Urban homestead vouchers
House Bill (HB) 26, sponsored
by Rep. Larry Wolpert (RHilliard),
authorizes cities to create
“urban homestead zones” and creates a new urban homestead voucher program. It is currently being heard in the House State Government and Elections Committee.
In an effort to increase population in Ohio’s urban centers, HB 26 seeks to expand voucher eligibility in the “Big Eight” urban school districts (Akron City, Canton City, Cincinnati City, Cleveland Municipal, Columbus City, Dayton City, Toledo City and Youngstown City) by allowing urban homestead zones to be created in these cities and only within their school districts.
The bill authorizes cities to create urban homestead zones in areas with a high poverty rate and declining population. If a homeowner makes at least $40,000 in improvements to the residence, he or she would have the right to an Urban Homestead Scholarship, commonly known as a voucher, to be used in a chartered nonpublic school. The right to the voucher would remain with the property for 20 years, and would stay with the property if sold or transferred.
The voucher amount would be paid directly to the parent and would be the lesser of either the tuition charged by the chartered nonpublic school or the maximum voucher amount allowed by the EdChoice voucher program. However, unlike the EdChoice voucher program, the urban homestead voucher would not be linked to the academic rating of the local school. Therefore, students in “excellent” or “effective” school buildings could be eligible.
Special education vouchers
Senate Bill (SB) 57, sponsored by Sen. Kevin Coughlin (R-Cuyahoga Falls), would create a Special Education Scholarship Program to provide vouchers for disabled children in grades K-12 to attend alternative public or private special education programs. It is currently being deliberated in the Senate Education Committee and we nexpect the committee will soon take a vote on the bill. A call to action was sent to OSBA members to contact senators on the Senate Education Committee to express concerns on the harmful effects of this bill on public education.
Under the bill, the number of vouchers would be capped at 3% of the total number of special education students in the state. It would be similar to the Autism Scholarship Program and would apply those voucher concepts to children of all categories of disability. However, the bill does not affect the Autism Scholarship Program.
The special education voucher program would be structured as a six-year pilot program beginning in fiscal year 2010. The Ohio Department of Education (ODE) would be required to conduct an evaluation of the program. The legislation specifies that while a child is using the voucher, the school district would have no obligation to provide a free appropriate public education (FAPE). But, the bill also specifies that the district would have a continuing obligation to develop the child’s individualized education program (IEP).
The voucher amount would be the lesser of:
- fees charged by the alternative provider of special education services;
- the amount that otherwise would be calculated for state and local funding for the school district’s provision of special education and related services to the child; or
- $20,000.
A voucher student would be counted in the average daily membership of the resident school district and the amount the district would have received for that student would be deducted from the district’s state aid. ODE would annually pay the voucher amount to the provider and the voucher could only be used for the implementation of the child’s IEP.
OSBA is adamantly opposed to vouchers. We joined with other statewide organizations to testify in opposition to the bill this week. The groups included the League of Women Voters of Ohio, Ohio Association of Public School Employees, Ohio Education Association, Ohio Federation of Teachers, Ohio PTA and Ohio School Psychologists Association. To view a copy of the testimony, visit www.osba-ohio.org/advocacy.htm.
OSBA again strongly urges you to contact your state legislator and share your concerns with the special education voucher proposal. We believe that public school funds should not be diverted to support voucher-type programs at the expense of the other students remaining in public schools. In addition, SB 57 would require the resident school district to re-evaluate the IEP, even though the district would have no interaction with the voucher student or the benefit of knowing first-hand the progress or ability level of the student. The current system allows school districts to use outside providers if the district cannot meet the needs of a particular student. It is impossible to hold private special education service providers accountable for the expenditure of public dollars.
For the latest legislative updates, please contact the OSBA legislative division at (614) 540-4000; or (800) 589-OSBA.
Editor's Note: All information in this article was current as of April 11, 2008.
