Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Five, rudiments.

[Sen. David Weeks — Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Fair line. Yeah.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Okay, we're, per third of business, I'm sorry, this is the Senate Education Committee, February 26, after an hour and a half away because the floor ran long. So we had, I had agreed fine time. So we had to squeeze in just a little bit of preliminary testimony from the one with us about the accolades and school counselors. We haven't even had the bill introduced. We'll let White, I might not do that later. Just-

[Sen. David Weeks — Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Go ahead.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: I thought we had ten minutes, so I put ten minutes on the schedule for some preliminary testimony from Lisa Plant, the school counselor. So we'll still try to stick with your gender as best we can. And as we go along, by the way, have just one person from AOE, we have to get a boardroom done. So we may have to jump around a little bit. But anyway, so we have a couple minutes set aside for you. People not here yet, but over here. David Weeks, representing Rutland County. Seth Bongartz, we've got to accept the district.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: Terry Williams, also from Relden. Steve Heffernan from Madison Keventon.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: You are.

[Lisa LaPlante — Board Chair, Vermont School Counselor Association]: Lisa LaPlante, I'm the director of student search that you go to. I'm also the board chair for the Mont School Counselor Association. So I thank all of you very much for taking time. And I also know that you are probably feeling, right? Like, you've run over. That's fine. We will just do our best. That's all we can all do on a given day. So, S-two sixty five ensures at least 80% of the school counselor's time is spent providing school counseling services. It's student centric policy that ensures students receive some counseling services that we are trained master level school counselors to provide. For many years, Vermont School Counseling Association, has heard from school counselors across the state that their time is being spent away from providing school counseling services to students. In 2020, VITSCA released, with support from the Vermont AOE, Vermont School Counselor Comprehensive Model, which we now refer to as the framework, to further clarify the roles and responsibilities of school counselors. This framework matches the national school counseling standards as outlined by the American School Counselor Association. The rationale of the comprehensive school counseling framework is student success. The framework's design, delivery, and content dedicated to the goal of personalized student learning, empowering all students to become highly motivated, self directed learners by breaking down systemic, interpersonal, and intrapersonal barriers in delivering counseling services designed to address three domains of student development, which are academic, career, and social emotional. Following the American School Counsel Association's mindsets and behaviors for student success through K-twelve college career readiness for every student. Even after the release of the framework, we continued to hear from Vermont School counselors that their time was not being fully utilized with direct and indirect services. At our November conference in 2024, 100% President Brian Fitz would pursue a bill that would require at least 80% of the school counselors' time to be working towards dedicated student services in which they are trained. It was unanimous of being moved forward with S-two five. So the benefits of S-two 65 would prioritize student needs by dedicating a larger portion of their time to direct student interaction. Counselors can better address individual needs, provide more personalized support, and offer timely interventions when necessary. It would improve access to the home. With more dedicated time to student services, counselors can see more students and provide a wider range of support, including academic guidance, career planning, social emotional development, and crisis intervention. It would allow counselors to address student challenges. School counselors are master level trained professionals with specialized skills to address student challenges, and an eightytwenty build ensures they're utilizing their expertise to the fullest. It also prevents counselor burnout. Many counselors currently juggle high case loads, measures tasks, continue to burnout and reduce effectiveness. And it would promote equity and access by ensuring that all students have sufficient access to counseling services. S two sixty five can help address disparities in support for students from diverse backgrounds. S two sixty five ensures that public funds allocated to school counseling positions are used primarily for student services. It does not with collective bargaining agreements or contract negotiations, prescribe specific daily schedules, eliminate administrative authority, or prevent schools from responding pledgibly in emergencies. The eightytwenty model is not an arbitrary union demand. It is a national standard by the American School Counsel Association. Supporting eightytwenty for counselors, it's about aligning with national accreditation and professional ethics. It has been proposed that requirements best two twenty five should debut Dresden local contract negotiations. This is not possible. In practice, collective bargaining agreements overwhelmingly teacher centric because teachers represent the vast majority of licensed staff in any district. Contracts are structured around classroom instruction and teacher specific duties. School councils make up a much smaller portion of district staff, and as a result, council specific responsibilities are almost never defined in negotiating permits. In fact, there's only one known school contract in the entire country that contains a provision specific to a school counselor vote authority. This underscores the reality that contract negotiations are not an effective or reliable mechanism for defining appropriate school counselor duties. Without statutory guidance, school counsels are frequently assigned administrative and non counseling tasks that diminish their ability to provide essential mental health, academic and career support for students. Statutory framework established a clear statewide standard for how licensed school counselors should be employed, ensuring that all students receive the services they deserve and that the districts maximize the impact of these highly trained professionals. This is not a new concept. Other states have enacted eightytwenty legislation for similar statute protections to ensure that school counters are utilized in accordance with their professional training, Maine, Tennessee, Washington, Pennsylvania, Texas, North Carolina, Utah, Virginia, and Alaska. These states recognize that rural community provides student outcomes, strengthens school climate, and helps address workforce shortages by making the profession more sustainable and professionally aligned. I'd like to leave you with this thought. While S-two sixty five's specific purpose, it is integral to much of the work this committee as well as other committees as legislator grapples with student absenteeism, student mental health, and other student challenges. School counselors play an important role in providing support and guidance on our schools and our time should be focused on providing support.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: So we're gonna, okay. So the idea was just to have the committee get the sense of what the discussion is. Maybe I thought it was later, but question?

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: A quick one. So this is just giving you, putting into law so that you can, if you're being abused, going to know the law since. Is that basically what you want this for?

[Lisa LaPlante — Board Chair, Vermont School Counselor Association]: It's basically saying that we should be used based on our national standards, that 80 to 20% should be in direct or indirect services for students. So, it shouldn't be things that are not school counselor related. Like in the past, yeah, we've people who have to drive a bus.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: Right, okay. So right now, that's why you'd like to see this become law because it's getting at

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: the age you got getting to do the eightytwenty.

[Lisa LaPlante — Board Chair, Vermont School Counselor Association]: We are not able to provide the services that we are trying to do with students and again, that's something we're seeing higher mental health rates with higher mental health issues with students.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Okay. So so I understand you work inside an extremely challenging environment. Couple of us here, a couple of them, profession where collateral duties are kind of the norm. We all we do various things on the side. I'm wondering if if your colleague teachers who you work alongside with have a similar segmentation of their workday via their labor association with the NEA? Or would this be like first? A lot of schools say this group of professionals must cannot can't violate what percentage of, you know, duties versus non professionally related collaterals.

[Lisa LaPlante — Board Chair, Vermont School Counselor Association]: If I understand your Don't

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: go away. Don't go away.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: If I understand your correctly,

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: See, I was gonna

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: go ahead.

[Lisa LaPlante — Board Chair, Vermont School Counselor Association]: In part of negotiations, right, it's very clear what teachers can and can't be asked to do. Right? Like, in our contract for our teachers, can they teach five classes every semester, and it's very it's clearly laid out how much time they have for prep, how much time they have for duty. There's none of that for school counselors. We also, right, because Vermont is a smaller state, right, there's different needs. Many of the states I mentioned actually went for eightytwenty 100% of the time. We are asking for eightytwenty for 80% of the time, which would still leave 20% of the time to be able to pivot and provide services that the school would need. So, we're not going for the full five day a week because we know that Vermont is a little

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: bit

[Lisa LaPlante — Board Chair, Vermont School Counselor Association]: different. Some of the towns and districts have some more challenges and that we need to be team players to do that. But we have members who are providing services way less than 80% in their role.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: Thank you for your Thanks,

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: thanks. Thank

[Lisa LaPlante — Board Chair, Vermont School Counselor Association]: you all.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: I'm asking you guys alike.

[Lisa LaPlante — Board Chair, Vermont School Counselor Association]: Yep, no, thank you all so Good very luck with the rest of your day.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Representative Olsen, we're switching gears now to the segment of the day, to suggest one or impose amendments to proposed that happened.

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: But that's something you wanted to set tonight. Yeah. Represents Earl Olsen, Addison Ford, five wonderful, vibrant, and North East Addison, Cathy Crystal, Lincoln, and Starsboro. And thanks for giving me some time. I think you're short on time. You know, let I can turn on the bar extension or whatever if you got me available. Oh, and that goes. I sent in a couple of documents in response to what I understood was your proposal. You you published posted a map, and then I think a three page, yeah, the the VAT, and then there was a three page sort of explanation of what the framework was and how you wanted to go forward. So there was a couple of things I did in response to that. We're a district in a town that is really kind of a unique situation in terms of education transformation in general, I think which town we're talking about. So, yeah, there's the four towns. I'm speak specifically to Sharksboro, but the reason for that is I know Lincoln has their own views, I'm confident that they'll express those views. I'm gonna certainly try to reach out to Crystal in London and just have had the bandwidth to do that. I will over account meeting week. So and and there's an organization in our town of Starksburg that is fiercely interested in being able to keep their now I was in school. It's been a multi year process. And, you know, this narrative, I think that it's a good school. It provides they have shows it's providing good efficiency data, SEL stuff. Yet we're a little bit out of sync, you know, with the surrounding district, which was why when you put out your, that framework, that was very encouraging to us because I think you recognize that not everyone's the same. And I think the key is trying to find a good fit, both in terms of educational values and in terms of sort of socially, societally, how you fit in there. So the first document is really based on more of the three page framework that he had. And what we noted was that he had a three year period where you could be asking folks to different towns to talk, you know, and see where he might fit, where he might not fit, I guess. And we saw that as an opportunity to tell you, we would love to participate in the prime class because we are concerned about the fit, know, some of the surrounding districts and stuff, whereas we're probably a little more in sync with an SU kind of structure, which is just over a mountain top from us. And, you know, we deal with Lincoln as sort of a sister town kind of thing. So that that was very intriguing. So we what we proposed there in terms of your narrative that we'd be able to continue that conversation during that three year period so that we can try to find a good fit to get to the larger district that I think you're looking for, try to get some cost savings, but at the same time recognizing that there are differences and that it's one place isn't gonna fit somewhere else. So is

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: there anything you'd like us to do, do you have an adjustment for the boundary that you have in mind?

