Education committee presses for draft bill, details on governor’s foundation‑formula and governance plan

Members of the Vermont Legislature’s Education Committee on Feb. 5 discussed the administration’s twin proposals to move the state to a foundation funding formula and to reorganize K‑12 governance, but said they do not yet have draft bill language and are worried about the limited time before crossover.

The committee chair opened the session by noting there were no witnesses available until 2:45 p.m., and suggested using the time for internal discussion of testimony the committee has already received on the foundation formula and preliminary governance ideas. "We don't have witnesses until 02:45," the chair said.

Committee members repeatedly urged the administration to provide a draft bill as soon as possible so legislators can begin formal review. One member said, "my biggest concern is the fact that we're maybe a month away from crossover and we still don't have language in front of us," and urged clarity on whether the committee will receive full drafting from the administration or must begin writing its own language.

Members asked for specific analyses the committee believes are essential: county‑level or district‑level hypotheticals showing how the foundation formula would change local revenues; clear rules for whether and how districts could raise additional local funds; and details on what a new governance structure would mean for roles such as superintendents, principals and local school boards.

Several speakers said they found recent numeric briefings helpful but need more testing and scenarios to understand distributional effects across property‑wealth differences and district sizes. One committee member noted an approximate federal funding figure mentioned in prior testimony, saying they thought "around 350,000,000 or so dollars" comes from the U.S. Department of Education, and asked the committee to confirm federal funding exposure as part of its analysis.

Members described competing priorities for any reform: affordability, statewide quality and accountability, local control, and the need to preserve teachers’ and principals’ capacity to focus on instruction rather than administrative burdens. A committee member summarized the political context: "the governor has spent an enormous amount of potential political capital to even put this on the table," and urged the committee to move deliberately but efficiently.

On governance, members said they expect a presentation Friday that will provide a fuller picture of the proposed district structure and administration plan. Several committee members raised questions about the optimal district size, citing testimony that suggested 4,000 students as a possible target for administrative efficiency and noting that other states and jurisdictions use very different models (one witness pointed out Hawaii has a single state district).

The committee also discussed practical implications of consolidation and district reconfiguration: what happens to surplus school buildings, how to avoid repeating previous funding shifts that reduced the foundation’s share of total education spending, and how to design a school‑construction funding mechanism that can be activated once new district configurations are decided. One member suggested creating incentives (for example, allowing localities to repurpose vacated school buildings for housing) to help communities see a tangible benefit from consolidation.

Several members emphasized the need for broad stakeholder engagement and clear public messaging well before town meeting season so parents and local officials understand how local control and tax decisions would function under the new formulas. The committee agreed to continue independent work while monitoring the House process, and to ask the administration for timetables, guardrails and dedicated staff support (budget counsel and JFO) for sustained review.

No formal motions or votes were taken during this discussion. The committee planned to reconvene later in the afternoon when witnesses — including representatives from state colleges and the chancellor referred to as Beth — were scheduled to appear at 2:45 p.m. The committee singled out the forthcoming Friday governance presentation as the next major milestone for moving from conceptual discussion to detailed legislative drafting.