Board a no-show at voucher meeting
There are no comments for this page [ Add Comment ]Thursday, June 21, 2007
By Amy K. Stewart
Standard-Examiner staff
Click here to read the letter.
Burningham at seminar, declines to attend 'gathering'
SALT LAKE CITY -- Adding fuel to an already smoldering fire, representatives of the Utah State Board of Education were a no-show at the Utah State Legislature's Education Committee interim meeting on Wednesday.
"They refused to appear," said committee co-chairman Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper. He said he considered issuing a subpoena for state Board of Education Chairman Kim Burningham, of Bountiful.
Burninghamtold the Standard-Examiner in a phone interview on Wednesday that he was in California teaching a seminar for his employee, Franklin Covey.
"It's not an attempt to evade them," Burningham said.
He added that state Office of Education Superintendent Patti Harrington was out of town for a conference.
Stephenson said, in an interview after Wednesday's meeting, the leaders of the education committee decided a subpoena would only serve to further divide the Legislature and the state board.
"We do have the power of subpoena," Stephenson said. "But we felt it would only inflame the issue more."
Stephenson said he was expecting a presentation by state board members and representatives of the attorney general regarding the role of the board and its relationship with the attorney general's office. Further, he hoped for discussions and questions regarding the state's controversial voucher program.
Burningham, in a letter read to the committee by House co-chairman Rep. Gregory Hughes, R-Draper, said he respectfully declined the invitation to send a representative to Wednesday's "gathering" -- a word to which Stephenson took great exception.
"I don't think it's just 'a gathering'," Stephenson said.
Burningham said in the letter he believes business between the attorney general and the state board should be conducted confidentially.
"... any further politicization of the relationship between the Attorney General and the state board is unwelcome to the board, if not to Mr. (Mark) Shurtleff, and would be ill-advised in any event," the letter read.
A copy of Burningham's letter was sent to state board and education committee members earlier this week.
Board member Greg Haws, of Hooper, said he doesn't blame any state board member for not wanting to appear before the committee.
"We felt we were probably in for a real tongue lashing," Haws said.
Further, some legislators and education officials pointed out the committee meeting would be a repeat of discussions that had already taken place the previous Wednesday. Last week's meeting included legislators and officials from both K-12 and higher education.
Rep. LaWanna "Lou" Shurtliff, D-Ogden, said there was a "healthy discussion" last week.
Ronda Rose, state PTA legislative vice president, agreed more discussion is redundant -- or worse.
"This just becomes further harassment," Rose said.
Shurtleff was out of town for a National Association of Attorneys General event and did not attend Wednesday's meeting. His office was represented by Ray Hintze, chief deputy attorney general, and Bill Evans, education chief for the office.
After hearing the office's presentation, legislators agreed to put off further discussions of the relationship between the state board and the attorney general's office until after the November referendum on school vouchers.
"This doesn't need to be as tenuous as we want to make it," Rep. Shurtliff said. "I think it can be a lot more conciliatory."
Relations have become strained between the state board and the Legislature, as well as the board and the attorney general's office, over the question of vouchers.
Attorney General Shurtleff and legislators wanted the board to implement the voucher program immediately, saying sufficient legislation would survive the November referendum to enact the program.
The board refused and the Utah Supreme Court ruled last week that the referendum would be the defining word on whether vouchers would be implemented.
The voucher program would allow for $500 to $3,000 per child, depending on family income, to be used for private school tuition.
Text 