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: Yeah, so, the first thing was the tweak to your three pages. Okay. And I got some language involved. Okay. In terms of boundary, got to speak as legislative representative of my family. I couldn't get together a vote in support or anything like that, but I'm confident that I know people. And I'm confident I'm confident in saying they would like to be a part of a supervisory union that I think it's identified in your map. I'll give you a copy of my mark up. It's small. Well, I could search for that. Oh, yeah. See, Bennington. Yes. Okay. Thought paper. So I see the white paper was.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: You're so saying your your suggestion is to

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: Blue Starksburg into which SUV? Yeah, the one to the east, which I think is Randolph. To Blue Starksburg to Randolph? Yeah. I sorta, no. I didn't.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: You did? Or I did. I did.

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: I turned all over. But I hatched in the town just south of. And I met the the black mark is starting.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Oh, I thought it was the Randolph. Well, Randolph is

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: Of the The Randolph is green. Okay. I believe in. Mhmm.

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: And so we're we're in black And I just hashed in because if I didn't hash in, it would look like an ant or something. And and so I hashed in Lincoln because I think they we have similar outlook, you know, and how we'd like to fit. We almost came together. A few years ago, they tried to, you know, close Lincoln. Lincoln withdrew. We almost withdrew. That's a long story, but we have a lot of affinity there. We're not right next to we're both high up in the Green Mounds, right up to the western slopes of Green Mounds. So we know each other.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: So it's Starksboro, it's own district right there?

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: No. No. So that's the difference between Lincoln. Starksboro is currently a member of the Mount Abraham Unified. So you're suggesting taking it out of that, correct, start throwing out of that district and move it the Dome District? I haven't gotten that far yet. Okay. So I I can't act fast. But in terms of the boundary that you're looking at

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Okay. That's that's what we're looking at. Yes.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: So we'll be talking about any oh,

[Carolyn Picasio — Director of Library Services, Kellogg-Hubbard Library (Montpelier)]: No. It's

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: So, maybe you haven't gotten this far, but you're saying that you would feed into Randolph High School?

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: Well, no. I guess that's where we're thinking about what the supervisory structure actually means. And in that context, we would hope we'd be able to keep the Mount Ape High School. It's just down the road. So I think Lincoln right now sends most of their high school students to Mount Ape.

[Lisa LaPlante — Board Chair, Vermont School Counselor Association]: And

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: I don't know how you figure out that, but it's just a lot closer, and that would certainly make more sense to us.

[Cindy Lemore — Stanford/Reedsboro area witness (Windham Southwest SU)]: To stay

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: with MAT AID?

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: To stay with the high school, but not the district.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: I mean, hear you. That's the can of worms that is around us. So I guess I'm wondering, are there other ways you could achieve, you know, conversations about the sustainability of your elementary school besides pulling wanting to be part of a

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: I

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: don't know how that helps your S I don't know how that helps you all besides maintaining your elementary school. You wanna be part of an SU. Yes. But the the areas around it right now are considered districts. I mean, that's the hard part about the title of this section right now is that we have people testifying for gonna testify on the big blob of district stuff, not the boundaries of the supervisory union. But you are saying you wanna be taken out of the district blob.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: Good.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: And you want to be attached to a supervisory union just for elementary school.

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: Just for elementary school. And we would be, I guess, a non operating tech on that at that school visit and at that point within the supervisory unions.

[Carolyn Picasio — Director of Library Services, Kellogg-Hubbard Library (Montpelier)]: Just for K through five?

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: K through we're K through six. K through

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: six. Okay.

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: And so the way I have stated it, if you're not operating school district well, you know, we were designated public schools, know, that's where our kids go now.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Isn't your sixth through eighth Ferrisburg?

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: No. Starks first, k to six. Yeah. There's middle school middle school in Bristol, and there's a high school. So there's not even the middle school, but one and the same.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: One middle. Yeah. Oh, one campus.

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: Okay. Same.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: But my question, I guess, I should ask you this early. Why do you believe that will help your school survive? If if they were because I know they're talking about voting on whether clothes are not. Yes. They

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: are. It's been decided in about five years. Now we're standing, know, having articles of agreement that say, you know, we'll get that involved. You know, it's a good, a large supervisory district. I'm thinking that it's per you know, that that would do a way that those articles bring back and go back and have that ability. So that's that's the deal this week. And so we're trying to sort of keep the structure that we end on our inbound. You know, listen, there are small schools that just can't cut. And I understand that.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: I mean,

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: we all understand that. We just want to be able to sort out the from the chat there. And if you do it well, you be financially efficient. Know, I think that's a good thing for kids. Yet we have, you know, a of it's not fit. And we're just having trouble, more and more trouble fitting into the Supervisory District structure. And we're thinking that this would be, you know, something that would help our students walk the streets a lot better, and keep them going to stay in the house and

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: go to high school. That's a good thing. Right. We've got to we want you to just get get people in. People get Yeah.

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: I appreciate you listening. I'm happy to I'm around the

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: hall just so can have us. Thank you, Lord. Now we

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: what time? Exactly. Exactly. So I wish you luck. It's it's a it's a really complex

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: task. So that's that's it. Yep. Thank you. I'm gonna stump around a little bit because I think I know we're gonna lose some people from the Department of Education. So if I'm patronous to the people who've already been waiting a long time, but apart forward or remaining witnesses for the bounds of investments could hang on for a little while, I want to get through, I think, jump ahead to the committee in the public libraries and the department of libraries and have to be honest and feel the right scandal. So I think we're here about the provision in the bill that suggests we have we actually even have two versions of the bill. Of them has language leading the effect that libraries would receive some percentage of the funds from the cannabis fund and the other one says 5%. And I think just to frame the issue a little bit, There's when we had the honest and here and talked about the way the process works now. We were left with the sense that it's very cumbersome that only larger organizations can do it and that an organization looking for what might like a library a small after school or summer grad that might be on the order of 2 or $3,000 that could be very helpful that just isn't the mechanism for them to tap into that. And so I think we wanted to have a a sense of so we recognized that by putting it into statute we're moving libraries up into the queue a little bit. On the other hand, we're hearing that if we don't put them up in the queue a little bit, you're gonna have no end up getting any of the money. And that's what we're trying to sort out. We wanted to hear from the two of you. If you wanna, don't know, Jill, you want to, mean, if you want to do it together or both identify yourselves for the record and then just be able to kind of chime in. So Jill, don't you unmute? Yeah. Okay. Sure.

[Jill Briggs Campbell — Deputy Secretary of Education, Vermont AOE]: Hi, folks. I'm coming to you from the West Coast right now. So thank you for bearing with me if I have any technical issues. For the record, Jill Briggs Campbell, deputy secretary of education and chief of operations. And our sort of plan here, chair Bongartz, was just for me to provide a little introductory context and then really let Johannes do the bulk of the, talking as your after school subject matter expert and address any questions that you have. I think we can get in and out probably pretty quickly today. Johannes, if you wanna introduce yourself, and then I'll just jump right in. Good

[Johannes Sench — Afterschool Opportunities Program Manager, Vermont Agency of Education]: afternoon. For the record, Johannes Sench, agency of education, current running opportunities program manager.

[Jill Briggs Campbell — Deputy Secretary of Education, Vermont AOE]: So you have a a very brief slide deck that we sent over. Just a quick description of current state, and you've you've heard our testimony on this. So it's just sort of a reminder. Right? So current state is that libraries are already eligible to participate under the existing legislation. Johannes and his team are actually in touch with libraries on a fairly regular basis. None have yet to submit an application. But there are currently 18 grant recipients that are already partnering with libraries. So we just wanna sort of level set on that. The agency's position is twofold. Any carve out for a single group does represent precedent that folks should be thinking about, what other entities, organizations might also approach. So that's something to consider. And then also there is just the issue that any carve out for a single group does reduce available funding for other applicants. So something to consider. And the existing program design supports affordability, affordability, access, and workforce development. We are actively in conversation around a real focus on literacy. So we would really encourage folks, on the senate ag committee to, have a full presentation on the read Vermont work. I think that would be very helpful for some of the decisions that you're making, and getting an update on the status of that work would be helpful. And critically, how libraries are already integrated into that work would be very helpful. So with that, Johannes, I'm gonna let you take over, and then if there's any questions.

[Johannes Sench — Afterschool Opportunities Program Manager, Vermont Agency of Education]: Yeah. Before we do that, need Senator Roberts to have a question.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: On Re Vermont, you have a, I think a $700,000 appropriation request before Senate appropriations before appropriations that I don't think has been approved yet. I could be

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: wrong about that.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Is any of that money going to literacy and summer reading work in our library?

[Jill Briggs Campbell — Deputy Secretary of Education, Vermont AOE]: Yeah. So I think it would be let's take a step back on that. So in both the BAA and in the f y twenty seven budget, the governor has a request for $700,000 for Reed Vermont activities. Again, I think it'd be very helpful for this group to get an update on the Reed Vermont activities. It's a little bit complicated, but I'm happy to take a moment to walk through those funds. So READ Vermont, which is the efforts of the agency to support the requirements of Act 139. I want to remind folks that one thirty nine did not come with any funding. So the agency of education has been pretty resourceful in braiding different funds that did include ESSER and GEAR funds. Unfortunately, last year in February, the Trump administration reversed course on the use of those funds, and that really brought the work that was underway, which is evidence based coaching. There's very, very clear research based evidence that the most effective thing that you can do to support literacy is improving classroom instruction. Unfortunately brought that work to a halt because we we had to stop. The funding was no longer available. Since then, we've done a lot of different braided sources of funding to restart that work. The request that you have is not an appropriation for any new funding. It's actually a reversion of a different source of funds that have a different identified purpose, which is some IT contracts that were originally funded with ARPA SFRF funds. We've ended up being able to complete those contracts with a bit of room to spare, and they were turned into general fund through the agency of administration in 2024. And so we're actually basically just asking for a reversion and reappropriation of those funds to continue the Read Vermont work. That work has already been restarted using other federal dollars and other sources of general fund. As I said, we're being very resourceful there. So there is work that is scoped that already involves libraries. And I just want to remind folks that the Commissioner for Libraries sits on the Read Vermont Advisory Council. The advisory council receives updates from libraries around their literacy efforts, and the agency is already actively working with libraries on the development of resources for literacy and other work that's involved in literacy. So that work is actually ongoing and and has been engaged since 2024.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Certainly. So I'm glad you're still here to do it. I had a the speak to them reach out to me today. Basically said that the libraries are not applying because it's twenty hours for for the application process. Is there any way you could cut that down or make it a smaller grant program?

