Bills look to expand North Dakota student opportunities through savings accounts
From the left, Rep. Pat Heinert, R-Bismarck, Shane Goettle, Joy-Nicole Smith and Sen. Michelle Axtman, R-Bismarck, participate in a meeting of the North Dakota Educational Opportunities Task Force on Thursday, Sept. 26, 2024. The Legislature is considering several school choice proposals. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor)
North Dakota lawmakers are weighing several proposals to establish Education Savings Accounts, but the eligibility, method of payment and amount students may receive differs.
Supporters say they want to give families more options but opponents object to using public dollars to pay for private school tuition.
Legislators have already demonstrated support for school choice, approving a bill in 2023 that would have provided $10 million in state funding to offset the cost of private school tuition for students who met income requirements.
The bill was vetoed by then-Gov. Doug Burgum, who at the time said he supported the concept but didn't think the bill went far enough to promote competition or expand options in rural areas. He also called for more transparency and accountability.
'I can say confidently today that he (Burgum) was most definitely correct,' said Sen. Michelle Axtman, R-Bismarck, during a hearing last week.
Axtman is the prime sponsor of Senate Bill 2400, which would provide a $1,000 Educational Savings Account for every student, whether they attend public or private school or are homeschooled.
Students attending private schools could qualify for $2,500 or $4,000 per year if their households meet certain income thresholds.
'This bill isn't about one educational option over another,' Axtman said. 'This bill is about increasing educational opportunities for each and every North Dakota student.'
The savings accounts can cover tuition, fees, textbooks, school meals, educational therapy and tutoring, among other educational items and services. Axtman added North Dakota would be the first state to cover student mental health services through the accounts.
Participating private schools would have to meet accountability requirements. For example, students who pay for school with a voucher would need to participate in statewide tests, with school results presented to a legislative committee. The state superintendent of public instruction would administer and audit the program.
A fiscal note estimating the cost of the program had not been prepared as of last week.
Charter school bill narrowly fails in North Dakota House; Senate considers similar bill
'Unless this is going to happen for free, the money is going to have to come from somewhere, and those are public dollars,' said Nick Archuleta, president of North Dakota United, a union representing teachers and public sector employees.
Rick Diegel, superintendent of Kidder County Public Schools, used basic math during his testimony in opposition to Axtman's bill and said the total for about 120,000 North Dakota students to receive at least $1,000 would bring the cost to about $120 million per school year.
In an interview, Axtman acknowledged $120 million per year would be a conservative estimate. She added she doesn't expect every North Dakota student will use the entire amount in their savings account every year.
Alexandre Fall, a senior associate with Pew Charitable Trusts who has studied school choice programs, said Education Savings Accounts have increased in popularity since 2020. The costs can be difficult to estimate because budget analysts don't know how many students will use the programs or transition from public to private education or homeschooling, he said.
'Once these programs become more popular, we'll have a better understanding of the cost mechanisms and the shifts in enrollment,' Fall said. 'But it's a very new policy and it is surrounded by a lot of uncertainty.'
Archuleta said siphoning of tax dollars to fund something that isn't for a public purpose, like private school tuition, means less money for public education, roads or anything else providing a public good for the state.
He said future Legislatures would need to continue funding the program, even in years with tight budgets.
Armstrong's first budget proposal addresses prison crowding, invests in housing
In Gov. Kelly Armstrong's budget proposal, he calls for a 2% annual increase to the K-12 funding formula, or an additional $60 million, which would bring total K-12 education spending to $3.12 billion for the 2025-27 biennium.
'We don't think it's enough,' Archuleta said. 'I think we can do better.'
Armstrong's budget also included $44.3 million for Education Savings Accounts.
Supporters of school choice, including Armstrong, have said the initiatives can be funded in addition to the traditional K-12 system.
Page Forrest, a senior associate with Pew Charitable Trusts, said education systems across the country have faced budget crunches, in part due to the expiration of federal pandemic aid.
'If budgets continue to tighten across the country, that means it may feel like public schools and nonpublic alternatives are competing for an increasingly smaller piece of the pie, even if they are being funded as separate entities,' Forrest said.
