Dear Editor,
Editor’s note: This letter is in response to Don Tinney’s commentary in the July 3 edition. Tinney is the president of Vermont-National Education Association (NEA), the union of 13,000 Vermont educators.
Tinney’s “hit piece” on Governor Scott is nothing new for the Vermont-NEA, although I’m surprised by the shrillness of the tone. Perhaps he realizes how much Vermonters have lost patience with rising property taxes and declining outcomes and is hoping to deflect attention away from his organization.
The basic facts are that we have more adults per students in our schools than any state in the country (it’s not even close), resulting in the second highest cost per student. Over the past decades, we have seen steady spending increases, according to the 2023 JFO Report on Vermont’s Education Financing, while staffing levels have persisted (despite Act 46). Further, and more alarming, test scores have declined compared to other states who spend less and have larger at-risk student populations.
We can see from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) data that in the early 2000s, we were spending below our peers in New England but achieving better results. But by 2015, their 8th grade math outcomes had surpassed ours despite our spending growing at nearly twice the rate (61% vs 37%). Test scores have been trending downward across the board over the past decade; however Vermont’s scores are declining much faster than the nation as a whole (5.9% compared to 3.4%). This trend is similar when looking at other disciplines and grade levels and the trend is continuing despite a sharp increase in spending since 2018-2019.
Today, we are spending nearly 79% more than the national average, but getting only marginally better results.
To be fair, Scott has offered few actionable policy suggestions to address this problem and the most coherent one was offered by the tax commissioner at the 11th hour of the legislative process. Tinney rightly criticizes the plan to borrow against reserves which would simply create a larger financial hole to dig out of next year. However, the VT-NEA and their friends at the other education special interest groups have also offered little in the way of meaningful reform. Tinney points to an income tax as the solution to our woes but the reality is that two-thirds of Vermonters pay based on their income today. Replacing the third of taxpayers that pay based on the actual value of their homes would increase the volatility of education tax revenues (home values are more stable than incomes particularly for higher income households) and further exacerbate the property tax roller coaster.
It’s also concerning that he casts fiscal restraint as a partisan issue and attempts to tie Governor Scott to Trump because he refuses to raise taxes. Vermonters know better than that. In fact, Senator Kitchell (D-Caledonia), who Tinney himself praises in his opening paragraphs, is known for steadily steering the ship of fiscal responsibility in the Senate. She even, as reported by VTDigger, opposed the Universal School Meals proposal in 2013 pushed by Tinney and his allies (which is now contributing to the current property tax crisis).
Tinney was right about one thing though, Vermonters have made it abundantly clear that they think the education funding system is broken. The problem is that our current system is so opaque it is not clear if increased taxes are the result of local spending, unfunded mandates, or Legislative taxing decisions. That lack of transparency means that no one is held accountable and spending and property taxes both continue to increase year after year unchecked.
The Commission on the Future of Education that the Legislature went all-in on this session is made of up lobbyists for superintendents, principals, teachers and other special interests who helped to design our current system. I, for one, am not optimistic they will produce a different outcome this time around.
Ben Kinsley, board of directors for Campaign for Vermont, a non-partisan advocacy group
