
Tuesday,
May 12, 2009 – Issue #10
Legislative leadership had been committed to an adjournment date of
this past weekend from early in the session, and the General Assembly completed
its work and adjourned Saturday night.
However, there is a distinct possibility that the Governor will veto the
Legislature’s state budget bill (H.441) according to news reports and
information we have heard inside the Statehouse. The state’s renewable energy bill (H.446),
and the Vermont Yankee decommissioning bill (H.436) are also possible
candidates for a gubernatorial veto.
Therefore, it is quite possible that the 2009 General Assembly will
reconvene for a veto session before July 1st. With that in mind, the following report on
the final education-related provisions of the 2009 Legislative session will
likely not be the final Education
Legislative Report of this year, particularly with regard to the education
provisions in the budget bill. To be continued…
Education Fund to Support the State’s Budget Obligations
The State of Vermont is facing very large tax-revenue shortfalls as a
result of the recession, and the Education Fund has been tapped to cover some
expenses that have heretofore been supported by the General Fund. One notable provision is a two-year freeze
(fiscal years 2010 and 2011) in the annual transfer from the General Fund to
the Education Fund at $240.8 million (existing statutes would have required a
transfer of $297.8 million in 2010). Federal stimulus money will contribute
$38.6 million to the Education Fund in fiscal year 2010, and likely the same
amount in 2011. Therefore, the state allocation to the Education Fund, including the
federal stimulus, will be $18.4 million less in fiscal year 2010 than required
by existing statute. In fiscal year
2011, the reduced allocation will be greater than $18.4 unless further
legislative action occurs.
The Legislature also chose to
freeze the base education payment for fiscal year 2011 at its 2010 amount
($8544), rather than allow the payment to increase by inflation as required by
existing statute. Reducing the base education payment in this
manner will increase every school district’s spending adjustment in fiscal year
2011 if the district’s spending increases or equalized pupils decline,
resulting in a greater yield in property tax revenue for the Education Fund
from homestead property tax payers, including those payers who are
income-sensitized.
The Legislature also approved the following statewide education
property tax rates for fiscal year 2010: (1) 86¢ for homestead property, and (2) $1.35
for nonresidential property. These
rates are one cent lower than the rates in fiscal year 2009, but are greater
than the minimum rates that would be necessary to support traditional Education
Fund expenses. A list of new expenses,
other than the $18.4 million reduced allocation from the General Fund, can be
found in the “Other cost shifts” section below.
Available estimates suggest that without those shifts the tax rate could
be approximately two cents lower.
Although less of a cost-shift than was proposed by the Governor in
January (see below), these three changes will result in increased property
taxes for all Vermont payers. The tax
rate and base education payment freeze were approved in the tax rate-setting
bill (H.12) that was rapidly approved by the Legislature on Saturday, the last
day of the session.
These actions will allow for non-traditional uses of Education
Fund revenue during the next two fiscal years.
The discussion of this cost shifting began with the Governor’s budget
address in January, when he proposed to shift the state share of the teachers’
retirement system to the Education Fund (approximately $60 million in fiscal
year 2010). The Legislature considered
this concept very seriously, as we have previously reported, but ultimately did
not approve the shift. Communication
from local school officials, municipal officials, and tax payers to their senators
and representatives certainly contributed to the decision not to shift
teachers’ retirement this year. However,
the budget bill does create a commission to study the teachers’ and state
employees’ retirement systems, including the funds’ funding sources and
sustainability:
The commission is charged with making recommendations
about plan design, benefit provisions, and appropriate funding
sources, along with other recommendations they deem appropriate for
consideration, consistent with actuarial and governmental accounting standards,
as well as demographic and workforce trends and the long term
sustainability of the benefit programs.
The commission will include representatives from the Legislature and
the Administration, including the State Treasurer and the Commissioner of
Education. Our associations will monitor
and report on the activities of the retirement commission, particularly with
regard to recommendations regarding funding sources.
