Walkthrough of proposed education funding bill highlights sparsity definition, homestead exemption and staged transition

John Gray, office of the elected counsel, walked participants through sections 34–59 of a draft education funding bill, describing where House and Senate language aligns and where it differs.

Gray said, "My sections start at section 34 and run through section 59," and explained that sections 34–36 set Title 16 definitions and update education payment terms including the base amount of 15,033 and references to an educational opportunity payment (EOP) and supplemental district spending.

The meeting focused on three sets of substantive differences between the chambers: how sparsity is defined, how districts transition from the current education spending model to EOP, and divergent approaches to property tax classification and the homestead exemption. On sparsity, Gray described the House approach as defining "sparse school districts" where population density is fewer than 55 persons per square mile and awarding a sparsity support grant based on a two‑year average enrollment of each public school in the district. He contrasted that with the Senate approach, which defines a "sparse area" at the ZIP‑code level and counts "sparse schools" within those ZIP codes for grant allocations.

Gray summarized a new Senate task in section 45a that would direct the Joint Fiscal Office (JFO) to contract with a vendor experienced in Vermont's education funding system to develop a cost‑factor foundation…