Private schools exist in Colorado and will continue to exist. But does the state need a Constitutional amendment for alternative education, and what would Amendment 80 really mean?
Rather than my typical “simplest way to describe it” opening paragraph, readers can just look at the very short main text to Colorado Amendment 80 below first, but get ready to parse the meaning afterwards!
SECTION 1. In the constitution of the state of Colorado, add section, 18 to article IX as follows:
Section 18. Education – School Choice
(1) PURPOSE AND FINDINGS. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF COLORADO HEREBY FIND AND DECLARE THAT ALL CHILDREN HAVE THE RIGHT TO EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO ACCESS A QUALITY EDUCATION ; THAT PARENTS HAVE THE RIGHT TO DIRECT THE EDUCATION OF THEIR CHILDREN ; AND THAT SCHOOL CHOICE INCLUDES NEIGHBORHOOD, CHARTER , PRIVATE, AND HOME SCHOOLS, OPEN ENROLLMENT OPTIONS, AND FUTURE INNOVATIONS IN EDUCATION .
(2) EACH K-12 CHILD HAS THE RIGHT TO SCHOOL CHOICE.
As astute readers already noticed, 80 is a Constitutional amendment, and will need 55% of voters to pass. It is a citizen-initiated amendment, and proponents gathered enough valid petition signatures to put what was once known as Initiative 138 on the ballot.
The major debate over 80 might wind up being what the word “right” really means in this context. Colorado families actually already can enroll their K-12-aged children in private schools, charters, or they can be homeschooled. However, there are some rules, laws, standards, realities, and exceptions regarding alternatives to traditional public schools at play in Colorado.
World’s Quickest Alternative Schooling Primer
Enrollment in charters is not addressed in the Constitution at present, but the following statement is in Colorado Revised Statutes 22-30.5-104 (3): “Enrollment in a charter school must be open to any child who resides within the school district…” There are about 256 charter schools in Colorado with about 134,000 total charter school students, per the Colorado League of Charter Schools, but they’re not always available or close to where students live in all Colorado locations.
Families can currently legally enroll students in private schools, but private schools don’t have to accept every student and some families might not be able to afford private school tuition. For some super-basic statistics on private schools in Colorado, per Private School Review:
- For the 2024-25 school year, there are 534 private schools serving 74,221 students in Colorado. 8% of all K-12 students in Colorado are educated in private schools (compared to the national average of 11%).
- The average private school tuition is $12,412 for elementary schools and $15,912 for high schools.
- Minority enrollment is 24%.
- 48% of schools are religiously affiliated.
Colorado families can currently legally homeschool their children, but homeschooling practices are subject to a number of requirements. This includes needing to provide at least 172 days of schooling per year, for at least four hours per day, and homeschoolers must teach content in several required areas including “communication skills of reading, writing, and speaking, mathematics, history, civics, literature, science, and regular courses of instruction in the constitution of the United States.” Readers can learn more about Colorado homeschooling requirements through the Colorado Department of Education.
Would Amendment 80 Create Constitutional Clarity or Chaos?
So, back to the original question – what does the word “right” mean in this initiative? There are those who believe the question might not be settled until it’s tested in the courts.
A recent story from Chalkbeat Colorado posed a number of rhetorical questions about situations in which actions or situations might be challenged as violating Constitutional rights should 80 pass. Kevin Welner, professor of education policy at CU-Boulder, was quoted as saying “It really is a ‘full employment for lawyers’ act. It puts judges in the driver’s seat later on to try to make some sense out of this.” On the other hand, proponent Kristi Burton Brown of Advance Colorado was quoted saying “I don’t think it’s (80) as nebulous as our opponents like to claim.”
A document prepared by Michael Tsogt, a policy analyst for initiative proponent organization Advance Colorado, was subtitled “Why School Choice Must Be Placed in the Colorado Constitution.” It mentioned that there are “ideologues who seek the destruction of school choice,” though it didn’t really specify much in Colorado beyond the introduction of House Bill 24-1363, a fairly long bill on charter school regulations and school district approval. There has been some recent controversy about how the State Board of Education might review charter applications that were denied by local school board, and HB 24-1363 did include language on that topic. The bill was defeated in its first committee, and Gov. Jared Polis opposed it. I’ll recommend reading the fiscal note for HB 24-1363 rather than the bill if readers want to quickly understand the main points.
The Colorado Education Association (CEA) has formally opposed 80, in part suggesting that the initiative’s language could enable a voucher program. Kevin Vick, CEA President, was quoted as saying “The right to public school choice has been enshrined in Colorado law for the past 30 years. Initiative 138 would open the door to taking money out of neighborhood public schools to pay for private schools, which directly harms our students.”
The Chalkbeat story on 80 mentioned above also noted that the proponent organization Advance Colorado had drafted initiative language fairly similar to 80, but it contained a sentence supporting vouchers for private schooling – “Parents and guardians have the right to direct per pupil funding to the schooling of their choice.” This language did not move forward in 2024.
