(Editor’s note: This article by Chris Mays was published in the Brattleboro Reformer on Feb. 21, 2017.)
[W]HITINGHAM — Residents here have received a letter recommending they vote down the school budget.
In the letter, the Whitingham Select Board says it is time to take a stand against the way education is funded in the state of Vermont.
The Twin Valley School Board reduced the proposed budget by $750,000 from last year, but an increase on the school tax rate of 41 cents per $100 of assessed property in Whitingham was attributed to the state education funding formulas. The owner of a $100,000 home in that town will see an increase of $410 this year. The rate in Wilmington is expected to rise by 22 cents.
“As a result of the way per pupil spending is calculated, Whitingham school is in the ‘penalty box,’” the Select Board wrote to residents. “In order to get out of the penalty box, through the convoluted education funding method that is based on ‘equalized pupils’ and common level of appraisal, the School Board would be forced to cut an additional $750,000 from the school budget! A cut of that magnitude would be devastating to our students.”
The “equalized pupil” count has to do with the way students are weighted differently. Factors include socioeconomic background and the ability to speak the English language. The common level of appraisal is the way properties in each community are assessed. It’s an attempt at making tax rates fair across the state.
Homestead and non-residential education tax rates are adjusted after the CLA is determined. The CLA for every town in Vermont “is the primary result of the Equalization Study performed by the Tax Department every year,” according to vermont. gov. The study compares the ratio of property values in the grand list to sale prices over the last three years.
“The study considers sales price as the best measurement of fair market value,” the state website said. “If Grand List values are generally less than sale prices for the recent sales, the town will end up with a CLA less than one hundred percent. If Grand List values are generally more than sale prices for the recent sales, the town will end up with a CLA of more than one hundred percent.”
Rep. John Gannon, D-Windham-6, who’s also on the Wilmington Select Board, said he thought the tax rate increases mostly had to do with the way students are counted.
“The CLA did go down, which is not good, because that increases the per-pupil cost,” he said, adding that it’s a factor towns have no control over.
At annual Town Meeting on March 7, Whitingham voters will consider the controversial budget but also whether to invest $100,000 in lawyers to fight the state on the issue of educational funding.
“It’s about inequality of education, isn’t it?” Whitingham Select Board member Karl Twitchell told the Reformer. “If we cut the budget to where we’re out of the penalty box, we’ll have no education.”
School officials have said transportation, arts and other programming would need to be cut to avoid the penalty.
Twitchell expects the Town Meeting article about the legal fund to spark conversation more than anything else. “It’s to get the people to talk about it,” he said. “Because as far as I’m concerned, we’re going to lose more residents and kids. I’m not the only household it’s going to affect.”
By defeating the budget at Town Meeting, Twitchell said the School Board would need to present the same budget or a different one at a meeting within 30 days. If it is voted down, then the budget would revert back to the one approved last year, he said.
Either way, the budget will need to be finalized by June 30. For Twitchell, the no-vote will at least send a message to lawmakers even if the budget is approved in the second round.
“By then, maybe they’ll do something because they see we’re taking a stand,” he said.
Whitingham’s dismay at the tax rate increases came as no shock to another local legislator.
“While unfortunate, it also seems understandable given the dynamic atmosphere that has existed in Whitingham since the inception of Act 60,” said Rep. Laura Sibilia, I-Windham-Bennington, referring to the Vermont law that was enacted in 1997 to address education funding but has left some communities like Whitingham feeling overtaxed. “Voters in the town have consistently worked to sustain and support quality educational opportunities for their students while struggling to manage the dramatic rise in tax rates resulting from that 20-year-old change in our education finance mechanism. Additionally, telecommunication challenges, improving but too slowly, only exacerbate a slow decline in population and student counts.”
Whitingham resident Ed Metcalfe, who served on the Twin Valley board for six years, said Act 60 gives economic incentives for large schools to spend more money.
“This has been the fatal flaw in the funding formula and is the one that has caused educational funding to skyrocket over the past 15 years,” he wrote in a recent letter to the editor. “Act 60 falsely points to small schools with higher per pupil costs as being inefficient and lauded those with low student costs as being efficient. The law fails to take into account the fact that economies of scale are what make the large schools seem efficient and assumes that because small schools have higher fixed costs per student that they were not using their tax dollars well.”
Metcalfe called for state legislators to look at how money is being spent and said the law is having a devastating effect on the small towns.
Sibilia said that before Act 46 — the new law that’s meant to inspire merger talks between school districts in order to improve educational opportunities for students and find efficiencies on the financial end — Whitingham led the way by having difficult conversations that brought about the consolidation of school systems with Wilmington.
“There is more work for the town and school district to do,” Sibilia said. “This latest challenge once again is consuming the time of the school district and the town at the same time they are trying to comply with Act 46 provisions. My understanding of this impossible situation is that, without further action, a failed vote on this year’s budget reverts to last year’s budget, an even higher increase.”
Gannon said voters of Whitingham should do what they think is in their best interest.
“Ultimately, we need a school budget and depending on what that is will depend on whether we’re in the penalty box or not,” he said. “I don’t know what their goal is for rejecting the budget if they’re only going to approve the budget in the future.”
Gannon suggested board members and residents speak with their legislators. The more vocal people are on a particular issue, he said, the more attention it will get. He’s working with Sibilia to change the laws that control education funding, for at least the short term.
“Hopefully, we’ll come up with a new formula in the long term,” he said. “Whether any of that will come to fruition, I don’t know. It’s very frustrating for me. I’ve been a co-sponsor for several bills for Act 46 and they’re not making any progress in the House Education Committee. I find it frustrating because we’re potentially facing closing the school some time in the future. So I take that very seriously.”
The Whitingham Select Board does not believe that Act 46 will achieve its goals via mergers.
“It’s not working for us!” the letter to residents said in a bold font.
Also in bold font, the Select Board wrote, “We recommend that you VOTE NO on the school board.”
“Our recommendation is not to reflect poorly on the School Board and [Windham Southwest] Supervisory Union as we appreciate all the hard work they have done to present a reasonable budget,” the letter said. “A ‘no’ vote would send a CLEAR MESSAGE to our legislators that we have had enough and are unable to financially support the projected increases. It is time for the state of Vermont to realize the excessive tax burden created by education funding as it currently exists.”
At a Feb. 1 meeting, Wilmington Select Board members declined to add an article to the Town Meeting warning about joining Whitingham for a legal battle against the state.
The Twin Valley School Board has been hoping residents would support the budget, while acknowledging the substantial increase on the tax rate. The Whitingham letter came after School Board Chairman Seth Boyd had told the Reformer the board would be looking for an affirmative vote.
“We have not talked about it yet but plan to at an upcoming meeting,” said Boyd, who’s also a member of the Whitingham School Board.
