|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By Michael Bielawski
The House Education Committee started work on Tuesday on a bill that would embody key elements of the governor’s proposed education overhaul. It reduces 115 school districts down to five, sets block grants per each student, changes how school choice is done, and more.
“This bill proposes to transform Vermont’s education governance, quality, and finance systems,” the introduction to H. 454 states.
All six sponsors are Republicans: Reps. Casey Toof, R-St. Albans, Pattie McCoy, R-Poultney, Chris Taylor, R-Chittenden-Franklin, Rep. Joshua Dobrovich, R-Williamstown, and Rep. Beth Quimby, R-Lyndon.
The governor’s proposal, supported by Education Secretary Zoie Saunders, can be read here.
$10K less per student?
A key component is a $13,200 block grant-per-student proposal that could require big adjustments for high spending schools. There would be adjustments for students with special needs.
According to the National Education Association, the national average spending per public school student for the 2022-2023 school year was $16,281. The average for Vermont, according to the US Census Bureau for that year, was $23,586.
Big consolidation
One of the most contested aspects of the governor’s proposal appears in this bill as well: the elimination of supervisory unions and a massive reduction in schools districts from 357 to five.
“It would create five school districts to govern the public education system for the entire State, each governed by a school board and operated by a central office,” it states.
Changes for School Choice
School choice – accepting tuitioned students from other districts – would be limited to high schools, not the lower grades.
“An independent school may be designated as a School Choice School to serve grades 9–12 by the school district in which it is geographically located,” the bill states.
To be eligible for designation as a school choice school, an independent school must meet critieria set by the Agency of Education.
Early reactions
Rep. Peter Conlon, D-Cornwall, chair of the Committee said on Tuesday that he supports some components, but some of it needs work. The committee session can be seen here.
Conlon said that the bill “doesn’t really speak to how do we bring together a whole bunch of collective bargaining agreements unless we’re leaving it up to the district board. I like the concept of fewer districts. Not sure if five is my number.”
Rep. Leanne Harple, D-Glover, had some thoughts on the school choice changes.
“But limiting it to [grades] nine to twelve, I’m slightly concerned about just because of where I live and what there are for options and how far away public schools are,” she said.
The free-market think tank Campaign for Vermont had some praise and criticism for the governor’s plan, including the reduction of districts to five.
“Overall, the funding changes alone would reduce Education Fund spending by as much as $184 million, according to Secretary Saunders,” they wrote. “This portion of the plan has a number of merits and is worth pursuing, however the governance reform proposal is unworkable.”
They offer a counter proposal for consolidation. They suggest “leaving school districts and their boards intact and consolidate the existing supervisory unions around Vermont’s 17 career and technical education centers.”
What do other states do?
According to Ballotpedia, as of 2022, Vermont had 293 schools and 98 districts. Saunders in a recent interview with Vermont Public Vermont currently has 119 districts for 2025. According to the 2022 numbers, Vermont would not be the only state to experiment with fewer districts. Hawaii has just one district for 294 schools, Delaware has 19 districts for 202 schools, and Maryland has only 24 districts for 1,420 schools.
Tell them what you think
See all bills assigned to the House Education Committee here. Constituents may contact committee members (click link on name for bio, party affiliation, etc.) with comments, questions, and information at the following email addresses:
House Education
Peter Conlon, Cornwall, Chair, pconlon@leg.state.vt.us
Chris Taylor, Madison, Vice Chair, cataylor@leg.state.vt.us
Erin Brady, Chittenden District 2, Ranking Member, ebrady@leg.state.vt.us
Jana Brown, Richmond, Clerk, jbrown@leg.state.vt.us
Joshua Dobrovich, Orange-3, jdobrovich@leg.state.vt.us
Leanne Harple, Orleans 4, lharple@leg.state.vt.us
Robert Hunter, Bennington-4, rhunter@leg.state.vt.us
Emily Long, Burlington, elong@leg.state.vt.us
Kate McCann, Washington-4, kmccann@leg.state.vt.us
Beth Quimby, Caledonia-3, bquimby@leg.state.vt.us
Casey Toof, St. Albans City, ctoof@leg.state.vt.us
All committee transcripts are available at http://www.goldendomevt.com. The Committee meeting video is available at the committees’ YouTube channels. The committee meets in Room M103 for House Education.
The author is a writer for the Vermont Daily Chronicle
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Education, State Government
Re: House school reform bill would set $13,200 block grant per student
This reform package is nonsense.
The Vermont Brigham decision specifically addresses the Education and Common Benefits Clauses of the Vermont Constitution and the requirement that taxpayer education funding provides ‘every school-age child in Vermont an equal educational opportunity’.
The Court went on to say that: “In this context, the Court’s duty today is solely to define the impact of the State Constitution on educational funding, not to fashion and impose a solution.”
Funding is required to be equalized, whether or not the educational service is provided by one public school or another, or one independent school or another.
Reform?? High school districts already have the option to provide school choice.
16 V.S.A. § 822 School district to maintain public high schools or pay tuition
(A) to a public school as in the judgment of the school board may best serve the interests of the students; or
(B) to an approved independent school or an independent school meeting education quality standards if the school board judges that a student has unique educational needs that cannot be served within the district or at a nearby public school.
(2) The judgment of the board shall be final in regard to the institution the students may attend at public cost.
Rules for Radicals | Saul D. Alinsky
RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty.”
This is what our politicians are doing to us…. on both sides of the aisle.
There is one education reform that satisfies all requirements. That is the H.89 School Choice bill that none of our legislators will touch with the proverbial ten-foot-pole. H.89 will also improve student outcomes and lower costs. A prospect that forces me to conclude that our legislators and executive branch aren’t interested in that result. Apparently, they want to control Vermont’s largest cash flow revenue source for their own benefit, not the benefit of our students.
The only logic I’ve received from legislators who might otherwise support across-the-board (i.e., ‘universal’) School Choice is that: …by staking themselves to universal choice, the ‘eliminate-choice-group’ will activate, and they feel they won’t be able to win that battle. “It’s not worth the risk.”
Of course, this logic accentuates the despotism currently being asserted by education special interest groups on the rest of us, not to mention the dis-service to our children. While I understand choosing one’s battles carefully, a political compromise that harms most of Vermont’s schoolchildren has little, if any, honor in it. I recall ‘never-Trumpers’ saying the same thing when they wouldn’t support the President. Thankfully, the majority of voters in the U.S. had the courage to act honorably. Unfortunately, most of our Vermont legislators, those who may actually support School Choice, are not yet that courageous.
Get government out of the business of regulating education. Period.
Indeed, Ms. McGuinness. But how? The majority of voters in control are either too frightened to act (fearing retribution), or too addicted to the illicit benefits of their office to quit their habit. In either case, the system is not sustainable and doomed to collapse. Unfortunately, the longer the charade continues, the more painful the downfall will be for those (parents, students, taxpayers, *and* educators) who have not yet figured out how to escape. Caveat emptor. We’re nearing the conclusion to this unfortunate episode, one way or another.