Follow The Money
The anti-Amendment 80 committee Public Schools Strong reported about $4.92 million in total campaign contributions on Oct. 28. The National Education Association had contributed a total of about $4.03 million. Also, the Colorado Education Association has contributed $175,000 to oppose Amendment 80.
The proponents’ campaign finance situation is a bit trickier to figure out. There is a committee called School Choice For Every Child registered to support Amendment 80, but it has not reported any campaign contributions. The organization Advance Colorado is supporting this initiative, as well as Propositions 128 and 130, but according to the Colorado Sun in a story about Prop 130:
“Advance Colorado may be spending directly in support of the measure, activity that wouldn’t show up in the state’s campaign finance system. The nonprofit doesn’t disclose its donors.”
A webpage called voteyeson80.com said it was paid for by a committee called Colorado Dawn. There is also a separate committee called Colorado Dawn IEC (IEC = Independent Expenditure Committee). This IEC reported contributions on its Secretary of State contribution and expenditure form of about $44,000 as of Oct. 28, but IECs do not have to disclose individual donations.
Also in mid-October, people started reporting that they had received misleading text messages about 80, showing the President of CEA saying positive things about school choice even though CEA is clearly against 80, and there was no identification on the texts as to who sent them. Colorado Dawn reported a ballot issue expenditure of $872,790.48 ($750,000 for direct mailings, $122,790.48 for texts) in support of Amendment 80, though as of Oct. 19 it’s not certain (to me) whether Colorado Dawn was responsible for the misleading texts or not. Former state Rep. Bri Buentello has filed a campaign finance complaint against Colorado Dawn, alleging that there should have been identification on the texts and that Colorado Dawn didn’t appear to be registered as an issue committee.
For a great explanation of the somewhat complicated campaign finance situation surrounding the pro-80 campaign, try this story from Colorado Politics.
Richard’s Take
Vote NO. I have already coined this phrase on social media about 80: “Too vague for our Constitution.”
For practical purposes, Colorado doesn’t need a new right to school choice because we already have it. Parents and guardians are already legally free to put their kids in private schools, homeschool them, or send them to a charter school.
Where the problem might be with some families is regarding access to alternatives to the traditional public school. Notably, can parents afford a private school? And a secondary question about private schools – should parents who CAN afford a private school need to pay the same amount of taxes that they currently do to fund the public school system?
The language in 80 does not answer any question about funding, in fact it doesn’t mention funding in the tiniest. It also doesn’t say whether school districts with students who have a “right” to a charter school in areas that don’t have them would have to finance and open new charters. It also doesn’t identify what “future innovations” in education would be, nor does it preclude innovations that might be impractical or disagreeable to most Coloradans.
Former President Bill Clinton gained notoriety once upon a time by trying to make a legal argument of “it depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” I feel that passing 80 would give some lawyer(s) an opportunity to pose similar rhetorical questions about the word “right.” I could easily imagine an attorney claiming that a “right” without attainable access is no right at all. And maybe they’d lose individual cases, but how far could they go with appeals, especially if voters put new language into the state Constitution? Let’s nip all of this in the bud and just defeat 80.
I read the Advance Colorado report on why they believe we need to put school choice in the Constitution, but did not find their conclusion compelling. It cited a state bill that didn’t pass as evidence that charters are under attack, which I thought was really overblown. Charters are in fact public schools, and the state legislature has passed various bills to regulate them over the course of decades. In fact, the fairly lengthy HB 24-1363 was lengthy in part because it would have amended existing statutes. It probably went too far for some people and was soundly defeated in committee, but I do not find the bill to be evidence that charters are under threat on a general basis. As a taxpayer, I want charters funded with my tax dollars to meet certain standards, and therefore in my opinion regulation is necessary.
As of mid-October, I was also quite disappointed that an Independent Expenditure Committee that seems to have several notable connections to Advance Colorado might have sent misleading text messages without identifying who sent the texts. I was going to vote against 80 anyway, but things just seem a little sketchy right now and I’m interested to see how the campaign finance complaint against Colorado Dawn turns out.
Readers might disagree with me, but I’m a supporter of a well-funded and inclusive public school system, and I don’t want vouchers to pull money from a system that can benefit the poorest of the poor. Our public schools provide a free K-12 education to any student in Colorado, regardless of family income, race, nationality, or any other classification. Public education is to me is a public benefit, since it produces graduates or near-graduates who have had access to learning the building blocks they’ll need for next steps, including higher education or the workforce. It’s not perfect, but it provides opportunity for individuals who use the system properly, and having more students educated in the ways of the world can only be good for society.
I can’t guarantee here that passing 80 would sap funding from the public school system, but the language of 80 doesn’t give me any reason to say with confidence that it won’t someday. So, I’m going to strongly recommend not enshrining it in our state Constitution.
