logo
Relief for missed school days in doubt after picking up surprise addition in KY Senate

Relief for missed school days in doubt after picking up surprise addition in KY Senate

Yahoo07-03-2025
Sen. Aaron Reed, R-Shelbyville, speaks in favor of reversing the state school board's decision to cap enrollment at a controversial virtual school, March 6, 2025. (LRC Public Information)
FRANKFORT — A bill that began as relief for Kentucky schools from weather-related closings was transformed by the Senate Thursday into relief for a controversial virtual school.
After the Senate overhauled House Bill 241, its sponsor, Rep. Timmy Truett, an elementary school principal, said he would recommend that the House now kill it.
The Kentucky Board of Education recently limited enrollment at the Kentucky Virtual School based out of the Cloverport Independent Schools in response to concerns about poor student performance and failure to meet staffing requirements.
The bill that emerged from the Republican-controlled Senate Thursday on a 23-14 vote would block the Department of Education from enforcing the enrollment cap on the privately-operated virtual school which has students statewide.
Some Republicans joined Democrats in voting against the bill.
Supporters of the virtual school attached their provision to a bill described by Senate President Pro Tem David Givens as 'vitally important' for school districts affected by recent flooding.
State law requires districts to provide 170 student attendance days. The original bill would allow districts to have five of the required days waived and to lengthen the school day. It also granted them additional days in which students could be taught at home via virtual learning. Some schools in Eastern Kentucky have yet to reopen following floods in mid-February.
In a Thursday morning committee meeting, language from Senate Bill 268 was added to the House bill. Truett, R-McKee, told senators it was the first time he had seen the new version of his legislation.
'This bill started off as a really good bill for all the districts in the state of Kentucky, especially the districts in Eastern Kentucky where I live,' Truett said. 'But you can take a good bill and make it bad. And I'm afraid that with the amendment that may be on this bill that I would have to encourage my colleagues to be against this bill.'
The move could mean the bill doesn't pass at all this session, Truett warned.
Concerns about the Kentucky Virtual School have been reported by the Louisville Courier Journal and Lexington Herald-Leader, which highlighted numerous accusations and lawsuits raised against Stride, a for-profit company that has a contract to run the virtual academy. While it serves students across the state through online instruction, the academy is attached to Cloverport Independent Schools in Breckinridge County.
According to the media reports, the school has rapidly increased its enrollment over the past two years but state education officials say it has failed to meet staff and testing requirements. The Kentucky Board of Education recently took action to limit enrollment through a new statewide policy.
Senators debated not only the contents of the bill, but the legislative process behind it, for more than an hour Thursday afternoon. Democrats futilely attempted to argue the bill was out of order under Senate rules because it had emerged from the committee just hours earlier with significant changes.
Democratic Caucus Chair Sen. Reggie Thomas, of Lexington, cited the newspapers' reports on the floor and emphasized the legislation is a 'matter of public interest.'
'The public, I feel, does have a right to know about what we're about to do,' Thomas said.
Sen. Aaron Reed, R-Shelbyville, who was the original sponsor of the bill revoking the enrollment cap on the virtual school, cited 'emotional testimony' from parents of students enrolled at the academy. 'What I heard from parents made one thing very clear — this decision (to cap enrollment) was made without fully considering the impact on students and families who had built their education around this model. 'To me, that's not right.'
Truett heard some of the Senate debate, watching from the side of the chamber. While he was present, Sen. Lindsey Tichenor, R-Smithfield, said that she wasn't happy with Truett's original bill, but was supportive of Reed's bill, and added that her family used Stride's curriculum for homeschooling in the past.
'I'm going to encourage the House sponsor to support this bill, because House Bill 241 didn't change the way that I want to see it change,' she said before voting in favor of the bill. Tichenor had filed four floor amendments to the original version of the bill.
Truett quickly left after the vote.
Givens said he was a supporter of the new language and also supports the original provisions for making up school days missed because of weather. 'This door provides relief for those districts,' he said. 'This is vitally important that we do this.'
The House must concur with the Senate's version of HB 241. It's not the first time in recent sessions a bill has been drastically changed in one chamber. Last year, the House overhauled Senate Bill 6, which became a bill to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion in higher education. The measure died at the end of the session because the Senate and House couldn't agree.
The Cloverport district's superintendent, Keith Haynes, said in an email to the Kentucky Lantern that while he couldn't speak to the merits of the legislative process, he was supportive of the contents of SB 268 'as it affords us the opportunity to continue operating and improving the Kentucky Virtual Academy, which has provided so many students and families with the kind of school environment that best suits them.'
'Our experience with Stride has been great,' Haynes added. 'They have been highly professional and laser focused on ensuring that KYVA is the kind of school that all involved can be proud of.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Was Trump right to send National Guard to Washington, D.C.?
Was Trump right to send National Guard to Washington, D.C.?

