Barre Unified Union School District board approves 4.95% budget increase after hours of debate

The Barre Unified Union School District #97 board voted to approve a 4.95% budget increase for the 2025–26 fiscal year and to use $1,000,000 from district reserves to reduce the tax impact. The measure passed after public comment and extended board debate on tax yields, state funding formulas and program reductions.

The vote matters because it sets the district's spending level ahead of an Australian-ballot vote warned for March 4, 2025. Board members and community speakers framed the decision around competing priorities: limiting tax burdens for residents and maintaining staff and services for students.

Board members opened the public discussion with a period of public comment in which parents, teachers and other residents voiced opposing views. Rachel Dan Bleed, a special educator and union president, urged the board to avoid cuts, saying schools need resources to support students with complex needs. Several other teachers and parents described measurable student improvements and appealed to the board to invest in staff and programs. Other community members urged lower increases, citing affordability, rising household costs and concern that higher nonresidential rates will shift costs to renters and small businesses.

During board discussion members emphasized two technical drivers behind local tax impacts: the state's new education funding formulas (referred to in the meeting as Act 173 and Act 183) and the property-yield calculation. Board members and attendees repeatedly noted that the yield is set after the budget, which complicates predictions of the ultimate tax rate. Administration staff pointed to a long-term weighted average daily membership adjustment that increases the district's calculated student count for funding purposes and reduces per-pupil figures on paper.

The board considered two formal budget motions. A motion to adopt a 5.14% budget that would have used $1,000,000 in surplus revenue failed after roll-call votes. A subsequent motion to adopt a 4.95% budget, also using $1,000,000 from reserves and incorporating additional reductions, passed by a majority.

Votes at a glance — - Motion to adopt 5.14% budget using $1,000,000 in surplus (failed): recorded roll-call indicated multiple ayes but not a majority. (Motion maker: Terry [last name not specified]; second: Garrett Grant.) - Motion to adopt 4.95% budget using $1,000,000 in surplus (approved): board recorded a majority in favor; the chair announced the motion passed and the board moved to approve the warning for the Australian-ballot vote process. (Motion maker: [name recorded in transcript]; second: Sonya/Sonia Spalding.)

The adopted budget package includes previously discussed reductions the administration identified earlier in the process. During the meeting staff confirmed a list of proposed reductions previously circulated totaling approximately $965,000 and enumerated as 11 positions (a mix of clerical, bookkeeping FTEs, counselor, instructors, paraeducator, behavior specialist and classroom teachers). The administration told the board that roughly 75–80% of the district budget is staff compensation and benefits, and that capital reserve funds remain available for large one-time projects.

Board Chair Sonia Spalding and multiple board members urged that the community's concerns about affordability be balanced with obligations to students who require special education services; speakers noted the district's substantial number of students with Individualized Education Programs (about 600 mentioned in the meeting) and the legislature's intent to weight funding for higher-need students. The superintendent, Joanne Canning, and business staff (Lisa, identified in the packet and meeting) answered technical questions about the elements that drive tax calculations but said some items — notably the property yield and the state's final funding decisions — will not be known until after the budget is set.

The board also discussed the nonresidential (nonhomestead) tax rate impact under the new formula and cited published guidance and commentary from state tax officials and other district leaders that the yield could move in a way that raises effective tax rates even when a residential rate appears flat. Several board members said they want to use the coming year to more closely examine facilities costs and other district spending before making longer-term commitments.

The board instructed administration to proceed with the warning and informational meeting logistics for the Australian-ballot vote, with a follow-up informational session to be scheduled for voters and absentee-ballot recipients. The board also asked administrators to continue developing the reduction plan tied to the chosen budget option so the public and board have clearer detail before finalizing the warning materials.

Looking ahead, the budget will appear on the March 4 ballot; the board scheduled an informational meeting for March 3, 2025, and directed staff to ensure materials are available to voters and absentee ballot recipients. The board's final tax impact will be shaped by state actions on yield and other funding details that are not set at the local level.

Ending note: Board members and several community speakers emphasized a shared goal of balancing affordability and student services, but the meeting exposed substantive disagreement about what level of spending best serves both aims. The adopted 4.95% budget represents a compromise the majority of the board endorsed for the coming year.