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: Yes.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: A of them are time librarians.

[Jill Briggs Campbell — Deputy Secretary of Education, Vermont AOE]: So Johannes is going to speak to this. He's actually gonna share with you a copy of the application. I do wanna point out that we do have a lot of smaller entities that do apply for these funds. And I think, critically, you're going to see in the application that the sort of critical pieces for us are around the description of the program to ensure quality and ensuring that it aligns with bulletin five, which is our kind of statewide bulletin on on grants management. So we're always looking for the ability to streamline our application. That's one of my consistent goals that I have for operational kind of effectiveness, and technical support. I'm not sure. I'm asking the the question something for you all to consider how moving that to a different department would reduce that burden. Right? So applying for a grant is not just the application. It's the management of the grant. It's the monitoring of the grant, and it's the payments for the grant. So we often think that the application is is the the work, but that's actually usually just the first step. So we just wanna signal that resource constraints are an issue for a

[Lisa LaPlante — Board Chair, Vermont School Counselor Association]: lot of

[Jill Briggs Campbell — Deputy Secretary of Education, Vermont AOE]: entities. And Johannes can speak to how his team supports different entities in applying for these grants and managing those grants and the ongoing technical support that his team does to monitor and support them throughout the lifetime of the grant. Entities traditionally struggle a little bit with grants management because it does come with a kind of a high degree of, like, fiscal responsibility as well. So I I'm I hear what you're saying. We're always looking for ways to streamline the application, and Johannes' team is always looking for ways to better support entities as well. We don't wanna lose the quality of the application, though, is the balance that you wanna strike.

[Johannes Sench — Afterschool Opportunities Program Manager, Vermont Agency of Education]: I had a question from Seth Bongartz. Thank you.

[Sen. David Weeks — Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Jill, did you mention that there were 11 libraries that were in conversation with, is that eighteen?

[Johannes Sench — Afterschool Opportunities Program Manager, Vermont Agency of Education]: Eighteen of our existing grantees are working with libraries. It actually works out to, I believe, 24 libraries. That was in the slide deck from my previous testimony because some of them work with multiple libraries.

[Sen. David Weeks — Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee]: And if there were to be a change that this goes to the Department of Libraries. How many libraries roughly would fall under that umbrella that would be eligible get money?

[Johannes Sench — Afterschool Opportunities Program Manager, Vermont Agency of Education]: I'm not sure I understand the question.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: So if

[Johannes Sench — Afterschool Opportunities Program Manager, Vermont Agency of Education]: I don't know I'm curious.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: If we were talking library, you're

[Sen. David Weeks — Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Yeah, guess, how many libraries are there that could get funds from this? You have somebody that

[Johannes Sench — Afterschool Opportunities Program Manager, Vermont Agency of Education]: might be up.

[Carolyn Picasio — Director of Library Services, Kellogg-Hubbard Library (Montpelier)]: 185.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: You guys are state your name.

[Carolyn Picasio — Director of Library Services, Kellogg-Hubbard Library (Montpelier)]: I'm sorry. My name is Carolyn Picasio. I'm the director of library services at the Kellogg Hubbard Library here in town. And there are 185 libraries in the state of Vermont public libraries.

[Sen. David Weeks — Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Thank you. That, yeah, that's that's basically what I was looking for. The and I just wanted to comment briefly that I don't really see this as a carve out for a single group. I I think this is the government saying we have a funding mechanism and we want to use 5% of what is coming in from that funding mechanism or another part of the government which I don't think is necessarily a bad precedent. So that's just a comment that I want to know.

[Johannes Sench — Afterschool Opportunities Program Manager, Vermont Agency of Education]: I'm to let you speak. You can stay with us for a while, right?

[Jill Briggs Campbell — Deputy Secretary of Education, Vermont AOE]: You have me until 03:50.

[Johannes Sench — Afterschool Opportunities Program Manager, Vermont Agency of Education]: Okay. I have, I believe, several answers. So I did watch the testimony you received on Tuesday. I tried to track all of the things that various people said, but we'll follow-up with, hey, we don't have a bank account on Thursday. And I've tried to provide answers to those questions to the best of my ability. That's how I've arranged the slide deck that I used to pass out. So looking at sort of the follow-up questions as I saw them, Senator Williams, you asked the question about LEA eligibility with the poison pill language. I can resolve that very quickly. The authorizing legislation says all entities public, private, and not signed. There's no language that indicates LEAs should not be allowable. I believe the poison pill conversation you're remembering was the earlier draft of act 78 where the ed fund and not a special fund was used as the financial vehicle. That created some complications around who could receive funding and who couldn't. The creation of the special fund resolved that. So now funding can flow to any eligible entity. Thank you. Yes, sir. The next question was on the budget structure. There was some conversation around how the agency of education is structuring our budgets for these multi year grants. And I want to speak to that because that's something that is an important component of our design, but also something that's maybe not necessarily entirely intuitive. And I think my answer to your question last time I was here was perhaps not while I think some of these which created more confusion and I apologize for that. So we are looking at multi year periods of performance. The agency of education has managed for the last twenty years federally funded after school programming through our 21C program. And we have done a lot of learning in that time about what is an effective way to build the programming. What we know from that is that it takes time. You can't stand up a new program in one year and have it running right out of the gate. So we knew that this needed to be something with ongoing support. Mechanically, our multi year periods of performance are functionally a commitment for sequential single year openness. And so when we're making our grant determinations and making our awards, we are cognizant of the fact that this cannabis fund is slightly unpredictable. We're not entirely sure where it's going to go. We don't want to fully expend every dollar that's available to us because then we end up in a situation where we might not be able to fund the next year. And also we end up in a situation where we don't give ourselves room to build these stacked cohorts. And here on the slide deck, on slide six, I've provided a chart that I find helpful. I've got this mixed feedback on it that demonstrates how that stacked cohort model works with sort of what the horizontals being the years where the funding is committed, and then the verticals being the years it's paid out. In a given fiscal year, when we are saying you're putting this much towards new awards, the rest of the money isn't getting stuffed under a mattress somewhere. The rest of the money is being used to pay the previous year's commitments and the year before that's commitments. The goal is to get to a point where we have a full five cohort running simultaneously. That way, every year we have somebody in year one, two, three, four, five. At the end of every fiscal year, the oldest group drops off and that frees up funding for a new group of applicants to comment. So that's kind of the design we're looking at. That's the model. That's based on what we've been doing with the federal funding in twenty one c. It's been very successful there. So we're trying to replicate that success to build something that will be predictable, sustainable, reliable for decades to come. Yes sir. So they draw off with the intent that the community then picks up this obligation or that they reapply? Yes. Ideally at the end, we would like the communities to pick up. Our intention is that there will be an opportunity for folks to reapply. So to pull from the model we're replicating in the 21c program, when you reach the end of your period of performance, you are able to reapply, but there is not a special chance. You will reapply and you come into the general competition pool. So if you've been doing your project for five years, you're reapplying and you are right there toe to toe with folks who are coming in for the first time. And if your application doesn't demonstrate sufficient quality, then unfortunately you are not. Privileged to receive an O-forty. Yeah, go ahead.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: I mean, I'm just, I'm going through the whole application right now and just circling the things that seem hard for programs to answer that are flexible. I mean, I was a boys and girls club kid. Right? And so I'm kinda like, would I don't know about the best practices section and

[Johannes Sench — Afterschool Opportunities Program Manager, Vermont Agency of Education]: We have multiple boys and girls clubs that work with us.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Right. So so then in the best practices section, that looks like we're work I'm hearing a lot of concern. You'd have to have a lot of like, you have to have special special education staff on-site.

[Johannes Sench — Afterschool Opportunities Program Manager, Vermont Agency of Education]: So I will say what you're looking at is the hard copy of the application. The actual application where you fill it out, the billable version, exists on our grant benefit system. In that specific section, the best practices section, there is a fillable section for if there are exenuating certain standards, conditions, or reasons why any of these requirements are not appropriate for your organization.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Mhmm.

[Johannes Sench — Afterschool Opportunities Program Manager, Vermont Agency of Education]: Explain that. And and we do have some goal has been, we want to be supporting the fullest possible range of eligible applicants. I've said it enough times, but all entities, public, private, and nonprofit, is a massive range for organizations. Our goal is to make sure that we are guaranteeing certain level of quality. We want the programs that we are supporting to be high quality, to be sustainable, to be affordable, to be safe. Within that, we also recognize that we have an obligation because of that eligibility criteria for flexibility. We need to be able to work with both. That's why after every round of this competition we've run, I have a series of conversations with various people about how what was your experience with this grant like? What didn't you know, and I think I shared already. After the first round, we got the feedback. Well, we use the word students everywhere. I'm a boys and girls club. I don't have students. So you'll notice through the application, you don't see students anymore. It says participants. We used to have language that said, this program has full access to the facilities of the district. Well, we had folks that say, I'm a licensed childcare center. I'm not attached to a district. So now it says you have full access to the facilities of your sponsoring organization. That might not be the exact language we use, but something to that effect. Just this past week, had a conversation with the Department of Libraries sitting down, reading through the application to identify where are spaces where this language is not super on. And that was a conversation that we had scheduled months ago before this bill was even up for debate just because this is something that we are passionate about and we are invested in and trying to advance. So just a

[Jill Briggs Campbell — Deputy Secretary of Education, Vermont AOE]: Johannes, I I think I'm sorry. I'm, like, voice behind your head there. It might also be helpful to remind this committee that we have different tracks for exactly this reason. And the the program track is is really the one that would likely be best suited for libraries. And we have a lot of small entities that apply for the program track, and it's a it's a much lighter touch application for exactly that reason. And if you wanna speak to that a little bit. So we have created customized tracks for exactly this reason.

