Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Jeannie (Jean) Albert (Chair, Lincoln School District Board; Member, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: We're live.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Alright, this is the Senate Education Committee on the February 24. We're back at a very short break. Shifting gears to with going back to Act 73 of '20 five and looking forward and we have a few witnesses, three witnesses, here this afternoon, and we invited them in to react, give some initial reactions, initial thoughts to the matter that was the proposed lab and the accompanying language about reducing the number of SUs from down to 23, I think, down to 11, and then within the SPs in the big gray area here, there's relatively short amount of time, but the same thing of reducing down from 23 to 12, and then reducing from a total of 119 districts to half or less than half. So there's the initial map. By the way, we have an afternoon, Thursday afternoon, we have an hour and a half set aside for school board members in particular to come in and make any suggestions about adjustments to the boundary lines of ASEAN's. So we have to go find set aside specifically for that. For today it's just to hear from a few witnesses with some initial reaction and give us a sense of what the field is thinking. So we'll talk down with the field a little bit. First, have Doctor. Cheryl Charles.

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: Doctor. Chittenden.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Chair of the Windham Northwest. We'll be supervising the individual. You

[Committee staff (unidentified)]: want to sit together? Yeah, Michelle. Do you mind?

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: No. Strange

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: numbers. We're we're doing this together. It's okay. Yeah. If you are. Alright. Thank you. So you did just introduce me, but for the record, I'm sure we'll try. I'm the chair of the Westminster School Board, chair of the Windham Northeast Supervisory Union Board, and I'm Chair of the Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee. Go ahead, Jean. Jeannie Albert. I'm the Chair

[Jeannie (Jean) Albert (Chair, Lincoln School District Board; Member, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: of the Lincoln School District Board in Lincoln, and I'm also a member of the World Community Alliance Steering Committee. So, you have two school board members.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Correct. Yeah.

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: Right now and we are delighted to come back again. Thank you very much for the opportunity and and we also, it was a we're speaking on behalf of the Rural School Community Alliance having sent out a formative to give us some insight about what their reactions to the maps, both maps, would be. But before we get into the specifics, we actually wanna thank you all, the Senate Education Committee, for how authentically you've been reaching out to people to get a diversity of testimony, including rural voices. So thank you. And thank you also for creating a welcoming environment. We appreciate being asked to be here. And the fact that you also went out in the summer and the fall and went out to saw people in the field is also something people notice and appreciate. So thank you for that. So, as the Senator said, we've been asked to offer testimony about the proposed school governance map and the associated proposal. I'd like to reiterate a few points that we've made before because they're relevant to your consideration of the maps and the proposals. You know, first, there really is no evidence that forced mergers in the larger supervisory districts will save money or improve educational outcomes. Research and Vermont evidence does however support savings and other benefits from voluntary mergers and the shared services models that you're looking at, including supervisory unions. Their cooperative education service areas, or BOCES, can be implemented quickly statewide in Vermont as a way to achieve cost savings and efficiencies. Supervisory unions, again, since you were looking at these various models, supervisory unions do demonstrate cost savings and improved educational quality while maintaining community vitality and democratic values, especially in rural Vermont. And the evidence does show that supervisory unions are the most educationally sound and cost effective governance model, again, for most of rural Vermont. And one last point, speaking especially for the rural Vermonters, school closures should require, if they are to occur, should require a vote on the townspeople. So, while we, the Rural School Community Alliance, we don't support any form of forced merger, We do commend you for making supervisory unions an essential part of the matter that you put forward, as well as voluntary mergers. Both those are things that you that you have emphasized. So knowing that both the House Ad Committee and the and the Senate Education Committee are considering maps, we last Friday developed a survey and set it out. This is Friday. This is Tuesday now. We sent a survey out and got responses that we're sharing with you today. We posed the questions. It was an electronic survey. We gave them links to the maps in both the House and the Senate. And we asked them what they thought. And so, and I will say also, because we did this quickly, we did it on Friday, we have given you a summary from yesterday afternoon. We could provide more detail. What we're giving you right now is high level, because we obviously analyze the results pretty quickly, but we're we feel confident that we could tell you what, at a high level, folks reported. Again, that we could give you more detail. We also urge you, because some of the specifics in these responses that we'll share with you are very specific to the map, that we will be happy to give you the names. People are happy to have you hear from them directly. It's better to hear that from them when it comes to the actual map. So, you could see that of those people who responded of the 75% were actually school board members, elected members right now of school boards. A few others were administrators. Office staff. I could list for you the entities that we heard from. They're in our our testimony everywhere from Caledonia Central. It's it's a long list. It's I think it's about 16 or 17 that that we heard from. We get a 20% weighted response. Just in

[Jeannie (Jean) Albert (Chair, Lincoln School District Board; Member, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: in a few days. Days. That's pretty good.