Boston Globe

time8 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

Was Trump right to send National Guard to Washington, D.C.?

David Bumcrot Belmont Heather Mac Donald cites several shooting incidents in Washington, D.C., including two heinous crimes involving the shooting deaths of innocent young children. Nowhere does she mention how Republicans block every effort at enacting gun-control legislation. Also left out is the number of convicted felons that President Trump has pardoned. Let's stop pretending this isn't just Trump's attempt to initiate martial law. Advertisement Robyn King Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Ipswich In Trump's political theater, Washington becomes a prop President Trump's National Guard deployment to Washington, D.C. is less about public safety and more about political theater. D.C.'s violent crime rates have fallen sharply since 2023. Cherry-picking a few brutal crimes to paint the city as in crisis ignores the data and serves a narrative, not the truth. If homicide rates alone justified military involvement, other US cities — some worse off than D.C. — would already be occupied by federal troops. The National Guard's limited 'command presence' won't fix longstanding issues of gun violence, juvenile crime, or car theft. Lasting reductions come from targeted policing, intelligence-driven enforcement, and community partnerships — not a 30-day show of force. Advertisement Worse, the move undermines D.C.'s elected leadership and sets a dangerous precedent for federal overreach. Washington's majority-minority residents have endured decades of over-policing. Imposing military oversight without an emergency inflames mistrust, chills cooperation with police, and treats citizens like subjects. Real safety is built, not staged. This deployment is a political stunt masquerading as crime control — and Washington deserves better than to be used as a prop in someone else's campaign. Paul Swindlehurst Londonderry, N.H. For this administration, an easy distraction It seems our president has found the secret for making the Jeffrey Epstein controversy go away: Invade Washington, D.C. It's amazing how short the media's attention span is. They are so easily distracted by the next outrageous thing President Trump and his representatives do or say. There is no follow-up, no accountability — essentially just narration and public relations. Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon was so right: 'Flood the zone,' and you can do anything. Patricia Fabbri Lynnfield

