The governor’s debate remark sparked controversy. But Winooski’s own records, Burlington’s linguistic diversity, and Vermont’s school funding formula reveal a much bigger story.
by Dave Souila, for FYIVT.com
During the October 28 gubernatorial debate, Gov. Phil Scott contrasted rural schools offering one or two foreign languages with Winooski and other Chittenden County communities, where he said they had 17. Winooski objected: French is the only world language taught at its high school. The school board characterized the remark as a “dog whistle,” arguing that it could leave taxpayers imagining special treatment for a diverse community.
On October 30, Scott acknowledged in writing that he had misspoken about Winooski’s foreign-language courses. That correction matters. So does Winooski’s factual point.
But there is considerably more to the number 17.
A Number Hiding in Plain Sight
A September 2025 City of Winooski language-access document contains a table provided by the Winooski School District: precisely 17 languages served as of August 15, 2025. They include Nepali, Swahili, Somali, Spanish, French, Mai-Mai, Karen, Arabic, Kinyarwanda, Vietnamese and seven others.
The table lists 540 “individuals served” across those languages. That’s not 540 unique English-learner students. It includes family-service populations, and the district’s own explanatory notes distinguish students from adults in their households.
It is tempting to conclude that Scott meant those 17 languages. We cannot establish that. In his January State of the State address, he had also referred to an unnamed, roughly 700-student school offering 17 foreign-language courses. His October correction described a mistake about courses, not the city’s language-access table.
What the records do establish is that Winooski teaches one world language while supporting households across 17 listed languages. Those are fundamentally different activities.
Burlington’s 45 Languages
Burlington School District’s 2025 annual reporting is even more striking: 45 languages other than English are represented among students, and 522 students—17% of enrollment—receive English-learner services.
That does not mean Burlington teaches 45 foreign languages. Its high school’s course catalog lists four: French, Spanish, German and Latin.
English-learner instruction helps students develop proficiency in the language used in classrooms; translation and interpretation help families access school information; world-language classes teach students another language. Confuse the three and the numbers become meaningless.
Nor does the classroom comparison neatly divide urban Chittenden County from rural Vermont. Winooski offers French. North Country Union High School lists French, German and Spanish; Otter Valley lists French and Spanish; Springfield offers Spanish in-house and other languages through outside options.
Course availability appears to depend partly on school size and scheduling, not simply geography.
What Is It Costing?
Winooski’s own FY2027 budget report lists $1,709,105 in actual English-learner program expenditures for FY2024 and $2,342,648 for FY2025—a 37% increase. Its FY2027 proposed program budget was $2,487,147, approximately 7% of the $34.8 million district operating budget.
For comparison, Winooski budgeted $124,057 for French instruction in FY2027. That’s roughly $20 for the English-learner program for every $1 for French.
The comparison is revealing in scale, but not proof of excess: one program provides language development and related supports, while the other teaches an academic subject.
There’s also an accounting wrinkle. Winooski’s audit Schedule B reports a different FY2025 ELL total, $2,184,203. Those figures require reconciliation before anyone declares a precise all-in cost. Burlington’s language-liaison spending is separately identifiable in its budget, but its total English-learner program cost is not clearly published in one comparable line.
English-learner services aren’t optional favors. Federal law requires schools to provide meaningful educational access. The legitimate question is what the services cost and what results they achieve.
Now for the Weighting
Under Vermont’s current Act 127 formula, each qualifying English learner adds 2.49 weighted-pupil equivalents. That’s additional to the ordinary pupil count.
A kindergarten-through-fifth-grade student with no other adjustment counts as 1.00; a qualifying English learner in the same grade counts as 3.49. Other factors, including poverty, grade level and rural density, can add separate adjustments.
And “English learner” is an official educational classification, not shorthand for everyone who speaks another language at home. Students must meet screening criteria. Former English learners being monitored are not counted as current English learners for this weight.
Here’s why the arithmetic matters.
Imagine two districts with 1,000 actual students and $20 million in education spending. Suppose one has 100 qualifying English learners and neither has any other weights.
The first district has 1,000 weighted pupils; the second has 1,249. Their spending per weighted pupil becomes $20,000 and roughly $16,013, respectively.
Same real enrollment. Same spending. Different denominator.
The 249 extra weighted pupils are not 249 additional children or a check for their schooling. They increase the second district’s taxing capacity, allowing a lower tax rate for the same spending, all else equal.
The formula recognizes presumed higher costs without requiring that the added capacity be spent dollar-for-dollar on English-learner services.
And That’s the Accountability Question
Vermont law requires districts to budget sufficient resources for English learners, report those expenditures annually to the Agency of Education, and evaluate program effectiveness. Yet the district-by-district spending reports and complete staffing, vendor and outcome breakdowns were not located in this investigation.
How many students receive direct services? What are the actual costs for teachers, liaisons and interpreters? How long does it take students to reach proficiency? How do spending and results compare across districts with different populations?
Scott’s concern about unequal educational opportunities deserves examination. So does Winooski’s need to serve children from many linguistic backgrounds. Neither consideration makes the other disappear.
Scott corrected the course-count mistake. The deeper arithmetic—what Vermont’s language programs cost, how weighting changes property taxes, and what students receive—still needs explaining.
Dig deeper in the Finder: English learners · Act 127 · weighted pupils