There's a popular and funny children's book entitled Math Curse, which aptly notes that 'you can think of everything as a math problem.' Everything IS a math problem, especially if you're trying to understand Vermont's education funding system.

The legislature is working on a proposal aimed at reducing education spending (and presumably tax burdens). That proposal is based on the notion that towns are currently allowed to spend up to 125 percent of the state average per pupil spending. In coming years that percentage will drop to 123 percent. (Spending over 125 percent/123 percent results in paying a penalty to the state in the form of extra funds to Montpelier.)

But something does not make sense. The state recognizes that its 231 towns are spending an average of $10,075 per pupil and then tacitly 'okays' spending up to $12,594, or 125 percent (soon to be 123 percent) of that. Yet Act 60/68, the state's education funding law, calls for creating 'substantially equal educational opportunities' for Vermont students and proposes to do so by issuing a per pupil grant to towns using funds raised from a statewide property tax (and a percentage of spending over 125 percent).

Average spending is $10,075 per pupil (allowable spending is up to $12,594) and the state provides a grant of $7,330 per pupil. Hmm, there's a shortfall--where is that money coming from?

And how is this making tax burdens any fairer? Are tax burdens actually going down in what used to be called 'poor towns'? Are educational opportunities substantially more equal now, or are those tasked with understanding this syphean system simply substantially more aggravated?

And why, when local schools are level funding their budgets, or reducing them, are local tax rates continuing to rise--even after some of the other Act 60/68 tweaking mechanisms (such as common level of appraisal) are factored in?

Local schools are spending $9,877 to $11,724 per pupil (after allowable construction costs are subtracted) which should put them all below the penalty level of 126 percent of average per pupil spending, yet tax rates don't go down, they don't even remain the same. Why aren't tax rates for the town spending $9,877 going down at a minimum?

Everything is a math problem and this problem has all the characteristics of a financial house of cards awaiting a strong gust of wind to blow it down.

{loadnavigation}