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.
Last week the Vermont State Board of Education voted to approve the first Act 46 “divorce”: the dissolution of the Southern Valley Unified Union School District.
In response to overwhelming public votes in both towns, Halifax and Readsboro will now be reconstituted as independent districts with their own locally elected school boards. The union district merged under Act 46, Vermont’s 2015 school consolidation law, will be dissolved.
Interestingly, however, the statute under which the districts voted to dissolve was not part of Act 46; in fact, it has been a part of Vermont law for many decades. Vermont law has long focused the State Board of Education on ensuring the schools meet state education quality standards. Given that these districts do indeed meet these standards, the statute directs that the State Board of Education shall approve the dissolution of the district as requested by the electorate. In this case the authority of the State Board of Education is limited to and focused on education quality.
Readsboro and Halifax originally voted to merge based on the Act 46 model, but these communities quickly found that merger in their rural region made no sense. The goals of Act 46 remained unmet: equity was not enhanced and cost savings were non-existent (in fact costs increased). The merger was cumbersome and artificial, and handicapped these rural schools’ abilities to be nimble and responsive to their communities’ needs. Consequently, the voters of both towns voted overwhelmingly to dissolve the district and chart their own paths forward. The towns will still collaborate as members of the same supervisory union but they will no longer be part of a marriage that never came close to meeting expectations.
Long-standing statute directed how the State Board of Education should handle this dissolution, because the statute clearly directs the board to focus on what it does best: monitor education quality. A focus on educational standards is an appropriate role for an appointed board of lay people.
In contrast, in recent years Act 46 gave the State Board of Education sweeping powers to force mergers, including the ability to dismiss warned votes of the electorate and impose a governance structure rejected by voters locally. Under Act 46, the board had the ability to summarily reject locally developed alternative plans carefully crafted to meet the goals of the law. Had these alternatives to merger been implemented, it would have been appropriate for the State Board to assess their progress toward equity, cost-savings, and other key goals; however, the alternatives were never allowed to see the light of day.
Now that the force-merging powers of Act 46 have wrapped up, Vermont has returned to long-standing law which rightly provides for checks and balances. Nevertheless, an Act 46 “divorce” is not easy. Every participating town in a union must vote “yes” to allow the break-up to occur. However, in cases where all participating towns agree, both long-standing state law and common sense dictate that the union should be dissolved. The State Board can remain focused on its mission of education quality, and support the electorates’ decisions on school operation and governance.
After all, and as the majority of Vermonters would agree, votes count. Democracy matters.
