VSA/VSBA/VPA Legislative Bulletin
January 22, 2008
Introductory Note to Our Readers. This is the first Education Legislative Bulletin of the 2008 legislative session. For the past several years, the VSA, VSBA and VPA have prepared regular Education Legislative Reports for distribution to legislators as well as our members. This year, we plan to spend less time on Reports, and will send Bulletins like this one, with succinct reports on legislative activities, to our members more frequently than we have in the past.
We are making this change in order to make more effective use of our legislative resources. While legislators have liked our Reports, we have found that preparing you to discuss education issues with your local legislators is most important to the success of our over-all advocacy efforts.
If you are a school board recipient of our Bulletins, you should understand that you are likely to be the only member of your board who receives legislative information from us. Notices of Bulletin publication are sent via email to members of our Governmental Relations Network only. The chair of any board with no designated GRN member will receive Bulletin notices until another member of his or her board is named. We rely on you to share the information in our Legislative Bulletins with your fellow board members. If you find that other members of your board would like to receive Bulletins directly, let us know and we will add them to our distribution list.
Here is our first update of the year on happenings at the State House
Public Education Reception Planned for State House
On January 31st, from 4:30 to 6:00 in the afternoon, board members, administrators and teachers will host a reception for legislators in the State House. Our goal is to have a large number of local educators and board members present to talk with legislators about Act 82, the current budget year, statewide calendars and any other education-related issues that are important to specific localities. There will be a program of student performances and brief presentations by representatives of the sponsoring groups, but the primary “event” of the afternoon will be an appetizer buffet and informal conversations with legislators. We hope you will plan now to attend, organize car pools, and begin thinking about the messages you want to deliver while you are in Montpelier.
New Proposals for Statewide Calendar Under Consideration
The Committee established by Act 31, the bill passed last year requiring the adoption of a statewide school calendar, met with the House Education Committee on January 10th to report on the hearings it conducted in the fall, and to express its general opposition to the imposition of a common calendar. The Calendar Committee, made up of representatives of various education organizations including our Associations, was charged by Act 31 to develop a common calendar for submission to, and adoption by, the State Board of Education. After the meeting, Commissioner Cate was asked by the House Committee to provide his perspective on the status of the Calendar Committee’s work, and he recommended a series of steps that would effectively replace the provisions of Act 31 with new processes. The Commissioner will meet with the Calendar Committee to discuss his recommendations and then return to the House Committee for more discussion.
The Commissioner’s recommendations include the following:
The Senate Education Committee has not yet been included in these discussions. It is at this point very unclear as to how this will eventually play out. We will report developments as they occur.
League of Cities and Towns Encourages Select Boards to Adopt School
Funding Resolution
The Board of Directors of the Vermont League of Cities and Towns has voted to support the major provisions of the Vermont Coalition of Municipalities’ resolution on “Vermont Education Finance and Property Tax Reform.” On January 14th, the League sent a message to all mayors, selectboards, city councils and city managers encouraging selectboards and city councils to approve the resolution and inform the Governor and legislators of their action.
The League characterizes the resolution as a “…call for a statewide discussion, debate and possible decision to move our current hybrid system of state-and locally-controlled education governance and finances structures to either:
1. A public education system that is governed, managed and primarily financed locally, or
2. A public education system that is governed managed and financed by the state.”
In his message to city and town officials informing them of the action taken by the VLCT Board, Executive Director Steve Jeffrey said “(N)o one is well served by the current system (or lack thereof).
Staying the course or continuing…to tinker with the funding source, or consolidation of school districts, or additional mandated services, or what state law should be passed to control school spending miss(es) the point of who do we want to make these decisions?”
We recommend that you follow the progress of this locally. Check the agendas of your selectboards or city councils to see if the resolution is scheduled for discussion, and talk with your city and town counter-parts about its obvious flaws.
Vermont is like every other state in the country (except Hawaii) in that the governance and funding of public education is a shared responsibility of state and local governments. Neither of the “either or” choices promoted in the VLCT supported resolution are viable. An education system “primarily governed and financed locally” has been ruled unconstitutional in this and many other states. And it is hard to understand how a state-run education system could be anything but a disaster. Hawaii’s state-run education system is widely known for its inefficiency and poor to mediocre results.
The resolution being circulated by the League is really just the latest attempt by municipal officials in a few Vermont cities and towns to reverse the Act 60/Act 68 education funding system. This latest effort amounts to nothing more than a “Hobson’s Choice” between two very flawed concepts.
House Education Committee Considers Amendments to Act 82 “Think Twice” Ballot Language
On Thursday of last week, the House Education Committee took up the question of how to “fix” Act 82’s prejudicial ballot language for presenting the two-vote question to voters. As you will no doubt recall, Act 82 requires the use of ballot terms like “total budget,” “Maximum Inflation Amount,” and “Additional Spending” to lead voters to the conclusion that the first budget amount must certainly be enough to fund the educational needs of the district and the second amount is just a request for “extras.”
