a controversial bill aimed at collecting sales tax on purchases from online merchants failed in a 43-50 vote in the House Monday.

Senate Bill 140 would require online sellers that gross more than $100,000 or process at least 200 separate transactions to collect sales tax or to report annually to the state Department of Finance and Administration information about online sales in Arkansas, including the name and address of each Arkansas purchaser and the amount of money spent.

The House sponsor for the bill, Rep. Dan Douglas (R-Bentonville), said "our Main Street businesses are suffering" because online sellers do not collect and remit sales tax.

"We have to catch up with the times and that's what this bill attempts to do," Douglas said.

Critics of the bill said it would be a new tax. Proponents of the bill said online purchases were the modern equivalent of catalog purchases, and therefore should be taxed according to a 1949 law that established the collection of use tax on goods used within the state but sold by out-of-state sellers, mainly through catalogs.

"This is not a state issue. This is a federal issue," said Rep. Stephen Meeks (R-Greenbrier), speaking against the bill. Meeks referenced Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives the U.S. Congress purview over interstate commerce.

Meeks also raised concerns about the bill's reporting requirements. "We're asking these companies to tell on the citizens of Arkansas who aren't paying their taxes."

Speaking against the bill, Rep. Bob Ballinger (R-Berryville), said it would lead to a new tax burden for Arkansans.

"As it is right now, we have citizens who are not feeling this burden. This burden is not on their back. I understand their is a use tax out there. We're creating an internet sales tax that they are going to feel."

Ballinger said the legislature needs to commit to use any new revenue to lower income taxes. "We have to take a burden off if we're going to put a burden on. That's the only way I could ever support a new tax," he said.

The question of how to spend potential new revenue collected by online sellers seemed to plague the bill. Several proposals were filed in an attempt to predetermine how the money would be spent, including bills that would have required income tax reduction, sales and use tax reduction and one that would deposit money in a fund to be used by the General Assembly.

For almost two months, the bill was held up in the House Revenue and Tax Committee, having failed three times before finally passing last week. Democrats on that committee attempted to amend the bill to earmark potential new revenue to the Medicaid Program Trust Fund, and to fund rural fire and police protection grants, pre-K education, after-school programing and highway repairs.

After the bill failed to pass the House on Monday, Sen. Jake Files (R-Fort Smith) said he was disappointed in House Democrats for holding the bill in committee for so long. Democrats hold half of the seats in the House Revenue and Tax Committee, giving them more power on that committee than any other in the legislature.

"Had they let this out even a week ago, I think we were at a point were we could have voted it and then worked with some of the members to see where their concerns were," he said.

Files also said, "This was a vote that took some political courage.

"The main reason it didn’t pass was there was some confusion as to if it’s a new tax. I think the Senate got passed a lot of these issues, but the House never seemed to and a fair amount of House members insinuated they would get a primary opponent" if they voted for the bill.

A similar bill that would require the collection of online sales tax, House Bill 1388, was on the calendar in the Senate Monday, but Files said after SB 140 failed to pass the House, there was not enough support to pass HB 1388, so he decided not to run it.

"We’re going to be taking steps backwards and not deal with a issue that needs to be dealt with," Files said, adding that internet sales tax is an issue that needs to be addressed by a pending tax reform task force.

Lawmakers have speculated that sales tax collected by out-of-state online sellers could annually bring anywhere from $35 million to $150 million in revenue to the state, but, according to the Department of Finance and Administration, the revenue impact of SB 140 is unknown. There is no record of what Arkansas taxpayers are buying on the internet.

Amazon began voluntarily collecting sales tax on purchases made by Arkansas residents in March.

This reporting is courtesy of the Arkansas Nonprofit News Network, an independent, nonpartisan news project dedicated to producing journalism that matters to Arkansans.

For the second time this legislative session, a controversial bill that would establish education savings accounts to be used at parents' discretion to fund private school and other education costs failed to pass in the Arkansas House.

Senate Bill 746 failed by a 43-50 vote Friday. The bill and its predecessor, House Bill 1222, have a long list of opponents. The legislation was initially opposed by Governor Hutchinson because of its potential cost, but he later said he supported it after HB 1222 was amended to cap the growth of the program. HB 1222 failed in a 37-47 vote in the House earlier this month after passionate testimony from representatives who said the bill would negatively impact public school districts they represent. That same day, SB 746 was amended to mirror the failed legislation and was amended again a few days later in committee to address lawmakers' concerns.

Under SB 746, individuals and corporations who contribute to the education savings accounts, to be managed by nonprofit organizations, would receive an income tax credit equal to 65 percent of their donation. The donation would also qualify for a federal income tax deduction. Parents could use the dollars in the savings accounts for private school fees or home school education. The tax credits, capped at $3 million, would be awarded in the second and subsequent years of the program. The program would sunset after four years.

Rep. Jim Dotson (R-Bentonville), a lead sponsor of the bill, said on the House floor that SB 746 was "the ultimate in local control."

"When parents are given the ability to customize their child’s education, many will take advantage of the opportunity tailoring their child’s education to that child’s individual needs," Dotson said.