[Johannes Sench — Afterschool Opportunities Program Manager, Vermont Agency of Education]: That's right. Yes. I'm done.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Look. I We didn't push those. Well

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: oh, yeah. Go ahead. Okay. So what we have in front

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: of us is the application pack for center track. Yes, sir. Do you have an application pack for program track?

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: I did not print that out, but it is something that is available on my website at this time.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Curious. I mean, if that's the you call it in the presentation, the skinny application?

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Well, that's the language I was using to refer to the the the requested even even smaller track. Uh-huh. That was on below the program track. And I'll I'll talk to that a little later. We don't currently have a skinny application. That's that's I think what we wanna hear about. Are you I mean, I've worked in the nonprofit sector a lot and I've seen grants with patients and sometimes the grant application is, you know, an age and a half, two pages and it's for small amounts of money, describe whatever you should want to do, and then at the end you write a letter saying what you're making clear how you actually use the money or reduce something. Program has worked as it's sitting in front of us I think is it's for larger grants there's a lot of tracking of you know how it's used and I understand all of that and but my question is is there a possibility to do something like you got a little one room library and they want to do a little summer reading program they're not going to do this and so how do you how do we make some of this money, some of this opportunity available for them when $3,000 would be a godsend for what they could do in this And so that's what I think this committee is trying to get its arms around is how do we get to that and not have it be so onerous and with so much oversight that it's like as you use the term reduces and work the squeeze, because right now it's literally not. Yeah by the way, I also wanted to say, even though I recognize the reference to the 18 libraries departments, as I recall, a lot of dispensing references to the libraries, they weren't really integrated into the program. I'm not being critical, but that's just what I remember that last time. I think we're really interested in that. Are you willing to, are you thinking about, or are you on track to figuring out how to make this opportunity just look little white birds across the pond. Yeah, so we are always open to the idea of new ideas. I mean this is an evolving process. We've been working on this for three years. I'm not here to say that we have completely cracked it and we've solved all the problems. This is an evolving process. This is what we have right now. This is kind of the best product we've been able to put forward with the iterations we've done so far. I think there are some areas where we would have some concerns. I did identify, so this is kind of the last section of my presentation here, talking about where some of those complexities enter in. Because when you're talking about a page and a half application, there's a lot of information that is collected there and that might be appropriate for certain amounts of money and certain types of programming and not others. So in our programming, you we take ultimately very seriously the fact that programs we are supporting are going to be providing service to somebody's children. And we take very seriously the fact that we have a certain obligation to make sure that those programs are safe, they are being run the way they say they're being run, and they're being run effectively. I I consider my first priority making sure that our programs are serving youth well. My second priority is making sure finances are being taken care of well. But youth absolutely are secure. Just trying

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: to follow on with the chairman's questions. Know, we're so interested. I'd like to know, can you is there some way AOE could give us a report back? Like, on the January 15 next year? Legislative report? Yep. Like Or which which libraries have got funded? You know? What the progress is with the program?

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: So I already submitted an annual legislative report on the development and progress of this Attitude Program through Act 78. I would be happy to include language in that about what has happened with libraries. Yes.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: If you were to How long would it take to write an application if you say, Okay, for 5,000, it's under People, Okay, talked as a committee, we decided, yes, we're gonna do something like this to help out smaller programs that needs some oversight, but not when we're sending them tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars. To start or finish from starting the concept to maybe actually getting a application out? How long

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: do you think that would take?

[Jill Briggs Campbell — Deputy Secretary of Education, Vermont AOE]: Sorry, Senator, is the question about how long, what's the sort of cycle of development for an agency of education grant? Is that the question?

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: If you decided to write a new, you know, hearing from this committee that's like, hey, we'd like to do something for people who want under $5,000 let's say. Right now this is a pretty complicated application for somebody that needs such a small amount of money in perspective to tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands. So in your committee or in your agency, how long from, okay, we're gonna take this idea, run with this concept, end product of a patent, how long?

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Our turnaround?

[Jill Briggs Campbell — Deputy Secretary of Education, Vermont AOE]: Yeah, go ahead, Johannes. You can speak to it.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Yeah. Our turnaround for developing and launching a new grant between when we sort of get the the administrative green light. Yes. This is something we want to do to prevent folks are able to apply for it. I think the fastest I would say that could be done if we are really kicking in with boots moving through this.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: I thought you had a different question, which was just like the amount of hours you expect someone to spend to get a certain amount of money. Right? That's kind of the best practice in prescribing.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: I do also I wanna speak to this this ten hours mark because I think it is important to remember what is actually involved in that. So the the pieces I would mark out is first, these grants are made available two months before the due date. So folks have eight weeks in which to do that ten to twenty hours of work. The second thing I would say is that that ten to twenty hours work is inclusive of gathering materials, sitting down with your team, and actually developing your requirement. Somebody who has a plan already developed that they know they want to do and has a good fluency with it, has a good operational knowledge of how it works, just the actual mechanical typing of the application is maybe an hour and a half.

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: So this is This one? Or not this one? I I say this one. These are that we've collected the data.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Once once you have your data in hand and you have your plan developed, The hard part of this is developing the plan. Good, so excited.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: Yes, go ahead. Well, and that's our, I think our concern that you're talking to a library that maybe has, maybe some only have one, so it maybe has five, is, but there is a demand for their after school reading appropriateness. That I think what this committee is believing is that we want it to be an easier access to get to some small amount of money with the easiest amount of steps. I believe that's what we're striving for in this meeting. And that's why we're considering saying, we'll just let the agency of libraries have the money and they can decide how they're gonna handle it.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Joan, I know you have to go. I just saw you turn your mute off. So

[Jill Briggs Campbell — Deputy Secretary of Education, Vermont AOE]: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I think so we've been paying attention to the conversations that you're having in the committee. I I think that your priorities are really clear. So I here's what I'm hearing as your priorities, and and please, you know, validate what I'm I'm hearing. So to me, what I'm hearing is a desire for a grant application doesn't necessarily have to be for libraries, but for smaller entities, for a small amount of money to do a very small scale program. So I'm I'm hearing that. And what are the what's the sort of furthest that we can continue to streamline while ensuring that we're maintaining some level of quality. And critically, I want to note this, the ability to report what's happening. Right? So we don't need every single data point in the world. But you all actually have asked us to do annual reporting. It requires some data to go in on the front end. Right? If you came back to me and said, how are these funds being used? And we don't have a budget detail. My answer is I'm not sure. Right? So we wanna there's a fine line to walk, and I'm hearing that as a priority. The second priority that I'm hearing really clearly is tied to how do we continue to elevate literacy for and improving literacy outcomes in the state of Vermont, and how do we continue to do that in partnership with libraries? That work, I think, again, I would encourage you to hear from our team on this, but that work is well underway, ongoing, and and very heavily engaged. And we are actually already contemplating a new grant track, which we have in our purview to do. So I would sort of signal that again. We can kind of do anything within our purview here that doesn't necessarily require statutory change. We're already contemplating a very literacy focused grant program. So that's what I'm hearing as the key priorities. It's you know, you're you're going to make your your own decisions around this. I have a high degree of confidence that we could actually meet those priorities. We already are meeting one of them around Read Vermont and Literacy and the engagement of libraries. But I think that, you know, you're you're not the only folks who have ever said we need to make sure that very small entities and under resourced and understaffed entities can apply for funds. Our concern is always that balance, and I think Johannes articulates this really clearly, ensuring that the programs are sustainable, safe, and high quality. Right? And that's sort of a bottom bottom line of stewardship that we have in any state state agency, and the Department of Libraries would be held to the same standard. Right? Bulletin five is a statewide standard. Right? So there's no there's no kind of moving it around and and hoping that it it sort of changes the the burden. Folks who receive state dollars have to meet bulletin five. So I but I I what I think you're hearing from us is a degree of confidence that we can actually meet these priorities within our purview already. And and we've, you know, it's very clear what your priorities are, if I've named them correctly.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: I don't know what order go ahead. Several weeks.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Sir. So or the other option, Jill, is to give 5% of the cannabis funds to the libraries and make the commissioner of libraries responsible, given all of the boundaries that they're obligated to observe. I appreciate the sensitivity about the supervision of state treasury funds and what have you. We're talking about a secretary of one agency, a commissioner of another. This is an internal government conversation, and I just want to put all of this in perspective, that the 5% that we're talking about, if we take the funds which we're discussing, this is about roughly somewhere in the order, slightly above $100,000 per year. This is like one of your 45 programs. Why not let the librarians take this fund, manage it themselves under all the guidance that have already been spelled out in legislature? I haven't heard a really compelling reason not to do that. If someone can articulate that, I I would be indebted. Otherwise, I'm inclined just to push the button and go and get on with the bigger fish.

[Jill Briggs Campbell — Deputy Secretary of Education, Vermont AOE]: I mean, that's obviously within your legislative purview, senator. I I think, you know, we tend to, always lean away from complexity. This is creating duplicate paths, right, and duplicate agencies running a very similar program. You know, I I think that's our our tendency is to why duplicate something in another department that we can actually address already within our own. I I do you know, I I heard senator Hashim's comment around, you know, this is moving from one to another, and it's not setting precedent. We do have some caution flags around this. Right? You know, I I don't think that it's unlikely that other entities would want to be engaging with you around potentially securing access to these funds and, you know, understandably so. So I I think that would be up to you all to be very clear in your language that this is a one time thing and, you know, not open for for, you know, sort of other conversations around it. But I I do think that that's we are concerned, and you're right. It's not a lot of money, but we are concerned about anything that's reducing the amount of funds available to all eligible applicants to kind of achieve the the vision for universal after school. But of course, it's absolutely within your purview to pass any legislation you desire.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Thanks. Do you have another question?