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: So, but then when we asked them about the maps, the house map, 95% rejected it. Doesn't work for them. Of the senate map, it was about fiftyfifty. And then we asked them, if you didn't support the map, what would have to change? So you see in our

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: test If I can interrupt, just for clarity, when you said the senate map, you're talking about senator Bongartz's map or senator Haffernan's map?

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: Oh, I'm sorry. It was senator Bongartz's map. Yeah, that he was going to go below.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: And they only had 20 responses. So far. So far.

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: That's right. And this is the representatives in the Rural School Community Alliance. They tend be school board chairs. And then, again, when we asked them what would have to change with respect to the house map, you can see, this is a summary of the major themes that came out. There's more detail behind all of this. But the first response was the house map, in order to be acceptable, would have to include supervisory unions. Another theme

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: They didn't say why. Think it's Were they Russian, was it?

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: Well, we've got all kinds of reasons for that that you've seen in the testimony. Merging, again, a preference for supervisory unions to merge into larger ones would make it more Larger supervisory unions would be more acceptable than forced mergers into large supervisory districts. Once again, House Map is forced. It's not voluntary. That was a major reason for their not preferring it. The House Map doesn't preserve school choice and doesn't show sufficient respect for the geographic differences that are occurring out there. When we posed the same question, how would the Senate map have to change to be acceptable? Was a preference to implement the Collaborative Education Service Areas, or BOCES, before a merger process. It's just a sequence that many of the respondents preferred. That, in the second category of responses for how to make it acceptable, it's where they got into specific details about where they fit. And that's where we'll help you follow-up with those folks if you'd like to do that. And then more options for voluntary supervisory unions than the map that you presented. Survive. Are you still accepting responses? Yes. Okay. Uh-huh. And we'll be happy. We just did this during we were

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: coming in today. It took us a long time to open a TM.

