Upcoming events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11, 18, 19

Experiences with Act 153 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

DALE continued on page 4

In June of 2010, Act 153 became law in Vermont. It includes three major provisions that create possible pathways forward for major changes in Vermont’s education governance, including:

Creation of a structure and incentives for voluntary mergers of school districts;• Consolidation of specifi c services and duties under the superintendent;• Assistance for the creation of joint service agreements among supervisory • unions;

VERMONT SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION PERSPECTIVES ON ACT 153By Steve Dale, VSBA Executive Director

This issue of From the Boardroom has a primary focus on Act 153. Act 153 was passed in the spring of 2010 as an alternative to “forced consolidation” of school districts. It requires some services to be delivered through the supervisory union structure, but most importantly, it outlines a blueprint for voluntary mergers and for combining services within and between supervisory unions.

In this edition, we include articles from policy makers, board members, and administrators. We have received submissions from districts which have completed plans for merger and from those who have looked at the process and decided not to move forward.

The VSBA is pleased to provide this kind of a forum for the sharing of ideas, perspectives, and experiences related to this law. A VSBA perspective is shown below, authored by Executive Director Steve Dale. Beyond that article, VSBA does not endorse any of the other positions, but rather welcomes the rich diversity of opinions and experiences which are refl ected here.

It is our hope that all members of the broader education community in Vermont will engage in a deep dialogue about education focused on increasing student opportunity, realizing increased effi ciencies, and maintaining deep community commitment to the education of our children. Act 153 has created options and incentives. Each community must decide how best to respond.

Vermont School Boards Association April 2011

Fromthe

h Boardroo

Vermont School Boards Ass

2

The House Education Committee has proposed legislation to create an Agency of Education, under the control of a gover-nor-appointed Secretary of Education. It would also create a modifi ed State Board of Education with no powers except to articulate a vision for public education. Enactment of this legislation will result in a direct shift of power over public educa-tion in Vermont from the State Board of Education to the Governor in the person of his appointed Secretary. It is hard to justify this transfer of power.

The governor is quoted indicating his desire to place control of public education into the hands of the executive branch: “I have a totally different philosophy, and I’m working with someone else’s infra-structure.”

The Chair of the House Education Com-mittee asks, “Is there something wrong with politics?” to justify the power give-away in this bill.

Arguments against the bill are many and deeply rooted in facts. A history of edu-cational excellence in Vermont supports leaving the Commissioner and Depart-ment of Education outside of the direct control of the Governor.

Under H.440, the board and commis-sioner would serve at the pleasure of the Governor, which places direct partisan pressure on these individuals to act and speak in concert with the Governor or

risk replacement. Vermont leaders thought care-fully about the struc-ture they put in place when they designed the current model and the purpose of the leg-islation was clear in

its intent to remove partisanship from those making important educational decisions.

The current model of governance through the State Board of Education was estab-lished in 1914 by the Legislature. The Legislature engaged the Carnegie Foun-dation which produced a report advocating the current structure; the Legislature itself wrote the bill that created the State Board. The preamble of which states in part:

“Above all, such an organization will be of advantage because it takes educa-tion in Vermont out of politics, and this action alone enormously increases the opportunity both for education freedom and educational sincerity.”

And concludes:“No measure which the legislature of Vermont has ever been called upon to consider has greater possibilities for good than are contained in this bill.”

Separating the governance of education from partisan politics is crucial to maintain-ing a quality education for our students. In fact this is the most prevalent model of governance with thirteen states using this model in 2011.

Currently Vermont schools benefi t from statewide deliberation over rules, policy and finance which include taxpayers, parents, local boards as well as the State Board, the Department of Education and the Legislature and Governor. While

RULES continued on page 3

H.440 – NO SOLUTION

3

Editor: David Cyprian email: dcyprian@vtvsba.orgLayout: Kerri Lamb email: klamb@vtvsba.orgArticles printed represent diverse points of view and may be controversial in nature. It is the belief of the Association that the democratic process functions best through discussions which challenge and stimulate thinking on the part of the reader. Therefore, materials published present the ideas/beliefs of those who write them and are not necessarily the views or policies of the VSBA unless so stated. This newsletter is distributed at no charge to all members of the Association. Contact the Association by calling 802-223-3580.

