The long-awaited education reform package moved out of the House Education Committee on Friday; the governance reform component is reminiscent of the Act 46. The study group the House is putting in charge is made up of the same administrators that both designed and run the current system. Do you think they're going to give us a different product this time around?

Unfortunately, the House has abdicated their responsibility to tackle governance reform. The Senate, on the other hand, isn't convinced that we should wait on Governance reform. A proposal from the Chair of the Senate Education Committee appears to be gaining traction -- that plan would result in nine top-level administrative entities (as opposed to 5, as in the Governor's proposal).

On the funding side of the equation, however, reform definitely still has traction. The House Ways & Means Committee is moving forward on a foundation formula with additional policies tacked on, aimed at making the financing system more transparent to both voters and taxpayers.

One such proposal would create nine new property classifications, which raised concerns from the Tax Department about the administrative burden and complexity of managing these classifications. The Department emphasized the importance of maintaining a simple classification system to ensure equitable administration across the state; there are over 250 taxing jurisdictions across Vermont. They highlighted that the current system, which only differentiates between Homestead and Non-Homestead, is already challenging to manage. 

While the Department was not opposed to exploring new classifications, they cautioned against introducing too many at once. They suggested that a more measured approach, perhaps starting with one or two new classifications, could be more manageable.

The discussion also touched on the complexities of mixed-use properties, where different parts of a property may serve various purposes (e.g., residential and commercial). The need for a clear framework to handle these scenarios was emphasized.

One bright spot in the reform package is minimum class size requirements. Our report from December indicated that significant cost savings and even improved educational outcomes could be gained by increasing class sizes. The House bill includes a 12 student minimum for Pre-K, 15 for grades 1-4, and 18 for grades 5-12. Our current average class size is just over 10 across all grade levels. 

Housing

The Senate pushed to get their housing bill (S.127) to the floor this week. The demand for housing is high, particularly for essential workers like teachers and nurses, yet the market is not responding adequately. There is a consensus in the Senate that investing in infrastructure could help lower housing costs. One of the main benefits of this bill is that it broadens the definition of affordable housing, allowing state programs to benefit Vermonters at multiple income levels.

Another aspect to the Senate's bill is project-based TIFs to facilitate housing development by covering necessary infrastructure costs. This would allow developers to focus on building more units without the burden of upfront infrastructure expenses. Equally important, the bill also requires annual reports from the relevant authorities to track the number and types of housing units developed. This will provide critical information about the effectiveness of each program. As we learned a few weeks ago, the average cost of housing funded by these units is over $500 per square foot. Knowing which programs are most effective will inform future policy decisions.

Workforce

Advance Vermont testified in the Senate on Friday, focusing on the organization's mission to enhance educational pathways and workforce readiness in the state. Their goal is to address the skills gap identified by employers and to help 70% of Vermonters achieve a postsecondary credential. As of now, Vermont has only achieved a 59% postsecondary attainment rate; however, this is up from 47.7% in 2017. They point to declining high school graduation rates and stagnation in postsecondary enrollment as concerning trends that need addressing.

Good Government

There was a showdown this week over H.474, which makes changes to the state's election laws. We are planning to review this bill now that it has passed the House, but independent lawmakers and Republicans challenged various sections that would change the filing deadlines and the appointment rules following primary elections. There was some great reporting on this by VT Digger so I won't try to reinvent the wheel here. Ultimately, a compromise was struck and the bill moved to the House floor.

The anti-ethics bill, H.1, also resurfaced this week in the Senate. This time, however, ethics experts were ready to debunk the claims of those who are against independent oversight of public officials. Peter Teachout, a professor at Vermont Law School, thoroughly trashed the separation of powers argument and the pushback against independent consultation when dealing with ethical complaints. This led one senator to exclaim that they never would have received this bill if the House heard all sides of this issue. Yes, we think so too!

On behalf of Vermonters,