[Jeannie (Jean) Albert (Chair, Lincoln School District Board; Member, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: So with that, Doctor. Robert. Yes, I'm gonna pick up from there. And I would say also some of the just to go back to Senator Weeks' question about did they provide any other detail? Some of the other options listed in that charted green bars gives you an idea. There are some additional things they were thinking about maybe when they were hoping for more SUs. There were some people who were thinking about the geographic considerations that happened with a forced district merger, when some of them talked about choice, there were different things that they brought up. Now I'm gonna actually highlight the last question we asked. It was a very short survey. We just really asked for reactions to the maps and then to, as Cheryl said, to what could improve them and then also just general feedback about either the maps or broad issues about education reform. Some of those highlights were talking about the need for adequate time for planning with new partners, support for the Act seventy three Redistricting Task Force recommendations, the need for financial and student outcome analysis before enacting major change. These are things I'm sure you have heard. Addressing major cost drivers, including health insurance, mental health, transportation, and respecting current articles of agreement and allowing when new entities are formed local development of new articles of agreement. So those are some of the additional themes along with the ones that we have that came up that Cheryl talked about. So I mean with this as background, well actually I'll say just one other thing I thought was interesting. The issue that was much more prevalent when responding to the map that Senator Bongartz was showing was much more direct, if there was a, if it was not acceptable, it seemed to be much more about their specific situation. So I thought that was helpful to know, was helpful for us and maybe up for you. But we wanted to share But that being said, there was no question at the SEDA map, this map Senator Rutland District presented, is, was far preferable to Vermonters who were in rural communities in alliance. And given that this is, this comparative preference is largely driven, along with the inclusion of supervisor unions, by a focus on voluntary mergers, we want to just offer a few comments about the critically important element of voluntary change. So, a steadfast commitment to change through voluntary mergers really is essential. Research on school district mergers confirms that forced or forced mergers are much less likely to succeed in large part because voluntary mergers build sufficient trust and respect to withstand the uncertainty, disagreements, challenging decisions, disruption that change inevitably brings. Minimizing disruption is essential, especially important in the realm of education where children often bear the negative consequences of change made without such trust. In Vermont, prior experiences of forced school district mergers have left many communities with added wariness, even in the face of reassurances that voluntary truly means voluntary. Vermonters are ready to solve problems together, but care must be taken to develop processes for change that are driven by evidence and include authentic opportunities for feedback and improvements based on working knowledge. A few other points relative to voluntary change that we wanted to add and offer as recommended principles that could be part of the process that was proposed. That when districts, if districts do merge voluntarily, that they would not be required to undertake further merger, that only light operating districts may merge. You were having that conversation earlier today with St. James. Only contiguous districts may merge. We also feel special review is needed for a proposed merger of districts that vary greatly in size when you have one big one and a little one that can cause challenges. And potential appeals process which could be applied in a number of ways, but specifically here for towns in merged districts where further merging is proposed to allow for potentially different voluntary associations. What that's about is, if you're already in a merged district, your town doesn't have a lot of agency. I mean, have mutual agency as part of that district, but you no longer do. If that district is then gonna merge, it's basically gonna dissolve, become a whole much bigger district. There might be opportunities for the individual towns to decide they want to do something different. So thinking about agency is really important in terms of success. We offered at the end a preliminary timeline for the CISO approach that we do favor. And I'll come back to it at the end just to highlight a couple of things. But to conclude, primary points we wanted to make: Vermonters are strongly opposed to forced mergers as evidenced by public engagement with the Redistricting Task Force. Therefore, you are on solid ground by taking a voluntary approach to mergers over time. The Merge Supervisory District model has not produced cost savings compared to multi member supervisory unions. We've shared some of that summary information before. We didn't include the charts this time, but we have them available. Once again, you're on solid ground by creating an approach, even a map that depends on supervisory unions as well as supervisory districts, especially in rural areas where large geographic area and sparse population makes it impractical, sometimes maybe even harmful, it makes sense to achieve scale via a combination of supervisory unions and BOCES or CESAs with their proven record of cost effectiveness, both nationally and specifically in Vermont. Cost sharing through CESAs and potentially larger supervisory reunions will likely suggest further voluntary merger opportunities after local management of administrative and other services is lifted up to the CESA level. And during this phase, the state could facilitate merger conversations between SU and SD neighbors with expanded high school and CTE opportunities a priority. And finally, for rural districts that don't operate in some or all grades, it is important that they remain members of supervisory unions. Non operating districts, and I think you heard some testimony about this last week, possibly other times, are important to towns by allowing families to find the best fit for their children's and their own overall needs and provide a safeguard for the future should enrollment once again grow and allow continued local oversight for the quality of education and its cost to serve their students. So just to orient yourself, I to want spend a very short part of a minute to say something about this timeline on the back. We just felt that because there's some overlap with an approach involving an interest in voluntary mergers, either at DSU level or at the school district level, This map, you know, we stated our preference for CESAs and this map does sort it starts right off with a map, a segway map, preliminary, where everybody would be assigned to CESA or BOCES. And we just wanted to lay out how that might look over a two year period. Could it be done? And we kind of outlined some of the more important steps. And two that I just wanted to highlight, because we didn't mention it earlier, are the importance of basing merger and other collaborative opportunities on evidence. And we are promoting the idea of having a foundational data analysis program that would be supported by the AOE and it would allow districts to actually have the information they need to know where are the best opportunities for sharing services. What's not gonna be maybe the best type of alignment to make. That type of information. And we also recommend in this timeline soon having a comprehensive performance review and a capacity evaluation of the AOA itself, given all of the

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Okay, thank you. So I saw a couple of hands here.

[Senator Terry Williams (Clerk, Senate Education Committee)]: Yes. So when we've been talking about mergers and we wanna see it done at local level, will it help if the state puts out or we put out criteria that we're looking for that will help drive that to happen more organically, if you will, because we've already seen up in Washington that both schools are small and the townsfolk still voted to keep them open. But if you set out a criteria of financial status and maybe even student status, do you think that is the, do you believe that would be a good starting point if you're gonna let it do it organically so they can look at, oh, here's what the legislators are thinking to make our school system better? Or is it just, Wow, if we wanna join, we'll join. If we don't, we don't.

[Jeannie (Jean) Albert (Chair, Lincoln School District Board; Member, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: My view is that the more information people have about what the benefits could be, the better. Was sort of part of what I was getting at with this data analysis program is, you know, if you're presented with information as a school board member, if I'm presented with information that says, Hey, you know, you've got this neighbor here, and here's some areas where you're both you both could benefit by joining forces in some way, either through the more, you know, the less intensive method of the BOCES where you're making a new school district, maybe through actual mergers or districts. I think that is one thing that would be received really well, actual support for understanding what the benefits would be.