333

Want more?

www.vtvsba.orgVisit the VSBA website to fi nd...

Best Practices showcase featur-• ing money and time saving sug-gestions from school throughout Vermont;Streaming videos on varying • topics;Examples of governance study • documents;Legislative information;• Teacher negotiation data;• School model policies;• Member to Member page where • you can ask and/or answer questions anonymously.

sometimes frustrating this deliberation en-sures thoughtful action and prevents sud-den or dictatorial change. It is not a part of Vermont’s tradition to centralize power in one person as this bill envisions.

Most important is the effect of governance on student success. Vermont has always ranked well among states for its success-ful public education. The 2006 – 2007 Morgan Quitno study of state education systems measures 21 indicators of suc-cess for public school systems. Of top ten school systems as ranked by Morgan Quitno, the top 3 state systems (Vermont, Massachusetts and Connecticut) use our current model of governance. None of the ten have governance as outlined in H.440.

This data suggests that our current gov-ernance structure is strong and has led to positive results.

The VSBA supports the aspects of the bill which strengthen the composition of the State Board of Education to ensure rep-resentation with experience and interest in Vermont’s excellent public education system. However, the VSBA and I both oppose the appointment of the Commis-sioner by the Governor, as we believe this would damage the current system which encourages deliberative interaction between executive, legislative, state, local governance and citizen interests in guiding Vermont’s public schools.

The need for H.440 is not supported by facts. It would have a negative impact on local control which has created Vermont’s top place in public education, it is a rush to solve a problem which does not exist, and it should not be supported as proposed.

Roberts is the president of the Vermont School Boards Association.

RULES continued from page 2

4

The 2011 Legislature has made clear its expectation that schools take this op-portunity very seriously in an attempt to create improved educational opportunity for students while decreasing the costs of providing educational services.

All supervisory union boards were required to discuss these issues by December 15, 2010. Currently, approximately one-third of Vermont’s school districts and one-half of all su-pervisory unions are actively engaged in considering oppor-tunities made avail-able by Act 153, with two groups in the process of moving formal proposals to the voters of their dis-tricts for the creation of regional education districts. (See page 9 for a breakdown of these activities.)

This article is designed to clarify the posi-tion of the VSBA relative to Act 153 and to outline how the VSBA can support implementation.

VSBA Underlying AssumptionsThe VSBA believes that local “owner-ship” of Vermont schools has contributed to Vermont’s educational system being, by most measures, among the best in the country. Voluntary efforts under Act 153 must engage communities in looking deeply at how best to increase opportunity, control costs, and maintain community ownership.

The nature of education is changing dra-matically in the information age. Educa-tion is no longer confi ned to the four walls of a schoolhouse and our connections are no longer limited to our town or state.

Students have unprecedented access to information. Learning opportunities must be individualized to meet the needs of a wide array of students. School boards and citizens must engage in envisioning the future of education to ensure our students are well prepared for a constantly chang-ing society and world of work.

In the midst of these global trends what makes Vermont special is small size, hu-

man scale, com-munity relation-ships, and deep commitment to place and to our natural environ-ment. Vermont’s school boards must be strong forces for main-

taining deep community ownership of the education of children while expanding opportunities for students, all in the con-text of an environment with constrained resources.

Although school board members are elected to focus on the education of children in a particular geographic area, all board members must be concerned about the children in adjoining towns and throughout Vermont.

While fully supporting the Act 153 ap-proach, VSBA strongly rejects proposals that would arbitrarily collapse and con-solidate school districts. These types of proposals turn our attention away from educating students and toward structural changes that devalue local ownership capable of responding to distinct condi-tions and needs that exist in our schools and towns.

The keys to effective education are qual-ity and continuity of leadership, quality of teachers, engagement of families, com-

DALE continued from page 1

“Voluntary efforts under Act 153 must engage communities in looking deeply at how best to increase opportunity, control costs, and maintain community ownership.”

