Joint Fiscal Office: education fund uses rising while pupil counts fall, increasing pressure on property taxes
Loading...
Summary
At an April 7 Senate Education Committee briefing, Joint Fiscal Office analyst Julia Richter told lawmakers statewide education fund uses rose from under $1.5 billion in 2009 to about $2.5 billion projected for FY27 while pupil counts declined, a combination that drives up per‑pupil costs and places more pressure on property tax revenue.
Julia Richter of the Joint Fiscal Office told the Senate Education Committee on April 7 that the state education fund has grown substantially over the last decade while the long‑term average student count has fallen, a dynamic that increases per‑pupil costs and shifts funding pressure toward property taxpayers.
"None of the numbers in the slide deck have been adjusted for inflation," Richter said as she walked members through charts showing total statewide uses of the education fund rising from below $1.5 billion in 2009 to a little over $2.5 billion projected in FY27. She noted that pandemic‑era federal ESSER funds inflated overall education dollars but are not captured in the state fund series used for this analysis.
Richter explained the technical definitions at issue: "education spending" equals a school district's budget minus offsetting revenues, and the "education payment" is the sum of those district needs. She said those measures differ from total education dollars and cautioned listeners to be explicit about which metric they use when comparing figures.
The presentation outlined the revenue side as well: non‑property sources such as sales and use tax, a share of meals and room taxes, lottery transfers, and Medicaid school‑based returns. Richter said those non‑property revenue sources have slowed relative to fund uses, which means property taxes must make up an increasing share of the education fund if no other policy changes are made.
Committee members probed the contrast between per‑weighted‑pupil and raw per‑pupil figures. Richter pointed to the statutory measure used for the foundation formula — per weighted pupil spending — and cited the December 1 letter's FY26 range (about $10,846 to $19,090 among districts that operate at least one school). She also noted that the weighted pupil count used in FY26 (about 142,564) differs materially from raw enrollment (~82,000), explaining why some local per‑pupil tallies appear higher.
On staffing, Richter cited National Center for Education Statistics data showing Vermont had among the lowest students‑per‑staff ratios in 2022 (roughly 4.4 students per staff member), and she urged caution in interpreting that aggregate without disaggregating teacher, paraeducator and administrative roles.
The Joint Fiscal Office offered to provide follow‑up tables and analyses at members' request, including inflation‑adjusted series and statewide average per‑pupil comparisons under alternate counting methods. The committee recessed for a scheduled break and asked JFO to return with additional calculations comparing current practice to the foundation formula under different weighting and base assumptions.