A separate proposal from Rep. Pat Heinert, R-Bismarck, takes a different approach. House Bill 1590 would establish what he calls education services accounts that would require matching dollars from families.
Families can deposit up to $2,000 per child and the Bank of North Dakota would provide funds to match 50%.
The dollars could be spent on private school tuition, dual-credit courses, vocational and technical courses, online courses and other approved programs.
Students could use the money in the accounts to pay for school meals, tutoring, mental health counseling and special needs programs, higher education entrance exams, other educational materials and education-related camps.
'Every student in the state of North Dakota is eligible to participate at whatever dollar amount they are comfortable putting into an account,' Heinert said. 'The idea of a match is not acceptable to many, but I think it makes the program go farther.'
Legislative Council estimates the program would cost $41.2 million.
Heinert's bill is a pilot program that would run through the 2026-27 school year.
'We've got two years to look at this,' he said. 'We've never done this before in North Dakota. We've tried. We've never got it accomplished. It's time though.'
Two similar proposals would provide state funding to be used toward private school tuition or homeschool expenses.
Senate Bill 2303, sponsored by Sen. Mike Wobbema, R-Valley City, and House Bill 1540, sponsored by Rep. Ben Koppelman, R-West Fargo, would deposit 80% of the amount allocated to public school students, or more than $8,800, into an Education Savings Account. Another 20% would be transferred to the student's home public school district. The dollars could be used for education-related expenses, but the participating student must be counted in their home school district to provide accurate state aid payments.
The proposals don't have any income requirements. The Bank of North Dakota would administer the accounts.
The estimated cost for each bill is $243 million for 2025-2027 based on the current enrollment of private and homeschooled students.
More 2025 legislative session coverage
House Bill 1607, sponsored by Rep. Matthew Heilman, R-Bismarck, would provide state dollars for private school students. His proposal would provide the full per-pupil state aid payment, or about $11,000, for each student to be used on eligible education expenses. The families would receive the dollars on a debit card. The estimated cost is $179 million for 2025-2027. The proposal does not have income requirements.
In all cases, the actual cost of the school choice programs would depend on how many people participate.
No action has been taken on the proposals, which had public hearings last week. The Senate and House education committees are expected to discuss education savings accounts this week.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Former Border Patrol agent David Huebner challenges Nebraska U.S. Rep. Adrian Smith
David Huebner of North Platte says his background in agriculture gives him an advantage against U.S. Rep. Adrian Smith, R-Neb. (Courtesy of David Huebner for Congress) LINCOLN — A former U.S. Border Patrol agent has decided to run for Congress in Nebraska's largely rural, sprawling 3rd Congressional District. North Platte native David Huebner will try to do what other Republicans in the district haven't and beat U.S. Rep. Adrian Smith, R-Neb, in a Republican primary. Huebner said he is running to bring some 'energy back' to the seat. 'I like active and present representation,' Huebner said, 'I don't feel like we have that right now from the incumbent.' Huebner said Smith lacks a background in agriculture, and the district wants someone with that background who can advocate for rural issues. He said the issues potential voters have brought up so far are the need for increased border security and improving the agricultural economy. Huebner acknowledges he's an underdog but said he wants to give voters a choice. 'I'm getting out, meeting people … finding out what's important to them,' Huebner said. 'Life is very different in western rural Nebraska than it is in D.C. It's very easy to get out of touch up there.' Smith, from Gering, has represented the district since 2007. Before Congress, Smith served in the Legislature from 1999 to 2007. He is on the House Ways and Means Committee, which is Congress's chief tax-writing committee. The 3rd District includes central and western Nebraska and much of the state's northeastern and southeastern edges. It's one of the nation's most conservative congressional districts by political party registration advantage and voting record. Registered Republicans outnumber Democrats in the district by 197,650 voters, according to data maintained by the Nebraska Secretary of State's Office. Smith having a GOP primary opponent is nothing new. He has had at least one primary opponent in every election since 2018 and has never gotten less than 65% of the GOP primary vote. In 2018, he faced three Republican opponents, including current State Board of Education member Kirk Penner. Smith faced four GOP challengers in 2020. Huebner said he differs from previous Smith opponents because he is an active agricultural producer growing hay and raising Black Angus cattle. A Smith campaign spokesperson said the congressman is a 'proven and trusted conservative fighting for Nebraskans alongside President [Donald] Trump,' focusing on issues such as border security and making the Trump tax cuts permanent. 'Adrian has a conservative record that reflects the priorities of Nebraska's Third District,' said Chris Peterson, speaking for Smith's campaign Democrat Becky Lynn Stille has also filed to run. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
