Future of Ed panel wrestles over report to legislature

By Shawn Cunningham
© 2024 Telegraph Publishing LLC

We can only improve the lives of kids and taxpayers if we are all rowing in the same direction,” said Emilie Kornheiser, who chairs the Commission on the Future of Education’s finance subcommittee, at its Dec. 9 meeting. The topic was what form the upcoming report to the Vermont legislature would take when it’s sent to that body on Dec. 20. It was due on Dec. 15.

But Kornheiser’s course was not the same as some subcommittee’s members — including Secretary of Education Zoie Saunders.  And so a push-and-pull over what to present to the legislature continued into and through Monday’s meeting of the full commission. That ended with a vote to add the last-minute narrative that some members had not read and to demote a list of possible legislative actions,  on which the members had spend a substantial amount of time. That list will be a link in the document instead of an appendix as planned.

The document is a spreadsheet containing a list of ideas for addressing a number of problems, including the rapidly rising cost of education and the accompanying property tax burden. The list came out of a brainstorming exercise by the finance sub-committee in September. Members of the commission have been concerned that such a list could be interpreted as its recommendations to the legislature, but many say there has been neither the time nor the data to fully work through the ideas.

Commission chair Meagan Roy has said the spreadsheet represents a starting point for the legislature. That document can be found here.

On Monday, Dec. 9, Kornheiser spoke first in her capacity of the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee saying that she was excited about having the brainstorming spreadsheet of potential actions the legislature could take and that it would be helpful for the legislature to “not begin our work in a vacuum.”

Kornheiser called the document “really important and helpful” noting that none of the ideas is perfect and each has a body of evidence for and against it. “Each will need significant changes, significant sacrifice and create significant opposition,” said Kornheiser. She noted that she was speaking in favor of including the document in the report even though it contains ideas she does not want to see become law.

At the same time, Saunders, who was appointed by Gov. Scott  a second time after being rejected by the state Senate in April,  said that if the spreadsheet was included she would not “vote positively” on the report. Instead, she pushed for a narrative to describe the process so the commission doesn’t “lose the opportunity to own the complexity of this work.” Saunders described the spreadsheet as “not vetted and reviewed” and having “a lot of inaccuracies.” She added that the grid lacked data and warned that publishing it would “undermine (the commission’s) credibility.”

Despite concerns that the spreadsheet could be taken as recommendations rather than simply ideas, many members of the subcommittee as well as the full commission said that, in the name of transparency, the list, which is already public, needs to be posted. Some also echoed members of the public who said that their ideas should also be included in the spreadsheet.

Then, on Sunday evening, members received a narrative draft containing additions and edits to the existing draft report that the commission was to take up on Monday morning.  The draft was created by Saunders and there was discussion of it although some members said they had not had a chance to read it.

Rep. Peter Conlon, who chairs the House Education Committee, referred back to the statute that created the commission and laid out what was expected of it. He asked if the report lives up to the law if it doesn’t include “cost containment considerations.” Several suggestions – such as general fund transfers, a change in the way healthcare is paid for and a target for school boards and supervisory unions to hold the line on expenditures in FY 2026 – were discussed briefly but not specifically added to the report.

Roy said that while it was too late to do line by line changes, Saunders’ draft does refer to the spreadsheet and the group agreed there could be a link in the report to the spreadsheet in the commission materials on the AOE website.  Saunders agreed that it could be on the Agency’s website, but that it should not be in “a place of prominence.”

With Monday’s meeting running long, the full commission voted 8 to 3 (with one absent) to adopt the report with Saunders’ edits and additions and with a link to the spreadsheet. Jeff Fannon, who represents the state teachers’ union, said he would have voted in favor, but he was concerned that Saunders’ material arrived at the last minute and voted no. The other no votes came from Oliver Olsen, who represents independent schools, and John Castle, representing the Vermont Rural Education Collaborative.

The commission then turned the draft over to the Steering Group to integrate a number of comments, suggestions and corrections to the draft.

The meetings were the last for this year. In looking at getting ready for the legislative session, Conlon suggested that the commission spend its first meeting of the new year getting educated on the issues the legislature may take up, including a presentation on the concept of a “Foundation Formula” for funding education.