Trump runs into the difficulty of Putin diplomacy and ending a long war

time35 minutes ago

Trump runs into the difficulty of Putin diplomacy and ending a long war

NEW YORK -- President Donald Trump walked into a summit with Russia's Vladimir Putin pressing for a ceasefire deal and threatening 'severe consequences' and tough new sanctions if the Kremlin leader failed to agree to halt the fighting in Ukraine. Instead, Trump was the one who stood down, dropping his demand for a ceasefire in favor of pursuing a full peace accord — a position that aligns with Putin's. After calls with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders, Trump wrote as he flew home from Friday's meeting in Alaska that it had been 'determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up.' It was a dramatic reversal that laid bare the challenges of dealing with Putin, a cunning adversary, as well as the complexities of a conflict that Trump had repeatedly boasted during his campaign that he could solve within 24 hours. Few details have emerged about what the two leaders discussed or what constituted the progress they both touted. The White House did not respond to messages seeking comment Saturday. While European leaders were relieved that Trump did not agree to a deal that ceded territory or otherwise favored Moscow, the summit allowed Putin to reclaim his place on the world stage and may have bought Russia more time to push forward with its offensive in Ukraine. 'We're back to where we were before without him having gone to Alaska,' said Fiona Hill, who served as Trump's senior adviser on Russia at the National Security Council during his first term, including when he last met Putin in Helsinki in 2018. In an interview, Hill argued that Trump had emerged from the meeting in a weaker position on the world stage because of his reversal. Other leaders, she said, might now look at the U.S. president and think he's 'not the big guy that he thinks he is and certainly not the dealmaking genius.' 'All the way along, Trump was convinced he has incredible forces of persuasion,' she said, but he came out of the meeting without a ceasefire — the 'one thing' he had been pushing for, even after he gave the Russian leader the 'red carpet treatment." Trump has 'run up against a rock in the form of Putin, who doesn't want anything from him apart from Ukraine," she said. At home, Democrats expressed alarm at what at times seemed like a day of deference, with Trump clapping for Putin as he walked down a red carpet during an elaborate ceremony welcoming him to U.S. soil for the first time in a decade. The two rode together in the presidential limousine and exchanged compliments. Trump seemed to revel in particular in Putin echoing his oft-repeated assertion that Russia never would have invaded Ukraine if Trump had been in office instead of Democrat Joe Biden at the time. Before news cameras, Trump did not use the opportunity to castigate Putin for launching the largest ground invasion in Europe since World War II or human rights abuses he's been accused of committing. Instead, Putin was the one who spoke first, and invited Trump to join him in Moscow next. 'President Trump appears to have been played yet again by Vladimir Putin," said Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. 'The President rolled out a red carpet and warmly greeted a murderous dictator on American soil and reports indicate he got nothing concrete in return.' 'Enough is enough," she went on. 'If President Trump won't act, Congress must do so decisively by passing crushing sanctions when we return in the coming weeks.' Sen. Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat who is the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he supports diplomacy but 'peacemaking must be done responsibly.' 'Instead of caving to Putin, the U.S. should join our allies in levying tough, targeted new sanctions on Russia to intensify the economic pressure,' he said. Trump has tried to cast himself as a peacemaker, taking credit for helping deescalate conflicts between India and Pakistan as well as Thailand and Cambodia. He proudly mediated a peace agreement between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo and another between the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan to end decades of fighting. Trump has set his eye on the Nobel Peace Prize, with numerous allies offering nominations. But Trump has struggled to made headway on the world's two most vexing conflicts: the Russia-Ukraine war and Israel's offensive in Gaza against Hamas. In Washington, the summit was met by little response from Trump's allies. Republican lawmakers who spoke out were largely reserved and generally called for continued talks and constructive actions from the Trump administration. 'President Trump brought Rwanda and the DRC to terms, India and Pakistan to terms, Armenia and Azerbaijan to terms. I believe in our President, and believe he will do what he always does — rise to the challenge,' Rep. Brian Mast, a Florida Republican who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement to The Associated Press. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, wrote on social media after the summit that 'while the press conference offered few details about their meeting" she was "cautiously optimistic about the signals that some level of progress was made." Murkowski said it 'was also encouraging to hear both presidents reference future meetings" but that Ukraine 'must be part of any negotiated settlement and must freely agree to its terms.' Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and close Trump ally, offered that he was 'very proud' of Trump for having had the face-to-face meeting and was 'cautiously optimistic' that the war might end 'well before Christmas' if a trilateral meeting between Trump, Zelenskyy and Putin transpires. 'I have all the confidence in the world that Donald Trump will make it clear to Putin this war will never start again. If it does, you're going to pay a heavy price,' he said on Fox News. For some Trump allies, the very act of him meeting with Putin was success enough: conservative activist and podcaster Charlie Kirk called it 'a great thing.' But in Europe, the summit was seen as a major diplomatic coup for Putin, who has been eager to emerge from geopolitical isolation. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of Russia's Security Council, praised the summit as a breakthrough in restoring high-level dialogue between Moscow and Washington, describing the talks as 'calm, without ultimatums and threats.' Former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt said the summit was 'a distinct win for Putin. He didn't yield an inch' but was also 'a distinct setback for Trump. No ceasefire in sight.' 'What the world sees is a weak and wobbling America,' Bildt posted on X.

Trump runs into the difficulty of Putin diplomacy and ending a long war
Trump runs into the difficulty of Putin diplomacy and ending a long war