‘When's it going to stop?' Bill could open Florida Keys to new development
The Florida Keys is poised to see a flurry of new development — despite warnings that island chain is already overpopulated with worsening traffic and rising flooding risks — thanks to a new bill set to become law at the end of the month. Senate Bill 180, which primarily focuses on hurricane recovery and emergency response, would also allow up to 900 new developments over the next 10 years in the Florida Keys through a small change in the mandatory evacuation window for Monroe County, pushing it just a half hour back from 24 hours to 24.5 hours. The small tweak could have big consequences for the Keys, the only place in Florida with state controls on growth. Long-time activist Ed Davidson, chair of the environmental group, the Florida Keys Citizens Coalition, spoke out at county and state meetings against the additional development in what he sees as an already overbuilt community. 'We've long since passed our environmental carrying capacity,' he said. 'And yet every time we reach the limit we all agreed to, we simply issue more development units.' The bill sailed through the Legislature, passing nearly unanimously earlier this year, and could become law by default on July 1 or sooner, with the stroke of the governor's pen. Monroe officials also downplayed the impacts. 'They have to be distributed out over at least 10 years, I wouldn't call it a boom,' said county growth management director Emily Schemper. Limits imposed in the 1970s In the 1970s, the state put a limit on future development in the Keys, based primarily on the single road that residents have to evacuate from the numerous hurricanes that wallop the island chain. Those permits for development, also known as a Rate of Growth Ordinance or ROGO, were set to officially run out in 2023, capping development in the Keys. READ MORE ABOUT SB 180: Florida bill could block communities from rebuilding stronger after hurricanes But that year, a state study found there were almost 9,000 vacant lots still awaiting potential development, and residents and local politicians began clamoring for the right to keep building in the Keys. 'That was supposed to be the build-out of the Florida Keys. That's it. We're full. And yet when we get there, they simply ask for the same number all over again,' Davidson said. Last year, the Monroe County Commission agreed that they would be OK with upping the evacuation window to get all permanent residents — not tourists — out of the county in the event of a hurricane from 24 hours to up to 26 hours. An earlier version of SB 180 called for expanding the evacuation window to 26 hours and allowing up to 3,600 new developments over the next 40 years, but the final version settled on up to 900 over a decade by expanding the window to 24.5 hours. Still, even a slightly longer evacuation window worries some, as more hurricanes begin to rapidly intensify, or strengthen very quickly over a short period of time. Every Category 5 hurricane that's ever hit the U.S. was a tropical storm or less three days prior, according to NOAA. If signed, the 24.5-hour evacuation window in the Keys would be only for permanent residents. Tourists are supposed to leave a day earlier. 'Except there might not be an extra day. With rapid intensification, we may not have 48 hours,' Davidson said. Cory Schwisow, Monroe's head of emergency management, said the proposed update would not affect how Monroe County plans and executes evacuations. 'The emergency management director looks at each storm differently based on the size, speed, and confidence level of the track, working closely with the National Weather Service,' he wrote in a statement. 'Each storm is looked at in a unique manner and residents and visitors will be given as much time as possible to evacuate safely.' Keep the development going If passed, the bill could restart development in some Keys cities and keep the permits flowing in others. While some municipalities — like Marathon — are fresh out of new development permits, the county is still working through its supply. It should be completely tapped out by 2026, said Schemper, Monroe's growth management director. The 900 more allowed by this bill would have to be spread out over a decade, and she estimates it would take at least a year before the state and county worked out a way to begin handing them out to would-be developers. 