5

munity ownership of educational services, and the breadth and depth of opportunities provided to children. Any action taken under Act 153 should further these aims.

Recommendations of VSBAVSBA supports the opportunities provided by Act 153 to examine existing delivery structures for education and to imagine possibilities for expanded learning op-portunities and increased student achieve-ment in an era of diminishing resources and societal change.

Act 153 is not a perfect law, and may need further refi nement to allow the fl ex-ibility that school leaders and voters may desire. However, adjustments are better left to the 2012 Legislature after local dis-tricts have had more chance to consider options and to work with the process for another year.

In 2012, the legislature should consider legislative change in Title 16 § 706b which outlines the process for creating unifi ed school districts. That statute es-tablishes the State Board of Education as the entity that approves governance changes. Because of that, many districts are reluctant to formally establish such committees. They would prefer to have the study process fully under the auspices of the involved local boards until the study is complete and a direction established. A small change in the law could facilitate progress.

The section of Act 153 requiring that certain services and duties be delivered through the supervisory union by July 1, 2012, should be adjusted to move the implementation deadline back to 2013. (This will ensure an orderly transition and will prevent confusion in districts that may be in the midst of researching creation of a Regional Education District or a Super-visory Union Joint Agreement).

VSBA encourages the Department of Education to focus on supporting creative, local Act 153 voluntary merger proposals and to refrain from mandates involving interim superintendents and mandatory governance studies.

VSBA encourages the Vermont Legislature and the State Board of Education to refrain from mandated consolidation activities over the next several years while districts work within the Act 153 structure.

ConclusionChange is inevitable. We need to adapt our education system to new realities. However, every change we make must be focused on improved student opportunity and achievement, continuation of strong community ownership, and effi cient de-livery of educational services. Change should not be driven by arbitrary, bureau-cratic consolidations.

Act 153 provides an impetus for local con-versations throughout Vermont, revisiting the vision for education and discussing organizational changes needed to sup-port the creation of new opportunities for our children. VSBA encourages boards to continue to engage in these conversa-tions. Where it makes sense education-ally, boards are encouraged to consider bold and creative ideas that may result in changing some education governance structures. VSBA is committed to offering consulting services to assist with these processes.

School board members have the op-portunity to set the tone for the ongoing effort to strengthen education in this time of change. Boards are critical civic insti-tutions rightly empowered to ensure that quality education in Vermont is pervasive. The VSBA stands ready to support boards in this ongoing challenge.

6

Act 153 was passed last year to provide incentives for local schools to consider voluntarily merging into larger districts. I recommend that ev-ery school district in the state exam-ine Act 153 to see if their students and communities could benefi t from such a consolidation. I see the potential both for greater effi ciency in how we operate our schools, and for improve-ment to an already strong educational system for our students.

This recommendation is based on over 30 years of experience working in Vermont schools, rural and sub-urban, in different parts of the state, as well as the traveling school visits I have made since becoming Com-missioner. We have one of the more expensive educational systems to op-erate not because we have overpaid teachers or staff, but because our complex system of delivery creates duplication of services.

Our student enrollment statewide is at one of its lowest points in de-cades. Our current enrollment of ap-proximately 89,000 students is down from a high in 1997 of over 106,000 students. When we examine the cur-rent student population and our state birth rates, this decline is projected to continue for several more years.

During this period of decline in our student population over the past 15 years, school staff has increased by about 20 percent. Our student-to-staff ratio is about 4.7 students to every adult. We have many supervisory

unions with full-time superintendents and central offi ces for districts with fewer than 1,000 students. We have 277 district school boards, including many that operate schools with fewer than 100 students. I am not question-ing the sincerity and commitment of school board members around the state, but we need to maximize our investments and share resources in order to meet the needs of students.

