By Polly Mikula
Vermont Senate passed H.454, the state’s landmark education reform bill, Friday night, May 23, after days of debate and uncertainty. The bill now heads back to the House, which was expected to call for a conference committee to work out its differences with the Senate version as soon as Tuesday, May 27.
Both chambers of the Legislature and the governor see education reform as a key issue in response to last year’s double-digit average property tax increases. Both chambers and the governor have also broadly agreed the state should transition to a new “foundation” education funding formula and move toward consolidating school districts in order to cull education spending. But they have disagreed on the base funding amount, the size and process for mapping new districts and the timeline.
The bill that finally passed the Senate largely mirrors the version that the House passed last month with slight changes most notably a decrease in targeted average class sizes and more leniency for independent schools.
However, despite the likely fact that the chambers are likely to come to agreement early this week, Governor Scott has already stated that he will not support the bill as it stands.
Scott issued the following statement on Friday, after the Senate passed H.454: “While the Senate moving this bill forward today is an important procedural step, I still cannot accept either the House or Senate versions. I do however remain optimistic about finding a path forward with the committee of conference… As I’ve said since the beginning of this process, I will only accept a final product that costs less than it does today, sets us on a clear path to achieve scale, reduces administrative overhead, and eliminates inefficiencies that prevent money from flowing towards more opportunities for students. We also need to make this transition as quickly as possible.”
The governor’s original education reform proposal, unveiled in January, called for consolidating Vermont’s 119 school districts into just five regional districts with a foundation formula base amount of $13,200 per student beginning next school year, 2026-27.
The House and Senate versions of the bill, call for a committee (to included school administrators) to proposed versions of consolidate districts with a maximum 8,000 students each, a foundation formula base amount of $15,033 per student (based on the Kolbe model), with implementation starting in 2029.
The Legislature faces intense pressure from Gov. Scott to pass a bill before adjourning for the year. Scott had all but demanded it, warning that he would use his powers to call them back for a special session until they came to a consensus.
“I have been clear: we cannot adjourn this legislative session without a bill that sets us on the course to accomplish these goals,” he said May 23 echoing what he said at his weekly press conference Wednesday, May 21: “I’ll call them back — and we’ll keep calling them back — until we get something accomplished,” he said. “We can’t go home without this transformation.”
Senate process, passage
Even as late as Friday last week, it wasn’t certain that Senate leadership had enough votes to get a bill over the line. At a tense meeting earlier in the week, it became clear support had faltered for a now-defunct Senate education and tax-writing committee’s version of the bill.
That led Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Baruth, D/P-Chittenden Central, to delay a vote planned for Wednesday then scrap the Senate’s version of the bill all together on the floor Thursday taking up an amendment to the House’s bill late Friday afternoon, instead.
Sen. Ruth Hardy, D-Addison, who was one of two “no” votes on the Senate Education Committee vote that passed it to the full chamber (5-2), lead the amendment discussion of the House bill in the Senate, Friday.
The resulting legislation that was approved by the Senate maintains much of the House’s bill: a four-year transition to new school districts and a new foundation funding formula of $15,033 (July 1, 2029) and a task force made up of experts and representatives of different public school constituencies to create three school district consolidation maps for legislators to consider next year.
Senate vs. House differences include:
Lower average class size minimums: The House bill suggests minimums of 12 students for Kindergarten, 15 students for Grades 1-4, and 18 for Grades 5-12, while the Senate’s bill sets the standards at 10 students for Kindergarten and 1st Grade, 12 students for Grades 2-5, 15 for Grades 6-8 and 18 for Grades 9-12. The Senate bill would also give the state secretary of education greater discretion over the enforcement of the class size standards.
District size: Senators also specified that a maximum size allowed for proposed new, consolidated school districts would be 8,000 pre-k through 12th-grade students. The House had instead set a minimum of 4,000 students per district. The Senate bill also nixed a requirement for a uniform school calendar across the state and for developing statewide graduation standards.
Independent school inclusions: The Senate version of the bill broadens the group of independent schools that would be eligible to receive tuition under the new system. In the House version, an eligible independent school would be one with a student body that was at least 51% public school students in 2024 and complies with minimum class size requirements. In the Senate version, independent schools must be in supervisory districts that, as of July 1, 2024, do not operate a public school for some or all grades, and have at least 25% of Vermont resident students tuitioned to other districts during 2023–2024. Out-of-state independent school tuition is no longer allowed in either chamber version.
Reactions from local politicians
The Senate’s vote, Friday, was not unanimous, but it was taken by voice, so individual senators’ votes weren’t on the record.
The three Rutland County Senators (Brian Collamore, Terry Williams and David Weeks, all republicans who ran on affordability) were asked where they stood on the bill in light of the fact that resulting estimates from the Joint Fiscal Office (JFO) show tax hikes for ALL Rutland County school districts — Ira, the highest, is projected to see a 31% tax increase.
Collamore responded “the bill which was the House version with 100 pages of amendments was voted out of the Senate Friday evening. It will now go to a committee of conference.” His opinion on the bill “will depend on what comes out of the committee of conference,” he added.
