[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6260424,"mediaKeyId","3131102-b723d16e0db4b7e6c4956168cc4ed657","parentId",3131102,"title","Committee hears nominations for State Board of Education seats; motion made for Brian Campion","audioSeconds",186,"startMs",636000,"endMs",822000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3131102-b723d16e0db4b7e6c4956168cc4ed657&start=636&end=822","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3131102-b723d16e0db4b7e6c4956168cc4ed657/thumbnail_636000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6260424/Vermont/Committee-hears-nominations-for-State-Board-of-Education-seats-motion-made-for-Brian-Campion","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6260424-25c09154df75fa5fb00aa872a4fef0f1/orig.mp4?Expires=1771309936&Signature=CnftepJW~kIcCJHuYKf6Ljx--q-PKZC5MkLWe7DJCpD8Bo9Fgu8Dbzs140NnOkwzaPhOvdN6kgy-OSJqB9cFU8v3qMaE2jRhpHV5WfU62Qdv6vWZ3J6t4mkV0acNo3BQNdlWDViq3GMUEabIoRyBGwj2Kswkbx1yhVAfHgP4tRrwaa3xCynYlog1mbBYX4tNlky8NAan-ceSnrrDqWCTzQ7XOxwIvQKTuUBAb6R0Ae2sltYFIEsscFtPAHVx1eO0o9FDhxJM7cy40MgDTd6~SaaZb2YaO2PIT2POUnQLvp88RXLytN0zEdUY-tLmt8WLkO9gkwe4cLBGMkxpJw22wg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-04-26T12:11:49.267Z","article","Toward the end of the session members took up nominations to the State Board of Education. A senator made a motion to approve Brian Campion of Bennington to the State Board of Education. Committee members discussed procedural steps for handling nomination letters and journaling votes; staff instructed members that the nomination letter and indicator of the committee vote should be returned to the Secretary of the Senate for journal entry.

Committee discussion included brief statements about nominees’ qualifications from senators who had interviewed them. A number of other nominees were referenced by members as part of housekeeping on committee assignments; those were not discussed in detail during the session. The transcript records the motion to approve Brian Campion and members’ intent to record action with the Secretary of the Senate, but does not include a formal roll‑call vote tally in the record available from this meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Education 2025-04-25 2:30PM","oneSentenceSummary","The committee discussed nominations to the State Board of Education, including a motion to approve Brian Campion of Bennington; members discussed procedural next steps for journaling nomination letters to the Secretary of the Senate.","taxTitle","Education, SENATE, Committees, Legislative , Vermont","taxId",37663,"location","Vermont","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6260429,"Senators ask for targeted reporting on special education costs and delivery; decline to adopt weights now",350,4600000,4950000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3131102-b723d16e0db4b7e6c4956168cc4ed657&start=4600&end=4950","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3131102-b723d16e0db4b7e6c4956168cc4ed657/thumbnail_4600000.jpg","/articles/6260429/Vermont/Senators-ask-for-targeted-reporting-on-special-education-costs-and-delivery-decline-to-adopt-weights-now","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6260429-90edac743f4b4b093cef00fe74cd67d0/orig.mp4?Expires=1771309936&Signature=j51Wy0sfdb5G8YRmwzcCpfgYw~fa8ulx6Wed88BumSrJHRRGOEC1JDJCzDm4PbM0rn0IJnB4uEap3T9xZPDDjmO1Ou9jBf~0JYtIDMUbui1SynCZUNACZ8bklifzkdtw3oTlORz3ke2nYS9MEFwZXV6hqwwW0jggH0Bs9L6rSvq7GDufBaZVWijHKjjAS71Ia4DEsOpmRbTBHT4oKojiiu0lwFjB7CfMFx872KelNsMxI3mKw-agslXdZY0tJxV1yaZr3dfEpVwoXhCfSd~2BcIDcl1QpjgSPTlD3n2cc6kNrv7XbSJs45P2JRGv2JVWnicrXTOIk7nu0DlW-NxHrQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Committee members used the H.454 markup to revisit special education funding and program delivery. The Senate version removed House references to special education weights; the committee discussed what information AOE and JFO should report back, including drivers of extraordinary reimbursement costs, geographic mapping of specialized programs and metrics to assess whether delivery is responsive to student needs.