[Senator Terry Williams (Clerk, Senate Education Committee)]: Well, we've seen the benefits of consolidating and having more students under one roof than that. So that, them are statistically accurate to look at. And where the disconnect comes is when you have schools, you know, like, one kid has done a great job of staying in budget, not on and if you're doing that, you shouldn't even be looked at. Like, hey, there's no reason to even however, we look at, like, Beaman Academy, 36 kids took one school. Now, just what happened to Ripton? You eventually lose scale, and you have, you know, really, it should no longer be a heart method, it is our financial. And that is one of the issues I've seen with everybody that's come in. It's like, well, want the data. Well, it's pretty easy to figure out if you only have 36 kids in a vast school.

[Jeannie (Jean) Albert (Chair, Lincoln School District Board; Member, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: I mean, I think one thing I'll just clarify that in this discussion and testimony, we're not really looking at, I think the question you're talking about is maybe consolidation of schools, which is an important question. I'm not saying it isn't. But from the point of view of actually just merging districts, that's what we

[Senator Terry Williams (Clerk, Senate Education Committee)]: were talking about, the information there. Yeah, organically we'd like to see it happen, but at some point if you're going, it's not working, when do you step in and say, all the data shows that you two come together really should do that. Should the state at that point go, we've showed you the cost savings. I know you don't really want to, but are you open to it?

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: It's already an action. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, just to just to kinda one of your points was that they're concerned that it was not adequate time. They weren't more adequate time needed for planning with new partners. They they could be doing that. I've got several weeks now where was school board meeting the other night, and I made that comment. You There's nothing says you can't start merger talks right now. And a couple of board members took offense at that. I mean I understand that you know their prior time and their time dependent you know to get something like that done but that could be happening right now and to the point where they're actually I know we do have some schools that are looking to merge in my district. So

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: So, Kesha. Yeah. If I can, I'm gonna challenge you just a little bit. Two two data points in your in your briefing and your summary. One is that you you say that Vermonters are ready to solve problems together. We've known the demographics, student populations. We know the demographics of the future. We know the periphery could change, but we know what it is now. We know what it has been. We know this data for quite some time. So I kind of pushed back a bit on Vermonters are ready to solve this because the history is that we have not. We're in this challenging scenario right now because we haven't reacted to what was already what was already known. So it's pushback number one. I I understand I understand what I think what you're saying here is that you're there's a new mentality, a new spirit of central cooperation, etcetera. So I I accept that, but I do push back on the fact that we already knew where we were heading. We've known this for quite some time. We've seen that all the demographics. The second is that, BOCES so far so BOCES has been in in effect now for over a year, and I think we have one taker statewide for a coalition of to create a BOCES. And again, if we're ready to solve this, the tools are on the table, people aren't picking them up. While I'm greatly sympathetic with the other points made here about disruptions and what have you, we're at that inflection point, and something's gotta happen, and do we take a slower approach? Do we take a faster approach? That's one of the questions that's circulating in in, you know, probably every committee in

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: the building right now. Anyway, I

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: do have one other question which isn't really related to what you have on paper, so you may not be prepared to actually provide a response, but I'm curious if the rural schools, rural school communities alliance has a policy position on statewide school choice. Is that anything you've ever wrestled with? No. No? Okay. I'm just curious. School choice in general?

[Jeannie (Jean) Albert (Chair, Lincoln School District Board; Member, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: I mean, our you know, we certainly have members who are that's important than others where it's not it's not part of their, you know, sense of reality. We have like a position specific to it, except that we obviously acknowledge that our map is important to some of our metrics.

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Is that community independent, whether they're in scenario where school choice is part of the landscape.

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: And there's a great variety of things.

[Jeannie (Jean) Albert (Chair, Lincoln School District Board; Member, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: I mean certainly when it comes to non operators too, I mean that's the most obvious situation where you don't have your own school. And situations there, especially in extremely sparsely populated areas.

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: So is there any feel this will my last follow on. Any feel for those members who are in communities that have choice? Do they tend to favor a continuation of choice, or do they tend to your choice as, I don't know, obstacle to some

[Senator Terry Williams (Clerk, Senate Education Committee)]: metric or other? My sense

[Jeannie (Jean) Albert (Chair, Lincoln School District Board; Member, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: is they the ones who have it wanted to continue.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Okay. And do you

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: have a just a sense of, like, is that of of your members of your communities that you're representing, is it half the communities have choice? Recorded?