Other Cost-shifts and Revenue Changes in the Education Fund
Annually, school-based Medicaid reimbursements that are not
appropriated to school districts, the Department of Education, or the Agency of
Human Services are to be transferred the Education Fund (16 V.S.A. 2959(g)), but
the transfer will not occur in fiscal years 2009 or 2010. The effect of the change is approximately $5
million of lost revenue for the Education Fund in both fiscal years.
The following three state obligations were shifted to the Education
Fund:
· Community High School of Vermont (Dept. of
Corrections): $3 million;
· Early Education Initiative: $1.1 million;
· Department of Education’s VISION computer
accounting system: approximately $250,000.
Tax-code changes, approved as part of the State’s tax bill (H.442),
will marginally increase revenues to the Education Fund. The following are the projections for
increased revenue in fiscal year 2010:
· $1.2 million for a sales tax on liquor sales;
· $300,000 for a sales tax on digital
downloads;
· $200,000 for an increase in the motor
vehicles Purchase and Use tax.
Other Education Policy Provisions in the Budget Bill
The Tax Department will immediately stop including the insert “About
Your 20XX Taxes: The more you spend the more you pay” in property tax bill
mailings.
Five limited-service positions are authorized within the Department of
Education to administer the federal stimulus money. The Legislature did not include requested
authorization for one classified position to comply with Act 1, the Child
Sexual Abuse Prevention law.
Education Fund Stabilization Reserve to Decrease Below Maximum
The total effect of the numerous adjustments to Education Fund
expenditures and revenues will result in the fund’s stabilization reserve
decreasing below its maximum of 5 percent in fiscal years 2010 and 2011,
according to projections from the Legislature’s Joint Fiscal Office. Since Act 68’s implementation in fiscal year
2005, the fund has maintained the maximum reserve every year, except in 2006
when it decreased to 4.6 percent. The JFO
projects the stabilization reserve to be 3.9 percent in fiscal year 2010 and
4.3 percent in 2011. Existing law
requires the stabilization reserve to be maintained between 3.5 and 5 percent.
Education Organization and Management Study
A provision in the Legislature’s appropriations bill creates a
committee to “examine potential improvements to the structure and funding of
the Vermont educational system in light of the state’s limited financial
resources.” Among other related charges,
the committee would:
Examine the role and the
effectiveness of the policy-making, management, and administrative structure
that creates and implements Vermont education policy, including consideration
of the functions of the legislature, the governor, the state board of
education, the department of education, supervisory unions, local school
boards, parents, students, community members, and other entities and
individuals…
Identify and evaluate the
long-range sustainability of current and potential funding sources and
mechanisms…
The committee will be comprised of 15 members including eight
legislators, the Commissioner of Education, and six other appointees from
outside state government (four appointed by the Legislature and two by the
Governor). The committee’s composition
“shall attempt to ensure both that committee members have a broad understanding
of the current education funding system and that the committee includes both
supporters and critics of the system.”
The first meeting will be convened by July 30, at which point a
committee chair will be selected. The
committee is to meet no more than six times and is charged with reporting on
its findings and recommendations by December 15 of this year. The Department of Education and the Joint
Fiscal Office will provide staff support.
H.427: All-encompassing Education Policy Bill
Other than in the budget bill detailed elsewhere in this report, all
other education policy provisions were incorporated in the final version of
H.427, including most provisions of S.136, the high school completion
bill. The House and Senate approved the
final version of the bill in the last 36 hours of the session, after their
respective conferees negotiated the differences between the House- and
Senate-approved versions of H.427 and S.136.
The bill is now awaiting action by the Governor, and the following is a
description of every significant provision in the bill.
Act 82 Divided Question Ballot Language (Section 6)
H.427 rewrites the required ballot language for those districts that
are subject to the Act 82 divided question (i.e., two-vote) law. The new language is as follows:
The total proposed budget of
$__________ is the amount determined by the school board to be necessary to
support the school district’s educational program. State law requires the vote on this budget to
be divided because (i) the school district’s spending per pupil last year was
more than the statewide average and (ii) this year’s proposed budget is greater
than last year’s budget adjusted for inflation.
Article #1 (School Budget)
Part A. Shall the voters of the school district
authorize the school board to expend $_______, which is a portion of the amount
the school board has determined to be necessary?
