Sen. Bongers outlines plan to shrink Vermont supervisory unions, give districts two-year voluntary merger window

BURLINGTON — Senator Bongers told members of the House Education committee on Feb. 25 that he is proposing a statutory map and governance framework to create larger supervisory units (SUs) and substantially reduce the number of school districts in Vermont.

Bongers said the plan’s central aim is to “gain efficiencies, gaining larger units,” and to cut the number of SUs and school districts so the foundation funding formula can be applied to larger units. “Larger units, fewer SUs and fewer SUs half and half, and then districts within the SUs reduced by more than half,” he said.

Under the proposal, the SU boundaries would be set in statute and many districts inside those SUs would be encouraged to merge. Districts in a large gray area on the map would be given a two-year voluntary window to merge; if they do not do so, Bongers said, the state board would step in to consolidate them. Bongers described that approach as a hybrid of voluntary merger and state action.

Committee members pressed for details on representation and day-to-day governance. A committee member identified as Seth voiced concern that larger SUs could concentrate representation and make superintendent posts less appealing: “a small pool of highly qualified applicants to be superintendents are veering away from the time commitment and complexity,” he said. Bongers responded that board-management tasks could be delegated and that scale could yield efficiencies, particularly for special-education and other specialized services.

Bongers said the map includes numeric goals — for example, references in the discussion ranged to reducing roughly 23 small districts in a gray area to about 12, and an aim of no more than 11 SUs statewide in some iterations — but he cautioned the counts might be off by a seat or two while the language is finalized. He also noted a separate target governance framework referenced in committee discussion: “25 SUs managed by 25 superintendents,” and that the final statutory language may instead use percentage language ("half") rather than fixed counts.

The senator said the committee has taken testimony and will take more, with an item set aside for school boards to discuss boundary adjustments; he said the map and draft language are posted on the committee web page. He acknowledged that the proposal has not yet been paired with a fiscal note, telling the committee they have not done a full fiscal analysis.

Bongers framed the proposal as preparatory for Act 46 implementation, seeking a short transitional period and larger units so the foundation formula can be set when Act 46 comes online. He said the plan did not delve into specifics such as regional high-school construction, but that larger SUs could enable BOCES-style shared services or joint arrangements if communities chose them.

Next steps: the committee will continue to take testimony and consider boundary tweaks and statutory language before advancing any bill. No motion or formal vote occurred at the Feb. 25 briefing.