The Committee looked at a rough draft of alternative language prepared by the Legislative Council, and then heard comments from our Associations. The initial draft included space for school boards to place 50 words on the ballot explaining its budget request, and contained a standard preface intended to inform voters that the budget is being presented in two parts because of past “above average” spending by the school district.
John Nelson of the VSBA suggested some simple and accurate language for the “think twice” ballot.
The language for first vote ballot would be:
1. Shall the voters approve an amount determined by utilizing an arbitrary statewide inflationary index without regard to the actual needs of any individual school district?
And the second vote language would be:
2. Shall the voters approve an amount determined by the school board to be necessary to provide an adequate program of education for the students enrolled in the district’s schools?
The Committee did not appear to be persuaded by our suggestions, and it is not clear how the Committee will proceed in the next few weeks with this issue.
Governor’s State of
State Address Makes Mention of Education
Governor Douglas delivered his State of the State address on January 10th. As expected, the Governor stuck to his “affordability” theme throughout the speech. On the question of education spending he had this to say.
Last year we enacted meaningful reforms to
ease steep yearly increases in property tax bills by calling for voters to
consider an alternative budget for school districts that propose spending
increases beyond a certain level. This
mechanism will help make our increasing investment in education sustainable.
While we wait for this common sense cap on
property tax increases to take effect, we must create a bridge to stabilize tax
bills right away.
The Governor explained how he would create the “bridge to stabilize tax bills right away” in his address by suggesting that the state lottery be leased to a private operator, yielding a one-time $50 million payment. The Governor would have $25 million of the lease proceeds go to property tax relief in the form of a reduction in the state-established tax rate and $25 million go to “…school modernization projects (to help) clear the backlog of school construction (and) give our students 21st century learning environments in energy efficient buildings…”
Finally, the Governor included in his State of the State address an undocumented criticism of Vermont’s record in teaching math, science and technical subjects, and he proposed a solution.
We must rethink now how science, technology
engineering and mathematics are taught in our state. Vermont spends more than nearly any other
state on a per capita basis for primary and secondary education…we want to know
that our children are ready for the challenge…let’s build a classroom framework
to support them. I have asked the State
Board and Department of Education to help schools implement more innovative
science, technology, engineering and mathematics curricula. By rethinking how our education resources are
deployed, we can make this transformation.
School Breakfast Bill Discussed in House
Education Committee
H. 333, a bill that would provide state funds to pay “…the student share of the cost of breakfasts provided to all students eligible for a reduced-price breakfast under the federal school breakfast program,” was introduced to the House Education Committee last week. The bill seeks an appropriation of $185,000 from the General Fund to pay the family share of reduced-price breakfasts for students from families between 130 and 185 percent of the poverty level. The funds would benefit families of four (for example) that earn between $26,845 and $38,203 per year. The bill’s sponsors estimate that 1,500 low-income Vermont students “who now cannot afford breakfast” would be provided breakfast if the appropriation is granted. If the $185,000 state contribution resulted in increased participation in the breakfast program, as much as $280,000 in additional federal matching funds would go to participating school districts, making the total benefit to school districts as much as $460,000.
Commissioner Cate’s White Paper on
Governance Report Gets Brief Consideration in Education Committees
Both the House and Senate Education Committees held brief discussions with Commissioner Cate on his school district consolidation recommendations last week. The recommendations are part of the Commissioner’s final White Paper report to the legislature. You can read the full report, as well as the recommendations made by our Associations prior to the issuance of the Report, at http://education.vermont.gov/new/html/dept/governance.html.
The House Education Committee considered the recommendations of the VSA and VSBA after hearing from the Commissioner. The Senate Committee asked for a review of this issue by the Commissioner during a discussion with him on state as well as local governance and accountability. In neither setting did the Commissioner advocate strongly for action in line with his recommendations. Rather, he conceded that his proposals have not received wide support. At this point, it appears that the State Board and Commissioner are willing to let discussions of governance changes continue as they pursue their “Transformation” initiative in the coming year, possibly hoping that school district consolidation will become more acceptable to Vermonters as the issue of transformation is discussed.
Teen Parent Education Programs
Section 22 of Act 66 of 2007 extended a financial arrangement enacted as a temporary measure in 2006 under which school districts pay a flat percentage of the base education amount to programs serving pregnant and parenting teens. The need for predictability in funding support for the programs arose in 2005 when eligibility to use federal TANF funding to support teen parent education programs was curtailed.
Section 22 required the Commissioner of Education to make recommendations to the General Assembly for legislation to address education funding for the teen parent education programs on a more permanent basis. The Commissioner was also required to report on an array of program features and statistics including students served, academic resources offered, current funding mechanisms and student success rates.
In early January, Commissioner Cate filed a report but did not make a recommendation for future funding of education services provided by the teen parent education programs. He is continuing to work with interested and affected parties and intends to file a recommendation before the end of January. Central to the sustainable funding dilemma is a conclusion by some that the teen parent education programs require sustainable funds that exceed the amount that can be derived through funding for education services. In summary, the teen parent education programs need a predictable and sufficient source of funds to address their need for overhead support and for the human services aspects of the important need that they fill. We will continue to follow this issue.