Since the passage of Acts 60 and 68, we have moved from a system of funding our schools mostly based on local taxes to one based on state taxes. Currently, statewide school tax dollars are sent to the state Educa-tion Fund, and districts are then paid for the bulk of their local school expenses. This means that local decisions made by one community have consequences for all of us. In my opinion, this is one of the biggest reasons we need to look at a different way of operating our schools.

Vermont has a long-standing tra-dition of local citizens serving on school boards, which I fully support. However, I believe we need to re-view our concept of “local.” I believe in a systems change wherein most of our current districts merge into larger supervisory districts. Elected offi cials from those communities will still be charged with setting the policy and vision for the larger district, but they would have greater resources and more options in terms of hu-man capital and physical space in

Changing Demographics Demand Examination of Educational Delivery

By Commissioner Armando Vilaseca

VILASECA continued on page 10

7

“Today, state offi cials examine school consolidation,” the clock-radio an-nouncer proclaims. Through my half-wakefulness, I think, “Wasn’t that last year’s headline? And wasn’t it the year before, too?” Like the movie, Ground-hog Day, it seems we are doomed to a perpetual purgatory of proposals to consolidate schools.

Over the past century, 20 major task forces have lambasted the “ludicrous, utterly ridiculous and wasteful” super-visory union structure. We tried county systems in the nineteenth century and briefl y did away with supervisory unions in the 1920s. We’ve had pro-posals for 32 districts, 18 units and 8 districts. Governors Hoff, Salmon, Snelling and Kunin all swung and struck out. Yet, today’s supervisory union is remarkably similar to the 1906 edition. For a weak, cumbersome and chaotic system, it has an amazing resilience.

Of course, all the reports about their ineffi ciency were a little bit right. But they were a whole lot wrong when they proposed eliminating citizen governance of their schools. On this point, they all fell.

The recent Council on the Future of Vermont reports that citizens see the school as the heart of their town. They value local schools, in their com-munities, where their children and the town’s children attend together. They value the election of local school board members. They value the ability to be able to call their neighbor to register a concern or a complaint and get something done. They value locally developed school budgets, voted by

them. Whether mega-banks, mega-business or mega-government, peo-ple are wary of distant decisions by far-away people where their voice is lost in voice-mail purgatory. The proposed replacement of school boards with toothless “community school councils” is a pale and wane substitute.

There are 1460 school board mem-bers engaged in the sometimes diffi cult, sometimes cantankerous, business of local government. What good reason exists for eliminating this citizen involvement? If we la-ment the decline of civic engage-ment, then turning boards into neutered “advisory councils” holds little promise for a resurrection of democratic participation.

Vermonters, as well as citizens across the nation, understand that schools are far more than just test scores. They intuitively know what the research says. Small schools raise student achievement, reduce violence and disruption, combat anonymity and isolation, increase attendance and graduation rates, elevate teacher satisfaction, im-prove school climate, operate more cost-effectively, weaken the effects of poverty and increase parent-community involvement. These civic knowledges are vital to the core purposes of schools. Perhaps it is because Vermont schools em-brace these characteristics that our performance is so high, our child well-being measures so positive and our citizens support their school budgets so well.

School Consolidation: Groundhog Day All Over AgainBy William J. Mathis

MATHIS continued on page 11

8

each of the schools and districts within LSSU by Dr. Raymond Proulx. As an out-come of each Board’s thoughtful refl ection on the study, a second study process was initiated which went beyond the data and delved into questions of quality, equity and community values and priorities. This process relied entirely upon the work of a committee of community members and students who represented a variety of stakeholder groups and was facilitated by Dr. Proulx. The committee identifi ed that: (1) the trends were compelling enough that the status quo structure might not meet community expectations for its schools in the future; and, (2) the Regional Education District holds the greatest potential of all of the options studied for enhancing educational quality and effi ciency and also provides some fi nancial incentives.” The RED committee’s work is scheduled to begin in April and conclude by August of 2012.Tracy Wrend, LSSU Superintendent

Experiences with Act 153 From the Boardroom asked local school offi cials to share with us some of their ex-periences working with Act 153 processes. Here is a sampling of the responses we received.