Part B. If Part A is approved by the voters, shall
the voters of the school district also authorize the school board to expend
$_______, which is the remainder of the amount the school board has determined
to be necessary?
Existing law requires that the divided question provision of Act 82 be
repealed following the fiscal year 2014 budget approval process. This year was the first that the law was in
effect. Ten districts requested a
second-question budget amount from its electorate and six were approved.
Exceptions to the Act 82 Divided Question Law (Section 20)
The following expenses will not be considered part of education
spending exclusively for the purpose of determining whether a district is
subject to the Act 82 divided question (two-vote) law (i.e., the expenses will
still be part of education spending for determining homestead tax rates):
·
Capital
construction costs that have approval from the Department of Education. This includes districts that have received
preliminary approval from the Department, provided that the district will not
receive state aid as a result of the moratorium on state aid for school
construction, and districts that have received final approval from the
Department and are receiving state aid.
These costs may include interest paid on debt.
·
Anticipated
tuition costs for students in grade levels for which the district does not
maintain a school. The law also allows
districts to include these costs in the Act 82 divided question calculation, if
the district chooses to do so.
·
Spending
attributable to the cost of planning a merger of a school with an average grade
size of 20 students or fewer.
·
Spending
attributable to the district’s share of costs for 21st Century
Community Learning Centers after-school programs.
·
“Spending
… attributable to the costs of providing alternative educational opportunities
designed to encourage at-risk high school students to remain enrolled in and to
graduate from high school, whether offered by the district or a contracting
entity.”
Exceptions to the Excess Spending Threshold (Section 20)
The following expenses will not be considered part of education
spending exclusively for the purpose of determining whether a district is
subject to the excess spending threshold (i.e., the expenses will still be part
of education spending for determining homestead tax rates):
·
Capital
construction costs that have approval from the Department of Education. This includes districts that have received
preliminary approval from the Department, provided that the district will not
receive state aid as a result of the moratorium on state aid for school
construction, and districts that have received final approval from the
Department and are receiving state aid.
These costs may include interest paid on debt.
·
Spending
attributable to the cost of planning a merger of a school with an average grade
size of 20 students or fewer.
Designation of Public High Schools (Section 13)
Districts that do not maintain a public high school may now designate a
public high school as the high school for the district by vote of the
electorate. The board of the receiving
school must vote to accept the designation.
Existing law allows designation of approved independent schools only.
In a district that has designated either a public or an approved
independent school, a parent may petition the school board to pay tuition for
his or her child to attend a different public or independent school not
restricted to designated districts. The
board’s decision is final, and tuition would be limited the least of (i) the
statewide average announced tuition of Vermont union high schools, (ii) the per
pupil tuition the district pays to the designated school, or (iii) the tuition
charged by the enrolling school.
High School Completion (Sections 40-45)
H.427 states that it is a “priority” of the Legislature and the
Department of Education to “take all necessary measures” to increase the high
school completion rate to 100 percent by 2020.
The bill will allow enrolled students to participate in the Act 176
high school completion program, whereby districts formulate a “Graduation
Education Plan” for certain students and are reimbursed for contracted
educational services provided.
The bill directs Educational Support Teams (ESTs) to determine which
enrolled students at any grade level will require additional supports to
graduate from high school based on guidelines to be developed by the
Commissioner of Education, particularly “during times of academic or personal
transition.” For an identified student,
the ESTs are to develop an individualized strategy to assist the student in
completing high school, in consultation with the student’s parents when
possible. ESTs must also report annually
to the Commissioner on how the team has addressed these students’ needs, and the
costs that it incurred.
The Commissioner is directed to develop an “accurate, uniform, and
reliable method for defining and measuring secondary school completion rates on
a school-by-school basis...” He is then to assess individual schools on meeting
these benchmarks, and the districts must report to their taxpayers on their
schools’ progress in achieving a 100 percent completion rate.
The Commissioner must also develop and publish guidelines to assist
districts in identifying and supporting students to who require additional
assistance to succeed in school.
