Rural school alliance and superintendents urge caution on consolidation, call for Vermont‑specific study

Speakers for the Rural School Community Alliance (RSCA) and rural superintendents urged the House Ways & Means Committee to proceed cautiously on consolidating districts and on governance changes tied to a new foundation formula, and to ground design work in Vermont‑specific data.

Jeanne Albert, chair of the Lincoln School District Board and speaking for the Rural School Community Alliance, said the alliance represents dozens of towns and emphasized that consolidation research shows no consensus that mergers reduce costs in rural settings. "There is over a hundred years of research on the outcomes of school and district consolidation," she said, "yet there is no empirical consensus that consolidation results in reduced educational costs in rural areas." Albert told the committee the group supports a foundation formula based on current state spending and called for contingency planning, transition parameters and protections to ensure the new payment meets Vermont's constitutional obligations.

Why it matters: committee members are weighing large governance and funding changes. Witnesses argued that rushing governance restructuring while over‑hauling the funding model could destabilize small rural communities and schools.

Ryan Herrity, superintendent of Lamoille South supervisory union, told lawmakers consolidation has in some cases increased spending and reduced local engagement, and he urged a "surgical approach" that favors transparency, stability and a multi‑year transition. "The research on district consolidation is highly concerning," Herrity said, and cited local examples where consolidation would have raised costs by requiring contract leveling.

Common themes in testimony:

- Vermont specificity. RSCA urged that the foundation formula use Vermont data and account for the state's geography and governance traditions; their written testimony included charts showing spending differences by district type and supervisory union scale.

- Governance and local voice. Witnesses recommended keeping or adapting multi‑district supervisory union arrangements in rural areas where distance and population density make large consolidated districts impractical and where local oversight supports community engagement.

- Transition and accountability. The alliance and superintendents asked for transition safeguards (for example, triggers or contingency conditions before major changes take effect), stronger monitoring to ensure state dollars support educational outcomes, and clarity on how supplemental local spending would be treated under a new payment system.

- Tax relief and fairness. RSCA urged immediate tax relief measures and supported a homestead exemption design that could simplify understanding of tax liabilities and reduce cliffs for lower‑income homeowners; they noted the committee's draft appeared to provide more relief in the lowest income bands than the governor's plan.

Ending: witnesses closed by asking the committee to avoid too‑rapid change, keep the foundation formula grounded in Vermont evidence, and attach transition protections and oversight mechanisms before implementing broad governance reforms.