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: It would be a request for more information. Actually, I was very opposed to like, take money off, but after seeing this application, this would take a full time grants manager, not somebody who just has ten to twenty hours of spare time to vision, but to collect all this data to make sure they're in sync with other organizations, etcetera. You said there's a lesser one, but I would think what worries me is it says in here, Hey, tell us if you're an underserved area. I can't imagine some of our underserved areas getting through this application to tell you they're underserved. So it would probably also help to look at a geographic spread and gaps and say, can we just get some money to some entities there?

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: That is part

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: of our communication strategy. Okay.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: We do every year, we do some targeted focused indications, identifying priority areas that we're trying to get involved. Also do an ex-

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: Has that been successful?

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Some efforts have been more successful than others. It is still, I will admit, a work in progress. I will say we offer an exceptional amount of technical assistance for folks who are navigating these questions. Oftentimes, we have folks who are not plugged into the schools who are saying, Look, I don't know what the free and reduced lunch rates at the schools near me are. That's something we are very happy to support people with development. We offer many, many hours of technical assistance with these kinds of applications of TISL. That's, did you want to say something?

[Carolyn Picasio — Director of Library Services, Kellogg-Hubbard Library (Montpelier)]: I would love to. Sure.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: So what, but don't go away. Just to get another voice in here.

[Jill Briggs Campbell — Deputy Secretary of Education, Vermont AOE]: Senator, I'm

[Cindy Lemore — Stanford/Reedsboro area witness (Windham Southwest SU)]: going to have to step away.

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: I apologize.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Thanks. Thanks. Thanks.

[Jill Briggs Campbell — Deputy Secretary of Education, Vermont AOE]: Yeah. Thank you all.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: There we go with

[Jill Briggs Campbell — Deputy Secretary of Education, Vermont AOE]: you. Absolutely.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Why don't you just kind of come up stand

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: up and

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: do it? Identify yourself for the record then.

[Carolyn Picasio — Director of Library Services, Kellogg-Hubbard Library (Montpelier)]: Yeah, sure. My name is Carolyn Pazio. I am the Director of Library Services at the Kellogg Harvard Library, just a couple blocks down the street. I wrote an email that I sent in early this morning that I'd love to read. As I've been listening, I was thinking about some things about the scale of some of our more rural public libraries. I would love to see the Department of Libraries get a small portion of this money and then be able to redistribute it. They already have the mechanism in place to do that. Even very small amounts of money are very, very meaningful to equally small libraries. I've worked in a single library setting before I got the job at Keller covered. When you said $5,000 I was like, Oh my god. How many do owe $5,000 in a small library? My email is, stated my name, I grew up in Maccabee Falls, Vermont. There were not after school programs when I was growing up. There was the library that was down the street that I could walk to, and I got to go to the summer reading program. That was my experience of camp and any other out of school programming that you could possibly imagine. Sorry, so what I wrote is, if your goal is to expand availability and create equity in after school and summer programming, there's no way you could do that more effectively than by including public libraries as recipients of these funds. Libraries are unique from other youth organizations in that they offer immediate barrier free access to a safe space where kids can explore, learn, and play. You don't have to sign up. You don't have to wait for an available space. You don't have to apply for a scholarship or meet eligibility requirements to come to your local library. At my library, we see 50 unattended kids after school every single school day. In addition to the dozen or so teens in our basement teen center, and about 35 toddlers and parents that come to our twice weekly preschool story times. These are disproportionately kids who cannot afford, are not eligible, or lack transportation to more traditional after school and care options. My library isn't unique. There's 185 public libraries in Vermont. Many of them are very rural. They're very spread out. They all support kids outside of school with a summer reading program, school break activities, and after school support. Many of them do this with very little funding. Many of them are the last remaining third space, this neutral environment that's not school or home, that's in their towns anymore. Continually, as schools continue to consolidate. My point is that libraries are already engaged in this work, they're really good at this work, and they could do it better if they

[Lisa LaPlante — Board Chair, Vermont School Counselor Association]: had access to better public support. Our

[Carolyn Picasio — Director of Library Services, Kellogg-Hubbard Library (Montpelier)]: local after school organization is part two for our district, As part of Part two's programming, they bring their kids to my library every Friday. We help them with research questions and with homework, we find the materials, and we prepare a craft for them, and we don't get support from FAR2 or from any other resource to do that. It's just part of our normal operating structure. If after school support is really meant to be universal, then I think it's really critical that libraries get access in one way or another to this funding. I would really support if it came through the Department of Libraries. That makes a lot of sense to me.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for Okay. Thanks for good for today. Thanks for coming in. Did you have more or you wanted to make sure you get with us? I just want add one piece just to make sure it is clear. It is a requirement that our grants, that programming that is funded through it be the cost or that they have cost mitigation measures in place so that those two just turned away for inability to pay it because we are also finding that an enormous barrier. Yeah, I would just close by saying I don't disagree with any statement I've heard here about the importance of libraries. We feel we recognize that libraries are an essential component of after school programming. It seems like we are kind of just dancing around what the best way to do that is. I don't want to be the one on the record as opposed to libraries. Yes, Chris.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: So just I just want you to know that I want to find a process where there's more libraries apply

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: and I'm hearing that I don't have 20 to fill an application. So yeah that's so there's already an event on the schedule for the Department of Libraries next fall. I'm going to be coming to one of their meetings to run a quick workshop and training on the grant application, doing some crosswalking, doing some definition terms, and helping folks with how to navigate the grant process. And that'll be happening irrespective of what happened to this February because, again, I've learned libraries, and I think they're an important component of that. Thanks, Thanks. But, yeah, it's very clear to me that you really care about this. Getting a bachelor about it. Yeah. So, and so, thank you for that. Thanks, Bernard. It's not your wallet sitting there, Sheronson. No. Okay. It's not. Okay. How much is it?

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: Want to let No? Yep, thank you. You too, thanks for your time.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: So now we're back to shifting gears once again to the adjustments to the proposed supervisory boundaries, the next person on the list is Robert Carpenter.

[Carolyn Picasio — Director of Library Services, Kellogg-Hubbard Library (Montpelier)]: Thank you very much,

[Lisa LaPlante — Board Chair, Vermont School Counselor Association]: Robert I appreciate Sonsson.

[Robert Carpenter — Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: Hey, thank you so much. Hello, senators. Thank you so much for your time today. I really do appreciate the time and commitment. And I know this is a long afternoon for you all extended much further than you probably planned. So thank you for your time and having us here. My name is Robert Carpenter. I'm the school board chair at the Essex Westford School District. I apologize I was not able to be there in person today. I also have my vice chair, Marlon Varasami, who will share some of the testimony with me as well, who's able to be there in person today. Number one, I just I just wanted to be here today just to really bring from a school board perspective some just clear data and numbers and facts of impact as you entertain some of these different discussions and decisions. And specifically around the idea of redrawing maps, oftentimes it's been proposed that that is gonna be the main solution. But what I would really implore all of you on this committee to really look into and ask I've had this ask from my staff, from our superintendent, from our directors, is to really look into, how to do this in a way because without a clear and sustainable funding formula, consolidation and redrawing of maps alone isn't gonna transform Vermont education, which is what we want to do. And as an example, I did reach out to our neighboring district at CBU and was able to talk to the board chair there. And as you may know, EWSD and CVSD were the two largest districts in the state. And if you were to take both of those largest districts, who by the way, have already undergone mergers in the past, over the past number of years, if we were to merge voluntarily, let's say, staffing costs immediately would rise due to leveling up of contracts. The second thing is neither of our districts would actually be able to close or consolidate any buildings because we wouldn't actually have physical space to relocate those students. And for us as a district, we actually completely closed down a building last year and now are at full capacity in our buildings and reutilizing that building in another way. But even with, let's say, those two districts, we chose to move that way forward, even with building a new consolidated facility, it would ultimately put a strain on our finances. I think newer and fewer is a great way to go. It's a great idea. But because of the foundation formula, construction costs would directly come out of that year's budget, forcing cuts to student services. And this is ultimately a direct result of that foundation formula as you consider the redrawing of maps. And I'll just be honest, there's a lot of concerns with that formula. And one of my main ones as a parent and as an individual who's worked, in special ed before is it decimate special education. And for our own district, we are the second largest in Vermont that serves some of the highest numbers of special needs learners. We would be underfunded by $6,000,000 just for special education. And for us to maintain special ed, we would require $6,000,000 in cuts somewhere else in our budget. And the catch is, if we didn't fund that $6,000,000 gap, we then automatically become ineligible for federal funding with special ed, which for us would be another $1,400,000 of critically needed funding for those vulnerable students. And just to give you an idea, we as a district cut 6,000,000 last year and close to 4,000,000 the year before, losing over a 100 staff members, closing a school, consolidating buildings, have done a lot. There's not much more we can do to cut another $6,000,000 And this price Sorry, go ahead.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: So you're actually not here to talk about an adjustment to the boundary as proposed?

