Earlier this summer, the Post asked our readers what issues you wanted to hear candidates in contested races address leading up to the Nov. 5. election.
Based on that feedback, we developed a five-item questionnaire centering the issues most important to residents across Johnson County.
Each day this week, we’ll publish the candidates’ responses to one question. Read the candidates’ responses to the previous question about test scores and student achievement as well as standards and curriculum guidance.
Today, we’re publishing candidates’ responses to the following question:
Kansas lawmakers in recent years have passed legislation that allows for open enrollment, as well as pushed measures that would expand a system of tax credits for families who send their children to private schools. Supporters of such moves say they give more freedom to families in making decisions about their child’s education. Opponents see these as threats to a public education system meant to serve all students. As a member of the board overseeing public schools in the state of Kansas, do you support or oppose such “school choice” measures? Why or why not?
Below are the answers the Post received from candidates on the issue:
Area 2
Melanie Haas (Democratic, incumbent)
The term “school choice” is misleading. Private schools can choose their students, while public schools accept all, especially those with special needs. Private schools also expel students at higher rates and have barriers to access such as applications, and a lack of transportation.
Public taxpayer money is crucial for our public schools. People move to Johnson County for our excellent public schools. Vouchers don’t allow poor students to attend elite private schools. Instead voucher programs lead to the proliferation of subprime voucher schools, which is why they actually cause a decline in academic achievement. Voucher programs hurt district budgets even if only a small number of students use them. If four students from a classroom leave the public school on vouchers, the district’s costs remain the same, but they lose critical funding. This takes away from a district’s ability to adequately fund teacher salaries, monthly utility bills, nurses, curriculum, playgrounds, and more.
Vouchers merely offer discounts to families who were typically already choosing private schools, and funnel money to the organizations running them. This becomes a new welfare program for the wealthy. Tax dollars shouldn’t benefit churches and private institutions. “Micro-schools” backed by Koch money are also emerging in other states, designed to exploit voucher legislation without protecting vulnerable students. This shift diverts support from public schools, which had been underfunded in Kansas to the extent that lawsuits had to be brought to force the legislature to restore funding. Our state’s priorities are clear from what we fund. If we don’t invest in public schools, it shows a lack of commitment to having the best schools. Vouchers will hinder education across the state.
Fred Postlewait (Republican)
For many years, public education has been a good decision for many reasons, quality education that the general public could afford.
That has been changing. Public education expenses are rapidly rising. Quality of Public education declining. Local and state education push parents out of their children’s lives and values. A Free Society requires the parents right to choose the place where their children are educated. Parents must have the right to choose the school without being penalized for that choice. It is a matter of Freedom
Kiel Corkran (Independent)
Did not provide the Post with a response.
Area 4
Kris Meyer (Democratic)
I oppose the expansion of school choice measures, such as tax credits and vouchers for private schools, as well as open enrollment initiatives that divert public funds from traditional public schools. These policies threaten the integrity of our public education system, which is designed to serve every student, regardless of socioeconomic status, special needs, or geographic location. Diverting resources from public schools disproportionately harms those who need support the most.
For nearly two decades in Kansas public schools, I worked primarily in Title I (economically disadvantaged) schools, advocating for equity and access for my students and working families. Public funds should be dedicated to strengthening our public schools, ensuring they have the resources to provide high-quality education, reduce class sizes, and offer robust support services like Special Education.
While advocates of school choice claim to increase freedom for families, the reality is that many low-income and rural families lack access to private or alternative schools, making this “freedom” largely inaccessible. Moreover, private school vouchers often lead to worse academic performance and reduced oversight.
Public funds should be accountable to taxpayers, ensuring transparency and equitable access for all students. Instead of siphoning money away from public schools, we should invest in them to create the best possible learning environments for every child. As a State Board member, I would prioritize policies that uphold public education as the cornerstone of equitable access to quality learning for all Kansas students.
Connie O’Brien (Republican)
I do not support school choice. The Homeschoolers and private schools do not want school choice because it means government interference and mandates to their education system. The tax credit legislation was set up for low income students in failing schools to give them an opportunity to attend a better school. This tax credit is used by individuals to receive a credit when filing their income tax and has been around since 2014.
Coming up:
Tomorrow we will publish the candidates’ responses to the following question:
Districts in Johnson County have continued to see parent and community member challenges to library books and classroom materials they deem to be inappropriate or offensive, usually along the lines of being too sexually explicit or overtly addressing LGBTQ themes. What is your position on how schools and districts should handle such challenges? What guidance should the state board give districts on this matter?
