Editor’s note: This commentary is by Margaret Maclean, of Peacham, who is an international education consultant, a Vermont principal of the year and a former member of the Vermont State Board of Education.
[N]ovember is a time we associate with voting. Although this November’s votes did not create quite as much stir as the 2016 elections (what could?), Vermonters are making their voices heard on important issues.
Voting took place in Vermont towns last week related to Act 46. Among the proposals voted on was one impacting the towns of Sheldon, Highgate, Swanton and Franklin – the Franklin Northwest Supervisory Union. What was striking about this proposal is that it was the first proposal being voted on not to merge school districts, but rather to meet the goals of Act 46 in ways other than merger.
A new phase of Act 46, Vermont’s 2015 education consolidation law, is now upon us. Since 2015, in regions of the state where communities felt school district mergers made sense, voters opted to do so. Now, communities that have chosen other paths are coming forward to meet the law’s December deadline, ready to describe how they will meet the goals of the law. How will the state respond?
Franklin Northwest has, like most places in Vermont, had an Act 46 study committee in place for over 18 months, working hard to weigh the pros and cons of merger. The outcome has been a decision not to merge, but instead to enhance how their current supervisory union operates to better meet the goals of Act 46. The supervisory union believes they can best meet Act 46’s goals of efficiency, opportunity, transparency and cost effectiveness by working together collaboratively. And it turns out that the voters agree: All four towns strongly approved the Act 46 committee’s proposal not to merge and in two towns the vote was unanimous.
Franklin Northwest is not alone in its decision. It is one of 14 supervisory unions, totaling 62 school districts, pursuing the same pathway: to remain as independent school districts with their own school boards, operating collaboratively within a supervisory union. A number of additional districts are also pursuing this route independently of their supervisory union.
Five other towns have already received approval from the Vermont State Board of Education to remain as independent school districts: Rutland Town, Ira, Marlboro, Peacham and Alburg. As these towns are geographically or structurally isolated, the State Board of Education agreed that merger was impossible for them. They will remain independent districts with their own school boards, operating collaboratively within a supervisory union.
They will forgo incentives and grants to best meet the needs of their community’s children and the goals of the law in other ways. Voters will weigh in to confirm these plans this month.
In total, 87 school districts statewide, more than a quarter of Vermont’s communities, are planning to meet the goals of Act 46 through collaboration rather than merger.
This should not come as a surprise. Vermont’s schools are a product of our history; we are not designing school governance from scratch. Act 46 argued for a preferred one-size-fits-all model. Applying this model in many of our most rural communities means significant trade-offs. The districts choosing to forgo incentives have made a clear decision that the trade-offs and incentives are not worth it, especially as the mergers feasible for them could not show clear evidence of delivering results.
By the end of 2017, these proposals will arrive at the State Board of Education’s door for scrutiny. As with districts proposing merger, these communities have worked long and hard looking at Act 46 from every angle — in many cases, much longer and harder than early mergers that easily fit the one-size-fits-all model preferred by the law.
For these districts, that model is unworkable for multiple reasons. For instance, in Washington Central Supervisory Union, comprising Berlin, Calais, East Montpelier, Middlesex and Worcester, merger would create significant inequity due to different levels of debt, with the harshest impact on the least wealthy communities. In other places, geography is a barrier, with mountains and dirt roads making easy collaboration challenging. In others, a town’s history has resulted in a different way of operating from its neighbors — a way of operating which is serving its students well. Marlboro and South Hero illustrate this. And in many communities too numerous to list here, local voice and involvement in decision making is treasured for the value it adds to schooling.
Fortunately the legislators creating Act 46 understood this. The law allows districts to forgo grants and incentives and propose how they will meet the goals of the law in an alternative way. These districts are complying with the law, and have buckled down and done just that. With ingenuity and hard work they have planned how to improve within a supervisory union.
Many Vermont citizens, including the voters of Franklin Northwest, agree that merger is inappropriate for these districts, and an alternative model is a better match for the education of their students. The state board must apply the same levels of respect, transparency and fairness to reviewing these proposals as they have to proposals for merger. The will of the people on how best to meet the needs of their students is well informed, and clearly expressed; I trust the State Board of Education will hold it in high regard.