[Robert Carpenter — Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: Right here in the end, am. Yes, sir, I am. I'm giving this context specifically because this crisis scenario, because of that foundation formula, does play out in every district. As you're redrawing the maps and as you're looking, especially at that gray area within the maps, we're in that gray area right now. And I know what's been proposed is that we should voluntarily merge with other districts. But I wanna give the reality of what that would look like because of that foundation formula. And regardless of the map, that foundation formula doesn't address special education, transportation costs, capital improvement, or aging buildings. Ultimately, we as districts have to cover all of these on an annual basis. Otherwise, it leads to massive cuts in our instructional abilities in school. And Marlon's gonna share a little bit more specifically about the boundaries and specifically about that redistricting that he said in person. Go ahead.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: So since you've raised the issue, so your testimony is that the weights, the special, the weights that are built into the form that you're saying are not enough for you to

[Robert Carpenter — Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: Correct. Yeah. So for a special education alone, it would underfund our district by $6,000,000 The formula also doesn't take into account transportation, capital improvement costs, or debt services, but all those schools do specifically need to cover. So these are the factors that we're taking into account when we're hearing of consolidation or merging with other districts, because these are realities of items that we will have to pay for, regardless of if we remain as a singular school district or if we're put together with other districts as well. That directly impact the costs. Marlon, I'll let you share as well, because he has more details that I'll add to that.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: On the record. Robert, I'm the Vice Chair of the School District. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, members of Senate. Thank for having me here today. So I'm gonna just talk

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: a bit about more of

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: the boundaries there. So we look at SSWareford District School District. We are a testament to the consolidation back for six, ten years ago, we consolidated. We were three towns. We came together. We merged our government structures. We merged our kitchens. We were different. We were surprising union back then. We became surprising district. We became cohesive district that serves 4,000 students. We're the second largest district in the state currently. When we thought about rightsizing, we've done that work. We've already been there. Then, you know, the districts around us, as Robert mentioned, you know, Senator Ram Hinsdale, her district, CVU, MMU, have all done the same work that we've done today. With that, we'll about the boundary maps. I know that the concerns were up on the surprise of the unions. Appreciate the work done with that there. I think the concern for us is, again, the unknown area, which is the gray area which involves us. From our perspective, when we look at Chittenden County, we look at the districts there, we prefer to look, we prefer the option that Representative Collins put the table for our area because it does, it starts with a more grounded point for us, for the work that we've done since today in the last ten years post at 46. When we look at what is in the current map right now in the gray areas, we understand again, and I again wanna give a lot of credit. There's a lot of intentional thoughtful work that was put into the supervising units, listening to folks on the ground, listening to local community members, and the concerns they had. Our concern is that we feel like we are not getting that same treatment when we talk about our areas of Washington County, here in Washington, along with Addison, Franklin County as well too. Those counties represent 36,000 students in our state. That's about 40% of the students, you know, that could call the school here in Vermont. That's a large amount of students that are not being represented in that map. And if it was on that alone, it wouldn't be a concern, but we've seen this now for the third time. Senator Beck's map that was during the task force, put us in a large district that was, you know, unfairly larger than other other areas that was put aside. The governor's original plan has a district that was two times the size of any other district in the state. So, when we see, you know, high performing districts that are continually kind of being put in this blob and being asked to do a lot more than other districts across the state, it doesn't feel like it's being intentional. It feels like it's, what I should say, it feels like it's being intentionally disproportional to us and the work that's being done and the work that we've done to date. So that's the

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: concern we have. How is your district? Our district

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: right now is 3,600

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: students. So you're kind of the Yeah, in that 2,004

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: ranges that Colin talked about. And so that's the kind of our CT students, which again, are co located with our high school, that we're supposed to be 4,000 with them. So what we're proposing is a hybrid approach. It's looking at the map you created that is listening to folks in rural areas in the state there for supermarkets unions, while also taking in the best pieces that are in the House plan that actually listen to the districts that have already done consolidation ten years ago of our Voices and there are high performing districts today. So with that, again, acknowledging the current scale, that 2,004 level, which again, most of our districts fit that right now, the Supervisory Union scale, Collins hit that the same way for us in Virginia County and Nassau County as well as Southern Franklin County. Respecting the identity of the districts right now. We've talked about supporting the who provides the cost savings, nobody wants see negative districts. We want see disproportionate large districts that again take away the liberal control, which again, the supervising unions were trying to preserve, and we feel like that's trying to be taken away from us in current proposals right now for the supervising districts for the 17 that remain outside of that area. Again, protect representation, Chittenden County accounts for one fourth of students in this state, over 20,000 students, and it feels like a lot of times these big proposals that come from the high levels, we've been left out in the polls, or we've been shoved together and basically have ignored the fact that again, we are a very diverse area in the state. When you look at diversity across the state, the areas in that block covered most of it, the other outside areas would be in Windham and Wayne Bravo Counties. Those areas would be, sorry, Windsor and Brownville Counties, those areas would be the areas that happened, but I was correct. The person who was Windham, not Boise or an apologist there, Senator. So that's the piece for us there. I won't go too deep into it, but again, another piece we want to push to is the C sub models. Again, we think that there's a lot of work to be done there that will also create economies by scale. I know our Secretary of Education has talked about or concerns about that there, but here's the thing about it. We talked about the foundation formula, which is used by 40 states in the country. Over 40 states in the country also use a version of CESAs, some called BOCES, some called RESAs, but again, those are designed to basically take some of the big costs off the transportation, transportation services, as my chair talked about, IT services, sometimes purchasing. That allows economies of scale and allows the districts at the local level to actually be able to do the biggest thing we need to do, which is to serve students. Again, I want to make it really clear for the conclusion that EWSD we represent is not anti reform. We definitely want to see change at the state that are going to create economies of scale and also be affordable and cognizant of our taxpayers' profits. All we just ask is that we, as districts in Chittenden County and districts in that gray area are part of that conversation. We look at both maps together and try to find the best of both worlds to reach that point because the bottom line, what we all wanna do is educate and support students. That is our goal. So with that, I want to thank you all for taking some time with us here. Both of are happy to answer questions that

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: you may have. So one of the things I hear you saying is, what you're suggesting is, don't make this merger more already at scale. Correct.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: We've done the work. We've been there. And I'll give you an example here, Senator. So we've in a district since 2017, the 2017. I've been on the board now for little four years now, and we, last month, were still approving infrastructure measures for IT and for phone services, for example, to still merge our district. We've been the district for almost a decade, and we're still doing the work to get our district completely merged because we still have systems that are different in our two middle schools, which are two different towns, and we're still doing that work today. I know other districts in Chittenden County and other current districts are still doing the same thing. I know supervised youth have talked about, as I think testimony they've seen, that they're still combining pay scales for support staff and teacher contracts right now today, and they've been in districts for ten years. So these are things that we're always concerned about because, again, as you know, even though I appreciate the three year kind of layout there to get to that next level, you're still looking another decade for those districts to actually get to where they need to be. So we're talking thirteen to fifteen years down the road, those districts to finally probably merge, and we know that because we've seen that in the current districts today in

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: the state. What what towns are in your district?

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: We have Estes Junction, Estes Town, and Westford. So in our two towns, Estes Town is about 11,000 members. SS Junction is about 10.5, and then Westport's about 2,000 people. So overall, we serve shy of 4,000 students, so we have about 2,200 members in our community. We also serve students on the Highlands, in Southern Grand Allis, South Peoria area. Students come from there. We also get some students from choice to come from Colchester and Leptonsville, too.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: You said that there was 600 or older. I thought already saying, I thought

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: I'd go to the CE portion too. K-twelve. Yes, pre K-twelve, yes.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Pre K-twelve, K-twelve, K-twelve, yes.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: How many stools in your testing?

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: Absolutely. So elementary stools, we have five. Have two stool. We have two, a k through two in the junction. We have a three through five as well in the junction. Same configuration in the town, and then we have a k through five in Westward because they're smaller. And then we have two middle schools, one in town, one in the junction, and then a high school, and the high school is called located MCT.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: So a single high school. Correct. Okay.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: But I'm really happy to hear your endorsement of OC seesaw models. We agree, it's why we passed the law. I came out of this room, it's a great thing.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: I've been to other states, I've seen it, it's seen it

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: work well. Why, here's the question. Sure. Why hasn't the ST to this point initiated a, what's the right word, an affiliation of like minded districts for the BOCES model?

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: That's a good question. So at least I would say this, here's the big thing right now. Our staff, again, consolidated, done a lot of work. COVID obviously slowed everything down there. There is some work between districts. Our special education director, she works with Seth Birlington with Burlington of the CBU, so there's been talks there. There has been some shared services. We actually combined and brought in special education services in house so that we can actually support students there and actually have a couple of slots open for other districts. They haven't taken advantage of that just yet. So there has been some talks there, but here's the problem. Again, they're serving our students right now. They're meeting needs, and so even our district staff right now, who has been pared down, it's a big ask to ask them to go to start pre insulceness. We just want field feedback. Absolutely. I think, again, I think that's where we need support from above to be able to have that support from AOE or from, you know, even, you know, whatever county governments, but we have something like that along, that would make that transition to BOCES much easier for districts like ours. And again, we're a big district, and we struggle with it. I can't even imagine what small rural districts on the other side of state were keeping with it. Again, I know it's the one in the Southeast part of the state. I commend them for getting it together. It is not easy talking with the folks there in the past year. They've done a lot of work, and it's, again, really, really hard to pull together when you're also doing day

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: to day work with the district. Good, thank you. I appreciate you.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: Senator Hinsdale. You said Westford, they're running what for school? K through five. K through five.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: They were K through eight last year, and you probably saw in the news, we actually consolidated that and moved their kids to our middle school next

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: to And is that school running under efficiency, or is it Westford

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: or the other town? Westford. Yes, right now there is some space that we're talking about utilizing for other areas, maybe increased pre K services there, maybe some other, our CT right now is lacking at space right now, and so we've turned away from students that want to be part of CT across the other superintendents and chairs in Chittenden County, so we thought it would be even less space out there at Westford to use that empty space right now that don't have those sixth grade students there, maybe for that for CPE. So right now, it is working at scale at the moment. We do have space there that we can utilize for other things that we have been putting off for years because we have enough space up this morning. For our Westward students moving to the town, it has increased opportunities for them. They have access to lot more sports because, again, they were having to do co mingled grades, configurations for sports and for actual activities. Now they're able to do that with grade appropriate at the middle school, and they have access to probably about three or four times the amount of activities and sports prior to what they had with Westbrook last year.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: I'll fart one more out. Just wanna make sure this gets us get out of here real estate.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: I'm happy to take a look at that. So

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: we've had some conversations in here about whether a superintendent what what's more relevant? The number of students that they have in their district, whether or union or whatever, whether it be schools. So you have five. It's five principles. Some of our smaller, some of our more rural areas of the state have potentially have same number of students, but there's there's 20 schools or thereabouts, fifteen, twenty, something like that. Point is, what's more relevant to a superintendent? Number of students or the number of schools? Where are they leading? Students or principals?