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: You know, I really don't know the answer. We haven't tried to do that.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: It's It's fair. I'm just trying to get access.

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: Is the bigger issue. I'd love to respond each fifteen minutes, but I understand there's more questions.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Yeah, I'd like give a response to the answer.

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: Well, I'm going back to the Senator. You know, when you're talking about change that is so dramatic without evidence of cost savings, then it really gives me pause to come in and force consolidation. And so that's why we keep saying, look for the evidence. Really show us. If you're gonna disrupt that many schools in the state, really show us that it'll save money and that it'll improve outcomes for kids. To the comment about the BOCES, yes, there is only one so far. It happens to be in the supervisory that I'm part of, is a part of the seven issues, one school district that created it. And we're already seeing savings. Want us to that can be done.

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Why we pass them off? Why we gave the opportunity?

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: Well, we've done it, and it took, I mean, the Vermont Learning Collaborative, it took for about five years to work on getting that kind of, you know, looking for those opportunities, and then the law came, and then we acted on it as soon as we could. I think others will, because I think others will.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Is the BOCES within which you operate, is that within supervisory union or across the lines between supervisory unions?

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: It's seven supervisory unions and one school district, which is Springfield. Okay. And so it's larger than what your map is proposing. Okay. Yeah.

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: If I could just, so we're not we're not here to disrupt schools. We're here to potentially disrupt admin. The admin layer. I have to reemphasize that. In every opportunity, we're not looking to consolidate schools. We're looking here for consolidated admin that can make wiser decisions on wider geographic tracks. Regional. Please don't, let's not, because we hear this often, and we hear this everywhere we go, we're not looking to close schools, We're looking for better decisions about the schools that already exist. Senator Hashim.

[Jeannie (Jean) Albert (Chair, Lincoln School District Board; Member, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: Thank you.

[Senator Nader Hashim (Member, Senate Education Committee)]: I think just a comment. I think it's important to keep in mind in response to Senator Williams, Senator Weeks regarding conversation of why aren't schools talking about merging now or why aren't they taking steps to go through the process now and I would suspect part of it has to do with the fact that for two years now, there has been a lot of uncertainty in which every month there's a new idea that will cause a certain district to think, oh yeah, we're definitely getting murdered, or another district to think, or SCU would think that they're gonna be losing some of their superintendents. And so when you have this much uncertainty from us in the next level of government, I'm not surprised that there may be districts or SUs that are very hesitant to undertake significant changes, whether it's going into a boisees or going into a voluntary merger, when, again, every couple of months there's a new idea that could completely, that could turn their plans moved.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Can I disagree? Yeah. I agree with you 100%.

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: We're talking about data that we've known for twenty years, reinforced ten years, you know, not changed, five years. We're not talking about month to month. We're not talking about maps. We're talking about a a scenario that's been unfolding right before our eyes.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: That's my goal.

[Senator Nader Hashim (Member, Senate Education Committee)]: I mean, years ago, we weren't talking about force builders. Mean,

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: we should have been. Yeah. Because we we live in a community where we have seven high schools that are bumping into each other and no one's willing to talk about the problem. Finally, they're having to raise the flag. Everybody's talking about the problem. So, I think I think that was a good move. That's disruptive. I apologize for this. But as disruptive as it is, we are all talking about well, thank god. We

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: have to have another witness we don't want to miss, but quick questions. Okay. So thank you. I'm just gonna do what we do. Thank you.

[Jeannie (Jean) Albert (Chair, Lincoln School District Board; Member, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: And we do have several members actually having these conversations. I just wanna make sure to say that.

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Well, I think everybody's out on the counter saying they want. It's a great thing. You know, where we land, you know?

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: So your survey's still out there. Oh, yeah. Because you asked a question about school choice. Could you add that on your survey? Could we?

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: See, the rural community, rural school, community can form an opinion?

[Jeannie (Jean) Albert (Chair, Lincoln School District Board; Member, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: Are you interested in, you know, the, the, excuse me, the situations where they have choice, do they want to continue? That the whole spectrum?