In August of 2009, the dis-tricts of Elmore, Morristown and Stowe began what has become a multi-stage process of exploring op-tions for governance and the future of the schools in the Lamoille South Super-visory Union (LSSU). Since then, changing economic circumstances have added increased urgency and legislative changes have added a new opportunity and incentives. The work has grown into a formal process for exploring what the communities want for the future of public educa-tion in each community, and the opportunity to assess the impact a change in gov-ernance might have.

The process began with commissioning a study of the fi nancial, demographic and school operations of

It is my belief that the primary purpose of Act 153 is to make school districts and supervisory unions func-tion more effectively and more effi ciently from both an educational and a fi scal standpoint. However, as a board member and a resident of Vermont, it appears to me the legislation has fallen short in important areas including school choice, voter participation and opportunities for the students in this State. Act 153 will be a hard sell to my community because of the reasons listed below. Convincing the majority of community members that the interest of the Legisla-ture is only in educational quality, and not just fi scal savings at the state level, will be a challenge. Con-vincing community members a RED Board is a good idea will also be tough. A RED Board could make the ultimate decision on whether a school stays open or closed and it will primarily be comprised of people outside their communities. Small towns will feel they have been left out of the decision making process. Another challenge will be addressing communities that could potentially lose school choice under an Act 153 merger. Parents and community members will feel the State is trying to limit and control the educational choices for their children resulting in limited educational opportunities.

Mary Van Vleck, Sunderland School Board Clerk

9

The member districts of the Addison Central Supervisory Union (ACSU) voted to form a governance study committee in August 2010. Like many districts across the state, most of our schools are experiencing declining enrollments, combined with a growing concern for the cost of education. We have undertaken this re-sponsibility in a thoughtful and deliberate way. The members of the committee have agreed that our recommendation will be primarily derived from the values and priorities of our communities, while also adhering to timely and relevant data regarding educational equity, effi ciency and quality. To that end, our most impor-tant role will be to engage the whole community in a discussion regarding the future of education, early in the process. We have established a website htt p://acsustudycommitt ee.org to educate, inform and, most importantly, provide an ongoing forum for all interested parties to express their opinion, share information and ask questions. Ruth Hardy and Rick Scott, ACSU Study Committee members

EXPERIENCES continued on page 14.

10

which to serve students. For example, Washington Central Supervisory Union (WCSU), which comprises the towns of Calais, East Montpelier, Worchester, Berlin and Middlesex, could transition from a fi ve-district system to a single dis-trict with board representation from each community. Better yet, Montpelier could be included as well, which is geographically surrounded by WCSU.

Please remember that, from a national perspective, these will still be small districts. If mergers occurred statewide along the guidelines I have suggested, no district would be larger than our largest existing district (Burlington). We would go from having 277 districts to somewhere around 40. The number of supervisory offi ces would be reduced by approximately one-third. My Department has calculated that the immediate and ongoing savings in educational expenses would be approxi-mately $20 million a year. By reducing the duplication of services and harnessing joint purchasing power, we could save ad-ditional money every year.

We also need to look realistically at the number of schools we currently operate around the state. We have more than 50 schools with fewer than 60 students, and most of their populations continue to drop. These small schools contribute to Vermont’s distinction as having the small-est student-to-staff ratio in the country. If we increased our ratio by a fraction (from 4.7:1 to 4.9:1), taxpayers could save ap-proximately $23 million annually.

Act 153 is not intended to close schools – it offers incentives for increasing district size and looking at different ways of delivery education. In fact, Act 153 actually offers protections for small schools by guaran-teeing that they remain open for a set period (the default is four years) unless the town where the school is located agrees to closure. However, I believe we cannot take school consolidation off the table. We do need to look at it on a district-by-district basis and make sensible decisions based on local conditions.

If we can fi nd effi ciencies in education, we can improve the overall fi scal condition of the state without reducing the breadth of educational services that we provide chil-dren. We can improve the outcomes for our students and meet the changing fi scal realities in our state, not by watching our small schools and districts die a death by a thousand cuts, but by systemic, thoughtful sharing of resources.