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: That's a that's a hard question to ask, and here's the problem. I would say, initially, we have less number of schools, we have more students in those rooms. That's a big difference. And that's the difference right there. I think that if you ask our superintendent, he came from Delaware. He was Secretary of Education in Delaware prior to that he was a superintendent, and he was in the biggest district in Delaware, about three times the size of our current district. The one thing he's told us is that one of the reasons why he wanted to come to us was that with so many schools and so geographically separated, he was unable to get to those schools very often. He lost that direct contact with them. Well, his only contact was with the principals versus being in the schools, seeing the students, talking to teachers, talking to support staff and getting to know them. In the six months he's with us so far, he has hit every school multiple times, sometimes all of them in the same week, and as he said that having that direct connection, hearing on the ground from staff, it's built better relationships with staff, students, and with parents, and he's able to, in real time, make changes and adjustments that have happened not just at one school, but at district level, by being able to be a part of that system and be able to answer their needs. And again, we lost students in every school. But because of that, because again, we're lucky because we're in a smaller geographic area, but everybody, again, a lot of students, he is able to get in there and talk with staff almost daily. We're doing negotiations right now, and staff members who are with them right now know him intimately because they've had a chance to work for over six months. And that has been a big difference for us. And I think in that instance, think the students is key. It's that ground truth that's not as hard again when you don't get to school once or twice a year when he's able to get there almost weekly and no one thing will change in real time. We hear concerns at the board, and you've probably heard the board stop about that when they hear concerns from community members. Our secretary knows about it because he's already been in contact with staff and he's already there addressing the situation. He loves the ability to be hands on and being at every level. He said this right now has been extremely satisfying for him at the level we are right now because it works. Doesn't feel like a school is losing out on his expertise there, principals can be very supportive because they're able to immerse with him multiple times a week, it works for us. And again, I know it's a hard thing to do as a supervisee unit because you have to pay a lot for schools there. And again, I know there's a local control there, there's lot more levels there that earns a difference for us. But I'll say this for our district, and I know I can speak for the other supervisor districts in our area in groups, students and the staff they'll connect with.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Good, it wasn't a right or wrong answer.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: No, I appreciate that, and it's not a one size fits all. Every community has different needs, and I think it's really, again, it comes down to it. What does the community want? Our community told us that that's what they wanted last year when we were looking for a superintendent, and we brought in a person that fit the community need, and it's been a perfect message.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Yes. So, I heard some figures thrown out if we go with the current proposed funding formula. You're to lose $6,000,000 for special understand that?

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: Probably just a little better if I can answer this one.

[Robert Carpenter — Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: So there's there's a maintenance of effort requirement that the federal government has. So for instance, if we spent 6 if we spent, say, $10,000,000 this year on special education, the federal government requires us to spend that same amount next year on students. It's so that we don't undercut students. So if we said, oh, we're having a shortfall. Let's just remove a bunch of special educators. The federal government then removes your federal funding. So that $6,000,000, if we're underfunded by $6,000,000, if we don't maintain that same amount of funding for special ed, the federal government, we then no longer meet that requirement. So they would pull back $1,400,000 from our district, and we would not be eligible for that money anymore.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: What does that mean for the whole state? I mean, is it statewide would be

[Robert Carpenter — Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: So that number, I actually don't know off the top of my head. I I can get that information for you, because our special ed director has been talking to other special ed directors at other schools to see what the individual impact is, but I know there's not been an analysis of statewide what that maintenance of effort fund would be. It it'd be significant for our

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: students.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Do you have that many Do you have significantly more special ed students in other districts? We serve some

[Robert Carpenter — Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: of the highest quantity of special ed students. I know even this year our number go ahead.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: No, since about onethree, I think about 31% when we looked at our last numbers

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: I heard of all your students are special ed.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: That were on IEP. So when we're talking about specialist needs, we're talking IEP, so it can be very, the needs can be very light. Can be very heavy with therapeutic services, which require a lot of outside placement. So again, we've got specialized, very wide spectrum. And some students, basically they might just sneeze all these, maybe a one on paraffin a little while in class that still allows them be there. Others who need, you know, basically, need special services that

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: they can't get in a regular classroom and need to

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: be reversed again. Live inspection. But all those students, all other special

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: patients. Right.

[Sen. David Weeks — Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Might be good to, Jay,

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: to vote and

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: Yeah. Be advised

[Sen. David Weeks — Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee]: for that question and also to the whole state as to what the implications might be.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: I mean, kind of funny. I don't know if it's been caught or not, but

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: we we are caught about it.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: It is a fear for every district right down my head. We hear it every day.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: We know about that.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Know about the maintenance of effort. That's a concern. May I interrogate my colleague? So,

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: but is the concern about the the the foundation funding with the special education roll up is not sufficient to fund? No. My concern is if if we went with the or and it was a one state, you know, contract for special ed. Maybe separate funding could be available so that because we we don't wanna hamstring our school districts for sure. Well, I'm just concerned. I'm just trying to unpack. When you say a million dollars to me, my my eyes roll black like that because I'm I'm talking about pathology.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: That's a process devastating. No. No matter no matter if they're a special education or not.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: So, alright. Should I have one more? So, are

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: you a high spending district?

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: Our right now is no, we're not. We again, that's the custody bait. We right now, I believe we're, well, we're good about $300 and that's appropriate for the average for the state right now?

[Robert Carpenter — Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: Correct. Yep.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: Yeah. So we're below the state average I've ever heard

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: for this decade. If I

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: could just make a observation, might be appropriate at some point to hear a high spending director coming here and tell us what their fears are given your foundation formula. That would be enlightening from a completely different perspective because we don't live in that environment. Yeah.

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: And our

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: districts in in Wellington District are

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: a

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: lot of the positive $500 Yeah. So they're very low spending.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: Yeah, you're one of the lowest. Yep.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: And they're concerned.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: Yeah.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Yep. And I think the suggestion of Senator Hashim to be a JF on that will to explore what this might mean for some districts because they probably have that. So for a number of reasons, a couple of, a few schools has been really helpful testimony. And thank you. And the only thing I do want to say, with Matt, it wasn't to ignore this area. It was to let you figure it out without us trying to

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: I appreciate it. Our concern was the idea that we're gonna go from 17 to nine. I'm like, there's a number between that seventeen and

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: nine, I think that would work.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: There's definitely some areas that are like for some consolidation. And there are other districts where there's no logical path. That was our concern, which we wanted to come talk to

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: you guys. Had the opportunity. So your testimony is, number one, I've got to go back and look at the number of students into those districts and think about that again. And then the other part though is just to really think about which districts really make sense the way they are and okay that's good that's good and helpful testimony.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: Thank you Mr. Chair thank you members thank you all for your time I appreciate it.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Next time you can relax because we're

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: just beat up. No worries, I appreciate that.

[Marlon Varasami — Vice Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: I'll go far enough there, I appreciate it, so thank you for that, yes. Thank you, man.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: So, Joe, from the Stratton School District. You familiar there? There you are, yeah. To keep waiting for a couple hours here, but yeah.

[Joseph (Joey) Frigo — Co-Chair, Stratton School Board]: Well, I got some other things done in the meantime, so no problem. I feel bad for you guys, but thank you for having me today. So my name is Joseph Frigo, and I'm the co chair of the Stratton School Board. On behalf of the board, I I just wanted to come today to testify in in full support of the Senate Education Committee Chairs, Seth Bongartz proposed maps, which includes Stratton, finally, with the other mountain towns in the Greater Manchester region. This is something that we've been pushing for since Act 73 kind of came out, and it's undoubtedly clear that the changes in this educational landscape in Vermont are a necessity. And we're appreciative as a board of all the hard work that you've been doing to ensure that the landscape improves for all Vermonters. In the midst of the statewide planning processes, we think it's, you know, it's important to recognize that small towns and non operating districts such as ours in Stratton can often be forgotten, and we just wanna commend senator Bongartz proposal for for listening to our town's voice. So that's been something that we've been really doing our best to put out there into the community and and outwardly into the state. So we've done that through open town meetings at Leland and Gray and, again, at Rutland, discussions within our community in Stratton, and also by looking at the data. So if if you take a minute to look at our data, as far as where we send our students as a non operating district, it's it's blatantly clear that our students and families center is the Greater Manchester region and and not that of Brattleboro or Springfield or Bennington. Our town has a unique geography, and and one there's really only one major road connecting our small town to the others in the area. And so the map really reflects kind of this understanding of this unique geography as well as our our rich tradition with an affiliation with Manchester and the other mountain towns. We think that this map proposes a path forward that merges some of our small nonoperating districts, but it also really maintains the educational opportunities that our students and families have valued for really generations. So this is an example to provide some some context to some of that data. So if you looking back at our enrollment data over the past eight years, for grades nine through 12, families in the town of Stratton overwhelmingly chose to send their students to schools in the grand Greater Manchester region, rather than elsewhere. So currently, less than 5% of our students in this age group, again, grades nine through 12, attend schools outside of of Manchester in the Mountain Town region. So that's 0.5% of students over those eight years attending Leland and Gray and Townsend, but 4445% attending Burn Burton and SMS respectively. Our younger students, same narrative is true. Many of our families live closer to Stratton Mountain, right along Mountain Road, kinda heading north and to the west, where we see our students attending schools in Manchester or in Windham, like the Mount School of Windham, rather than traveling south or east. We think that the map that as it's currently proposed would allow for continued access to these schools that have, again, served our families for generations and preserve our students important right to the educational opportunities that their siblings or even their parents and even their grandparents have had. So, yeah, I guess just overall, we we feel valued and seen by the proposal. And, you know, on behalf of our small town, just wanna really express a sense of thanks for taking into account kind of the the unique geography, the educational traditions presented here. So it definitely embodies the voices of not just Stratton, but I think many of the small and non operating towns like us across the state. I'm just recognizing Vermont's unique geography, and we know that it's a challenging thing that you all have at your hand here. So we've already and I just wanted to put out that, you know, we fully support the idea of voluntary mergers and and our our the opportunity to kinda create our own destiny, and so we've already begun conversations with neighboring districts like Windham, and recognizing that, like, a future voluntary mergers with neighboring districts is is not just like a possibility, but a reality. And and we support this reality and want to do our part to ensure the vitality and improvement of Vermont's education system overall. But it's also incredibly important to us and and our duty really to advocate on behalf of our students and families in our rural community to be able to continue to attend those educational institutions that are that are really linked to their region and their home. So in closing, I just want to say thank you for your continued work and, you know, mapping out this future educational landscape. And we just from the school board, we just hope that it it continues to be centered on student well-being, continue you know, considers the new unique geography of our state and preserves the legacy of educational opportunities that have served our students and our communities so well for generations. So thank you. Happy to answer questions if you have any and

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: So thank you, Joey. The takeaway I have from your testimony, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that we need to respect where non operating districts now send their students. We need to respect that historical exercise of your towns. Is that Sure.

