6

Education

Colorado’s Third-Largest School District Takes on the Edu-Blob

From my friend and School Reform News contributor Ben DeGrow comes word of a scrappy school district in Colorado on the cusp of a big advance on the school choice front. The Denver Post reports:

The Douglas County School District is examining starting a voucher program to give students state money to attend private or religious schools.

The school board this summer hired a Colorado Springs lawyer to develop a plan for a voucher system that would give parents 75 percent of state per-pupil funds to attend “nonpublic schools,” which could include religious schools.

No other Colorado school district has a voucher program.

What’s “news” to the Post has actually been in the works since June. Douglas County School District is Colorado’s third largest, serving about 60,000 students. Like most districts, Douglas County has wrestled with severe budget cuts in recent years. Voucher programs, study after study shows, actually save money by funding children directly and eliminating the bureaucratic filter.

Naturally, the word “voucher” cannot appear in a major newspaper without an accompanying paragraph or two that attempts to gin up controversy. Think the unions and their friends will sit still for this one? To ask the question is to answer it.

And so:

This scares the hell out of me,” said Cindy Barnard, a Douglas County parent who is on one of the other subcommittees. “Mixing public funds for private schools, in my opinion, is wrong.”

…

“We come from a fabulous school district, and they are high-performing schools,” said Barnard, who is a parent to a high-school student and a recent graduate. “Ninety-eight percent of our parents are very happy with Douglas County schools. I truly believe the Option Certificate Program has the possibility to destroy the district.”

“Eddie” at Ed is Watching tries to shed a little light on the matter:

First, let’s set aside the hyperbole. If DCSD is doing a fabulous job and parents are happy, it’s extremely difficult to see how this proposal (still under consideration) would destroy the district. A close look at the proposal shows careful consideration has been given to ensuring public and parental accountability and compliance with existing laws. Any final decision also will have to take those issues into account.

…

Also, a couple persons interviewed in the story expressed their concerns about a possible negative fiscal impact on the district were this plan to be adopted. So I respond: What if the plan included private school choice AND provided a fiscal benefit to the district on a per-pupil basis? What if the overall school choice plan (that includes better advertising available options, making the open enrollment process more parent-friendly, enhancing neighborhood school autonomy, improving charter school relations and expanding services to home educators) yields similar benefits?

Indeed, what if the public schools in Douglas County, Colorado served the interests of taxpayers and parents, and not those of the unions and ranking members of the establishment with a vested interest in preserving the status quo? Public hearings on the Douglas County proposal are scheduled for this month, with a board vote expected in December. We’ll keep an eye on this one.

Tags:

Ben Boychuk

— Ben Boychuk

Ben Boychuk is a policy advisor for education at The Heartland Institute and a former managing editor of School Reform News. Ben joined the Heartland Institute in 2010 after several years writing on education and other national issues as an editorial writer for Investor's Business Daily and The Press-Enterprise in Riverside, Calif. More recently, Ben was co-moderator of RedBlueAmerica.com and was managing editor of the Claremont Review of Books from 2000 until 2004. He is now editor of the California edition of City Journal. In addition to his work for Heartland, Ben writes a weekly syndicated column for Scripps-Howard News Service and contributes regularly to The Sacramento Bee. His writing has also appeared in The Los Angeles Times, the Orange County Register, the San Diego Union-Tribune, the Rocky Mountain News, The Washington Times and the Arizona Republic, National Review Online, and elsewhere. Ben graduated with a B.A. in political science from the University of California, San Diego. He lives in the Inland Empire of Southern California with his wife Millie, their two children, a cat, a tree frog, and an albino corn snake.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Ed Is Watching, Colorado, school choice, vouchers, teachers unions, school reform, Douglas County, taxes, Ben DeGrow -- Topsy.com

  • Anonymous

    Woo Hoo!

    It is time for all of us to relentlessly pressure the existing system with these proposals. We need to have programs like this pop up everywhere.

    Next, the think tank movement needs to relentlessly and aggressively show who is standing in the way of children and their education, and the financial interests that undermine their moral legitimacy.

    Last, we need the entire Tea Party and Patriot movement to stand up and provide the organizing muscle to promote and defend these aggressive proposals.

    In 1985, no one would have imagined the end of the USSR. Dare to imagine the end of unionized and bureaucratized education. They are on the edge of the cliff. Push them off.

  • Pingback: Ed is Watching » Let’s Shed Light, Not Heat, on Douglas County School Choice Reform Efforts

  • Douglasblue

    The idea of parental choice is a red herring. This is all about union busting; it has nothing to do about what’s best for kids.

  • Lonnandcindy

    Section 7. Aid to private schools, churches, sectarian purpose, forbidden.

    Neither the general assembly, nor any county, city, town, township, school district or other public corporation, shall ever make any appropriation, or pay from any public fund or moneys whatever, anything in aid of any church or sectarian society, or for any sectarian purpose, or to help support or sustain any school, academy, seminary, college, university or other literary or scientific institution, controlled by any church or sectarian denomination whatsoever; nor shall any grant or donation of land, money or other personal property, ever be made by the state, or any such public corporation to any church, or for any sectarian purpose.

    Source: Entire article added, effective August 1, 1876, see L. 1877, p. 55.

    Cross references: For religious freedom, see § 4 of article II of this constitution; for prohibition against appropriations to private institutions, see § 34 of article V of this constitution.

  • Lonnandcindy

    Section 7. Aid to private schools, churches, sectarian purpose, forbidden.

    Neither the general assembly, nor any county, city, town, township, school district or other public corporation, shall ever make any appropriation, or pay from any public fund or moneys whatever, anything in aid of any church or sectarian society, or for any sectarian purpose, or to help support or sustain any school, academy, seminary, college, university or other literary or scientific institution, controlled by any church or sectarian denomination whatsoever; nor shall any grant or donation of land, money or other personal property, ever be made by the state, or any such public corporation to any church, or for any sectarian purpose.

    Source: Entire article added, effective August 1, 1876, see L. 1877, p. 55.

    Cross references: For religious freedom, see § 4 of article II of this constitution; for prohibition against appropriations to private institutions, see § 34 of article V of this constitution.