'It could allow the county to continue giving out permits, but probably slower than we do now because there's less than we have been giving out,' she said. The bill leaves some open questions that would still have to be addressed before the permits could be handed out. For instance, the bill specifies that these new developments would be single-family. But it also says that owner-occupied, affordable and workforce housing would be prioritized for building permits. Affordable and workforce housing are often multi-family, to save on building costs. The biggest concerns seem to be with traffic, which already can be sluggish on the Overseas Highway. A county-commissioned study found that with an estimated 1,000 more developed lots, Monroe would run into issues with traffic in the upper Keys, have slightly fewer school buses than needed and potentially need to beef up its fire department. Currently, the study found, Monroe has too many drivers to keep traffic moving smoothly in Upper Matecumbe and Windley. With 1,000 more developments, Lower Matecumbe would also face traffic stress. Water, wastewater, electricity and trash needs could still mostly be met with all those extra residents, the study found. However, not everyone agrees with the findings. Steve Friedman, an Islamorada commissioner, called the concept of adding this much new development 'ludicrous.' 'None of the residents that live here, unless you own property, really want this. Nobody wants more development,' he said. 'When's it going to stop? It was supposed to stop in 2023. We have to draw the line in the sand somewhere.' The county study also did not mention sea level rise, which is already swamping some spots in the Keys regularly and driving up costs for drainage fixes. Monroe County has seven road elevation projects underway — a $300 million bill footed largely by federal and state grants. There's still $4.7 billion of road raising left to go in the next few decades for the Keys alone. Threat of lawsuits looms Other than straining environmental and governmental resources, the biggest impetus behind allowing new development in the Keys appears to be the threat of lawsuits from property owners who don't get the chance to build. The fear is that developers left at the end of the ROGO musical chairs game with an empty lot and no permit to build on it will sue for the full value of their potential property — a multi-million dollar sum. Monroe's official stance appears to be that as long as there are development permits to hand out, they can avoid lawsuits. So this bill could help stave off a potential flood of suits. 'It's not just kicking the can, it's also allowing time for additional strategies to combat that,' said Schemper, who suggested that Monroe could use the coming decade to round up more money to buy out vacant lots and halt development. Monroe just finished the paperwork on the last of its property buyouts from Hurricane Irma, a process that was so popular there was a waiting list at one point. Those homes are now empty lots, not counted in the official tally of undeveloped properties. But environmentalists like Davidson doubt that landowners actually have much of a legal case. And if a judge rules they do have standing, Davidson would like to see governments simply pony up the cash rather than allow new development. 'Unless you owned the property before critical concern was designated, you have been on public notice that we're going to run out of permits in the Florida Keys, and you might well never get a building permit,' he said. 'It is vastly cheaper to say no and pay everybody $1 million for an empty lot than to say yes and pay for all that expansion, not to mention ruining the Florida Keys.'
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
House Republicans draft competing budget as Senate nears deal with Hobbs
Photo by Jerod MacDonald-Evoy | Arizona Mirror Arizona lawmakers are at odds again, but this time it's the Republicans in the House of Representatives and Senate who can't agree on how to forge the state budget. Creating the state budget — deciding how much to allocate to departments, projects and initiatives or whether to fund them at all — is the most important job that legislators do each year, and the only thing they are constitutionally required to complete. Before the group of bills that will become the state budget becomes law, it must be approved by a majority in both the Arizona Senate and House — which are both controlled by Republicans — and garner a signature from Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs. In recent history, budget negotiations in Arizona have occurred behind closed doors among the governor and legislative leaders in the House and Senate. But this year is different, with Hobbs and Republican leaders in the Senate nearing a deal after weeks of negotiations. GOP leaders in the House, who haven't been involved in those talks, have responded by drafting their own budget, which was introduced late Wednesday afternoon. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX 'This is a sound, disciplined budget that delivers safe communities, strong families, and a government that lives within its means,' House Speaker Steve Montenegro said in a Wednesday evening statement. 'We're raising pay for our state law enforcement officers, reducing tuition at public universities, fully funding school choice, fixing critical infrastructure and roads, and protecting taxpayers. Our budget reins in government and puts it back to work for the people it serves.' But the spending package, which is chock-full of proposals that are unlikely to pass muster with Hobbs, will never become law. Instead, it is better viewed as a way for House Republicans to lay down a marker in order to force Hobbs and the Senate to move closer to the House's proposal. Republican political consultant Barrett Marson said House GOP leaders are hoping to demonstrate that the chamber can pass a spending plan in order to get leverage in the negotiations. 