Members noted the House considered weighted funding proposals (citing Professor Tammy Colby’s modeling) but the Senate is not adopting those weights this session. Several senators asked for information the committee could use if it decides to consider weights in a future year, including the fiscal effect of potential weights, frequency of review and how implementation would shift funding between districts.

The draft asks for a report that includes: a geographic map of specialized programs, information the agency uses to support consolidation assistance to districts, an estimate of costs to provide consolidation support, and a review of extraordinary special education reimbursement drivers. Committee staff and JFO said some of the requested data already exist, while other analyses (for example, weighting models) may require outside expertise or additional time.

On program delivery and staffing, senators expressed concern that the bill’s reporting requirements should include analysis of staffing pipelines and whether current staffing levels support responsive special education delivery. The committee directed staff to refine reporting language and to prioritize metrics that would help evaluate program location, cost drivers and staffing challenges. No change to the current special education reimbursement mechanism (extraordinary reimbursement combined with census block grant) was adopted in the session.","The committee kept language requesting reports on special education drivers and program locations, and members agreed not to adopt a weighted foundation approach this session while asking for data and analysis to inform future decisions on weights and extraordinary reimbursement.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6260433,"Committee narrows school construction policy language; agrees to keep a concise overarching statement",160,2730000,2890000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3131102-b723d16e0db4b7e6c4956168cc4ed657&start=2730&end=2890","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3131102-b723d16e0db4b7e6c4956168cc4ed657/thumbnail_2730000.jpg","/articles/6260433/Vermont/Committee-narrows-school-construction-policy-language-agrees-to-keep-a-concise-overarching-statement","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6260433-5abd4809c7fb247f93b5c994eda2861b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771309936&Signature=Vl3mLdmkV7mirkcYyD~uXbUkRtB8~TntzoRpRh5TrLQTHkbd51~drHyVj7Gp2MnA9DYUb0adjdYYe04ZJUU3Yic5dVqpDvhHSEk4Wd88k7B~5K0NV1mWm-bFI2eXubtufM5t80J2zrmbac-2aRTU5mCYYXrFQQVNMHst-B-A-Wvi5zXGFf6i0gMQAu7E0y01ZWu2Fe27q1Uc0arwsvoqwYG0-p0gOWjEu-ErajgYhmZ-zANV06G~sdAiobvr8fVSy2CUppOmwZ~vAxopX5XTt-puztqjFDkHF6ZinRKX65oimFDf3vtEgkWoJs6m~hvUrE9CEX94YZfz0Cy3NOhXAg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","During markup of H.454 draft 4.1, committee members debated a proposed statement of policy about school construction and the modernization and reuse of existing infrastructure. Some lawmakers recommended keeping a short, high‑level sentence about encouraging efficient use of public funds to modernize school infrastructure and removing more detailed prescriptions that could constrain rulemaking by the Agency of Education.

One senator said the draft’s longer paragraph may be inappropriate as an overarching policy directive because it could direct the Agency of Education during future rulemaking. Committee counsel advised that the statement of policy should provide direction but cautioned against overly prescriptive language that might force specific outcomes.

Members discussed whether language should explicitly encourage considering public buildings that are not currently schools for conversion and whether to refer to \"public infrastructure\" or \"school infrastructure.\" The committee tentatively agreed to retain the first two sentences on lines 7–13 of page 22 and remove the rest of the paragraph so the policy statement stays focused and non‑binding. No formal rulemaking was initiated in the session; members instructed staff to reflect the narrower policy statement in the next draft.