Critics of the bill say the education savings accounts are a voucher program. School vouchers use state money to fund scholarships that pay for students to attend private school. Opponents include the Arkansas Education Association, which represents public school teachers; the Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators, which represents superintendents; the Arkansas School Boards Association; the Arkansas Rural Education Association; the Rural Community Alliance; Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families; and the Arkansas Public Policy Panel.

Debate on the House floor lasted an hour.

While speaking against the bill, both Rep. Kim Hammer (R-Benton) and House Education Committee Chair Rep. Bruce Cozart (R-Hot Springs), called on Hutchinson to create a blue ribbon commission to determine the future direction of education in Arkansas.

Hammer said the last time there was such a commission was in 2002, and that there were now a lot more stakeholders in education: "home schoolers, private schools, charter schools, public schools, schools that have been taken over by the state, schools that have been released back by the state, probably going to be taken back over by the state.

"Where's the one point in time we can put our finger on it and say, 'This is where everybody that has an interest was allowed to come to the table and put forward a comprehensive overall plan that says this is where we are moving forward, we're not just going to go here and then go there the next time, but we're going to have one comprehensive plan'? Where is it?"

Cozart echoed Hammer's sentiments, "The future of education, if we don't do something -- it's just going to get worse. ... We've got to have a plan. We can't just come in and change things every year without a plan."

In an emailed response to questions, Governor Hutchinson said it is "undetermined at this point" whether he will appoint a panel to consider the future of education in Arkansas. In past statements, the governor has pointed to work being done by ForwARd Arkansas, a collaboration between the Walton Family Foundation, the Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation and the Arkansas Department of Education, aimed at improving education in the state.

Speaking for the bill, Rep. Ken Bragg (R-Sheridan) said there were five superintendents in his district who were against the bill, but that he was voting for it because "parents should be able to make the best education decisions for their children."

Rep. Mary Bentley (R-Perryville) encouraged her colleagues "to be bold, to be courageous, to don't listen to fear."

"I can tell you, your superintendent didn't choose you to sit in that chair," Bentley said. "God chose you to sit in that chair. God chose you to sit in that chair, and if he wants you back here in two years, if he has favor, you'll be back, that's how you're going to get here. But I'm telling you, while you're sitting in that chair, he wants you to do the right thing. He wants you to vote the right way."

Rep. Charlotte Douglas (R-Alma), vice chair of the House Education Committee, spoke in favor of the bill, saying that it would bring competition to education. "Competition in education will drive improvements that we can never legislate," she said.

Rep. Jana Della Rosa (R-Rogers) said she was against SB 746 "on principle."

"Education's not free market," Della Rosa said. "People say, 'Schools ought to be run like businesses because, you know, competition and you know, they are much more efficient and public schools are wasting all this money and students are the product' -- I've heard that a lot, students are the product. Businesses don't actually care about their product. Businesses turn out the best product they have to get or have to make to make profit, that's what businesses are actually after to make money, and I got no issue with that, but I don't really think that that ought to be the goal of education."

Governor Hutchinson said in an emailed statement that he is "doubtful" similar legislation will come up during next year's fiscal session or in a special session of the legislature. The 91st General Assembly is expected to recess after Monday's session.

Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families and the Arkansas Public Policy Panel have provided donations to the Arkansas Nonprofit News Network. Arkansas Public Policy Panel donated specifically to support legislative coverage on education issues. Donors have no say in editorial decisions.

A bill aimed at collecting sales tax on purchases from Amazon and other online merchants advanced out of the Arkansas House Revenue and Tax Committee Thursday after having failed to pass three times before in the same committee. Each time the previous vote had to be expunged before the bill could be presented again.

Senate Bill 140 would require online sellers that gross more than $100,000 or process at least 200 separate transactions to collect sales tax or to report annually to the state Department of Finance and Administration information about online sales in Arkansas, including the name and address of each Arkansas purchaser and the amount of money spent. The bill already passed in the Senate.

Sen. Jake Files (R-Fort Smith), lead sponsor of SB 140, said it was a tough bill, but it "has the opportunity to probably have the most impact of anything we do down here for all of our local businesses and for cities and counties as well, as well as the state."

Rep. Reginald Murdock (D-Marianna) proposed an amendment to Files’ bill that sought to earmark $25 million of the money collected to be added to the Medicaid Program Trust Fund, and to fund rural fire and police protection grants, pre-K education and after-school programing and $100 million to highway repairs. The panel rejected the amendment. Similar amendments proposed by Democrats on the committee previously failed to pass.

Democrats hold 10 seats in the House Revenue and Tax Committee, giving them more power on that committee than any other in the legislature.

House Minority Leader Michael John Gray (D-Augusta) said even though the amendments were not incorporated into the bill, the ideas within the amendments were brought into the conversation about how potential increased revenue from online sales tax collection could be used.

Gray said, "Having these discussions over these last 90 days about this bill and getting some real conversation with leadership on both sides of the aisle ... I don’t think those things were really being heard at the beginning of this session, but when we got to today, [we got] some real strong commitments from our friends across the aisle that those issues will be of a priority as we move forward with a new tax task force and into the new budget."

Rep. Joe Jett (R-Success), chair of the House Revenue and Tax Committee, said of the Democrats on the committee, "My commitment to them was when we get into the tax task force, I'm fully prepared to make sure their voices are heard." Jett said he told members he was only going to run the bill again if there were enough votes to pass it.

