Anyone remember Vermont’s Act 127 – meant to equalize education costs by establishing weights for students based on services they need to be educated? It included a 5% cap on annual property tax rate increases to protect districts from sudden tax hikes. This cap failed when it became a loophole, allowing districts to increase spending significantly while shielding taxpayers from the full cost which threatened to blow up the whole ed funding system.
The cap was repealed, and Act 127 had to be mitigated with a five-year phase-in program that provided schools that lost student weight with diminishing tax subsidies, thanks to another bill H.850. That was in 2024.
Last year, the state decided to prop up all town’s Common Levels of Appraisal with the SACLA (state adjusted CLA) which was pretty much a smoke and mirrors ploy that didn’t really change education tax bills either way. The SACLA continues.
Last month Senator Phil Baruth introduced S.220 which would cap school districts’ per pupil spending in FY2028 and FY2029. These new spending caps are tied to prior year’s spending and can range from 2 to 9%.
(See three paragraphs ago about the 5% loophole and its impact.)
The road to hell is definitely paved with good intentions. Proponents of the bill point out that high spending districts will have to spend less and lower spending districts “may” spend more. The idea is to try to reach equity, according to Senator Phil Baruth who introduced the bill. (See Act 127, equity and student weights.)
This work comes as efforts to shrink the state’s school districts from 100 to five came to naught this summer and fall.
Lawmakers are making policy that does not recognize that school districts have costs that defy legislative mandates. Schools have negotiated multi-year contracts and wage increases for their staff. They provide health care and those costs cannot be controlled. Roofs collapse, infrastructure wears out.
It’s fine to say that our district, which has cut millions over the past three years, cutting programming, staff and services, should cut some more – but where? Creating arbitrary caps does no more to contain ed spending than all the failed efforts since Act 60 was passed in 1997.