Act 153 is a great start but the work has just begun. I would like to see a long-term, systemic, conscious, data-driven process to move us closer to a better, more ef-fi cient and potentially less costly system to organize our schools based on 21st century ideas, not those that were con-ceived in the 1800’s.

Armando Vilaseca is Vermont’s Com-missioner of Education.

VSBA SURVEYNew VSBA Executive Director, Steve Dale is engaging in a thorough as-sessment of VSBA to help the VSBA board plan the future direction for the organization. Part of the assessment has involved meeting with boards and individual board members. Another part will be drawn from a survey. The survey has been sent to all school board chairs in Vermont. We are asking that board chairs place the survey on the agenda for an upcoming meeting to respond as a group. If no meeting time is available during the survey period, the chair can respond individually. We are anxious to have a strong response. Thank you for your cooperation.

VILASECA continued from page 6

11

The Commissioner has to show that con-solidation will not diminish democratic par-ticipation, will save money, and enhance student learning and civic virtues to such a degree that citizens will swap-off part of their democratic power. There is little evidence that this case can be made. In fact, in the short term, it costs more, ac-cording to the testimony of Dr. David Sil-vernail and Dr. Craig Howley, two national experts who testifi ed before the Vermont Education Funding and Effectiveness Committee.

Local towns and schools should, however, band together for greater effi ciencies and better programs. More than 30 successful and productive examples have occurred in recent years. (Full disclosure requires me to report that I have been involved in very successful and not so successful lo-cal consolidation efforts).

Likewise, we can increase school effi -ciency while maintaining our democratic linkages in our communities. School busi-

ness operations, special services, trans-portation, curriculum and professional development are needlessly fragmented. Centralizing these functions is simple and expedient.

The Council on the Future of Vermont said the state’s number one priority is affi rming Vermont’s identity. The second concern is promoting community and the third is building Vermont unity in a society increasingly economically and cyber-seg-regated. There are good ways to achieve and sustain these values. One would be in strengthening, rather than weakening, the bonds between towns, citizens, and generations in the democratic governance of our schools.

Mathis, a former Vermont school superinten-dent, is the Managing Director of the Nation-al Education Policy Center at the University of Colorado. He was recently appointed to Vermont’s State Board of Education. The

views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily refl ect the position of the Vermont State Board of Education or the

National Education Policy Center.

MATHIS continued from page 7

Jamie Vollmer

The VSBA/VSA Fall Conference is scheduled for October 20-21 at the Lake Morey Resort in Fairlee. We are at a critical time in the evolution of Vermont’s education system. It will be very important for school board mem-bers to attend this important event. The VSBA Annual Meeting is scheduled for the afternoon of October 20. If you have limited time, October 21 is the best day for board members to attend. Our keynote speaker (presenting on October 21) will be Jamie Vollmer who is a nationally known speaker who will address the value of local boards and

VSBA/VSA CONFERENCE—SAVE THE DATE

the challenge of engaging c o m m u n i -t ies in un-derstanding what educa-tion needs to become. His message will resonate with board members from throughout Vermont, and we expect he will provide energy and insight for the ongoing work ahead. More information will be forthcoming, but we urge you now to set aside the date.

12

“A signifi cant restructuring of the educa-tional system in Vermont is imminent and the need for such change is much more obvious now than it was four or fi ve years ago. It is important, however, that we not be rushed to judgment and risk losing what makes our school system ours. In that respect, I remain convinced that the effi ciency, economy and equity of a uni-fi ed union is a reasonable fi rst step for the schools and the community of Addison Northwest Supervisory Union.” (O’Brien, January, 2010)

On Town Meeting Day, 2010, the com-munities of the Addison Northwest Su-pervisory Union (ANWSU) voted by a two to one margin to form a unifi ed union governance structure for its schools. The vote was the fi rst of its kind in the state and marked the beginning of voluntary efforts around the state to reduce the number of school districts and the overall cost of education.