After the vote, Files told the committee, "I promise that I will work with you on this moving forward."

In a statement, Governor Hutchinson said it is premature to decide how new revenue from online tax collection should be used.

"We need more time to measure any results and to be sure current budget needs are met. I have a long term goal of reducing income tax rates, but again it is too early to make decisions on future revenue at this point," he said.

Amazon began voluntarily collecting sales tax on purchases made by Arkansas residents in March. Lawmakers have speculated that sales tax collected by out-of-state online sellers could bring anywhere from $35 million to $150 million in revenue, but, according to the Department of Finance and Administration, the revenue impact of SB 140 is unknown. There is no record of what Arkansas taxpayers are buying on the internet.

The bill now goes to the full House. Files said he is not sure what will happen.

"I think the chances there are 50/50, so it’s going to take a strong effort on the House floor to get it passed," he said. "But at least we’ve got a chance now."

This reporting is courtesy of the Arkansas Nonprofit News Network, an independent, nonpartisan news project dedicated to producing journalism that matters to Arkansans.

A controversial bill that would establish education savings accounts to be used at parents' discretion to fund private school and other education costs passed in an 11-5 vote in the Arkansas House Education Committee Tuesday.

Senate Bill 746 and its predecessor, House Bill 1222, have a long list of opponents. The legislation was initially opposed by Governor Hutchinson because of its potential cost, but he later said he supported it after HB 1222 was amended to cap the growth of the program. HB 1222 failed in a 37-47 vote in the House earlier this month after passionate testimony from representatives who said the bill would negatively impact public school districts they represent. That same day, SB 746 was amended to mirror the failed legislation and was amended again a few days later in committee to address lawmakers' concerns.

Under SB 746, individuals and corporations who contribute to the education savings accounts, to be managed by nonprofit organizations, would receive an income tax credit equal to 65 percent of their donation. The donation would also qualify for a federal income tax deduction. Parents could use the dollars in the savings accounts for private school fees or home school education. The tax credits, capped at $3 million, would be awarded in the second and subsequent years of the program. The program would sunset after four years.

Rep. Jim Dotson (R-Bentonville) told the House Education Committee Tuesday that "the bones of the bill are virtually the same" as HB 1222.

The main differences between SB 746 and the bill that failed to pass the House is that SB 746 would require that schools comply with federal anti-discrimination legislation. It also specifies that no more than 1 percent of students in a single public school district could receive an education savings account per academic year and that the funds could not be saved to pay for college expenses once a student graduates from high school.

“This puts the parent in the driver's seat for the child's education,” Dotson said.

Critics of the bill say the education savings accounts are a voucher program. School vouchers use state money to fund scholarships that pay for students to attend private school. Opponents include the Arkansas Education Association, which represents public school teachers; the Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators, which represents superintendents; the Arkansas School Boards Association; the Arkansas Rural Education Association; the Rural Community Alliance; Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families; and the Arkansas Public Policy Panel.

Alyce Love, a retired teacher from Dumas and a member of Arkansas Citizens First Congress, a coalition of organizations that work together for progressive changes in state policy, testified against the bill. She said it would divert money away from public schools.

"If Arkansas is now ready to invest more money in education, there are many proven strategies that we could invest in that would have far more benefits for all of the students than an education savings account or voucher scheme," Love said, adding that pre-K, summer and after-school programs and teacher quality would make for worthy investments.

In Arkansas, the largest portion of the cost of a public school student’s education is covered by what is called “foundation funding” — a mixture of state general revenue and local property taxes that the state collects and then remits to local school districts. The legislature has established foundation funding at $6,646 per student for the current school year. When a student leaves a public school for a private school, the foundation funding does not follow the student. The student’s former public school district does not receive foundation funding for that student the next year.

SB 746 would not directly divert public education funding to private schools as some voucher programs in other states have done. Instead, dollars that would have otherwise entered state general revenue in the form of income tax would not be received because of state tax credits granted to the donors of the nonprofits administering the education savings accounts. Those nonprofits would then be able to transfer an amount of money equivalent to foundation funding for each academic year into an eligible student’s account.

Parents could use the money in the education savings account to pay for tuition at a private school as well as for other education expenses, including uniforms, books, tutoring services, transportation and examination fees, among other things.

Proponents of the bill say it would provide opportunities for low-income students and could potentially save the state money.

"We have a potential unrealized loss in state revenue collection that is less than the realized loss in expenses that the state is obligated for," Dotson said. "So when we're no longer having to pay for that student's education directly out of the state treasury, that is a reduction in expenses that exceeds the amount of tax credits available."

This potential savings would rely on enough students leaving the public school system so that the amount of money the state would have provided for their education was more than the cost to the state to provide the tax credits, which are capped at $3 million for the second, third and fourth year of the program.

Richard Abernathy, executive director of the Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators, said in an interview that the bill would not save the state money.

"Save the state money? Lord, no. I mean, that’s good talk, but no, it’s not. Anytime you’re saying that it’s going to cost $3 million, it’s going to cost $3 million. And general revenue is going to be reduced by that, so no, it’s not going to save the state money," Abernathy said.