[Joseph (Joey) Frigo — Co-Chair, Stratton School Board]: Yeah. I think that, you know, putting something into ArcGIS might, you know, give you a certain number as far as the crow flies. Right? But the the geography of Vermont is actually much more unique. And so, you know, by looking at, you know, I think in some of the past map proposals, right, it's understood how one could potentially associate Stratton, right, with towns to the East or to the South. But the reality is is that our cultural center is not there at all, nor have our students or families commuted in that direction, really, you know, not only just over the past eight years, but but ever. So, you know, I think that element of, like, understanding Vermont's geographical uniqueness, as well as those long standing traditions, right, are what give our students at these educational opportunities that they can really prosper from, whether that's attending a great college, having the opportunity to engage in the arts or sports. There's a number of of benefits that by eliminating their opportunity to attend these schools from non operating districts, put at risk, right? So, as we work to improve Vermont's educational system, I think it's important that we also recognize the risks at play here, too.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Thank you, Yeah, thank you. Well, thank you. That was very crisp, so thanks.

[Joseph (Joey) Frigo — Co-Chair, Stratton School Board]: Sounds good. Thank you. Thanks for having me.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: It looks like we're now understanding some of the wisdom of the chair's mouth, especially his neck and woods and white positioning.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Cheerleader.

[Joseph (Joey) Frigo — Co-Chair, Stratton School Board]: All right.

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: Thank you, guys.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: You're welcome to stay on and listen if you want to, but we have one more. Cindy Lemore?

[Sen. David Weeks — Vice Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Sounds good.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Cindy, see you're there. There you are.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: Turn on your volume.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: We can't hear you.

[Cindy Lemore — Stanford/Reedsboro area witness (Windham Southwest SU)]: How's that? Now

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: we can hear you.

[Cindy Lemore — Stanford/Reedsboro area witness (Windham Southwest SU)]: Okay. Thank you so much, gentlemen. You've had a long day. I appreciate your time and your energy, especially with the proposal of the redistricting map that you worked so hard on but definitely proof that too many cooks spoiled the previous pot. This, I wanted to speak to you today about the redistricting of the sample in Reedsboro in the new format. Our town's economic base is really reliant on Massachusetts for employment, for health care, grocery shopping, places of worship. Just within the last year, we've had our local Catholic church closed, so it's more important than ever to go find these sources as close as possible to home. Parents mostly work in Massachusetts, so they're able easily to attend after school programs, especially sporting events, help their students grow and be there for them in their shining moments. The extended travel time for students to participate in after school sports, should we be put in the Bennington area, it could jeopardize the time and the distance for traveling back and forth. Some students would be prohibited from attending after school curricular activities because of transportation issues. Parents wouldn't be as easily afforded the opportunity to be on the field, watch their children excel. Student needs these opportunities, as you know, it's vital to their high school experiences, especially for those that are better at sports than there are academics. And there's been several times, three times, that Stanford's been deemed geographically isolated. Cited them in my report, The title 16 chapter 37, subject to section 13 or fifteen thirty one paragraph c. There was a consultant study in 2012 and another study under secretary Dan French in 2018. All all the citations prove, that we have a very unique situation, with our road structure, mountains, and it reinforces that our need to continue, with a school choice for all our students as as well as, to continue in with the Windham South, District. We've seen, the people talk about the local voice, but we feel it's local voices and just limited to community members. Local voice also for us entails our supervisory union. We've had the supervisory union under our new superintendent Bill Basic. We've seen so many improvements. We've tried to reorganize and modernize, and we've been working together with staff to achieve these efficiencies. And we know the people that we're working with, and we feel that those are a vital important part of our educational community for support for our youngsters, especially in these times. We've been working so closely together. Improving governance should be mindful of the current structure of education and special education, placing Stanford and Reedsboro and Southwest Supervisory Union could inhibit the delivery of special education services for our students. Given the specialists would travel further over mountainous roads or have to loop down into Massachusetts, Adding time to schedules and more than likely taking the time away from the student needs because of the extra travel. And currently Stanford and Reedsboro are in talks to voluntarily merge in response to restructuring needs. At the annual town meeting on Monday, Reedsboro School will be asking the community to vote to authorize school closure of their pre K through six elementary school and become a non operational district. We will work together to support the town of Reedsboro, and we have had preliminary talks with them. For solution in it to become form manager.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: You have a clarifying question, Jake, so hang on a second.

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Thank you, Mr. Chair. So Cindy, I'm a little confused because in paragraph two, you're recommending to remain part of the proposed South or Windham South SU, but in the third paragraph and then the following paragraph, she's saying it should be placed in the Bennington area as you I'm kinda wondering which way you're leaning.

[Cindy Lemore — Stanford/Reedsboro area witness (Windham Southwest SU)]: I I I I think I probably were was confusing in my wording because in the third paragraph it said should we be placed in the Bennington area would make family participation harder. So no, that's not the direction we want to go.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Cindy, just to make sure everybody understands this, I know your area well, of course. So you're at your own little supervisory union now, right?

[Cindy Lemore — Stanford/Reedsboro area witness (Windham Southwest SU)]: Correct.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Yeah, with the two towns and Our

[Cindy Lemore — Stanford/Reedsboro area witness (Windham Southwest SU)]: supervisor of the union is Whitington, Reidsboro, Halifax, Stanford, and Searsburg nonoperational.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: The, the road runs north south from Greensboro, Stamford, down into Massachusetts. And so, and there's a mountain to get over to Bennington, so that's not practical by any stretch of the imagination. The Woodford Mountain, to send the kids over to Woodford Mountain.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: And

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Thank then you, on the other side, you have, I know that those two towns, Greensboro and Stamford, really are more, they're almost part of Massachusetts, as much as they are as a lot, just because that's the way the travel flows, work, where people go to work and where your kids have always gone to school. Yes. Right? That's what's going on there. So, so whichever SU you end up in, your real point, I think, is that you maintain the ability for your kids to go to school in Massachusetts, right?

[Cindy Lemore — Stanford/Reedsboro area witness (Windham Southwest SU)]: Yes, Senator. It would be a a considerable hardship to all of a sudden have to redirect everybody north. Transportation being the major factor, but of course not allowing parents really much participation at all.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: And so your second level, if I understand it right, is you're saying that rather than be in the Southwest Vermont Supervisory Union, would make, if you were going to be in the SU, it would make more sense for you to be in the Windham South. That's

[Cindy Lemore — Stanford/Reedsboro area witness (Windham Southwest SU)]: correct. Yes.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: So your signature would be to change those colors, the beige color on this map here, to blue for those two towns.

[Carolyn Picasio — Director of Library Services, Kellogg-Hubbard Library (Montpelier)]: I would love that if

[Cindy Lemore — Stanford/Reedsboro area witness (Windham Southwest SU)]: you got your crayons out and made that happen. He's very, very happy. It it really is an important part of both our towns and especially where Reesboro is now looking at their I mean, they're right on the precipice of not having a school. And from what we've been talking with community members and board members that they really want to keep the group, like the students coming into Stanford and keeping that community base coming up for the parents.

[Robert Carpenter — Chair, Essex Westford School District Board]: Yeah.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: That's okay. The

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: first person to say, we'll have you not the almost third, but switch districts. So that's what we're looking for today. And we hear you.

[Cindy Lemore — Stanford/Reedsboro area witness (Windham Southwest SU)]: Thank you. Thank you very, very much. I know that was the first phase is to fix those boundaries. And if we can fix this allow the boundary to be more easier for everyone to navigate and for the services and for the transportation and we would be much appreciative. I mean, it's a fabulous job you did. Absolutely. And kudos to all of you and for your hard work that continue also the education for months. Kids.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Guarantees. Okay. What do say? No guarantees. Okay. Finger under advisement. Okay. So Reedsboro is going voting on Camp Meeting Day. Right?

[Cindy Lemore — Stanford/Reedsboro area witness (Windham Southwest SU)]: Yes. On Monday. So we're all kind of a little hesitant as which direction that's gonna go. It was a close vote last year because they had already brought it up to a town vote last year, but they continue on and there's 37 children in school and they know that they can't continue along those lines.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Okay, thank you.

[Cindy Lemore — Stanford/Reedsboro area witness (Windham Southwest SU)]: Thank you, senators. Thank you very much. I appreciate your time. Have a good day.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: So we pushed off the project agenda tomorrow.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: 02/27.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Yeah. So we have a new draft though. Mhmm. I had two drafts before we saw we never saw the middle one. Have a new draft for tomorrow.

[Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Do you want me to say to VAP if they have a comment on sentence to just email it to us? Sure. Okay.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Yeah. Or if they want to get on that they wanna testify. Either way.

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: You had some really good support there. Mhmm. Gotta make

[Sen. Nader Hashim — Member, Senate Education Committee]: Oh, you said it's the agenda.

[Sen. Seth Bongartz — Chair, Senate Education Committee]: Yeah. It's great. Makes it easy.

[Rep. Earl Olsen — Vermont House (Addison County; Starksboro/Lincoln area)]: It's a good

[Sen. Terry Williams — Clerk, Senate Education Committee]: way to end. Great to look forward to.