Supplemental Reading Instruction (Section 40)
H.427 amends 16 V.S.A. § 2903 to specify that schools must provide
supplemental reading instruction to enrolled middle level and high school
students “whose reading proficiency creates a barrier to the student’s success
in school.” It also specifies that
supplemental reading instruction must be provided to fourth grade students
whose proficiency falls below third grade expectations.
The Commissioner of Education must develop comprehensive model truancy
protocols that “confront truancy on a statewide, countywide, and supervisory
unionwide basis and include the post-complaint involvement of both the State’s
attorneys and the court system under 16 V.S.A. § 1127.” The Commissioner may present to the
Legislature recommended statutory changes consistent with the model protocols.
Supervisory unions must adopt truancy policies by July 1, 2010 that are
consistent with the model protocols.
Teen Parent Education Programs (Sections 32-38)
H.427 codifies the fiscal arrangement first implemented last year,
whereby the school that a pregnant or parenting student is enrolled in pays 83
percent of the prior year’s statewide average net cost per pupil for a full
year of services at a teen parent education program.
The bill also adds three definitions to Title 16, in 16 V.S.A. § 11: a
pregnant or parenting pupil, approved education program, and teen parent
education program.
H.427 explicitly states that the educational plan at the teen parent
program must be the substantial equivalent of that required by the school
district to obtain a diploma, as determined by the district.
The bill also states that the district or the pupil may request a
determination from the Commissioner of Education in the event of dispute, and
that the Commissioner’s decision will be final.
If the dispute involves the equivalency of the teen parent education
program to the high school curriculum, the Commissioner must consider certain
criteria when making a decision.
Audits and Auditors (Section 3)
16 V.S.A. § 323 and § 563(17) are amended to state that audits of
supervisory unions and school districts are to be “conducted in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards, including the issuance of a
report of internal controls over financial reporting…”
H.427 also requires that the annual supervisory union board report to
town auditors (16 V.S.A. § 261a(10)) shows actual or estimated special
education-related expenditures, including how much was paid to each school
district and a summary of services provided.
Existing law requires that the report detail how much special education
aid had been awarded and generated by the supervisory union’s member districts.
Deadline for Tuition Rates Increases (Section 13)
Notices of public school tuition increases must be announced 15 days
earlier than existing law requires. The
new deadline is January 15th preceding the academic year.
Procedure for Withdrawing from a Union District (Section 11)
If the electorate of a member of a union school district votes to
withdraw from the union, other member districts must vote to ratify or not to
ratify the withdrawal within 90 days of receiving notice of the
withdrawal. Existing statutes do not
specify any particular timeline for this process.
Aid for Joint Contract Districts (Section 12)
Through fiscal year 2010, districts that choose to operate a joint
contract school will be eligible for the same state transition aid that is
available to districts that form a union district. The amount is the lesser of $150,000 or five
percent of the base education payment multiplied by the combined enrollment of
the districts in the year of the vote.
Tuitioning Elementary Students (Section 13)
A student’s parent can petition his or her school board to allow the
student to attend a nearby but out-of-district public elementary school. The board may pay the tuition “if in the
board’s judgment the pupil’s education can be more conveniently furnished there
due to geographic considerations.” The
parent may appeal the board’s ruling to the Commissioner of Education, who will
decide whether the board must pay all, some, or none of the tuition. The appeal to the Commissioner and the
standard of “geographic considerations” are the changes from existing law.
If the district does not maintain an elementary school, a parent can
notify the board that his or her child will attend an approved independent
school by April 15 preceding the academic year.
The board shall pay tuition not to exceed the least of (i) the statewide
average tuition of Vermont union elementary schools, (ii) the average per pupil
tuition the district pays for its other resident elementary students, or (iii)
the tuition charged by the approved independent school. Existing law allows parents to chose public
elementary schools, and boards to decide whether a student could attend an
independent school.
New Definitions of State-placed Students (Sections 14-15)
H.427
will add two new categories of state-placed students: those students in the
custody of the Commissioner for Children and Families and those students in the
custody of a temporary legal custodian pursuant to 33 V.S.A. § 5308(b)(3) or 33
V.S.A. § 5308(b)(4). The new categories
will allow the Commissioner for Children and Families more latitude in
determining which public school a child should attend in order to provide for
educational continuity. The bill also
specifies which district or state agency or adult would assume responsibility
for transportation and transportation costs for certain state-placed students.