SB 746 requires the nonprofit organizations that would administer the education savings accounts to approve two new applications from students who attended public school during the prior year for every student who applies who did not attend public school the prior year. This provision would likely have the biggest effect in the first year when all applications will be new. In the second and subsequent years of the program, priority would be given first to eligible students who received funding in an education savings account during the previous academic year, then to those students' siblings, then to students who are eligible for free and reduced school lunch, then to dependents of members of the United Armed Forces or National Guard, then to all other students on the wait list and new applicants.

Molly Dunaway, the mother of eight children and the daughter of House Education Committee Vice Chair Charlotte Douglas, testified in favor of the bill. Dunaway said she has spent a decade homeschooling six of her children. (Two of her children are 18-month-old twins).

Dunaway said her children have costly education needs including curriculum, speech therapy, concurrent classes and ACT prep classes. She said she is part of a network of about 200 families that homeschool their children in Crawford and Sebastian counties.

"These children all belong to the state. They are all children of the state of Arkansas who all have special needs," she said.

Also testifying for the bill was retired Maj. Gen. Kendall Penn, executive director of the National Guard Association of Arkansas; Adam Thompson, regional advocacy director for ExcelinEd, a nonprofit organization founded by former Florida Governor Jeb Bush that promotes conservative education reform; and Sen. Alan Clark (R-Lonsdale).

Clark said of the bill's opponents: "The worry that this will expand? Probably will. But the only way it will expand is if this pilot program is successful. So what the people testifying against it are telling you is that they know it's going to be successful, and they don't want that because they don't want school choice."

Candace Williams with the Rural Community Alliance urged legislators to think about how this bill might affect school districts in the future.

"We're at a position now where public education is not even fully funded to the [Bureau of Legislative Research] recommendation. And we're deciding now to siphon out more public dollars to private entities, it just doesn't make sense," Williams said, adding that she comes from an impoverished community.

"I think about if this bill were around when I grew up, would my peers be able to use this? No, they would not have been able to use this bill" because of the additional costs that come with a private school education.

Tracey-Ann Nelson, the executive director of the Arkansas Education Association, said in an interview after the meeting that the bill would "allow corporations to not pay their fair share through a tax credit."

"It’s a tax credit scheme for wealthy individuals and corporations, and legislators should be ashamed to be diverting dollars from the revenue pot for the state, because the citizens of Arkansas need those resources" for education, roads, housing. "We need it for the things that all of our citizens need and not just a few," Nelson said.

Dotson said he is optimistic that this time his education savings account bill will pass in the House.

"You know, what I've learned around here is that I don't make predictions. Until the votes are cast and you see them on the board, it’s … you never know," he said. "We have a lot of support for it. More support than there was for 1222."

The bill now goes to the full House.

Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families and the Arkansas Public Policy Panel have provided donations to the Arkansas Nonprofit News Network. Arkansas Public Policy Panel donated specifically to support legislative coverage on education issues. Donors have no say in editorial decisions.

Legislation enacted in 2015 established the Succeed Scholarship, a voucher program that uses public tax dollars to pay for students with special needs to attend private schools. The student must have an Individualized Education Program, an education plan for children with disabilities in accordance with federal law. In order to participate in the scholarship, parents are required to waive their child’s federal civil rights protections under the United States' Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

The State Board of Education capped the program at 100 vouchers for the 2016-17 school year, the first year the program was available. Subsequent years do not have a voucher cap and are dependent on available funding.

Twenty-four students took advantage of the voucher this school year, according to Katie Clifford, executive director of The Reform Alliance, a nonprofit organization that promotes school choice and is tasked with administering the scholarship worth $6,646 per student for the 2016-17 school year. That sum is the base amount of per-pupil funding that a public school would receive from the state to educate the student. When a student receives a Succeed Scholarship, the money is instead diverted to a private school. The scholarship is available to any family regardless of household income. If approved, the $1.3 million appropriation for the 2017-18 school year would pay for about 200 vouchers.

There have been several attempts to expand the Succeed Scholarship this legislative session, including a bill Governor Hutchinson signed into law that permits nonaccredited schools to participate in the voucher program as long as a school has applied for accreditation. A school would then have four years to attain accreditation, during which time students would be eligible for the scholarship.

Before that law passed, 20 schools were eligible to participate in the scholarship program, “only about one-fourth of private schools in the state,” Clifford said in an interview in February, adding that most of the parents who were interested in participating in the scholarship program send their children to one of five schools currently seeking accreditation.

A bill that would also expand the program to foster children passed in a 30-1 vote in the Senate Monday. House Bill 1567 would make foster children living in group homes eligible for a scholarship. In a departure from the original intent of the voucher program, the children would not need to have an Individualized Education Program to qualify. Up to 20 vouchers could go to foster children.

Another bill that Hutchinson signed into law allows superintendents to waive the requirement that a student attend public school for a year before being eligible to participate in the Succeed Scholarship.

This reporting is courtesy of the Arkansas Nonprofit News Network, an independent, nonpartisan news project dedicated to producing journalism that matters to Arkansans.

A bill that would give teeth to a law that requires dyslexia screening and intervention in public schools passed by unanimous voice vote out of the Senate Education Committee Monday.