The committee also discussed facility‑level data requests that appear elsewhere in the bill, such as five‑year facility condition indices and existing PCBs testing scores; members noted collecting both data elements could increase administrative work and that Agency of Education already may hold some of the data.

Staff will return with a revised version that preserves the concise intent sentence and removes the more directive language.","Senators cautioned against over‑specifying school construction policy in the bill’s statement of intent and agreed to keep the opening sentence on modernizing infrastructure while removing prescriptive language that could constrain future rulemaking.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6260438,"Committee debates task force membership, contractor role and $50,000 appropriation for consolidation work",455,1830000,2285000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3131102-b723d16e0db4b7e6c4956168cc4ed657&start=1830&end=2285","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3131102-b723d16e0db4b7e6c4956168cc4ed657/thumbnail_1830000.jpg","/articles/6260438/Vermont/Committee-debates-task-force-membership-contractor-role-and-50000-appropriation-for-consolidation-work","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6260438-50233cbfc9391d4cd1cfe64a8de8661b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771309936&Signature=Fs8FIfnUpEBJpJriPqq421zHSsGcGDymLBn9vz3DLP0sQHRBcKYGcBJ-6xu81M7E3ZAarsgCl7-kiWqq-o~Gx4dLES0i8BOjEpYTBGBSech72ZM6XGTM2G5UZIGBftzpcRmO9tYk6HDktxQ1pIE98ID4oviDLwzHrxQWS0z3PViMTeWARaVk8Ifr-JvTAATtqusEiAx~y-YrT-XsZ4T6ePyiL2cpFvDgu1eLqyRT5H7EC3YZBD8ajQcbpgiBSAsQWlgCvhM90jrRGfX3nUbsqV2MnbSGDx94bMc5954BeyM4jvpcCwhkJ5ZMpPFW~L8sVaLSI-5IPM9m1Ybh51E2VQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","During markup of draft H.454, the Senate Education Committee discussed how a proposed task force should be staffed and supported, whether to hire independent contractors for facilitation or mapping, and whether the bill’s current $50,000 appropriation is adequate.

Committee members debated whether the task force should include multiple legislators and whether that membership would duplicate other legislative work; some members said six legislators would institutionalize the process and aid scheduling, while others worried about map‑making during session when legislative capacity is limited. Staff cautioned that contractors are useful only when the committee is clear about the contractor's scope: facilitation and mediation differ from project management or technical GIS mapping.

Julia Richter of the Joint Fiscal Office advised that the dollar amount required depends on the consultant’s tasks. Committee members noted an existing $50,000 appropriation in the draft (page 22) but did not adopt a formal change. Staff said the Joint Fiscal Office could hold an appropriation but the bill should specify the purpose of any contracting dollars to help appropriators and to set expectations about timing; one lawmaker observed that an RFP and procurement process could delay hiring until September.

The committee also considered whether the Vermont Center for Geographic Information (VCGI) or Agency of Education staff could provide mapping services; counsel and JFO said it is not clear those agencies are able to supply all needed services and that hiring outside mapping expertise may be necessary. Members discussed whether to use the terms \"facilitation and mediation\" or \"project management\" in the statute; staff described the facilitator role as including agenda planning and stakeholder mediation, which is more than typical committee assistance.