The Hill

time2 hours ago

  • The Hill

Trump runs into the difficulty of Putin diplomacy and ending a long war

NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump walked into a summit with Russia's Vladimir Putin pressing for a ceasefire deal and threatening 'severe consequences' and tough new sanctions if the Kremlin leader failed to agree to halt the fighting in Ukraine. Instead, Trump was the one who stood down, dropping his demand for a ceasefire in favor of pursuing a full peace accord — a position that aligns with Putin's. After calls with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders, Trump wrote as he flew home from Friday's meeting in Alaska that it had been 'determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up.' It was a dramatic reversal that laid bare the challenges of dealing with Putin, a cunning adversary, as well as the complexities of a conflict that Trump had repeatedly boasted during his campaign that he could solve within 24 hours. Trump's position after the summit with Putin Few details have emerged about what the two leaders discussed or what constituted the progress they both touted. The White House did not respond to messages seeking comment Saturday. While European leaders were relieved that Trump did not agree to a deal that ceded territory or otherwise favored Moscow, the summit allowed Putin to reclaim his place on the world stage and may have bought Russia more time to push forward with its offensive in Ukraine. 'We're back to where we were before without him having gone to Alaska,' said Fiona Hill, who served as Trump's senior adviser on Russia at the National Security Council during his first term, including when he last met Putin in Helsinki in 2018. In an interview, Hill argued that Trump had emerged from the meeting in a weaker position on the world stage because of his reversal. Other leaders, she said, might now look at the U.S. president and think he's 'not the big guy that he thinks he is and certainly not the dealmaking genius.' 'All the way along, Trump was convinced he has incredible forces of persuasion,' she said, but he came out of the meeting without a ceasefire — the 'one thing' he had been pushing for, even after he gave the Russian leader the 'red carpet treatment.' Trump has 'run up against a rock in the form of Putin, who doesn't want anything from him apart from Ukraine,' she said. Democrats call for consequences for Putin At home, Democrats expressed alarm at what at times seemed like a day of deference, with Trump clapping for Putin as he walked down a red carpet during an elaborate ceremony welcoming him to U.S. soil for the first time in a decade. The two rode together in the presidential limousine and exchanged compliments. Trump seemed to revel in particular in Putin echoing his oft-repeated assertion that Russia never would have invaded Ukraine if Trump had been in office instead of Democrat Joe Biden at the time. Before news cameras, Trump did not use the opportunity to castigate Putin for launching the largest ground invasion in Europe since World War II or human rights abuses he's been accused of committing. Instead, Putin was the one who spoke first, and invited Trump to join him in Moscow next. 'President Trump appears to have been played yet again by Vladimir Putin,' said Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. 'The President rolled out a red carpet and warmly greeted a murderous dictator on American soil and reports indicate he got nothing concrete in return.' 'Enough is enough,' she went on. 'If President Trump won't act, Congress must do so decisively by passing crushing sanctions when we return in the coming weeks.' Sen. Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat who is the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he supports diplomacy but 'peacemaking must be done responsibly.' 'Instead of caving to Putin, the U.S. should join our allies in levying tough, targeted new sanctions on Russia to intensify the economic pressure,' he said. Trump has touted himself as the president of peace Trump has tried to cast himself as a peacemaker, taking credit for helping deescalate conflicts between India and Pakistan as well as Thailand and Cambodia. He proudly mediated a peace agreement between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo and another between the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan to end decades of fighting. Trump has set his eye on the Nobel Peace Prize, with numerous allies offering nominations. But Trump has struggled to made headway on the world's two most vexing conflicts: the Russia-Ukraine war and Israel's offensive in Gaza against Hamas. Republicans and Trump allies offer little response so far In Washington, the summit was met by little response from Trump's allies. Republican lawmakers who spoke out were largely reserved and generally called for continued talks and constructive actions from the Trump administration. 'President Trump brought Rwanda and the DRC to terms, India and Pakistan to terms, Armenia and Azerbaijan to terms. I believe in our President, and believe he will do what he always does — rise to the challenge,' Rep. Brian Mast, a Florida Republican who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement to The Associated Press. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, wrote on social media after the summit that 'while the press conference offered few details about their meeting' she was 'cautiously optimistic about the signals that some level of progress was made.' Murkowski said it 'was also encouraging to hear both presidents reference future meetings' but that Ukraine 'must be part of any negotiated settlement and must freely agree to its terms.' Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican and close Trump ally, offered that he was 'very proud' of Trump for having had the face-to-face meeting and was 'cautiously optimistic' that the war might end 'well before Christmas' if a trilateral meeting between Trump, Zelenskyy and Putin transpires. 'I have all the confidence in the world that Donald Trump will make it clear to Putin this war will never start again. If it does, you're going to pay a heavy price,' he said on Fox News. For some Trump allies, the very act of him meeting with Putin was success enough: conservative activist and podcaster Charlie Kirk called it 'a great thing.' Some see a Putin win and a Trump loss But in Europe, the summit was seen as a major diplomatic coup for Putin, who has been eager to emerge from geopolitical isolation. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of Russia's Security Council, praised the summit as a breakthrough in restoring high-level dialogue between Moscow and Washington, describing the talks as 'calm, without ultimatums and threats.' Former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt said the summit was 'a distinct win for Putin. He didn't yield an inch' but was also 'a distinct setback for Trump. No ceasefire in sight.' 'What the world sees is a weak and wobbling America,' Bildt posted on X.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store