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Spectrum,

[Senator Terry Williams (Clerk, Senate Education Committee)]: those that want have choice and those that don't It's have already like

[Jeannie (Jean) Albert (Chair, Lincoln School District Board; Member, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: the middle of survey, so we're not going to get the people who've already answered. Okay. But we will think about it because we do surveys sort of periodically. Thank you

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: for It's going to be important. It's going to be, you know, maybe not right today, but over the next two and a half months, it's gonna be huge.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: And if I ask you the question, it may think that it may be an issue. Alright. Thank you. So we we have Andrew Haas, superintendent of the Windham North East Supervisor. Just a second, Bill. Now we'll get

[Senator Terry Williams (Clerk, Senate Education Committee)]: one more test. I'll catch you

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: at morning. Yeah. How well can I talk? Yeah. So if you could introduce yourself for the record.

[Andrew (Andy) Haas (Superintendent, Windham Northeast Supervisory Union)]: Sure. My name is Andy Hass. I'm the superintendent from Windham Northeast Supervisory Union, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you today. I'm here to share my perspective on the proposed consolidation maps and strongly advocate for the power of voluntary collaboration through supervisory unions and educational service agencies.

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: You get a little

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: bit Mike? We're having a little bit of a hard time there with you. Just get a little closer. Just a little bit closer if we can find.

[Andrew (Andy) Haas (Superintendent, Windham Northeast Supervisory Union)]: Is that any better?

[Senator David Weeks (Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Yeah.

[Andrew (Andy) Haas (Superintendent, Windham Northeast Supervisory Union)]: As my board members know all too well, whatever governance model we ultimately have, it's only relevant if it benefits our students. Our focus on Act 73 tends to be on cost savings. The truth is larger districts and supervisory unions, no matter what they are, will most likely not lead to any cost savings. So I ask what is best for our students. Currently, our education system is operating under immense stress. In this climate, implementing forced mergers would be highly disruptive to our students, staff, and communities. I believe that voluntary mergers can be more effective than forced ones. When our neighboring district was without a superintendent, I floated this exact idea. Mergers are approached voluntarily, and when they make financial and geographical sense in sparsely populated regions, combining like operators within a supervisory union can be very practical. Unfortunately, the current Cullen map eliminates the option for voluntary mergers. Windham Northeast Supervisory Union, I believe, is a model for how supervisory unions can be both cost effective and supportive of our students. We have one collective bargaining agreement for both our professional and our support staff. We develop and support policies that are at the SU level while allowing the local district to pass policies they deem important. We've established a coordinated curriculum for all of our schools, and we continually present budgets for taxpayers that are fiscally responsible. Supervisory unions are vital structure component for rural Vermont, and I support their presence in rural regions. The current Conlon map does not include any supervisory unions. SU's work because they allow distinct rural communities to share administrative overhead while maintaining a localized programming that students rely on. Erasing these structures raises significant concerns about the proposed map and the new language introduced into the committee. Instead of top down consolidation, we should look towards collaborative models like boards of educate board pardon me. Boards of cooperative educational services or BOCES or comprehensive educational service areas, CESAs. Eight years ago, when I came to WNASU as the director of student services, I experienced the deficit of programming and high cost of special education services. Five years ago, I was a founding member

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: of

[Andrew (Andy) Haas (Superintendent, Windham Northeast Supervisory Union)]: the Vermont Learning Collaborative Board. We already have a successful scalable model right here in Vermont. In January 2026, the Vermont Learning Collaborative officially launched as the state's first established BOCES. The mission of BOCES is jointly conducted is to jointly conduct educational programs and services for member supervisory unions and districts. This approach is designed to be cost effective while increasing educational opportunities for children ages three through 22 and building staff capacity. Through collaborative educational service agencies, districts experience tangible benefits, cost savings and staff. Supervisory unions and districts can access part time, full time, or per diem positions to fill needs. This can save up to 50% or more per full time equivalent position. There's an efficient evaluation services. Utilizing a regional service provider like VTL VTLC saves member districts 20 to 50% on evaluation services with an average savings of 38%. There's a reduction in transportation fees. By offering local high quality programming, districts can reduce their transportation fees by up to 85%. And professional development. Districts utilizing VTLC as a regional provider saw an average savings of 66% of professional development compared to hosting events individually. Local and virtual hostings also saved on staff time and transportation costs. Furthermore, ESA models provide broader, responsive service abilities, greater capacity to hire high quality staff, cooperative purchasing power, and essential grant administration. Nationally, ESAs are recognized as the infrastructure that enables school systems to operate efficiently and deliver high quality services regardless of a student's zip code. Forced consolidations overlook a geographical realities of Vermont and to dismantle supervisory unions that rural communities rely on. I urge the committee to support the advancement of Act 73 through viable, scalable models like BOCES that foster efficiency without sacrificing local identities. Let us prioritize voluntary collaboration disruption. And let's continue to ask what is best for our students.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Quick question for you. First question for you is, how many students are there within the BOCES that you form?