A version of the bill failed to pass last week. That vote was expunged before Sen. Joyce Elliott (D-Little Rock), lead sponsor of Senate Bill 708, presented an amended bill.

In 2013 a law was enacted that required school districts to screen all students in kindergarten through second grade for dyslexia so that the necessary intervention services could be offered to students in need.

SB 708 would strengthen the reporting requirements of the law. Superintendents would be required to post information about the dyslexia program on a public school district website or in writing to parents. The bill would also codify enforcement measures. A public school district that failed to comply could be placed on probation and would have to post on its website or notify parents in writing the reason for its probationary status. The bill was amended to eliminate a Nov. 15 deadline for screenings and to limit the information that superintendents would be required to report. SB 708 no longer includes a deadline for screenings.

Elliott told the committee, "Of all the things we have done in here, all the the tests that we're talking of giving, all the classes that we're talking about making kids take, the seminal issue we have in our state is a reading issue. We can give the kids all the tests we want, but if they can't read it, that's a problem."

The National Institutes of Health defines dyslexia as a type of learning disability that impairs a person’s ability to read. It is not connected to a person’s IQ. “People with dyslexia usually have trouble making the connections between letters and sounds and with spelling and recognizing words,” an NIH website reads.

In the 2015-16 school year, there were 4,341 students in Arkansas identified with dyslexia, according to the 2015 adequacy study conducted by the state Bureau of Legislative Research.

This reporting is courtesy of the Arkansas Nonprofit News Network, an independent, nonpartisan news project dedicated to producing journalism that matters to Arkansans.

A passionate group of parents and reading advocates left the state Capitol disappointed but determined not to give up last week when a bill that would give teeth to a law that requires dyslexia screening and intervention in public schools failed to pass out of a Senate committee.

The National Institutes of Health defines dyslexia as a type of learning disability that impairs a person’s ability to read. It is not connected to a person’s IQ. “People with dyslexia usually have trouble making the connections between letters and sounds and with spelling and recognizing words,” an NIH website reads.

In the 2015-16 school year, there were 4,341 students in Arkansas identified with dyslexia, according to the 2015 adequacy study conducted by the state Bureau of Legislative Research.

Kim Head, the mother of two sons with dyslexia, attended the Senate Education Committee meeting Wednesday. “When a law is passed there is the assumption that it will be followed, and when it’s not, what do you do?” she asked a reporter.

In 2013 a law was enacted that required school districts to screen all students in kindergarten through second grade for dyslexia so that the necessary intervention services could be offered to students in need.

Senate Bill 708 would set a Nov. 15 deadline for screenings and would strengthen the reporting requirements of the law. Superintendents would be required to post information about the dyslexia program on a public school district website or in writing to parents. The bill would also codify enforcement measures. A public school district that failed to comply could be placed on probation and would have to post on its website or notify parents in writing the reason for its probationary status.

Sen. Joyce Elliott (D-Little Rock) filed SB 708. “I’m hearing over and over and over again to the point of ad nauseam that there are some school districts that are not doing what they need to do per the legislation or per the needs of kids who are dyslexic,” she said.

The 2015 adequacy study found that in the 2015-16 school year, there were 4,645 students in Arkansas who were receiving services through their district’s dyslexia program. But Elliott said some districts are not testing students until late in the school year.

“There are school districts who are using the old notion of fail first before you get intervention, and that’s just unacceptable,” she said.

Sen. Jane English (R-North Little Rock), chair of the Senate Education Committee, initially declared the bill had passed by a voice vote with some dissent, which prompted supporters of the bill to start clapping. Sen. Bart Hester (R-Cave Springs) then called for a roll call, and the vote was split on party lines. The three Democrats on the committee voted in favor, while three of the five Republicans voted against it, and the other two abstained from voting.

Sen. Alan Clark (R-Lonsdale), who did not vote on the bill, said he had walked into the meeting late and had not heard Elliott’s presentation. Sen. Blake Johnson (R-Corning), who also abstained from voting, said, “It’s a matter of enforcing law we got on the books. That’s why I didn’t vote for it at all. I think we’ve got something on the book and we need to enforce what we got.”

Hester said that the focus on students with dyslexia meant other students who need reading intervention were being overlooked.

“We understand that we have a finite amount of resources and with these bills we’re saying we’re focusing these resources down here, which means other kids not in that box get less resources,” Hester said.

Richard Abernathy, executive director of the Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators, which represents superintendents, answered questions during the committee meeting at the request of Johnson for feedback “from somebody in the field.”

Abernathy said dyslexia screening usually happens on the first day of the school year. He also said the dyslexia screening law has shifted the emphasis of some schools’ intervention programs. “It’s more zeroed in dyslexia. Is that a good thing? Bad thing? You know, that’s a policy decision, but it has, in fact, shifted personnel in order to implement this law.”

The Arkansas Association of Education Administrators has not taken a position for or against SB 708.

Johnson and Sen. Jim Hendren (R-Gravette) expressed concerns that the reporting requirements in SB 708 would be overly burdensome for school districts.

