Voters statewide have strong reasons to reject the school voucher proposal on election day next month, but people voting in Grand County and other rural areas have even more arguments for doing so.

    The Citizens State Referendum Number 1 would activate H.B. 148, which the Utah Legislature passed last February. That bill established the Parent Choice in Education Program, which would provide state funding (vouchers) to families who want to put their kids in private schools. Another bill, H.B. 174, modified the original voucher bill. The Utah Supreme Court later decided that the bills could be enacted only if a majority of Utah voters approved them. And so it is on your ballot Nov. 6.

    If approved, the voucher program would give scholarships ranging from $500 to $3,000 per student to families, depending on family size and income. The scholarships would increase annually by the same percentage as the increase in public school funding. School districts would be able to retain some funding from those students leaving the public schools for private classrooms. But after five years that dividend to public schools would be cut off, even though state funding would continue to flow to vouchers for private schools.

    Utah schools rate last in the country for per-student expenditures. Compounding that lack of monetary support for our students is the fact that Utah has the nation's most crowded classrooms. Utah voters and lawmakers need to be thinking of more ways to channel funding into the public schools, not ways to divert it. Unfortunately, the voucher program may only drain money from public schools.

    The Legislative Fiscal Analyst for Utah estimates that the voucher program will cost more than $5 million the first year, and increase to $71 million per year by the time the program is 13 years old, after all private school students in Utah have become eligible for a scholarship. These costs would be paid from general state tax revenues. Initial number crunching reveals that school districts may save some money as students transfer out to private schools, but those numbers are not clear. The fiscal analyst found that the first-year savings would be between $2.4 million and $11.5 million, and by the 13th year, between $11 million and $28 million. That's too wide a range to bank on.

    In a perfect world, it would be great if a first-rate education cost very little to taxpayers. If approved, the voucher program might demonstrate that the private sector can accomplish that task. But that's a big "if."

    Proponents of vouchers say class sizes will decrease as kids switch to private schools. The risk is this: The loss in public school funding could reduce the number of teachers, thereby increasing class sizes. Class size is determined by a formula that figures the ratio of students in a school building at the beginning of the year. Teachers are hired based on those numbers. If many students take a voucher and leave public schools, fewer teachers will be hired and class sizes will remain about the same. Further, schools receive their funding based on Oct. 1 enrollment each fall. If a student attends private school then switches back to public school after Oct. 1, absolutely no funding will come with that student.

    Here's another catch: Public schools can't turn away students. While private schools can discriminate on the basis of ability to pay and English proficiency, public schools must take all kids, at any time of the year. So if a student starts at a private school, or even a charter school like we have here in Moab, and the student decides to switch back to public school, he or she may freely go there.

    Proponents of vouchers argue that they want a better choice of schools for their children to attend. On the Wasatch Front, wealthy families can afford to place their children in private schools if they choose. However, the $3,000 voucher would probably do little to help a poor to middle class family afford the entire tuition. The average annual cost of private tuition is $8,000 annually per student in Utah.

    But we're not on the Wasatch Front. There are few private school options in our region, save the DayStar Adventist Academy in Castle Valley ‒ the only area private school for high school age students ‒ and The Rock Christian School in Moab, which accepts students in grades kindergarten through sixth.

    One option is the Moab Charter School. The charter school is a public school that is funded by the state, but operates outside the traditional parameters of the Grand County School District. It is too soon to tell whether the charter school experiment in Moab and similar charter schools throughout the state will create better educational options for families. Test scores don't prove it's more effective at this time. To be sure, it isn't cheap for the state to fund the charter schools. But it is one effort  on behalf of the state to produce well-educated students. We support the charter school effort at this time, but think additional experiments with education funding, specifically the voucher program, are too risky.

    Here's another problem: Private schools do not have to meet the same requirements as do public districts. Under the voucher program, private schools would not have public accountability for public funds received. Private school teachers don't have to be licensed and some may not even need to possess a college degree. There are no demands for testing or taking attendance. Perhaps those requirements aren't entirely necessary in the makings of a good teacher or a good school, but under that relaxed atmosphere, the accountability for using taxpayer dollars is vulnerable to abuse.

    Ninety-six percent of Utah students are educated in public schools. Anti-voucher voices say money for the proposed program would be better spent on the great majority of students who attend public schools. To reiterate, there is limited funding for public schools under the voucher program. Funding will end after five years. Because the voucher plan is an entitlement program, its funding cannot be spent on public schools or any other state program. Again, the costs of the program are not clear, but they could be staggering.

    The idea of school vouchers is not new. Florida, Wisconsin, Washington, D.C., Ohio and New York have experience with vouchers, and the reviews are mixed as to their success. Studies have found little demonstrable difference in achievement levels. What's worse, there have been allegations of fraud in some of the programs.

    Bringing these issues back to a local level, Moab area residents need to ask themselves what students here would stand to gain from a voucher program. A few kids might actually take the $3,000 and use it to participate in a Wasatch Front school, but that's not likely. What is likely is that tax dollars generated here will help fund an experiment up north that would benefit a portion of the 4 percent of Utah school children who don't attend public schools. In so doing, the costs of the voucher program could decrease funding that is needed by public schools.