'Sometimes there's just gotta be movement to unstick a sticky situation,' he said. 'The House has an equal voice. And unlike previous years when one or both chambers had a go-it-alone ethos, the House isn't looking to be draconian or anything. They want something more responsible.' Marson said a major point of contention between the House and Senate is what to do with the budget surplus. While the Senate and Hobbs have settled on copying the novel process from 2023, in which each lawmaker was given a pot of money from the surplus that was used to fund whatever initiatives they wanted, the House wants to negotiate all of those details and not surrender control of that money to individual legislators. During a House Rules Committee meeting earlier Wednesday afternoon, House Minority Leader Oscar De Los Santos, of Laveen, said he was disappointed in the way the budgeting process was happening this year. 'We should not be moving forward with a House Republican-only budget that is destined to fail,' he said. 'This will not get signed by the governor. I don't even think it's going to pass out of the Senate.' De Los Santos even questioned whether the proposal would get enough votes to pass through the House, where Republicans hold 33 of the chamber's 60 seats. 'What we do know is that this is not a negotiated, bipartisan deal in good faith,' he said. 'House Democrats are at the table negotiating in a bipartisan way with the executive, with our (Senate) counterparts across the courtyard. That is the way to get things done in shared government.' But Republican Rep. Neal Carter, of San Tan Valley, replied that the work of governing should be done transparently, instead of in private — and that it should allow for input from the public. 'As a Republican, I stand for full transparency and not for back-room deals or negotiated budgets with parties that are somehow outside of this public process,' Carter said. The House Republican budget, introduced by House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Livingston, proposes significant changes in how federal money allocated to the state, but not restricted to specific uses, is controlled. The billions in unrestricted federal funds, currently controlled by the governor, would shift to legislative control and could only be spent on essential government services. The House GOP's budget proposal would also place new restrictions and monitoring requirements on entitlement programs, like the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System — the state's Medicaid program — and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly called food stamps. Both programs would be monitored on at least a quarterly basis for participants who don't qualify, to be kicked off. And any participants who win $3,000 or more through gambling or playing the state lottery and don't report those winnings would become ineligible. It would also give the Arizona Department of Economic Security the authority to screen recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families for illegal drug use and would ban anyone who tests positive for drugs not prescribed to them from the cash assistance program for a year. House Republicans also intend to increase the percentage of money spent in K-12 classrooms, as opposed to on administration; to decrease tuition for students attending the state's three public universities; and to ban those universities from using public or private money to give scholarships to students without legal immigration status. Hobbs introduced her budget proposal, which includes a much different list of priorities, back in January. Shortly after that, Livingston and Rep. Matt Gress, R-Phoenix, panned her proposal for leaving out projected cost increases for programs like AHCCCS. Hobbs spokesman Christian Slater told the Arizona Mirror on Wednesday that Livingston and Gress were to blame for the House's lack of collaboration on the budget. 'This is DDD all over again,' Slater said via email, referring to a fight earlier this year over funding for the Department of Developmental Disabilities. 'It's another circus led by the Speaker, David Livingston, and Matt Gress where they have refused to participate with any caucuses, including their Republican counterparts in the Senate, in a meaningful manner and are once again just trying to score some political points even though they know their plan is going absolutely nowhere.' Livingston and Gress, a former budget director for Republican Gov. Doug Ducey, were both key players in the fight over an extra $122 million in emergency funding for DDD that put vital services for the developmentally disabled in jeopardy. 'Rather than being productive, the House Republican leadership continues to show they are in over their head and unserious about governing,' Slater said. The House Appropriations Committee is set to discuss the proposal Thursday morning. The Senate Republicans have not introduced their budget proposal. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