For ANWSU, this change meant that instead of four school districts with four school boards and four budgets for 1150 students, it would be-come one K-12 district governed by a single school board with one budget that would serve all students in the district. The effi ciencies and equi-ties associated with this change are well docu-mented. The economies, although logically antici-pated, are more diffi cult to clearly and immediate-

Unified Union Structure Provides Equity, Opportunity

By Tom O’Brienly ascertain. It stands to reason, however, that savings will accrue by reducing or eliminating the redundancies inherent in the current educational operations.

Unfortunately, the vote in 2010 was over-turned in one of our fi ve communities. Concerns about the potential closing of schools, the cost to taxpayers and the perceived loss of local control appeared to be the primary issues. Since, a concerted effort has been made to address these concerns by providing several opportuni-ties over the intervening months for com-munity members to express their concerns and to learn the facts through participation in several public forums.

In December of 2010, this renewed dis-cussion culminated in a unanimous vote by the State Board of Education that it

13

found (again) “the proposed formation of the Addison Northwest Unifi ed Union School District is in the best interests of the students, the state, and the school districts involved” and, thereby, has set the stage for the same question to be presented to the ANWSU communities once again.

By forming a unifi ed union school district, student opportunities, especially at the K-6 level, will be broadened and result in greater equity, effi ciency and economy across the supervisory union. Individual town school districts will no longer have to “go it alone” in their effort to provide re-quired and desired educational programs for their students in the face of declining enrollments and resources. Although the strategy is most often viewed as a cost saving measure via economies of scale and elimination of redundancies (which it is), the primary motivation in ANWSU has revolved around the equity issue, i.e., a common (unifi ed) effort on behalf of all

students regardless of the town in which they reside and/or the school they hap-pen to attend. It is our belief that a single K-12 school district is the platform through which greater equity and improved student opportunities can be provided.

Coordinated professional development and a common curriculum K-12 will strengthen the preparation of students at the K-6 level and increase the likelihood for improved success at all levels. At the same time, redundancies of time and expense across elementary grade levels and schools will be signifi cantly reduced. The creation of the proposed unifi ed union school district will also expand school choice options at the K-6 level. The uni-fied union structure will allow student attendance beyond current town and union boundaries based upon capacity, geographical proximity and the best in-terests of a student and it will not require a tuition payment.

Some might wonder why the ANWSU Board of Directors continues to pursue this

change for our schools. Simply put, it is the most fi scally responsible and educationally sound alternative available to us. Without this choice, each of our schools risks the likelihood of becoming “too small” to sustain its programs and the certain inability to overcome the intrin-sic challenges of “going it alone.”

Tom O’Brien is the su-perintendent of ANWSU.

School Board Academy - Online VideosDid you know the VSBA website (www.vtvsba.org) has 34 streaming videos on several topics available at your fi ngertips?

Some of the video topics are listed below and range from 5 to 20 minutes in length.

Presenting the Budget• VSBIT• Act 82• Robert’s Rules• Athletic & Cocurricular Policies• Parent-Board Collaboration•

Real World Graduates• Agendas & Meetings• School Policy• Board Reorganization• Public Engagement• Code of Conduct•

14

As Chair of the Windham School Board for a very small school, I have signifi cant concerns about the whole consolidation conversation, and allowing others to have control over what happens in our lo-cal communities. I am also concerned that, while, superfi cially, we have couched the conversation in educational opportunity and quality terms, the major impetus, at least from the previous administration, has been money: what we can and cannot afford.

If schools want to discuss Regional Education Districts (RED), I think it is a valuable conversation to have, but please do not expect every school to participate and please do not threaten us with reassignment to another supervisory union if we do not participate - this is just not the Vermont way. As we move forward with the RED/consolidation discussion, I think there are several important things to consider: Educational quality is number one; others are the health and well-being of the children, including a parent’s ability to be involved in their education if a proposed school is an excessively distant, and a community’s desire to maintain a local school.

I think it is wrong to allow the State Board of Edu-cation, the RED, or anyone else to make a school closing decision, other than the community itself. I would urge school boards to carefully research the process and ramifi cations before participating in a study group.

Rep. