Stow school board chair urges data dashboard and phased foundation payment instead of forced consolidation

Tiffany Donsa, chair of the Stow School Board, testified to the Senate Education Committee on March 24 that Vermont’s education funding system lacks accountability and risks worsening outcomes if the Legislature pushes hurried consolidation.

Donsa told senators that the current system pools statewide property taxes while allowing districts to vote individually on budgets, which she said disconnects many voters from the direct cost of school budgets. "Accountability is what makes systems efficient and produce good results," she said, arguing that voters who rent or otherwise do not feel immediate tax impacts are less likely to hold districts accountable.

She recommended two primary reforms. First, Donsa urged creation of a comprehensive, public data dashboard maintained by the Agency of Education so taxpayers, boards and administrators can compare financial inputs and educational outcomes across districts. Second, she proposed adopting a foundation payment to fund districts, initially pegged to current spending and followed by a phased review by a professional judgment panel to calibrate appropriate funding levels. That panel, she said, would help make nuanced decisions rather than rely solely on a student‑weight formula that creates winners and losers.

Donsa cautioned that forcing consolidation or redrawing supervisory union lines to fit a new foundation formula could “level up” contracts and transitional administrative costs, increase pressure on the teacher pension fund and ultimately raise costs without delivering equity or better outcomes. She said past attempts to mandate consolidation had resulted in administrative chaos and higher budgets in her experience.

Committee members pressed Donsa on tradeoffs, including whether school size and declining enrollment require closures. Donsa and a superintendent who accompanied her described cases where small schools proved efficient and warned that correcting funding first could prompt voluntary local changes rather than top‑down consolidation.

The committee recessed from the testimony to take up other items on the agenda and scheduled further work later this week, including a planned session to continue mapping and drafting under Act 73.

The committee did not take formal action on these recommendations at the hearing; members indicated interest in additional expert briefings on funding models and outcome metrics before deciding on legislative direction.