Fayneese Miller, chair of the Vermont State Board of Education. Photo from the UVM Web site
UPDATE: The Vermont State Board of Education approved Fairfax and Fletcher’s regional education district proposal on Nov. 16, 2010.
Editor’s note: This story is by Susan Bush, a freelance reporter who lives in Pownal.
The State Board of Education is expected to decide next week whether to grant the first school district consolidation waiver under the new law, Act 153.
The Fairfax and Fletcher school districts, which are part of the Franklin West Supervisory Union, want to explore the idea of combining their separate town school boards to form a “regional education district.”
Click here for the State Board agenda for the Nov. 16 meeting.
Under Act 153, school districts that voluntarily merge receive tax breaks.
The law requires all supervisory unions to discuss whether they wish to consider consolidation by Dec. 1 and vote on whether to “perform a more comprehensive analysis of a potential merger” by Oct. 1, 2012.
Proponents of the regionalized districts say consolidation enables schools to cut costs and improve services through shared resources; detractors fear a loss of local control and access to school choice.
Supervisory unions are eligible to receive up to $20,000 from the state to finance studies that examine the impact of a regional education district.
Ned Kirsch, superintendent of Franklin West said the study won’t necessarily lead to the formation of a district.
“We’re seeking the waiver so that we can get the study funded,” he said. “I go back and forth on the pros and cons of this and I’m sure when we have a study group, these groups will know their towns and they’ll come up with [considerations] I’ve never thought of.”
The supervisory union is also seeking a waiver under Act 153. The law requires that the regional districts consist of at least four school districts and serve a population of at least 1,250 students.
The Franklin West proposal is for two districts with about 1,100 students. Another district in the supervisory union, the Georgia School District, is not interested in regional consolidation, Kirsch said. Georgia is one of 90 school choice communities in the state, he said.
“I think [residents of Fletcher and Fairfax] see the tax incentives as a good reason for a RED,” Kirsch said. “Most of the kids from Fletcher go to the [Bellows Free Academy Fairfax] high school. They’ve been in the same supervisory union. Georgia does not want it, they have school choice and if they join a [RED], they lose that.”
Board member Donald Collins, who is a past Franklin West superintendent along with state Department of Education Commissioner Armando Vilaseca, said that he believes the waiver will be approved if the requested information is provided.
“The information they brought was good,” Collins said. “We wanted some more information. Personally, I didn’t see any deal breakers [within the waiver application].”
Collins said that board members want more details about Fletcher students who are “tuitioned,” or enrolled in public schools outside of the Fletcher district and more information about the benefits a R.E.D. would deliver.
An incremental property tax break that starts as a $.08 reduction per $100 of value of the homestead rate and concludes four years later with a $.02 reduction is included in the initiative as an incentive for consolidation. The tax break is effective beginning with the commencement of R.E.D. operation, usually at the July 1 start of a new fiscal year, said Mark Oettinger, the attorney for the Department of Education.
Additional incentives include state grants of up to $20,000 to cover costs of R.E.D. associated consulting fees, up to $130,000 in revenues to cover facilitation of regional education districts, and, in the event a R.E.D. leads to school closures, an obligation to return state aid for school construction is “forgiven,” according to documents about the initiative.
To qualify for any of the incentives offered, an RED must be operating by July 1 2017, or fiscal year 2018, according to information included in a multi-page document that describes regulations and offers details about the initiative.
Incentives are unlikely to sway those whose communities now offer school choice, said Kirsch and Collins.
“I support the RED, I think the concept is good,’ Collins said. “I’m not sure it was thoroughly thought out. If I was living in a town that was seeking a RED but would lose school choice, I’d vote against it.”
Kirsch said the he does not believe the RED initiative will gain widespread support statewide as long as school choice is lost to the regional district. Both agreed that allowing school choice in all communities might encourage consolidation.
“I think if the legislators take [Act 153] back and modify it, it will encourage a sharing and consolidation of services,” he said.
Winton Goodrich, the associated director of the Vermont School Boards Association, said that he prefers the term “merger” to “consolidation.” He emphasized the initiative’s voluntary approach and also stressed that schools boards would merge as part of a R.E.D. As long as control remains at the local level, Goodrich said he supports the legislation.
“Act 153 allows more control over student population,” he said “With one board, you have more flexibility. Another benefit is that unexpected expenses can be shared.”
The flexibility means, for instance, that school boards could create class size policies and shift enrollment, he said. Goodrich offered this example: If a town saw a jump in third grade enrollment that meant hiring another teacher, the board could opt to send those children elsewhere, to a smaller class in another school within the R.E.D. containing that town, thereby avoiding hiring a new teacher, Goodrich said.
Vermont Superintendents Association Executive Director Jeff Francis said the merger law has merit.
“Act 153 offers, in my view, a useful piece of legislation to guide change at the local level,” he said. “It’s early in the process. While we’re seeing indications of interest, it’s happening at different levels in different places. I do think that Act 153 provides a useful framework. What they really did was pass a law saying we have to have a conversation [about consolidation] and I don’t think there’s more behind it right now.”
Kirsch said that consolidation isn’t the only proverbial iron in the fire.
“The aspect of a virtual merger, sharing resources with other districts, that’s worth talking about,” he said. “I know there are tons of discussions going on out there.”
Kirsch noted that between the season’s thorny political climate, the controversy surrounding outgoing Gov. Jim Douglas’ desire to use $19 million in one-time federal education funds to shore up the state teachers retirement fund and Vilaseca’s contention that the money be directed to school districts to support school budgets, and issues involving the new Challenges for Change education cost-cutting mandate, most school administrators are mired in a high stakes version of guessing games and supposition.