Hendren said in an interview after the vote that he does not think SB 708 is a bad bill, but he thinks more paperwork is not productive. “We have good intentions but we continue to pile more and more paperwork and reporting procedures and administrative load on the school districts to where teachers can’t teach anymore.”

Dale Query, a retired superintendent at Flippin School District, spoke in favor of the bill. “We have found that dyslexia intervention is one of the most effective things we have every done — ” at this, supporters of the bill broke in with applause “— to bring nonreaders up to level and get them engaged in the process.”

While no other supporters of the bill testified, the committee chair asked them to stand to be recognized. About half of the people in the room stood.

Sen. Uvalde Lindsey (D-Fayetteville), who voted for the bill, said in an interview after the committee meeting had adjourned, “All of our school districts are different, and we believe strongly in local control, all of us do. It just personified itself in this particular bill. I don’t think it says anything about how we feel about dyslexia or what we need to do to combat dyslexia because it’s something that affects a lot of kids.”

Lindsey said he was hopeful SB 708 might still pass out of committee this legislative session. “We’ll come back,” he said, adding that the supporters of the bill should also “come again and fight the fight.”

On Friday, Elliott said in a phone interview that she was surprised the bill failed. “I do not know what happened. I did not have any indication that there was going to be a problem with this bill.”

Elliott said the concerns brought up in committee were worthy issues and that she would be making some changes to the bill before bringing it back to committee on Monday.

A bill that would expand a special-needs education voucher program to include foster children passed on a voice vote with some dissent in the Senate Education Committee Wednesday.

Legislation enacted in 2015 established the Succeed Scholarship, a voucher program that uses public tax dollars to pay for students with special needs to attend private schools. The student must have an Individualized Education Program, an education plan for children with disabilities in accordance with federal law. In order to participate in the scholarship, parents are required to waive their child’s federal civil rights protections under the United States' Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

House Bill 1567 would make foster children living in group homes eligible for a scholarship. In a departure from the original intent of the voucher program, the children would not need to have an Individualized Education Program to qualify. Up to 20 vouchers could go to foster children.

Rep. Kim Hammer (R-Benton), lead sponsor of the bill, said, "If you have a foster child,  they may not necessarily have an IEP, but that doesn’t mean they don't have needs that the Succeed Scholarship opportunity would certainly help them out."

The State Board of Education capped the program at 100 vouchers for the 2016-17 school year, the first year the program was available. Subsequent years do not have a voucher cap. An appropriation bill for the state Department of Education calls for $800,000 to fund the Succeed Scholarship program for the 2017-2018 school year, the same amount of funding for the program that was appropriated in the 2016 fiscal session of the General Assembly.

Democratic lawmakers in the Senate committee raised concerns about the lack of a cap in the original legislation, as well as the expanding definition of who qualifies for a scholarship.

"It’s the mission creep of it all," Sen. Joyce Elliott (D-Little Rock) said. "I could come up with a whole list of smaller groups of people who might do well under the bill."

Hammer responded, "If we identify a population of kids that need the help that this would allow, why would we not want to at least on a -  if nothing else - pilot program be able to incorporate them into the framework of this?"

Opponents of the bill also include the Arkansas Education Association, which represents public school teachers.

The Reform Alliance, a nonprofit organization that promotes school choice, administers the scholarship worth $6,646 per student for the 2016-17 school year. That sum is the base amount of per-pupil funding that a public school would receive from the state to educate the student. When a student receives a Succeed Scholarship, the money is instead diverted to a private school. The scholarship is available to any family regardless of household income.

Earlier this session Governor Hutchinson signed a bill into law that permits nonaccredited schools to participate in the voucher program as long as a school has applied for accreditation. A school would then have four years to attain accreditation, during which time students would be eligible for the scholarship.

A second bill that would allow superintendents to waive the requirement that a student attend public school for a year before being eligible to participate in the Succeeds Scholarship is awaiting the governor's signature to become law.

House Bill 1567 now goes to the full Senate.

This reporting is courtesy of the Arkansas Nonprofit News Network, an independent, nonpartisan news project dedicated to producing journalism that matters to Arkansans.

A controversial bill that would establish education savings accounts to be used at parents' discretion to fund private school and other education costs passed in a 22-5 vote in the Arkansas Senate Tuesday.

Senate Bill 746 and its predecessor, House Bill 1222, have a long list of opponents. The legislation was initially opposed by Governor Hutchinson because of its potential cost, but he later said he supported it after HB 1222 was amended to cap the growth of the program. HB 1222 failed in the House last Thursday after passionate testimony from representatives who said the bill would negatively impact public school districts they represent. That same day, SB 746 was amended to mirror the failed legislation.

Under SB 746, individuals and corporations who contribute to the education savings accounts, to be managed by nonprofit organizations, would receive an income tax credit equal to 65 percent of their donation. The donation would also qualify for a federal income tax deduction. Parents could use the dollars in the savings accounts for private school fees or home school education. The tax credits, capped at $3 million, would be awarded in the second and subsequent years of the program. The program would sunset after four years.

After the House version of the bill failed to pass, the Senate version was amended to address lawmakers' concerns. The amended bill would require that schools comply with federal anti-discrimination legislation. It also specifies that no more than 1 percent of students in a single public school district could receive an education savings account per academic year and that the funds could not be saved to pay for college expenses once a student graduates from high school.

