[T]he Senate unanimously passed two education bills Friday — one that would offer more options for school district mergers and a catch-all school regulation bill.
The miscellaneous education bill, S.130, makes technical changes to education laws. Two provisions, however, have sparked controversy: one that addresses private school rules and another that changes the licensing of speech language pathologists.
The school district merger bill, S.122, gives towns more flexibility as they try to comply with Act 46, a 2015 law that requires districts with a “catastrophic” decline in student enrollments to consolidate school boards.
Since Act 46 was signed into law two years ago, 96 towns and 104 school districts have merged into 20 unified union school districts.
Sen. Philip Baruth, D-Chittenden, who chairs the Senate Education Committee, said that 60 percent of Vermont students are now in school districts that have met the goals of the law.
“Prior to Act 46, only one district had taken us up on that offer,” Baruth said.
Lawmakers this year have focused on ways to help areas of the state where consolidation discussions have stalled.
In some areas, districts both tuition out students and operate schools. The Agency of Education has required districts that are considering mergers to choose between one or the other. That mandate has forced residents to consider painful options such as closing schools or abandoning long-running traditions in which students have been sent to schools in other districts, a practice known as “tuitioning out.”
To address this issue, lawmakers created three new merger options. In addition, they have greased the wheels with tax incentives, extended deadlines and a $10,000 bonus to new unified districts that take in another school district.
Sen. Robert Starr, D-Essex Orleans, said districts that already give students an adequate education shouldn’t have to consolidate. The largest high school in Starr’s Northeast Kingdom district has fought state merger requirements.
John Castle, the superintendent of North Country Supervisory Union, has opposed Act 46. Many of the districts in his supervisory union are considering applying for an alternative structure.
“I want to thank the (Senate Education) committee for the work they have already done and I plan to vote for this because they made some good improvements, but I want to say that I don’t think their work is over yet,” Starr said.
Baruth agreed and said that there is at least another decade’s worth of consolidation work ahead. Under current law, North Country school districts may conduct a self-evaluation and make a case to the secretary of education and the state board to keep the same district configuration.
Sen. Jane Kitchel, D-Caledonia, said some people won’t be satisfied with the changes, but in her view the education committee “has chosen to give the flexibility needed.”
The miscellaneous education bill
The most controversial plank in S.130 revolves around licensing for speech language pathologists. A debate has been raging over whether the Agency of Education or the Office of Professional Regulation should license practitioners who help with speech, communication and swallowing disorders.
The Senate agreed to allow the agency to license speech language pathologists employed in schools. The new provision makes the Office of Professional Regulation responsible for pathologists who work in clinical environments. Those who work in both will be licensed by both agencies. In the past, all speech language pathologists were licensed by the education agency.
In 2015, lawmakers moved the licensing program to the Office of Professional Regulation. Those who worked in schools still had to get a teacher’s license.
The debate is likely to reignite when the House looks at the Senate bill.
S.130 also sets up a special committee to dig into rules for approving private schools that accept public dollars. The State Board of Education has been embroiled in a controversy over draft rules that would require private schools to provide more public financial accountability and offer open enrollment for all students, including special education students.
When the two sides couldn’t resolve the issue, lawmakers got involved.
The Senate decided to set up a study committee, with both sides evenly represented, that would come up with compromise language that the state board can use to move the rules process forward.
The language in S.130 charges the committee with deciding how private schools should deliver special education. “The State Board of Education did the state a service,” Baruth said, in pointing out problems in the delivery of special education for students with school choice. “We want this committee to find a solution to how those schools can deliver education in that regard … that will be agreed to on all sides.”
Both bills now go to the House for consideration.