Williams and Weeks, who was a member of the Senate Education Committee, didn’t respond directly to the Mountain Times request for comment.
The three Windsor County Senators (Allison Clarkson, Becca White and Joe Major, all democrats) also did not reply to requests for comment on the bill in light of the fact that resulting estimates from JFO show tax cuts for most Windsor County districts while simultaneously gutting those school district budgets that voters have supported year after year.
Jim Harrison, who represents Chittenden, Mendon, Pittsfield and Killington in the state House, responded, “As the Senate changed the bill Friday evening, I have not had a chance to review the changes. Suffice it to say, there is a lot of angst with the bill on both sides. The governor has indicated he would not sign either the House or Senate versions right now, but remains hopeful the gaps can be bridged this week. That is a tall order,” he emailed Monday, May 26. Adding, “I support consolidation (we cant justify 119 school districts and 52 supervisory unions for 80,000 students) and a simpler financing system.”
Reactions from school leaders
School leaders have argued that the Senate’s proposed funding model could upend operations at schools across the state, slashing budgets that have garnered strong voter support over the decades for some districts while spiking tax rates in others that can least afford it.
“There’s something for everyone to dislike in the legislation,” John Castle, the executive director of the Vermont Rural Education Collaborative, a nonprofit advocacy group, said in an interview with VTDigger.
Castle said lawmakers were laboring under a “false narrative” that school consolidation could solve all of the state’s education woes while failing to tackle the root causes of education spending increases, like skyrocketing health care premiums and deferred facility maintenance costs.
In a letter sent to members of the Senate Finance Committee, Brooke Olsen-Farrell, superintendent of the Slate Valley Unified School District in Rutland County, similarly expressed her concern about the “lack of long-term vision for education in Vermont” included in the Senate’s version of the bill.
Although Slate Valley schools would receive an increase in education funding from the proposed spending model, Olsen-Farrell wrote that homeowners in the district could see property tax increases of up to 22%.
“The Senate’s version of H.454 does not reflect the values or needs of our students, families, and communities,” Olsen-Farell wrote. “It jeopardizes our ability to deliver equitable educational opportunities and modernize our education system, while placing an untenable financial strain on Vermonters.”
Olsen-Farrell’s sentiments were largely shared by superintendents in Franklin County, who collectively panned the Senate proposal in a scathing open letter to their communities.
“The latest attempts at school funding reform are a stark reminder of how disconnected the current legislative process is from the realities facing our local districts,” wrote Maple Run superintendent Bill Kimball, Missisquoi Valley superintendent Julie Regimbal, Franklin Northeast superintendent Lynn Cota and Franklin West superintendent John Tague.
Noting that the proposed model could yield tax increases of up to 30% for some homeowners in Franklin County, the superintendents wrote that the bill would do little to address the “core drivers” of increased education costs, as Castle had noted.
“Until our elected officials demonstrate the courage to confront these fundamental cost drivers and craft equitable solutions, we’re simply rearranging the deck chairs on a sinking ship,” the superintendents wrote. “Our children deserve better than this political charade.”
While far from having widespread popularity in the school community, the House-passed version of H.454 had the support of the state associations representing superintendents, school boards, and principals. Those groups, however, strongly opposed the Senate’s Ed Committee changes to the bill and school district leaders from across the state had issued missives panning many of the Senate committees’ proposals after it came to the Senate floor, Thursday, May 15.
That pressure, in part, helped sway the discussion successfully back in the direction of the House version.
“I wanted to thank everyone who became engaged in this conversation of Vermont Education Reform,” wrote Superintendent Sherry Sousa in a letter to the Mountain Views Supervisory Union (MVSU) community, Sunday, May 25. “No matter what position you took, the voices of Vermonters were heard and the Senate pulled their version of H454. This was a true example of democracy in action and I’m so appreciative.”
Mountain Views School District serves the towns of Barnard, Bridgewater, Killington, Pittsfield, Plymouth, Pomfret, Reading, and Woodstock and is projected to see a $6 million to $8 million (or about 24.6%) of current spending levels cut under the ed reform bill, H.454, according to Analysis performed by the Joint Fiscal Office (JFO), May 2.
“We are one of the Top 5 in terms of per pupil spend. So that’s why we’re getting such cuts,” Sousa explained in an earlier interview with the Mountain Times. “Our community has consistently voted to support our schools at a very high level and want that for our students. So it kind of seems like a worst-case scenario for everyone. It’s a real lose-lose,” Sousa summarized.
Sen. Ann Cummings, D-Washington, who chairs the chamber’s finance committee, responded to concerns over affordability saying it was not possible to fully understand the proposal’s tax rate implications until new school district boundaries are drawn up and approved by the Legislature next year, which is the schedule proposed in the bill.
“We’re aware that there are going to be problems we need to solve. But we don’t need to solve them tonight in order for this process to go forward,” Cummings told her colleagues on the Senate floor. “To do it now, is premature.”
In addition to tax increases likely to hit those who can least afford it, H.454 would also repeal the law’s current provision allowing low- to middle-income residents to pay some or all of their school taxes based on their income, which 70% of Vermont homeowners do.
Shaun Robinson/VTDigger contributed to this reporting.
