Key Points: 

• Public school groups introduced ballot measure to regulate ESA program

• School choice proponents form political action committee to oppose attempt 

• Match-up creates race to gather signatures, or dissuade ESA families and voters

With little success at the Legislature, public school advocates and the state’s teachers union are now turning to the ballot to usher in reforms to the Empowerment Scholarship Program. 

But the road ahead is, admittedly, an uphill battle with a pro-school choice group already forming a political action committee and mobilizing ESA families to obstruct its path.

Still, proponents see the fight as well worth it given the need to ensure student safety, fiscal responsibility, academic accountability and stronger reporting and enforcement mechanisms. 

“The Legislature has had bills in front of them to reform this program for years upon years and haven’t done anything,” Beth Lewis, executive director of Save Our Schools Arizona, said. “In the meantime, it’s skyrocketed to a billion dollar program. We’ve seen many, many instances of fraud, waste, abuse and scandal, and our public schools are closing en masse. It’s time to right-size this thing and get some reforms in place that make sense for everybody, for taxpayers, for ESA families, for public school families, for everybody.” 

On Feb. 6, Save Our Schools Arizona and the Arizona Education Association filed the Protect Education, Accountability Now Act, which proposes a sweeping list of changes. 

On the enrollment front, the measure enacts a $150,000 income cap on families whose students qualified under universal expansion, not the prior program categories, like disability, failing schools, juvenile wards or military families. 

Marisol Garcia, president of the Arizona Education Association, said the income cap was based on a rough doubling of the state’s median income, which is just shy of $80,000. 

As for program vendors, private schools and tutors receiving ESA dollars would be required to adhere to local fire and safety codes, conduct background checks on educators and staff, maintain safe storage of heavy machinery and weapons, and prohibit drugs and alcohol on school campuses. 

Private schools, microschools and tutors would also be required to maintain fingerprint clearance cards for anyone with unsupervised contact with children and to investigate misconduct allegations and require all tutors to be at least 18 years old. 

The proposal would also require all ESA funding schools to either have students take statewide assessments at public schools to track academic success or secure a national accreditation. 

Garcia noted the current lack of transparency into the curriculum or academic standing of students in the ESA program. 

“We have no idea what is being taught. We have no idea what kind of growth, graduation rates, none of that. And if we’re paying for it,” Garcia said, “there should be some level of assurance that students are learning.” 

On the fraud front, the ballot measure would ban the use of ESA funds on non-educational and luxury items.

The measure specifically lists household appliances, home or property improvements, jewelry, lingerie, admission to water or amusement parks, swimming pools, hot tubs, saunas, gift cards, out-of-state or international travel, museums or excursions, child care, restaurants, hotels, bounce houses, water slides or motor operated land or water vehicles as unallowable expenses. However, much of the list is already out-0f-line with the ESA handbook. 

And a provision addresses an ongoing lawsuit between an ESA parent, represented by the Goldwater Institute, and the attorney general over whether supplemental materials must be documented in the curriculum to be allowable items.

Per the language, and in line with the current legal position by the attorney general, all supplementary materials would have to be “directly and substantially related to curricular content that are used to teach or enhance approved curriculum.” 

And finally, all ESA funds not spent by a student each quarter would also be swept back by the state into the classroom site fund, which supports teacher compensation, development and student support services. 

Lewis said the measure is aimed at placing most of the work on the Department of Education, the State Board of Education, and private entities that take state dollars, rather than on families in the program. 

But, school choice proponents expect impact across the board. 

Jenny Clark, founder of school choice advocacy group Love Your School, has already formed a political action committee, AZ Loves ESA, to oppose the measure every step of the way, calling it a “really clear attack on all choice in Arizona.” 

“We have over 100,000 students on the program,” Clark said. “They’ve really overstepped by throwing private school regulations and also regulating all these education service providers that are just trying to serve kids.”

The last time Save Our Schools Arizona attempted to pass a ballot measure to stop universal expansion of the ESA program in 2022, ESA families mobilized a “Decline to Sign” campaign, in which ESA families would show up to protest signature gatherers. 

Their efforts ultimately blocked the measure from the ballot. 

“I anticipate all of that and more this time,” Clark said. 

The Goldwater Institute also came out in early opposition, as did the Arizona Christian Education Coalition. 

Matt Beineburg, director of education policy, called the policy proposals “disingenuous” and “phony,” claiming the regulations on private schools and families will prove burdensome and ultimately “smother private and homebased education in this state and force families into schools that aren’t meeting their needs.” 

Lewis said she expected school choice proponents to claim an impact on tens of thousands of families, though she challenged the claim, noting that only families at the top of the income scale would truly be affected. 

“That is not true, that it’s going to hurt families with kids with disabilities, that is not true, that it’s going to hurt homeschoolers – unless you’re buying luxury items – that’s not true,” Lewis said. “It’s really important to get the truth out there about who this will impact and who it won’t.”

Lewis and Garcia said the next steps lay in voter education, awaiting review from the Legislative Council and then, starting signature gathering. 

To get on the ballot, the groups need to turn in 255,949 valid signatures by July 2.