What is happening with education funding and the Vermont Legislature this year is not for the faint of heart to follow. First, we have a proposal from the governor’s office that offers sweeping changes including five statewide districts and higher class sizes.
Then the Vermont House takes a stab at it, tinkering with the governor’s ideas, adding a few of their own (including ANOTHER damn study) and a 2029 date for bringing this to fruition with its new legislative districts (number not yet determined), a Foundation Formula plan for funding and more.
Then, the Vermont Senate stepped in and seriously tinkered with the whole thing, changing representation, timelines, and other specifics. But wait, one more wrinkle, the Legislature proposed and Governor Scott signed into law a plan to buy down this year’s education costs with a one-time infusion of $118 million (from the Education Fund and a state surplus).
There are lots of issues with all these things, not the least of which is buying down this year’s tax rates without addressing the drivers of those tax rates (i.e. health care) means a bigger hole to backfill next year.
It’s complicated and fast moving and many in our local school district received a well-crafted email from district superintendent Dr. Mike Leichliter explaining his concerns with the House vs Senate versions of the bills and with infusing $118 million in one-time funds into this year’s equation.
Astonishingly, having our paid, professional district administrator weigh in on things that are clearly in his wheelhouse rubbed a few folks on social media the wrong way, based on the comments posted when his email was shared by our colleagues at the Waterbury Roundabout on Facebook
Despite what those contrarians wrote, we believe it is Leichliter’s job to opine on these things and to keep us informed about impacts of these versions of an important state bill. His opinions and his advocacy have gotten him onto at least one statewide board working on the future of education in the state. He represents us and is advancing our cause and raising our profile.
How is it bad to have a superintendent who’s paying attention and informed on statewide issues and understands the nuance of education funding in our state?
