Superintendents and residents urge changes to proposed supervisory-union map, citing travel, safety and governance concerns
Loading...
Summary
Superintendents and residents told the Senate Education Committee the proposed supervisory-union boundaries risk geographically isolating some towns, complicating voluntary mergers and increasing transportation burdens; witnesses urged flexibility, 'gray' status options, or map adjustments to reflect daily travel and historical ties.
Superintendents and residents told the Senate Committee on Education on March 27 that the draft supervisory-union map could create geographic misalignment that would hamper voluntary mergers, increase transportation times and reduce local voice in governance.
Matthew Fetters (S5), superintendent of the Central Vermont Supervisory Union, told the committee that placing Northfield and Williamstown in proposed SU 8 risks "geographic isolation" from their functional partners and could prevent voluntary alignment with nearby districts such as Montpelier, Roxbury and Barre (U32). Fetters noted that some trips from Northfield and Williamstown to the eastern parts of SU 8 could take "an hour or more," while travel to Montpelier or Barre is often 15–20 minutes, and warned that statutory codification and a transition timeline that makes supervisory unions operational by 07/01/2027 means early placements will shape future options.
"If the goal of this legislation is to support meaningful voluntary alignment, then the initial boundaries need to reflect those possibilities," Fetters said, urging the committee to reconsider placements that would limit natural partnerships.
Abigail Pelton (S6), representing Windham School District and speaking by Zoom, described a unanimous town vote calling for structural reform and said the proposed map would pair her town with distant districts in a way that could create unsafe bus routes, longer travel times (she cited Brattleboro as approximately 40 miles away versus 14–24 miles to closer alternatives), and risks to continuity for students who currently use tuitioning options.
Pelton urged the committee to consider alternatives such as inclusion in the Rutland–Bennington supervisory union or Windham North SU, and she recommended expanding Windham’s tuitioning to grades 7–12 to preserve family choice and limit disruption. Both witnesses said boards are willing to engage in regional discussions and that temporary 'gray' designations or more flexible processes to move between unions could alleviate some concerns.
Committee members asked whether districts have formally surveyed communities or explored separation; witnesses said some boards have discussed options but that statutory pathways to alter supervisory-union boundaries are cumbersome, requiring local votes, multiple hearings, state-board review and legislative action.
The committee heard requests for additional outreach, a superintendent roundtable and staff follow-up as the map moves forward.
