Last week, the Vermont School Redistricting Task Force voted on a plan to revamp the number of districts across the state. The new maps are being criticized by educators and the governor.
During its last session, the Vermont Legislature passed Act 73, which requires the state to “enact new, larger school districts that would become operational on July 1, 2028, (and) creates the School District Redistricting Task Force to recommend new school district boundaries to the General Assembly.”
At the latest meeting of the task force, Chair Martine Gulick said the process for creating new districts has been intense.
“The timeline has felt often fairly unrealistic given the sort of critical nature of the work. But we have certainly worked extremely hard and done our best to produce some really solid work for proposals and maps moving forward,” Gulick said.
Legislative task force member Sen. Scott Beck explained changes to the district maps and how they would affect supervisory unions across the state.
“There’s 21 school districts that fall within the SU structure. So, seven supervisory districts, seven supervisory unions, and within those seven supervisory unions, there would be 20 school districts,” Beck said.
Nonlegislative task force member Kim Gleason, who served a six-year term on the state Board of Education, criticized the new district maps.
“We have inequitable access to education with the use of our money going to some of our private schools, and I think that being preserved is objectionable to me,” Gleason said. “The model of governance matters if we are directing our limited resources to the benefit of every student. That’s why I thought we were here. That’s the intent of the law. This map doesn’t do that.”
Nonlegislative member Dr. Jay Badams, a former school superintendent, noted that the intent of Act 73 was to create a small number of districts and simplify governance, and said the panel needs more time to meet those requirements.
“Why can’t one of our recommendations be no map — go back and work on Act 73 some more?” Badams said. “I don’t feel like we’re ready for prime time today, and I really have no confidence that going to forced mergers into 6, 5, 13 districts is going to save us money.”
Harwood Unified Union School District Superintendent Dr. Mike Leichliter told the task force that Act 73 is a political solution and not good public policy for education.
“Structural change without a deep understanding of local context, capital needs, unresolved cost drivers and system complexity will not solve the challenges we face,” Leichliter said. “I appreciate the work that you’ve done, and I would encourage you to also send a message that we need a long and thoughtful approach before we arbitrarily consolidate school districts.”
During public comment, former State Board of Education Chair and Cambridge resident Christie Healing said the task force should reject the proposed maps.
“This map is gerrymandered, designed to preserve and augment school choice and vouchers. It relies on preserving choice through SU structures in select areas, but fails to apply that consistently statewide. Some of the proposed district sizes are unworkable. The map is a continuation of the bias toward protecting private school interests that was on full display during the conference committee for this bill, and it comes at the cost of our public schools,” Healing said.
The panel voted 7-4 to advance maps for Cooperative Education Service Areas. It also voted 8-3 against advancing the proposed map for Regional Career Technical Centers.
VTDigger reports that Gov. Phil Scott, a Republican, chastised the panel, saying they “didn’t fulfill their obligation ... and they failed.”
The last meeting of the task force will be held Nov. 20.
