State auditor: Much to learn about school vouchers

Editor’s Note: This is the first of a two-part series about Iowa State Auditor Rob Sand’s visit this week in Creston.

With schools scheduled to open for the year later this month, state of Iowa Auditor Rob Sand he is already learning more about the state’s new school voucher plan approved earlier this year by Republican controlled legislators and Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds.

Speaking to people Tuesday at Creston’s Rainbow Park, Sand, a Democrat, was critical of the program and its potential consequences.

“We are just shoveling hundreds of millions of dollars basically into a black hole with this bill,” he said.

People who already pay for private-school tuition will have access to state tax dollars to pay the tuition.

“They like to call it school choice, but what that means it’s the school who chooses who attends. You don’t actually get to decide as a parent where you kid is going to go. They have to accept you and they don’t have to accept you if they don’t want,” he said.

Creston has two parochial schools, both through eighth grade; St. Malachy and Mayflower Heritage Christian.

According to the governor’s office, “The bill makes state education funding available for K-12 students who choose to attend private schools. It also provides public schools with additional categorical funding for students who live in their district but attend private schools, and allows public school districts to use unspent money from some categorical funds to supplement teacher salaries.

With the passage of the Students First Act, parents who enroll their eligible children in an accredited private school will receive an amount equal to the per pupil funds allocated by the state to all public school districts each year. The funds are estimated at $7,598 per pupil for the 2023-2024 school year and will be deposited into an education savings account (ESA) to be used for tuition, fees, and other qualified education expenses.”

Sand is cautious of the lack of oversight of the funds and how schools could spend the money.

“If you’re a parent in the program, there are rules that apply to you. If you spend the money you can have yourself kicked out of the program. If you misspend the money you have as a parent you can face criminal charges. Neither of those things apply to private schools.”

Sand sees the details of the bill as the only thing a school can’t do with the funds is pay a rebate to parents.

“If they want to take your tax dollars and send their principal on a world tour every summer, fly him first class and put him in five-star hotels, they can do that,” he said.

If a school is for-profit, they can decide to take the funds and keep it as profit beyond established salaries.

“If someone did that in a public school, we would charge them with theft as a crime. In a private school that would be entirely legal. There is no obligation the money actually gets spent on educating children.”

Sand said his office’s duty hits a roadblock with the bill.

“How are we going to know what they have done with the money when they are not required to follow public record laws, not required to follow public meeting laws and not required to have an annual audit that is available to the public? None of those things apply,” he said. “We are shoveling all this money into a black hole.”

Sand said his office does confront public schools yearly. “They are run by human beings. None of us are perfect,” he said. “I’m pretty sure it’s not the people running the private schools are free from sin. I don’t think that’s the situation. I am really concerned about this program. We are going to have no accountability for how they spend it. I think that is just wild.”

Sand said he asked some people in support of the bill and asked what happens to schools after tuition is paid, thinking it was an oversight.

“No, we don’t want public oversight of private schools,” he said was the sentiment he heard. “Then don’t give them public money,” he said was his response. “Anybody who has public money should get public oversight. That’s your tax dollars. That’s your sweat. That’s your tears.”

Sand did not name the people who supported the bill he met.

He said some response he has heard is the participating schools must be accredited. “That has nothing to do with how you spend money,” Sand said.

Another supporter of the bill told Sand he has “a lot of faith in Iowans.”

Sand said he has a lot faith in Iowans too. “I also have enough common sense, like most Iowans, that we are not quite perfect. That kind of happy talk is just an excuse to do stuff that everybody knows is a bad idea. I get frustrated with it.”

Sand said the people who care will prevent people from being put in positions and tempted to do something they shouldn’t do.

“Putting them in a situation where you can spend tax dollars on absolutely anything you want, and you can probably can keep it a secret, isn’t going to work,” he said.

Sand has also heard from supporters if parents suspect the program is being misused, they will send their children to other schools.

“There is nothing in this bill giving parents the right to public records, to go to meetings or get an audit. Different school. Where?”

Sand also is cautious of parents who are intended to spend the money for the program to also provide oversight.

“That is not a very good idea,” he said. “If I want someone to do oversight I want someone who doesn’t have conflict of interest.”