Some lawmakers say the state's new private school voucher law would remain in effect even if a referendum against the measure succeeds and voters reject the law.
But voucher opponents disagree, saying it would be impossible to implement a voucher program with the fragments of another bill that boosts funding for the program.
"Their arguments are not sound, and they are really just trying to discourage people from collecting signatures," said Janet Jenson, attorney for Utahns for Public Schools. "This argument is really dumb."
The latest dispute over the Parents for Choice in Education Act surfaced Thursday after the Lieutenant Governor's office was contacted by attorneys who claimed the efforts of the newly organized Utahns for Public Schools to overturn HB148, the original voucher bill, would be for naught because another bill, HB174, which amended and carries some of the language of the original bill, would remain on the books.
"Public opinion doesn't change state code. The only way is for the Legislature to change it or (another) referendum to overturn it ... but they are challenging the wrong bill," said Sen. Curt Bramble, R-Provo, Senate sponsor of HB148. "This is going to be a true battle ground between parental choice and the union mentality."
Last week Utahns for Public Schools, which includes the teachers union Utah Education Association, applied for a referendum petition that could put the final decision on vouchers in the hands of voters during the general election in 2008.
At the time, HB174 had yet to be signed into law, but it was signed this week. That bill included some of the language in the original bill and made some changes, including more money for oversight and background check requirements. It was intended to supplement the original bill, but some lawmakers say it could stand on its own.
Bramble said although HB174 does not include the $9.2 million appropriation, which would allow money to stay in schools for five years after a student leaves to attend a private school, it would still be in the surviving voucher law.
"The heart and soul of the voucher (law) is also in 174," Bramble said.
But voucher opponents and state education leaders said the amendment bill includes a few items from the original bill, but not the vital elements needed to create rules and regulations to run the program.
"It would be very difficult, if not impossible," said Carol Lear, director of school law and legislation for the State Office of Education. "(HB174) was clearly not meant to stand alone."
She said it is anyone's guess how the State Office of Education would frame the program based solely on HB174.
"I don't know what we'd do ... it couldn't be implemented," Lear said.
She said the lack of the $9.2 million in mitigation money — funding that was clearly anticipated — is huge. Plus there would not be enough administrative money since HB174 only added an extra $100,000 to existing funding in the law.
"This is an amendment — there are significant limitations and we don't have enough information to run a program," Lear said.
Jenson said out of the 11 sections included in HB148, only five are in HB174 — leaving out the definitions, purposes, enforcement and accountability measures.
"It would be very hard to argue that the law stands when the amendment leaves out half of the language in HB148," Jenson said. "If you repeal the underlying bill the amendments are dead."
The voucher program provides Utah families with a private school tuition voucher ranging from $500 to $3,000 per student attending a private school. That doesn't sit well with voucher opponents, who don't want state funding going to private schools.
But some lawmakers said opponents who want to put the issue before voters would be shooting themselves in the foot if voters reject the voucher law, since the $9.2 million for the program is not appropriated in HB174, and districts could potentially not be held harmless for five years like the original bill promised.
That provision was meant to soften the blow to public schools losing students to private schools — something that helped woo moderates in the House who had opposed vouchers in past years.
"The only big difference that I am aware of is the hold harmless," Bramble said. "The money would be there, but there would not be a statutory obligation" to spend it on the voucher program.
As for Utahn's for Public Schools failing to challenge HB174, Lear said the group was in a "catch 22."
The law only allows a people to file a referendum five days after the session. HB174 wasn't signed until after that five-day window.
"They can't file referendum on a bill that is not even signed — you cant challenge something that you don't know if it is even going to be law," Lear said.
E-mail: terickson@desnews.com