This week in Montpelier, education governance reform took center stage, with Act 73 discussions evolving from high-level overviews last week to concrete proposals on district consolidation, shared services, and regional structures. This signals a shift toward mandatory regionalized service (or consolidation) to address equity and costs, though voluntary options and rural safeguards remain hotly debated. We weighed in early in the week with the letter to the House Education Committee, urging them to challenge assumptions similar to those that derailed Act 46 (the previous consolidation effort). We followed later in the week with testimony in the Senate Finance Committee about our report identifying $300 million in potential savings by consolidating Supervisory Unions (instead of districts) and taking advantage of shared services.

This week lawmakers delved deeply into education funding and reform, reflecting ongoing efforts to build a more equitable and sustainable system amid demographic challenges and a persistent spending crisis.

Here it is... the first legislative update of the year!

Lawmakers dusted off major 2025 reforms, such as last year’s landmark economic and workforce bill, S.122, which continues to steer targeted grants and training dollars to small businesses and high-demand fields, positioning Vermont to compete for workers and employers in a tight regional market. Legislators also began early discussions around how the new, long‑term CHIP infrastructure and housing finance program can be deployed on the ground. The program has the potential to channel up to $200 million per year into local infrastructure that supports new housing and grows the tax base.

This week the Judicial branch jumped on the H.1 bandwagon, saying that if the Legislature is going to exempt anyone from ethics oversight, it should be them!

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?

This week tensions boiled over between Governor Scott and the Legislature over the mid-year budget adjustment for FY2025. The Legislature's version of the bill faced significant opposition from Governor Scott, who criticized it as "irresponsible" spending. At the heart of the dispute is the motel voucher program, which is set to expire in April for the summer (the FY2025 budget only funded the program for families most in need through the winter months). Legislative leaders, lacking the votes to override Governor Scott’s veto, shifted focus earlier this week; they pressed the Governor to extend the motel shelter program for a subset of unhoused persons, reflecting a narrower approach to address the "immediate needs" amid budget disputes.

This week Governor Scott gave his budget address for FY2026 and we learned more details about his plan to overall Vermont's education system.

Governor Scott gave is budget address on January 28th, proposing a $9B budget for FY2026 with heavy investments in housing and other areas while simultaneously cutting taxes for the most financially vulnerable Vermonters.

July 1 has come and gone, and with it the end of Vermont’s 2024 fiscal year on June 30 and the start of fiscal 2025 on July 1. Given it’s an election year in Vermont, now is a good time to consider important fiscal trends within the budget that might bite taxpayers going forward.

Governor Scott presented his FY2025 budget to state legislators on Tuesday in the annual budget address. They will, of course, toss it out and write their own, but it’s still a purportedly important ritual.

Scott led with a more admonishing tone than normal, telling legislators that Vermonters “want to do their part, but they are being crushed by the burden of property taxes or the higher rents that come with it as well as by increased fees just to renew a license or register a vehicle, or the looming payroll tax, or the unknown in higher fuel and electricity costs, not to mention inflation.” He is of course referring to the 13% budget increase from last year that the legislature overrode his veto to pass. He continued on to tell them that “when we spend beyond our means, it catches up to us… When we fail to address the fundamentals of decades-old problems, they get worse.”