Committee reviews bill to make 'Seesaws' the statutory regional service areas, require study committees and set multi-year timeline

The Ways & Means Committee on April 2 heard a line-by-line walkthrough of legislation that would rename existing boards of cooperative educational services ("Boseies") to cooperative educational service areas, or "Seesaws," and would create those Seesaws by statute while assigning supervisory unions to regional Seesaw memberships.

Beth St. James, Office of Legislative Counsel, told the committee the draft makes the change in statutory structure explicit — "a Seesaw shall be a body politic and corporate with the powers and duties afforded it under this chapter" — and shifts formation from a voluntary to a statutorily mandated process. She said the bill also directs the Vermont Learning Collaborative (the only existing Bosei) to hire facilitators and oversee study committees that will assess whether groups of school districts should form unified union school districts.

Why it matters: The bill would centralize and standardize regional program delivery by requiring Seesaws in statute, mandate that every school district participate in locally convened study committees, and create a sequence of deadlines and state-funded supports intended to accelerate district consolidation studies and potential votes on new unified union school districts.

Key points and details

• Name, structure and statutory change: The draft replaces references to "Boseies" with "Seesaws," defines a Seesaw as an association of supervisory unions, and places Seesaw membership and bylaws into statute rather than relying on voluntary agreements. St. James said the change makes cooperative educational service areas state-created entities rather than purely voluntary collaborations.

• Governance and membership: Each Seesaw would be governed by a board of directors composed of one person appointed annually by each member supervisory-union (SU) board; appointees must be SU board members or the SU superintendent (or their designee). The bill removes prior statutory language allowing member withdrawal or termination, on the basis that only the legislature could change membership once Seesaws are created in statute.

• Required services: The bill sets a minimum menu of services Seesaws must offer, including special education (including maintenance of tiered systems of support and low-incidence, high-cost services), professional development, curriculum coordination, transportation, business and administrative services, and union school district formation facilitation.

• Facilitators and study committees: The Vermont Learning Collaborative (VTLC) would be required to employ or contract for seven regional facilitators and one lead facilitator (eight total) by Oct. 1, 2026. Facilitators will group districts in their Seesaw region into study committees and convene each committee by Dec. 1, 2026, following guidance in the bill; a study committee's total average daily membership should be roughly 2,000 students "as practical." Study committees must follow current law's Chapter 11, Subchapter 2 processes and produce either a report and proposed articles of agreement (if they find formation advisable) or a detailed inadvisability report (if they do not).

• Funding and grants: The bill alters startup and support funding: startup grants per Seesaw rise from $10,000 to $15,000, and the draft adds a $30,000 general-fund appropriation to the Seesaw grant program (the AOE reportedly has about $60,000 remaining from a 2024 appropriation). The draft also appropriates $210,000 for study-committee reimbursement grants (up to $10,000 per committee on a two-stage payment schedule), $442,000 to VTLC to hire facilitators (with up to $32,000 allowed for administrative costs), and $300,000 to AOE to provide $50,000 executive-director hiring grants to each new Seesaw (VTLC excluded). The bill uses a reimbursement model for study-committee invoices and requires quarterly financial reporting from VTLC on the facilitator funds.

• Timeline and review steps: Deadlines in the draft include facilitator hires by Oct. 1, 2026; study-committee first meetings and assignments by Dec. 1, 2026; school-board review of committee reports by Feb. 1, 2027 (committee discussion corrected the date in the published timeline); final study-committee reports due Dec. 1, 2027; the secretary's review of proposed articles within 60 days (or study committees bypass the secretary to send proposals to the State Board); State Board findings by June 1, 2028; and voter elections on proposed unified union school districts by Nov. 7, 2028 (election day).

• Act 73 contingencies and pre-K coverage: The bill also amends Act 73 effective-date contingencies tied to the foundation formula's phased implementation, and it directs the Joint Fiscal Office (JFO) to hire a contractor (budgeted at $50,000) to recommend how to account for pre-kindergarten in Vermont's education finance system; the contractor's report is due in the draft by mid-January of the calendar year specified in the bill.

Concerns raised: Committee members asked for clarity on map accuracy and how Seesaw boundaries interact with supervisory-union boundaries. Members also raised implementation questions about oversight of facilitator contracts (VTLC would hold facilitator contracts), the meaning of an ambiguous "related" entity prohibition intended to limit conflicts of interest, and whether the appropriations are sufficient for the workload districts and facilitators will face. A member expressed concern that the contractor and study-committee funding appeared small compared with the staff time required to do the work; St. James encouraged members to provide detailed cost estimates to inform future appropriation decisions.

Next steps: St. James agreed to update and circulate an accurate project timeline. The committee planned to reconvene with staff and House Education Committee colleagues for further review and scheduled a caucus and floor debate the next day.

The committee recessed after the presentation and will continue detailed review in subsequent meetings.