No formal appropriation vote was taken. Committee staff were directed to clarify the intended contractor scope, membership of the task force and the appropriation language ahead of the next draft.","Lawmakers discussed the composition of a school consolidation task force, possible use of outside contractors for facilitation or mapping, and a $50,000 appropriation in the draft; JFO and Agency of Education staff warned that the scope of consultant work will determine cost and timing.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6260443,"Senate education committee trims \"intent\" language on district consolidation, debates timeline",236,36000,272000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3131102-b723d16e0db4b7e6c4956168cc4ed657&start=36&end=272","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3131102-b723d16e0db4b7e6c4956168cc4ed657/thumbnail_36000.jpg","/articles/6260443/Vermont/Senate-education-committee-trims-intent-language-on-district-consolidation-debates-timeline","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6260443-748076ddd2d6ebd80793e79abe0da8f7/orig.mp4?Expires=1771309936&Signature=V9KUruO3Vz20geslMl382~TTvlrp8yjCeH8Nf9WVsd2pHu-P7yQqfMm091c6Gi8VwEop0y5iYFGWIxfWYNUWmpOf29gyEpbdpO8tQ2gSae4s9j-oc~Y~jz9L6oNzKsvaBYhtrrBk1zQH21-~tGuJ23-5Is3hqargf3mAWh32oqgzaPBhdrmtWiSNSW3shH7jDbqsRAWtlMG-hjQDLiJunHMMvsfKI25lR68AFBE6poMwGJqKqcmttcH90EAH3H8XOZ9f7Or0eYhCGllAM1-jFYaW-wKFsZE6XzhU~6Zcb7PlPhaRamXR3B-SL0WbhjCQe2kjxmtIcqLV8fegBnShOg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Members of the Vermont Senate Committee on Education on the markup of draft amendment H.454 agreed to remove an \"intent\" subsection that spelled out actions the Legislature would take in 2026 and spent extensive time debating how school district consolidation should be framed. The committee said consolidation language should be tied explicitly to student outcomes and possible cost savings, and discussed preserving community input in decisions about school closures and boundary changes.

The committee reviewed draft 4.1 of the Senate proposal, which largely tracked the House language. Several senators said they were uncomfortable using session law to lock the next Legislature to a course of action. One senator said that provisions describing what the Legislature will do in 2026 read like a \"to‑do list\" and proposed deleting the timeline text. Committee staff reported a \"consensus to cross out starting from page 2, line 12, through page 3\" of that intent text; the committee proceeded on that basis.

Lawmakers repeatedly returned to the standards that should guide any consolidation policy. Members said consolidation should be authorized only where it produces savings and improves student opportunities, not as an end in itself. Committee members questioned the phrase \"substantially equal educational opportunities,\" suggesting a preference for wording that emphasizes \"excellent educational opportunities for all students,\" and discussed whether measures of property wealth or the foundation funding formula should be used to avoid recreating inequity.

The committee also debated how to ensure local community voice in decisions about school closures. Several members proposed removing a clause that singled out \"certified elementary school\" and instead said the process should allow the community to participate in decisions regardless of school type. Committee counsel said wording such as \"served by\" was intended to tie community voice to the community served by a school rather than the whole supervisory union.

The committee discussed specific dates in the draft. A deadline previously set at August 15 for some commission activities drew criticism as too early; members suggested September 30 (one speaker mistakenly said \"September 31\" and the clerk corrected it to September 30) or October 15 as more realistic timing for work that requires stakeholders to be present.

Where the draft referred to \"raising teacher salaries,\" one senator suggested a small grammatical edit to make the phrase read \"raising teacher salaries.\" Another lawmaker cautioned that higher pay does not, by itself, guarantee higher quality and urged care with language that could be seen as patronizing.

The committee said it would continue to refine the bill language and return to remaining sections at a later meeting. No formal final amendment or enactment votes were taken during the session; the committee made drafting decisions and recorded consensus on deletion of the specific intent subsection.","Lawmakers at a Senate Education Committee markup of draft amendment H.454 debated whether to keep a multi‑line \"intent\" section describing actions to take in 2026 and agreed by consensus to delete it; members also pressed to tie any consolidation policy to student outcomes, community voice and possible cost savings.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee hears nominations for State Board of Education seats; motion made for Brian Campion

Senators ask for targeted reporting on special education costs and delivery; decline to adopt weights now

Committee narrows school construction policy language; agrees to keep a concise overarching statement

Committee debates task force membership, contractor role and $50,000 appropriation for consolidation work

Senate education committee trims "intent" language on district consolidation, debates timeline