Mentor board hears Vouchers for Ohio presentation, votes to draft resolution to join lawsuit
May 26, 2026 | Mentor Exempted Village, School Districts, Ohio
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Mentor Exempted Village School District Board convened a special May 26 work session to gather information about Ohio’s EdChoice voucher program and the Vouchers for Ohio lawsuit, hearing a presentation from a representative of the Vouchers for Ohio coalition and comments from state Rep. Daniel Troy.
Dan Vines, introduced as a Vouchers for Ohio representative and a local school board member, told the board the expansion of Ohio’s EdChoice program drove a large increase in voucher use and state spending. He said the state will spend more than $1.7 billion on vouchers in 2026, that a K–8 EdChoice voucher is worth up to $6,166 and a high‑school voucher up to $8,408, and that private schools also receive an administrative fee of about $933.80 per school. Vines outlined five claims in the coalition’s lawsuit and said a common pleas judge ruled for the plaintiffs on three counts, deferred one to the state and left a fifth count for trial; the state has appealed.
Board members pressed Vines on transparency and local impact: how the coalition spends dues ($2 per student, he said, with most toward legal costs), whether participating districts and private schools are listed publicly, and whether the program’s expansion produced higher private‑school enrollment or simply subsidized families already sending children to private schools. Vines said available state data shows a spike in voucher usage beginning in 2024 but not a corresponding rise in private‑school enrollment, and that 90% of voucher dollars come from 11 counties. He said the coalition is audited under Ohio law as a council of governance.
State Rep. Daniel Troy, present to answer questions, told the board he would not support legislation to repeal vouchers and described the program’s evolution from a limited Cleveland scholarship model to a broader statewide subsidy. He cautioned that even if courts find vouchers unconstitutional, the legislature would decide how any freed funds are reallocated. Troy emphasized long‑term state funding trends and said Ohio’s share of school funding remains well below earlier levels.
After the presentations and discussion, a board member moved that the district prepare a resolution to join the Vouchers for Ohio lawsuit and present the resolution at the June meeting. The motion passed on a roll call vote recorded later in the meeting: 4 in favor, 1 opposed. The board agreed to continue public fact‑finding and to include additional public comment opportunities at upcoming meetings.
What’s next: the board will receive a drafted resolution and additional information in June and will take public comment before any final decision about formal participation is made.
Dan Vines, introduced as a Vouchers for Ohio representative and a local school board member, told the board the expansion of Ohio’s EdChoice program drove a large increase in voucher use and state spending. He said the state will spend more than $1.7 billion on vouchers in 2026, that a K–8 EdChoice voucher is worth up to $6,166 and a high‑school voucher up to $8,408, and that private schools also receive an administrative fee of about $933.80 per school. Vines outlined five claims in the coalition’s lawsuit and said a common pleas judge ruled for the plaintiffs on three counts, deferred one to the state and left a fifth count for trial; the state has appealed.
Board members pressed Vines on transparency and local impact: how the coalition spends dues ($2 per student, he said, with most toward legal costs), whether participating districts and private schools are listed publicly, and whether the program’s expansion produced higher private‑school enrollment or simply subsidized families already sending children to private schools. Vines said available state data shows a spike in voucher usage beginning in 2024 but not a corresponding rise in private‑school enrollment, and that 90% of voucher dollars come from 11 counties. He said the coalition is audited under Ohio law as a council of governance.
State Rep. Daniel Troy, present to answer questions, told the board he would not support legislation to repeal vouchers and described the program’s evolution from a limited Cleveland scholarship model to a broader statewide subsidy. He cautioned that even if courts find vouchers unconstitutional, the legislature would decide how any freed funds are reallocated. Troy emphasized long‑term state funding trends and said Ohio’s share of school funding remains well below earlier levels.
After the presentations and discussion, a board member moved that the district prepare a resolution to join the Vouchers for Ohio lawsuit and present the resolution at the June meeting. The motion passed on a roll call vote recorded later in the meeting: 4 in favor, 1 opposed. The board agreed to continue public fact‑finding and to include additional public comment opportunities at upcoming meetings.
What’s next: the board will receive a drafted resolution and additional information in June and will take public comment before any final decision about formal participation is made.
Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!
Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.
✓
Get instant access to full meeting videos
✓
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
✓
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
✓
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
30-day money-back guarantee
