House Education committee briefed on how Vermont tuition rates are set under current law

The Vermont House Education Committee spent about a half hour on April 24, 2025, receiving a statutory briefing on how town tuition rates are set for public and approved independent schools, legislative counsel St. James told members.

The briefing reviewed Title 16, Chapter 21 — the town tuition program — and the related sections that govern how a student’s sending district pays tuition for elementary and secondary students. St. James, legislative counsel in the Office of Legislative Counsel, read the controlling language and explained statutory limits, reconciliation rules and exceptions.

St. James told the committee that “the district shall pay the full tuition charge to students attending a public elementary school,” while also describing how the law establishes alternative caps for approved independent schools and how the Agency of Education (AOE) calculates and publishes announced tuition figures. He also noted a reconciliation process that triggers if a receiving district’s tuition charge differs by more than 3 percent from the AOE’s calculated net cost per pupil.

The committee heard that for elementary students tuition is paid by the district of residence and that receiving districts and sending districts may negotiate tuition agreements with differing terms, provided any negotiated offer is made uniformly to all sending districts. For approved independent elementary schools that meet Education Quality Standards (EQS), the statute limits a district’s payment to the least of: the average announced tuition for Vermont union elementary schools for the year of attendance, the tuition charged by the approved independent school that year, or the average per-pupil tuition the district pays for its other resident elementary students — unless local voters approve a higher amount at a warned meeting.

For high school students, the committee was told, districts pay the full tuition charge for students attending public high schools in Vermont (or adjoining states) and for students attending approved independent schools that function as area career and technical education (CTE) centers or that meet EQS. St. James said some independent schools functioning as CTE centers can receive the full tuition charge without the same statutory cap that applies to other approved independent schools.

St. James summarized the statutory definition of “calculated net cost per pupil,” noting that the secretary of education sets the definition and that certain expenditures are excluded from the calculation — for example, transportation costs for which the receiving district receives reimbursement and specific grant-funded items. He also explained the statutory constraint that prevents a receiving district from charging tuition at a ratio that would make tuition revenue exceed the proportion of tuition-paying students in the district.

Committee members asked for practical context. St. James pointed committee members to the AOE’s announced-tuition tables, which list per-school figures (he cited the most recent averages the AOE site showed: about $19,000 for union elementary schools and about $20,000 for union high schools for the next year). He noted the AOE tables date back to 2014 and that schools proposing tuition increases must notify the sending-district school board and the secretary on or before Jan. 15 of the year they propose the change.

The briefing also clarified related topics: designation of a nonoperating district’s students to an approved school treats that school as a public school for tuition purposes; special education and CTE tuition have separate funding arrangements (CTE rates are covered in Chapter 37); and Act 166 universal prekindergarten is a separate program with a different funding and rate structure from the town tuition program.

Committee discussion emphasized budget effects. Members said high tuition bills for out-of-district high-school students can strain sending districts’ elementary budgets and that declining enrollment can increase per‑pupil costs. St. James noted the statute gives limited options under current law, though districts can pursue designation or negotiated agreements; he also agreed to draft statutory cleanup language where statute references obsolete district names and other outdated text.

No motions or votes were taken during the briefing. The committee did not direct formal legislative action in the session; legislative counsel offered to prepare language removing outdated references for committee consideration at a later date.