School Consolidation Legislation Moving Through the House
Legislative Update
by Representative Scott Orr
March 25, 2010, page 6

Since the Town Meeting break, during which many of us legislators seemed to have taken home the flu, including myself, the House and Senate have returned to the Statehouse as we enter the time in the session when the pace picks up and we aim for adjournment in a matter of weeks. We’ve been at the point in the session known as crossover where the bills need to be moving from the committees to the floor for debate by the full House and then move to the Senate with enough time to be considered there. Just this week we’ve seen some of the major bills of this session coming to the House floor: the education merger incentives bill, the job creation bill, and the judicial restructuring bill. By the time this column is published the House will be taking up the 2011 budget bill, and then the focus will turn to working on the bills that have come to the House from the Senate.

Of particular interest to many is the education merger incentives bill. While the bill is not yet passed by the House and may face changes in the Senate, I can give some details of the bill as it has come out of the House Education Committee on a unanimous and bi-partisan vote.

Even before a very well-attended public hearing on the issue of how Vermont may make changes to the structure of the state’s school districts, the House Education Committee had focused its attention on a bill, H.782, which maintains local decision making over whether a school district will merge with another district or multiple districts. Incentives would be offered to assist districts that choose to merge. Most important, under this bill all school districts will decide for themselves whether to move toward merging with any other district.

Here is how it would work:

Contiguous school districts (from one or more SUs) merge to form a Unified Union School District (UUSD):
• K-12 available – may include designated schools / independent schools / etc. at voters’ choice;
• Distinct entity from former districts and SU(s) – is its own Supervisory District;
• No schools closed prior to FY18 unless the voters in the town in which it is located consent to do so;
• Single elected school board; with opportunities for local participation as determined by voters at formation;
• Elementary / high school choice determined by the local voters at formation – if the voters of a district accept fewer options than they have had, the UUSD must provide waivers allowing students to complete school where they are currently enrolled;  at least as under Act 150 “regional high school choice;”
• Special Education: UUSD is LEA and develops IEP;
• Collective bargaining and hiring at the UUSD-level.
 
Formation
• All school district boards must discuss merger and vote whether to investigate further by 12/1/10.
• If boards choose to consider merger:
– With technical assistance, a subcommittee of the interested districts (each district has one vote on the subcommittee) analyzes advisability of merger; if advisable, develops a detailed proposal for voters
– Electorate of each district votes whether to approve the merger, including all details and budget
• Districts that don’t merge remain in their own SU; voters may also choose to operate as a Supervisory District or ask to be assigned to an SU. State board cannot change UUSD’s boundaries without consent.
 
Incentives
Tax Rates, for no more than four consecutive fiscal years, ending by FY18:
• Decreases or small increases in a UUSD’s education spending result in a graduated reduction in the figure for “education spending per equalized pupil” used to calculate the homestead property tax rate;
• Year 1 is compared to the combined ed spending of the districts two years before merger plus an inflator;
• Figures below show graduated reduction in ed spending per equalized pupil for tax rate determination: 
- If ed spending is less than in prior year, $875;                    
- If no increase or decrease, $750 ;                                         
- If up to 1% increase, $600;                                                   
- If up to 2% increase, but more than 1%, $400;                   
- If up to 3% increase, but more than 2%, $200.
                    
• During this period, the homestead property tax for each municipality in the UUSD is distinct and would not be permitted to decrease or increase by more than 5% annually – until they are the same.
• FY18 and after: all municipalities in the UUSD have the same tax rate based on the approved budget.

Capital Debt - From FY18 forward, if a district merging into a UUSD has approved capital construction debt for which state aid remains due, the state will pay the interest on the state portion of the debt.

Sale of Buildings – If the voters of the merging districts decide to sell a school building as part of the merger plan, then the district is not required to refund state construction aid.

Consolidation Support Grants – Merging districts would no longer be eligible for small school grants (because small school grants are based on district numbers), so the money they would have received is given as a consolidation grant during the first four years of merger prior to FY18.
 
Other
• Supervisory Unions perform common functions for any remaining non-merged districts;
• Policy required for minimum and optimal class sizes;
• Reports/analysis/recommendations due re: merger process – including analysis by UVM Jeffords Center.
 H.782 is being reviewed by other committees as appropriate and may come to the House floor by the time this column is published or soon after. I’d welcome any comments or questions you have.

As always, you can most reliably reach me by e-mail at repscottorr@yahoo.com, by phone at the Statehouse 1-800-322-5616, or at home 425-2257, or by mail at 20 Baldwin Road.