The Legislature passed two bills earlier this year: HB148, the main voucher bill which gives a $500 to $3,000 private school tuition voucher based on family income, and HB174, intended to amend HB148 by giving a little extra money to the State Board of Education to put the program in motion, among other changes.

HB148 was automatically put on hold, however, after opponents gathered enough signatures to let voters decide whether to repeal that bill.

The twist, according to Shurtleff and other attorneys, is that HB174 contains enough language to implement a state voucher law. The main provision HB174 doesn't contain is a $9.2 million appropriation to mitigate financial losses school districts might experience under vouchers.

Legislators passed HB174 by a referendum-proof two-thirds vote. So, some argue, even if voters repeal HB148, HB174 will stand.

The legal volley has created public confusion, state education officials and attorneys contend.

"Right now (HB174) is making the issue very cloudy, and they'd like to clear the skies so people are clear on what they're voting for or against," Harrington said.

In a meeting with Huntsman next week, Shurtleff and education officials plan to ask Huntsman to call a special session, assuming legislators will act.

They would request the special session to clear up confusion the two bills have created. Lawmakers could repeal or suspend HB174, which is what the education bosses would like. They could make sure it has all of HB148's elements. Or, Shurtleff said, they could make it so the state board has money to put HB174 into action.

If HB174 is repealed, and the public in November votes to keep the voucher law, then HB174's amendments could be reinstated in the 2008 Legislative session, State Office of Education attorney Jean Hill said.

Valentine, R-Orem, said Friday he had not heard about Shurtleff's, Harrington's and Burningham's plan.

But Valentine said outside of the question of implementing HB174 and a special session, the ballot language on the referendum ballot itself "is hard to understand."

And Valentine fears that voters could become so confused in the polling booth Nov. 6 that any resulting vote may not be a "fair, accurate reflection of the impression of Utah voters" on the voucher issue.

In short, the GOP legislative majority may not see the November vote as a binding statement on vouchers.

"I think there are serious questions about the ballot language," said Valentine.