“There are so many pieces to all this and it was all so quick,” he said. “Here, we’ve been talking about the budget since the first day of school. After Nov. 3 [the state election day] things may be clearer. I’m hoping so but it might be January before we know anything.”
“I do think that Vermont has an excellent education system,” he continued. “It’s expensive, we pay for it, but we have a good education system. I think we lose sight of that sometimes.”
[Begin dead horse flogging]
Act 153 has already merged individual districts. Beginning July 1, 2012 all the major financial and policy decisions (curriculum, staffing, special education) are moved to the supervisory union boards and administration. This is very important to keep in mind – there is no “voluntary” in Act 153 – it is a mandated consolidation bill. (Plus watch how fast the state does away with local boards once they have become nothing more than overseers of extra-curricular activities and student hearing boards.0
[End dead horse flogging]
I have real problems with this whole money saving proposal for at least two reasons: 1) There is no real evidence to support the contention that consolidation (“merger” if you will) will result in any savings; and 2) once we factor in the taxpayer funded property tax breaks and other financial incentives to consolidate (“merge”) – how much has to be saved over what period of time to break even with just the consolidation effort?
The whole money saving argument is nothing more than a canard to convince the voters that consolidation will merit a podium next to the likes of sliced bread and other modern wonders.
In the meantime local boards throughout central Vermont are getting together to talk about what really will and won’t work.
I agree with Rama Schneider’s comment. The more time that passes since the last legislative session, the more statewide school consolidation looks like a pseudo-solution to a trumped-up problem.
People who have looked into the question in detail (e.g., Public Assets Institute) have shown that education spending per se is not the scary runaway train that the governor made it out to be.
And what the legislature so confidently proclaimed as “findings” in Act 153 (e.g., greater educational opportunities, efficiencies, and economies of scale) are only tenable as goals or at best as assumptions, not as guaranteed outcomes.
Of course, mergers, consolidations, etc., will make sense for some school districts, as would have been the case even without Act 153. But where they don’t make sense on their own long-term merits, we shouldn’t waste our time on them.
In my opinion there are too many chiefs and not enough Indians.
By that, I mean there is too much money spent on administration and we do not put money into the folks doing the work.
We could have one superintendent for each county and one staff. The work for the staff would only be bigger numbers in their forms.
Teachers and assistants would be able to spend more of their time teaching instead of doing things that administrators dream up to justify their jobs!
Mike
It feels like the state is putting its thumb on the scale as it pushes communities to weigh the pros and cons of consolidating schools. Actually, the state doesn’t seem to want the pros and cons compared. According to the press release, which was apparently written by the Vermont State Board of Education, a “study committee” will look at “potential educational and fiscal advantages” of a proposed merger.
Umm, is the committee allowed to look at potential DISADVANTAGES? Is it allowed to look at other impacts from a merger, likes the effect that losing local control, and in some cases a local school, would have on community spirit? On volunteerism in the school (which saves untold tens of thousands of dollars at every school)? On the development of new leaders (ever notice how many candidates for statewide office and the legislature cut their leadership teeth on local school boards?)
Is this really a study committee, equipped with a magnifying glass to look at all the impacts of a merger, or a transition committee that only gets a rubber stamp?
Backers of school consolidation seem convince that Vermont can buck the national trend of school mergers raising costs rather than lower them. If Vermont is somehow the exception to this rule, and we really can save lots of money by getting rid of local schools, why does the Legislature need to give tax breaks to talk communities into merging schools?
Challenges for Change and the 112 million budget hole – the first thing that can be saved are these $20,000 grants.
If Fletcher and Fairfax want to merge FINE but why should we all pay for that? If the citizens of Fletcher and Fairfax want to explore consolidation then they are free to approve the $ in their school budgets to support the study.
Consolidation plans ignore the reality that small schools are more efficient when measured on a per graduate basis rather than annual per pupil basis. That’s because they have higher graduation rates. A Nebraska study measured the annual cost per graduate and found small high schools with as few as 100 students were more efficient than high school with over 1,000 – because their graduation rate was 97% vs 84% graduation rate for the large high schools.
Consolidation has a blind eye about the lives of kids. One result: More hours on buses. In WV – thousands of kids spend over 2 hours on the bus. Some are on the bus longer each day than they are in the classroom. Another result: less participation in co-curricular activities. Most alarming: higher drop out rates.
If you think it’s hard to get people to run for the school board, wait until you tell them that they can still come to the meetings, they just don’t have any power. “Local control” may be a cost driver, but it is also a driver of public support for education.
People make hard choices before bureaucracies do. Shrinking the public role in school decision making means more failed budgets, more internecine arguing over where the money goes and whose school gets closed by which voters, and reduced public support for education. Kids are best served when the decisions are made by those closest to them, by parents, teachers, community members, not centralized bureaucracies.
YES a conversation is needed but it is not a conversation about consolidation.
Vermonters need to ask the right questions.” How can we have sustainable healthy rural communities 50 years from now?” Great local public schools are part of the solution dealing with the question of how to create them in cost effective ways is a community discussion not a centralized decision.
One comment quoted studies in other states. Vermont’s school sizes are on a different scale. For accurate Vermont school population (a real eye opener) info, look here:
http://education.vermont.gov/new/excel/data/enrollment/educ_data_enrollment_10_table_04.xls
When it comes to issues of school size, school governance, and school choice, we tend to think our local community is representative of the rest of the state. This simply isn’t so. Vermont has a complex and diverse educational landscape.
Collins refers to school choice, a map of school choice communities is available here: http://www.schoolchoicevermont.com
While I’m not a fan of the 20K grant or the tax breaks that accompany merger, Act 153 deadlines that push local communities to have consolidation conversations are valuable.
Overviews of Act 153 are available here: http://vtvsba.org/ and here: http://www.vermontAct153.org