House Education reviews class-size minimums, seeks parallel waiver process for independent schools

The Vermont House Committee on Education met March 25, 2025, to continue consideration of amendments to H.454 addressing class-size minimums in the Education Quality Standards (Section 165 of Title 16). Committee members reviewed draft language that would (1) specify which class types are excluded from class-size minimums, (2) tie classroom limits to maximum occupancy as set by state fire and egress rules, and (3) create a waiver path in limited circumstances. The committee also discussed adding approved independent schools that accept public tuition to the statute and asked staff to draft a parallel waiver process for those schools.

The draft would exclude from class-size minimums several categories of classes and services, including career and technical education, flexible-pathway and terminal courses, advanced-placement courses, classes requiring specialized equipment, driver's education and small-group services that provide special education, supplemental or targeted academic intervention, or English learner instruction. Legislative counsel told the committee the Superintendents Association suggested the exemption list; the committee discussed the meaning of "terminal courses" and whether AP and IB should be singled out or grouped.

The draft also adds a provision that ‘‘class sizes shall not exceed the maximum occupancy when it is established by lower state fire codes, including egress and safety requirements,’’ language committee members supported as a commonsense safety limit. Members debated whether to qualify other wording (for example, when and how the State Board of Education could order consolidations) and discussed inserting a limitation preventing the state board from ordering school consolidation when the resulting consolidation would impose significant bonded school-construction costs on districts until the General Assembly establishes new district boundaries and addresses school-construction funding. Members tested wording options such as tying the prohibition to costs that exceed district capital reserves or to "significant school construction costs," but did not settle on final statutory text in this session.

On waivers, the draft permits a school board to request a waiver from class-size minimums if a school is unable to comply due to geographic isolation or if the school has developed an implementation plan to meet the standards (for example, a plan that may include consolidation or merger). The committee discussed whether approved independent schools that accept public tuition should have the same waiver criteria as public schools, or whether the State Board should develop a tailored waiver process under its rulemaking authority. Committee members directed staff to draft language that creates a parallel (equitable) waiver system for approved independent schools while leaving certain enforcement tools distinct because independent schools do not fall under the same administrative controls as public schools.

The committee reviewed how the proposed change would intersect with the town tuition statute (Section 8.28, chapter 21) and the State Board's rulemaking. The draft asks the State Board of Education to initiate rulemaking (rule 2200 series) on or before July 1, 2026, to require approved independent schools that intend to accept public tuition to comply with the class-size minimum standards and to create a process for review or waiver for failure to meet those standards. Committee members noted existing State Board authority over approval, suspension and revocation of approved independent schools and discussed whether existing regulatory procedures could be adapted for class-size compliance or whether separate rules are preferable.

Members raised policy concerns and local impacts throughout the discussion. Several representatives said applying the same class-size rules to independent schools funded with public dollars is a matter of equity and economic justice; others stressed the practical realities of rural and remote communities (for example, Northeast Kingdom towns) where an approved independent school may be the only local option and where closure or consolidation could impose long travel times and large capital costs. Committee members asked for testimony from independent-school stakeholders and noted that special-education placements, transportation, and sibling continuity raise additional legal and administrative issues.

Next steps: staff will draft statutory and rulemaking language reflecting the committee's direction—keeping the listed exemptions, retaining the occupancy/fire-code limit, preserving a waiver process for geographic isolation or implementation plans, and creating a parallel waiver process for approved independent schools that accept public tuition. The committee agreed to return to the item at a later meeting for additional drafting and stakeholder input; no formal vote was recorded on this draft during the March 25 session.