In the waning days of the legislative session, lawmakers and Gov. Phil Scott’s administration remain at odds about a common sticking point in Montpelier: money for schools.
But while the Legislature and the governor frequently fight about how much to spend on education — and whether to raise taxes to do so — the fight this time is about who, exactly, is in charge of doling out the unprecedented influx of federal cash into the state.
“We are all used to working when there isn’t enough money. It’s a completely different challenge,” said Rep. Kate Webb, D-Shelburne, who chairs the House Education Committee.
The present education tussle is part of a larger theme this session, with the governor and legislative leaders at loggerheads about how to spend the $1.3 billion Vermont received in the federal American Rescue Plan Act.
On the education side of things, for example, lawmakers want to use $3.5 million in ARPA money on literacy initiatives, $3.4 million on a grant program for schools with wrap-around support services, and $2.5 million to create an inventory and assessment of the state’s K-12 facilities.
Dan French, the secretary of education, has agreed these are laudable goals — some of which he once championed himself. But he has accused lawmakers of micromanaging funds that he needs the flexibility to administer once schools and the Agency of Education have had a chance to make a long-term plan.
“From my perspective, the General Assembly (has) embarked on a less than strategic appropriations process that was largely focused on policy ideas that predated the pandemic,” French wrote to the chairs of the House and Senate appropriations committee on Monday.
The pandemic will “cast a long shadow” over schools, Ted Fisher, a spokesperson for the agency, added in an email to VTDigger. “With that in mind, it is critical that these funds be used strategically, that flexibility to respond to unforeseen needs be maintained, and that we preserve sufficient funds to address needs in the following years.”
The majority of education-related federal aid is coming through the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund, established under the first Covid-relief package last spring. Each congressional pandemic stimulus package included more money for the ESSER Fund and, all told, Vermont is set to receive about $450 million for its schools under the program.
But 90% of ESSER funds flow directly to schools based on enrollment, and while the federal government has outlined allowable and nonallowable uses, the state has basically no say in how districts spend the money.
What the Legislature and administration are fighting over is the 10% “set-aside” that the state is responsible for administering. This pot of money amounts to roughly $43.7 million. (Most of the set-aside must ultimately flow to schools; only about $2 million can be spent on state-level administration.)
Webb said she’s intent on working something out with French, despite the late hour, although she did not say what a compromise might look like.
“I always think that there’s enough time. If something is that important, you make enough time,” she said.
It is unclear, meanwhile, how hard the administration will push back on the Legislature’s approach. The tone of French’s letter led some legislative leaders — including Senate President Pro Tempore Becca Balint, D-Windham — to speculate the governor might go as far as to veto S.114, the literacy bill, which was delivered to him last week. But he will not. Jason Maulucci, his spokesperson, said the governor would sign it Thursday evening.
Jeff Francis, executive director of the Vermont Superintendents Association, said he hoped the Legislature and governor would ultimately resolve their differences, given how many initiatives this session appear to rely on federal funds.
“Otherwise there will have been a lot of work for naught, and a lot of unfinished business that we’re going to need to return to,” he said.
Xander Landen contributed reporting.