Topeka ? Public school advocates voiced alarm Tuesday over voucher and charter school proposals that will be discussed today by the State Board of Education.

“Kansas has a 12-year track record of improving schools,” Christy Levings, president of the Kansas National Education Assn., said. “Nothing in these proposals would make Kansas schools better.”

The topic also vexed moderate board members and some legislators who met with the board for lunch.

Today, the board is scheduled to put together its package of recommendations for the legislative session which starts in January.

Up for discussion are items dealing with vouchers: proposals giving parents state money to educate children at the school of their choice, possibly private schools and charter schools: schools that are given greater autonomy to serve a certain group.

New Education Commissioner Bob Corkins has spoken in favor of both moves, but such proposals have been rejected by the Legislature.

Levings argued that it was unfair to deprive money from public schools for vouchers because public schools must take all students while private schools can be selective. And she said Kansas’ current charter school law had strict accountability of tax dollars and should not be weakened.

Chiquita Coggs, executive director of the North East Business Assn. in Wyandotte County, however, said that the state charter school law should be “updated” to allow a school in that area to serve at-risk students. Coggs is a member of Corkins’ recently announced transition team.

Kathy Cook, executive director of Kansas Families United for Public Education, said if the board wanted to help schools it should implement all-day kindergarten statewide, lower class sizes and ensure every school has a plan for parental involvement.

“There is no magic potion that a voucher bill or a change in our charter school laws will do for the thousands of students currently not succeeding in Kansas public schools,” she said.

When Corkins and conservative board members were pressed on what they were contemplating, they said they were just at the information gathering stage.

“It’s a little premature at this point,” said John Bacon, R-Olathe.

In Lawrence, school officials said they would oppose vouchers.

“I can’t see any positive thing that could come out of vouchers in my mind,” Lawrence school board member Craig Grant said.

Sue Morgan, another Lawrence school board member, said she had questions about what a voucher proposal would do to meet the needs of at-risk or special needs students.

“That is not the group of students that (private schools) typically have accepted or have dealt with,” Morgan said.

Two Lawrence private schools said they have little or no ability to serve students with special needs.

Jeff Barclay, of Veritas Christian School, said the school has considered taking in students with autism, but found that it did not have the resources.

Barclay said he’s in favor of vouchers for many reasons.

“Choice is always good,” he said. “It breaks my heart every day that there are Christian families who can’t afford to send their kids to Veritas.”

“The government schools have a monopoly on resources. We’d like to have some of their money.”

Chris Carter, headmaster of Bishop Seabury Academy, said, “My feeling about vouchers is that if vouchers were to make independent schools affordable and accessible without in any way entangling the school with the government, then we’re interested.”

Carter said the school has a limited ability to serve students with special needs. The school’s mission is to provide a college prep education and students have to be capable of handling a college-prep curriculum.

Carter said the school can accommodate students who require minimal accommodations to be successful. It can serve non-English speakers and some learning disabilities that require minimal accommodations. He said the school does not have any para-professionals who typically work closely with students with special needs in public schools.

And he said Bishop Seabury is not capable of working with students with serious behavioral or emotional disabilities. Changing this would require the school’s board to alter its mission statement.

“Certainly at this point, there’s not any feeling that the mission is inappropriate,” he said.