“Not every child fits within the box of public education, but public education has to serve every child,” Sen. Blake Johnson, (R-Corning), lead sponsor of SB 746, said. “This program will not destroy our responsibility to the children of Arkansas, it will just give opportunity to children who don't fit in the box.”

Critics of the bill say the education savings accounts are a voucher program. School vouchers use state money to fund scholarships that pay for students to attend private school.

In Arkansas, the largest portion of the cost of a public school student’s education is covered by what is called “foundation funding” — a mixture of state general revenue and local property taxes that the state collects and then remits to local school districts. The legislature has established foundation funding at $6,646 per student for the current school year. When a student leaves a public school for a private school, the foundation funding does not follow the student. The student’s former public school district does not receive foundation funding for that student the next year.

SB 746 would not directly divert public education funding to private schools as some voucher programs in other states have done. Instead, dollars that would have otherwise entered state general revenue in the form of income tax would be diverted to the nonprofits administering the education savings accounts. Those nonprofits would then be able to transfer an amount of money equivalent to foundation funding for each academic year into an eligible student’s account.

Parents could use the money in the education savings account to pay for tuition at a private school as well as for other education expenses, including uniforms, books, tutoring services, transportation and examination fees, among other things.

Speaking against the bill, Sen. Joyce Elliott (D-Little Rock) said, “What’s bad about this whole thing is we don’t have a plan for education in our state. We’re just doing this and doing that, and we’re just doing most of it in the name of choice.

“What I’m really speaking against is the way I see us watering down our future. … The more we water it down, we guarantee everybody rather mediocre schools.”

Speaking for the bill, Sen. Jim Hendren (R-Gravette) said he was “somewhat reluctant initially” but became a co-sponsor of the bill after it was amended.

“We strive for a world class public education system, but the fact is sometimes we also have an obligation to stop and step back and say, ‘Does it work for everybody?’ and ‘Can it do better?’ ”

Hendren said the bill could make “it much better for a few kids,” and that in general, “competition makes you better.”

“This bill is an opportunity to encourage all of our students, our charter schools, our private schools, our home schools and our public schools to strive for excellence,” he said.

The bill now goes to the House.

This reporting is courtesy of the Arkansas Nonprofit News Network, an independent, nonpartisan news project dedicated to producing journalism that matters to Arkansans.

A controversial bill that would establish education savings accounts to be used at parents' discretion to fund private school and other education costs passed in a voice vote with some dissent in the Senate Education committee Monday.

A version of the bill failed to pass in the House in a 37-47 vote last week.

Senate Bill 746, and its predecessor, House Bill 1222, has a long list of opponents. The legislation was initially opposed by Governor Hutchinson because of its potential cost, but he later said he supported it after HB 1222 was amended to cap the growth of the program.

Under SB 746, individuals and corporations who contribute to the education savings accounts, to be managed by nonprofit organizations, would receive an income tax credit equal to 65 percent of their donation. The donation would also qualify for a federal income tax deduction. Parents could use the dollars in the savings accounts for private school fees or home school education. The tax credits, capped at $3 million, would be awarded in the second and subsequent years of the program. The program would sunset after four years.

On Monday, the Senate version of the bill was amended to address some lawmakers' concerns about the bill. The amended bill would require that schools comply with federal anti-discrimination legislation. It also specifies that no more than 1 percent of students in a school district could receive an education savings account per academic year and that the funds could not be saved to pay for college expenses once a student graduates from high school.

"We are not trying to disparage public schools," Sen. Blake Johnson, (R-Corning), lead sponsor of SB 746, said. "We can’t fit everybody into the box that we created, no matter how good the student is or how bad the student is. I just want the opportunity for all children to be educated in their way and by their parent's choice."

Critics of the bill say the education savings accounts are a voucher program. School vouchers use state money to fund scholarships that pay for students to attend private school. Opponents include the Arkansas Education Association, which represents public school teachers; the Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators, which represents superintendents; the Arkansas School Boards Association; the Arkansas Rural Education Association; the Rural Community Alliance; Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families; and the Arkansas Public Policy Panel.

Tracey-Ann Nelson, the executive director of the Arkansas Education Association, testified against the bill.

"All our students in Arkansas deserve a chance at success and the proven way to accomplish that is well resourced public schools, not a risky voucher program like education savings accounts," Nelson said.

In Arkansas, the largest portion of the cost of a public school student’s education is covered by what is called “foundation funding” — a mixture of state general revenue and local property taxes that the state collects and then remits to local school districts. The legislature has established foundation funding at $6,646 per student for the current school year. When a student leaves a public school for a private school, the foundation funding does not follow the student. The student’s former public school district does not receive foundation funding for that student the next year.

SB 746 would not directly divert public education funding to private schools as some voucher programs in other states have done. Instead, dollars that would have otherwise entered state general revenue in the form of income tax would be diverted to the nonprofits administering the education savings accounts. Those nonprofits would then be able to transfer an amount of money equivalent to foundation funding for each academic year into an eligible student’s account.

Parents could use the money in the education savings account to pay for tuition at a private school as well as for other education expenses, including uniforms, books, tutoring services, transportation and examination fees among other things.

