Vermont superintendents tell House panel PCBs in schools require state funding, not short-term fixes
Loading...
Summary
Superintendents from across Vermont told the House Education Committee that PCB contamination has forced program relocations, modular classrooms, tents and repeated testing, and urged the Legislature to fund long-term remediation rather than piecemeal fixes that drain local budgets.
Superintendents from across Vermont told the House Education Committee on Jan. 16 that polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) found in school buildings are costing districts millions, disrupting instruction and requiring clearer, sustained state funding.
The testimony centered on H.542, a bill under consideration that would change the state pproach to PCB testing. Witnesses described large local expenditures for temporary measures, repeated air and material testing, and uncertainty about whether the state will cover permanent remediation.
"Hope is not a strategy," said Elaine Collins, superintendent of Burke Country Supervisory Union, describing repeated mitigation at her high school that began with carbon filters and moved through polyurethane encapsulation and expanded mitigation plans. Collins said the district spent about $500,000 across several schools on quarterly air sampling, consultant fees and a leased modular classroom; the high school mitigation alone later grew to a planned $5.2 million and, across five affected schools, mitigation and remediation costs are approaching $9.2 million.
Collins and other superintendents described how the state's testing protocol groups rooms by material type, samples roughly 30 percent of rooms in a group and extrapolates results to determine occupancy limits. She stressed that Vermont's air-based thresholds differ from EPA material-based standards and that test results can vary with temperature and humidity, complicating interpretation of summer tests versus school-year testing.
Katie, a superintendent for the Hartford area Career and Technical Center, told the committee three programs were displaced after test results: two repurposed inside the facility and one relocated off campus. "Students are losing about 10 hours per week of instructional time because of the transportation we're having to offer," she said, and she described additional local costs including a $26,191.53 test for a school the state had not yet tested and vendor invoices that exceeded state "not-to-exceed" reimbursement letters.
Smaller systems reported six-figure remediation estimates. Lynn Coda, superintendent for Franklin Northeast, said two of her district's buildings required classroom closures and modular rentals; her district has spent about $55,000 so far and expects ongoing monthly modular costs around $2,000. Caledonia Central superintendent Nat Foster described remediation options presented for a contaminated gym — encapsulation (~$900,000), partial or full roof work, or demolition and rebuild at higher costs — and said the district is in a holding pattern while awaiting clearer funding commitments from state agencies.
Not all districts had identical experiences. Andrew Haas of Windham Northeast said an ESSER-funded $5 million HVAC investment, focused coordination with the Department of Environmental Conservation and active project management drove PCB readings down to near undetectable levels in his high school; his district also secured roughly $2 million to remove PCB-containing fire retardant from structural columns.
Several superintendents warned of hidden administrative costs: frequent meetings, time spent by facilities and finance staff, and recurring annual testing that some estimated at six-figure levels. "That's one less teacher we can have working with our students," Haas said of the recurring testing burden.
Speakers raised practical and policy questions for lawmakers: whether to tie future testing to construction aid or require the state to assume legal liability if it fails to fund remediation, how to avoid repeated spending on short-term fixes for buildings likely to require replacement, and how Vermont's air-sampling thresholds should align with federal guidance.
The committee chair noted the governor's budget address next week will clarify FY2027 funding plans and could affect what the state can cover for affected schools. The panel's testimony concluded with superintendents urging the Legislature to prioritize long-term remediation funding to avoid leaving costs on local taxpayers and disrupting students' education.
