|
January 12, 2012
By Nathan Burgess, Stowe Reporter
Vermont’s system for funding education has leveled the playing field for poor communities, according to a report presented to the Legislature last week.
But questions about rising costs, declining enrollment and other issues continue to dog lawmakers, school officials and students.
“The mixed blessing of this is we’re all in this together,” said state Rep. Peter Peltz, D-Woodbury.
In 1997, the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that relying on town-by-town property taxes to finance public schools was so unfair, it was unconstitutional. Schools showed the effects of huge swings in property values from one community to the next.
As a result, the Legislature passed Act 60 and later Act 68, setting up a complicated tax system that raises money and allocates funding at the state level, while giving local voters control over their school budgets.
The intent was to give children in property-poor communities the same opportunities as those in wealthier towns.
It worked, according to a report that consulting firm Lawrence O. Picus and Associates delivered to lawmakers last week. The report found no link between per-pupil spending and a town’s property wealth. It also highlighted five schools that have worked within the funding system to significantly increase student performance on the New England Common Assessment Program, commonly called NECAP: Brewster Pierce Memorial School in Huntington, Colchester High School, Montgomery Elementary, Whitcomb Senior High School in Bethel, and White River School in White River Junction.
But the report also highlighted sharp increases in the cost of education in Vermont, even as enrollment declines. Vermont has the lowest student-to-teacher and student-to-staff ratios in the country. As a result, per-pupil spending has ballooned 83.7 percent since fiscal year 2001, the report said.
Local reaction
Local lawmakers and school officials had mixed reactions to the report.
Peltz, who’s on the House Education Committee, said the report puts to bed any question about the equality of funding, paving the way for a debate on costs.
“This is a significant concern, but one of the things that at least we don’t have to dwell on is the legal structure we created around how it is funded,” he said. “Now we really have to look at the cost of how we’re delivering education and what we’re getting as a result of it.”
Peltz was instrumental in passing Act 153 in 2010, which offered incentives for school districts to consolidate services to cut costs, and also required that control of some services be shifted from school districts to the supervisory union level. He said that conversation will continue this year.
“If there are issues in terms of how can we address costs and improve outcomes, who is going to drive that?” he said. “Is that driven at the state level or the local level?”
Most importantly, he said, the state needs to address high-school dropout rates, particularly in poor, rural communities, in addition to focusing on preparing gifted students for college.
Rep. Heidi Scheuermann, R-Stowe, said the report largely missed the point.
“Nobody argues that equity hasn’t been achieved,” she said. “In fact, people who support changing and really modifying the system, they say we want to ensure that equity continues. This report is just sort of the status quo and that’s unfortunate.”
|
