Vermont panel reviews wide-ranging education-transformation draft covering tuition, CTE, school construction and special education study

Members of the Vermont House Ways and Means Committee on April 4, 2025 reviewed a new, consolidated draft of an education-transformation bill that would reshape district boundaries, change how tuition is funded, require a multi-part review and planning process for special education, add new adult-education funding language and change how school construction aid is paid, committee staff and lawmakers said.

The draft gathers prior House Education language and new provisions into a single committee amendment. Legislative counsel Beth St. James told the committee the package covers intent language, Commission on the Future of Public Education duties, tuition and funding changes, special education reporting and planning, adult-education payments and school construction aid details.

The committee was told the proposal would make three notable funding and structural changes: 1) beginning in a future state the resident district would pay an amount tied to the foundation base adjusted by student weighting rather than the tuition charged by the receiving school; 2) the Agency of Education must produce a detailed special-education report and a three-year strategic plan with measurable outcomes and a suggested transition timeline; and 3) school construction state aid would be awarded in annual installments rather than as a single lump sum.

"This is the plan part of the intent section," Beth St. James said while walking members through the bill’s intent and new CTE language. On the tuition reform she summarized a drafting approach: "the district would be paying an amount equal to the base amount ... multiplied by the weighting factors applicable to each individual student pursuant to section 40 10 of this title for each resident student attending the receiving school." The draft sets an effective date for the tuition funding change tied to the bill’s future-state timeline (the draft lists 07/01/2029 as the date when new districts would be operational).

Special education drew extended discussion. The bill would require the Agency of Education to submit a written report by 09/01/2025 identifying drivers of rising extraordinary special-education costs, documenting services and placements across district-operated specialized programs, independent nonprofit and for-profit programs, and mapping program locations. The report must include data such as disability categories served, grade levels, number of students with individualized education programs (IEPs), average duration of placements over the previous 10 years, and average cost per pupil inclusive of extraordinary spending. The agency would also produce a three-year strategic plan, due 12/01/2025, that contains measurable benchmarks for transitioning to a weighted special-education funding model. The draft author noted the bill includes a new permanent classified position and a $150,000 general-fund appropriation to support that work, but that any appropriation would still need approval by the Appropriations Committee.

Members repeatedly flagged implementation concerns. Several lawmakers asked how the special-education weights would be set and whether the draft creates internal conflicts if the underlying chapters for special education are not revised before a funding shift. One member asked, "Will this be including review of federal Perkins and implications of any changes in Perkins?" (Representative Hochul). Staff and members cautioned that many of the programmatic and operational changes would require additional policy decisions as new, larger districts are created.

The draft also amends the Commission on the Future of Public Education’s school-district-boundary subcommittee charge to require proposals that account for educational research, Vermont’s geographic and cultural landscape, historic attendance patterns and career and technical education (CTE). The subcommittee would recommend no more than three boundary proposals to the General Assembly and "may consult with the Vermont Association of Career and Technical Directors regarding how to incorporate career and technical education into the proposals," St. James said. Lawmakers asked that the subcommittee consider grand-list (property value) equity when developing boundary options and debated whether contiguous-town requirements should be mandatory.

On school closure and tuition, the draft clarifies that if a district closes a school it may not simply pay tuition for affected students; instead the district must educate those students elsewhere in the district or designate up to three public schools outside the district to serve them (the designation law historically applied to secondary schools; the draft clarifies application to elementary schools where relevant).

School construction language was revised in response to comments from the treasurer’s office. Committee counsel said the draft now makes explicit that state school construction aid is intended as an annual debt-service payment and not a lump sum of 20% of project cost. The treasurer’s office also suggested that the State Board of Education chair, not the treasurer, call the first meeting of the new aid advisory committee; the draft was changed accordingly and the first meeting was moved to 09/01/2025. The draft directs an advisory committee report on transfer of debt obligations from current districts to future districts, with a working report due in January 2026 (committee members discussed moving the deadline to December 15).

Adult-education language carried from the House budget was placed in the draft: the Agency of Education would receive an appropriation equal to 26% of the base education amount for each student who completes the diagnostic portions of an adult secondary credential program (averaged over the prior two years). The draft requires payments to local education and literacy providers under a funding formula contained in State Board rules and directs the agency to negotiate in good faith to extend existing contracts for one year to maintain the status quo while policy work continues.

Committee members and counsel repeatedly noted that the draft collects many interlocking changes and that additional technical and policy work will be required before any final vote. Multiple members urged that staff and the Agency of Education complete the special-education chapter review and rulemaking needed to ensure the funding changes work as intended. No formal motions or committee votes were recorded during the review; staff said they expect staff edits and small amendments over the weekend and possible floor amendments next week before any final votes.

The committee paused the review for a short break and planned to continue drafting and decision-making in subsequent sessions.