New Education Bills Introduced in January 2008
H. 533
CODIFICATION OF EXISTING STATE LAW ESTABLISHING REGIONAL SCHOOL CHOICE FOR
PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS IN GRADES 9 THROUGH 12
Sponsor: Ainsworth, David
This
bill proposes to codify No. 150 of the Acts of the 1999 Adj. Sess. (2000),
establishing regional school choice for public school students in grades 9
through 12, as amended by No. 182 of the Acts of the 2005 Adj. Sess. (2006),
which repealed the date on which the original bill was scheduled to be
repealed.
H.559 AUTHORIZING ALTERNATIVE,
COST-CONTAINING MEASURES BY SCHOOL DISTRICTS
Sponsors: Koch, Thomas, Donahue, Anne, McDonald,
Patricia, McFaun, Francis
This
bill proposes to authorize the commissioner of education to exempt a school
district from state education statutes upon approval of the district’s proposal
to implement alternative, less costly measures that meet statutory goals.
H.581 TELEPHONE
NUMBERS ON SCHOOL BUSES
Sponsor: Bissonnette, Clement
This
bill proposes to require school buses to display the telephone number of the
bus company on the rear of the vehicle so that citizens can report instances of
dangerous driving.
H.582
SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION FUNDS AND THE EXCESS SPENDING AMOUNT
Sponsors: Ancel, Janet, Bray, Christopher, Jewett,
Willem
This
bill proposes to authorize the commissioner of education to review school
construction proposals to determine whether funds may be deducted from district
education spending when calculating excess spending.
H.630
PROVIDING NOTICE OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY TUITION RATES
Sponsors: Trombley, Ira, Johnson, Mitzi
This
bill proposes to require public and approved independent schools to establish
tuition rates by December 28 for the following fiscal year (approximately five
weeks earlier than required currently).
H.640
REQUIRING POSTSECONDARY CREDITS IN AFRICAN AMERICAN HISTORY AS A CONDITION OF
TEACHER LICENSING
Sponsor: Pugh, Ann
This
bill proposes to require each applicant seeking to obtain or renew a license to
teach in a public elementary or secondary school in Vermont to have completed
at least one three-credit course at an accredited college or university in
African American history, covering the period from the European colonization of
North America through the end of the twentieth century.
H.646
TEN PERCENT HOUSEHOLD INCOME LIMIT ON EDUCATION PROPERTY TAX
Sponsor: Komline, Patti
No
description available.
S.211
SOLICITING OF ARCHITECT PROPOSALS BY A SCHOOL DISTRICT
Sponsor: Collins, Don
This
bill proposes to require that a school district wishing to hire an architect
solicit at least three proposals.
S.263
APPROVING SCHOOL BUDGETS BASED ON THE COST PER EQUALIZED PUPIL
Sponsor:
Coppenrath, George
This
bill proposes to change the method by which the electorate votes on school
budgets from one based on the district’s total education budget to one based on
the cost per equalized pupil. The bill
would require that the ballot provide seven spending options from which to
choose and a method for determining the spending option of which a majority of
the voters approve.
S.264 CONTAINING
EDUCATION COSTS AND AUTHORIZING PARENTAL CHOICE FOR STUDENTS RESIDING IN HIGH
SPENDING DISTRICTS
Sponsor:
Coppenrath, George
This bill proposes to use a portion of a
district’s budget that has been identified as excess spending under 32 V.S.A. §
5401(12) to fund “parental choice scholarships” that pay all or a part of the
tuition assessed by an approved or recognized independent school or to pay
costs in connection with a home study program.
S.293 THE
CREATION OF A STUDY COMMISSION TO EXAMINE STATE AND LOCAL DECISION-MAKING
Sponsor: White, Jeanette
This
bill proposes to create a study commission to consider the nature of
decision-making in the state, including the nature of the decisions currently
made at the state level, the nature of those made at the local level, and
whether some decentralization of decision-making authority is appropriate and
advisable.
S.306 HIGH
PERFORMANCE SCHOOL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS
Sponsor: Illuzzi, Vincent
This
bill proposes to require the development of high performance school design and
construction standards. It requires that
with regard to applications for school construction aid submitted on or after
July 1, 2009, full state aid shall be available only if the project’s
preliminary aid application states the intent to comply with the standards and
if compliance with the standards is documented upon project completion. The bill proposes that the department of
education may determine that compliance with the standards is impractical for a
specific project and may elect to provide partial or full state aid absent compliance.
S.327
EDUCATION FINANCE AMENDMENTS
Sponsor:
Hartwell, Robert
This
bill proposes to repeal the annual adjustment of education property tax rates;
expand the housesite acreage under the property tax adjustment program from two
acres to ten acres; change the method for annual determination of the per-pupil
base spending amount; begin the process of transferring the cost of federal
mandates relating to special education and the No Child Left Behind act from
local budgets to the state; and replace the divided vote provisions enacted in
2007 with caps on education spending, which would require a supermajority to
override.