Hearing and Vision Screening Law Modified (Section 31)
At the behest of the Department of Health, the provision of law that prescribed
in which school years children must have their vision and hearing screened has
been eliminated (16 V.S.A. § 1422), and replaced with the following:
Periodic hearing and vision
screening of school-aged children shall be conducted by school districts and
primary care providers pursuant to research-based guidelines developed by the
commissioner of health in consultation with the commissioner of education. School districts and primary care providers
will attempt to avoid duplicating services provided by the other and will share
information as practicable and allowable by law.
Testimony from the Department of Health indicated that the
research-based guidelines would be from the American Association of Pediatrics.
Districts Encouraged to Seek Waivers from School Quality Standards (Section 25)
H.427 “encourages” school district and supervisory union boards to
request variances from the State Board of Education regarding specific school
quality standards, while protecting school quality. The bill also authorizes the Commissioner of
Education to act directly on variance requests, if the State Board fails to act
on the request at its first regular meeting after the request is made.
Base Education Payment Renamed Base Education Amount (Sections 16-19)
H.427 will rename the base education payment the base education amount wherever it appears in law. The new name will more accurately reflect the
base education payment’s role in public education financing, because there is
no “base payment” or “block grant” in the Act 68 system.
Existing Public High School Choice Codified (Section 27)
Existing law on regional public high school choice (Act 150 of 2000)
will be codified in the Vermont statutes as 16 V.S.A. § 1621-1622.
Statewide School Calendar Law & 40-day Census Repealed (Sections 28, 30)
The uniform statewide school calendar law, which was never implemented,
is repealed by H.427. Regional calendar
regions organized around technical centers remains current law (16 V.S.A.
1071(e)).
The 40-day student census law, which has been succeeded in statute by a
20-day census, is repealed.
$10.3 million for School Construction Aid
The Legislature authorized $10.3 million in state aid for existing
school construction projects. The
moratorium on state aid for new school construction projects remains in
effect. In the next two weeks, the
Department of Education will be providing districts with a spreadsheet
detailing which districts will receive aid.
ARRA Revenue Partially Supplanting State Funds for Districts
A portion of the state’s education payments to districts, as well as
portions of reimbursements for special education and state-placed students,
will be supplanted by federal revenues earmarked for local districts.
A portion of the regular education payments from the Education Fund to
local districts will be reduced, and supplanted by separate checks that will be
sent to districts with federal money provided by the State Fiscal Stabilization
Fund (SFSF) portion of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The total amount of SFSF money supporting
education statewide will be $38.6 million in fiscal year 2010.
Special education reimbursements paid to districts from the Education
Fund will have a reduced allocation totaling $6.1 million statewide. Districts will be expected to utilize
enhanced federal reimbursements for special education to supplant the reduced
allocation. State-placed student
reimbursements will have a reduced allocation of $500,000 statewide as well.
Internet Sex Offender Registry to Expand
Approximately 1600 names of convicted sex offenders will be added to the available online database of 400 registered sex offenders, under a bill that will increase the number of crimes that qualify for online registration (S.125). Act 1 of 2009 prohibits any person from being a work-study student in public schools who is registered on the Internet database. Our associations will be updating our unofficial manual on criminal record check and abuse registry check procedures for school officials and providing our members with the updated manual before the next academic year.
S.125 also makes “sexting” (transmitting sexually provocative photographs on electronic devices like cell phones) between consenting teenagers a juvenile offense.
Department of Taxes to Transition to the Department of Revenue
The Legislature’s appropriations bill has a provision that will result in a three-year process that will likely reconfigure and rename the Department of Taxes; the new name will be the Department of Revenue. A committee is created to define the scope of the new department. The Commissioner of Taxes is charged with evaluating each state revenue source and determining whether the management of the revenue source should be administered in the new department or elsewhere. We expect that education property taxes will be part of this determination, and will report on developments in this area.
End

Photograph ©
Matthew Trump