Montpelier — At a joint hearing of the House and Senate Education Committees, three major education stakeholders urged lawmakers to slow down changes under Act 73, prioritize health‑care cost containment and school construction funding, and favor voluntary, evidence‑based district reconfiguration over fast, state‑mandated mergers.

Jeff Bannon, executive director of the Vermont NEA, told the committees the task force’s approach to voluntary, incentivized consolidation and recommendations for five cooperative education service regions (CESAs) are reasonable and could expand career and technical education and reduce duplicative services. "The task force took a measured approach," Bannon said, adding the proposal for larger regional high schools should remain voluntary and tied to construction aid.

Bannon also said NEA supports moving toward an income‑tax approach to fund education that would eliminate the residential property tax; nonresidential property taxes would remain. He highlighted health‑care reforms already enacted, citing Act 68’s reference‑based pricing and the Vermont Education Health Initiative, and warned that without similar action on health benefits, other reforms will be undermined. "Health care benefits are now a primary driver of education costs," he said, noting many educators and staff are feeling the squeeze: "Last year, over 400 educators lost their jobs."

Sue Zaglowski, executive director of the Vermont School Boards Association, said VSBA members share goals of improving student outcomes and affordability but oppose the prospect of mandatory districts sized 4,000–8,000 students as written in the Senate version of Act 73. VSBA surveyed board chairs and reported that nearly all respondents had discussed redistricting and that 77% had taken a position. Zaglowski said the task force report offered a measured, community‑centered path but the law’s size thresholds and some conference‑committee changes (including a lowered independent‑school threshold) raised major concerns. "Moving forward must include clear data, cost modeling, and meaningful participation by school boards," she said.

Zaglowski urged immediate focus on health‑benefit reforms tied to statewide bargaining: VSBA proposes capping the total value of benefits (phased in), a single HRA administrator, expanded arbitration criteria to consider Vermont Health Connect comparability and education‑spending impacts, and blended arbitration outcomes rather than winner‑take‑all awards. She provided cost figures to underline the urgency, saying school employee health benefits now approach $400 million annually and that HRAs added tens of millions in 2023 alone.

Jay Nichols, representing the Vermont Principals Association, urged "Direction‑Alignment‑Commitment" in any transformation and argued that Act 73 has been rushed. Nichols drew attention to a widely cited school‑construction shortfall and told lawmakers that the state faces a multibillion‑dollar building deficit that must be part of planning for consolidation or regionalization. He recommended replacing the 4,000–8,000 language with a 1,000–4,000 range if the legislature insists on numeric thresholds, and favored voluntary, phased approaches that begin with entities that already collaborate.

Committee members pressed witnesses on tradeoffs: whether unions could ask locals to limit wage demands during a budget squeeze (NEA said bargaining is local and that statewide NEA does not impose salary requirements), whether larger districts would close schools or lengthen bus rides (witnesses noted mixed evidence and urged local decision‑making), and how the legislature might break the recurring cycle of annually "buying down" property‑tax rates without addressing structural drivers.

All three witnesses told lawmakers that health‑care costs and the shifting of expenses into the Education Fund (pensions, mental‑health services, HRAs) have amplified pressures on local budgets. Witnesses recommended reviewing what currently comes from the Education Fund and considering moving some items back to the General Fund, paired with reforms to benefits and bargaining to reduce long‑term growth in health spending.

The hearing paused for a short break with the committees scheduled to hear closing remarks from the secretary at 3:00 p.m. No formal motions or votes occurred during the session.