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: Oh.

[Andrew (Andy) Haas (Superintendent, Windham Northeast Supervisory Union)]: I don't have that number in front of me exactly, but I mean, there are eight school districts and supervisory unions that make up the whole piece.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: I have an answer. Were removed.

[Dr. Cheryl Charles (Chair, Westminster School Board; Chair, Windham Northeast SU Board; Chair, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: About 8,000. Okay.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Okay. So any questions? So I think what you're saying is voluntary work terms and you prefer going to post it sports before doing anything else?

[Andrew (Andy) Haas (Superintendent, Windham Northeast Supervisory Union)]: Yeah, I mean, the idea, and I heard very loud and clear, this is about administrative cost savings. The fact is that a larger geographical area to get around to be able to service those schools and everything, you're going to need a level of administration that currently exists. It's just you're not going to be calling them superintendents, you're going to be calling them something else. That's just a fact of reality. So to say that any kind of mergers of districts are going to save money, there's actually no research that actually shows that there's a savings of money for over ten years. So after ten years, you start to see a savings. So by coming up with voluntary mergers or even another crazy idea I had at one point was don't don't hire any more superintendents. I've been the superintendent here for five years in our region with 13 school, you know, 13 superintendents in our region. In the five years that I've been a superintendent, there's only one superintendent who was in place before me. So in that five years, you could have consolidated down a whole bunch if you just said don't hire superintendents. So if the cost if that's really the cost driver, then then then approach it that way. Stop talking at like, it's it becomes disruptive. When I go to try and hire per people right now, people don't even wanna come work in Vermont because they they ask the question, will you even be in existence next year? That that's the reality that we are seeing. People don't, you know, they they they want certainty. They wanna know what's gonna happen next. And if I could say to someone, yep, we're going to be merging in two years with this school district, but you're going to lose your job because those teachers are not going to have priority over your position, then I'm not going to be able to hire a teacher.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Did I see you hit over?

[Senator Terry Williams (Clerk, Senate Education Committee)]: I was just gonna say, you said that BOCES 8,000 students inside it. So it's like that you're already showing savings that way so that if we down to one superintendent over 8,000 students in the BOCES works, there could be savings there. Just saying that. Not saying that's the right answer, not saying that's the right answer, but I'm just, you're putting out that shows that you put that many kids, we can save as much money as you were just showing.

[Andrew (Andy) Haas (Superintendent, Windham Northeast Supervisory Union)]: So over It can't be that 8,000 student area, you're talking about a three hour travel time, One way. And that's only going north. If I'm if I'm going east, it's gonna probably even take or west, it's probably gonna take me longer because of the mountains because I don't have an interstate. So, therefore, for one person to be overseeing that entire area, it it it it's I I can't even wrap my head around how to get around that whole area. So the fact is then I'll need assistant superintendent. And then I'm gonna hire assistant superintendents who are gonna be regional or regional superintendents. So when you look at some of the and you talk with superintendents around the country, in some of these very large districts, there is a superintendent, but then there are regional superintendents. And then underneath the regional superintendents are assistant superintendents. So you continue to maintain an administrative structure because you cannot effectively have enough supervision for that large area. The reason why the BOCES is working right now is we're putting a lot of the and for full disclosure, I do sit on the board for the Vermont Learning Collaborative, but we are putting a lot of emphasis in the professional development. We have finally gotten to the point where we have one professional development day in everybody's calendar for next year that everyone has taken that day so that we can do regional professional development. And that's a start. It's taken five years to get there, but we are trying to look at those kind of regional things and to be able to offer those professional developments where I don't have to put someone in a car and send them up to Mount Pillier or Burlington all the time.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Thank you. Thanks. Thanks. Appreciate the time. I think we're done with the day. So, we can return and we can go

[Jeannie (Jean) Albert (Chair, Lincoln School District Board; Member, Rural School Community Alliance Steering Committee)]: out.

[Senator Seth Bongartz (Chair, Senate Education Committee)]: Take care.