Speaking against the bill, Richard Abernathy, executive director of the Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators, recommended the founding of a committee to explore the future of education in Arkansas.

"We need a comprehensive approach on how education is going to look, who all we're going to serve, and where we want Arkansas to be in five to 10 years," he said.

Sen. Joyce Elliott (D-Little Rock) echoed Abernathy's sentiment during discussion about the bill, saying that the "piecemeal" approach to education is not serving the state. As examples of the piecemeal approach, Elliott pointed to legislation to increase the amount of time students spend in recess, as well as the bill to require all students to pass a civics test, along with SB 746.

"I do not know how Arkansas ever becomes a state that can move forward in great leaps and bounds until we can decide what our core mission and direction are," Elliott said.

Sen. Alan Clark (R-Lonsdale) said he also would be in favor of such a committee.

In an emailed statement on the possibility of a committee to consider the future of education in Arkansas, Governor Hutchinson pointed to ForwARd Arkansas, a collaboration between the Walton Family Foundation, the Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation and the Arkansas Department of Education that's aimed at improving education in the state.

"ForwARd Arkansas has already done a great deal of work in addressing needs in this area. However, when the session is over, I look forward to discussing this with Commissioner [Johnny] Key and other education leaders," the statement read.

The bill now goes to the full Senate.

Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families and the Arkansas Public Policy Panel have provided donations to the Arkansas Nonprofit News Network. Arkansas Public Policy Panel donated specifically to support legislative coverage on education issues. Donors have no say in editorial decisions.

A bill that would establish education savings accounts to be used at parents' discretion to fund private school and other education costs failed to pass in a 35-45 vote in the House Thursday.

A Senate bill sponsored by Sen. Bart Hester (R-Cave Springs) was amended Thursday to replicate the failed House bill.

Under House Bill 1222 and Senate Bill 746, individuals and corporations who contribute to the education savings accounts, to be managed by nonprofit organizations, would receive an income tax credit equal to 65 percent of their donation. The donation would also qualify for a federal income tax deduction. Parents could use the dollars in the savings accounts for private school fees or home school education. The tax credits, capped at $3 million, would be awarded in the second and subsequent years of the program. The program would sunset after four years.

"This bill is about customizing an education opportunity for an individual student," Rep. Jim Dotson (R-Bentonville), lead sponsor of HB 1222, said.

Opponents of the bill who spoke on the House floor said not all parents would be allowed such an opportunity.

"Not every corner of Arkansas is the same," Rep. James Sturch (R-Batesville) said. "The same opportunities that exist in Northwest Arkansas do not exist in Northeast Arkansas."

Because there are not many private schools in Sturch's district, he said "many parents will not be able to take advantage of the opportunities promised in this bill simply based on where they live."

Parents could use the money in the education savings account to pay for tuition at a private school as well as for other education expenses, including uniforms, books, tutoring services, transportation, examination fees and even college, since a portion of the unused money in a savings account would carry over to the next year.

Rep. Les Warren (R-Hot Springs) echoed Struch's concerns.

"I consider this bill to be a discriminatory bill. Public and charter school kids are not eligible for these savings accounts to fund college."

Warren added, "I also see this bill as promoting a breakdown of our public schools."

If education savings accounts were established, money would be directed to unaccountable schools and there would be less funding for the public school system, Warren said.

In Arkansas, the largest portion of the cost of a public school student’s education is covered by what is called “foundation funding” — a mixture of state general revenue and local property taxes that the state collects and then remits to local school districts. The legislature has established foundation funding at $6,646 per student for the current school year. When a student leaves a public school for a private school, the foundation funding does not follow the student. The student’s former public school district does not receive foundation funding for that student the next year.

HB 1222 and SB 746 would not directly divert public education funding to private schools as some voucher programs in other states have done. Instead, dollars that would have otherwise entered state general revenue in the form of income tax would be diverted to the nonprofits administering the education savings accounts. Those nonprofits would then be able to transfer an amount of money equivalent to foundation funding for each academic year into an eligible student’s account.

Sturch also expressed concern about the bill's impact on public school districts. "Losing students has never meant increase funding for school districts. Schools still have to maintain their facilities. They still have to pay there utility bills. And they still have to try to find the same quality of education they have been with the same or less amount of money each year."

Speaking for the bill, Rep. Stephen Meeks (R-Greenbrier) cautioned lawmakers to not allow fear to sway their vote.

"All of us have gotten emails from people all across the state, and the No. 1 thing that is typically been in all the emails that I've got is fear. The fear of what might happen if we do this. I've gotten emails about how this is going to be disastrous for the public school system. How it's going to reduce funding. How -- fill in the blank.

"Do not let fear of what might happen stop the good that will come from allowing this to take place," he said.

Rep. Bob Ballinger (R-Berryville) said public schools are the backbone of the community.

"This is not going to hurt public schools! We argue for competition all the time, and so now all we are talking about is empowering the parents to help kids.

"I mean the sky is not falling every time something changes," Ballinger said.

Dotson said he has not decided whether he will seek reconsideration of HB 1222 on the House floor this legislative session. SB 746 may be heard in the Senate Education Committee next week.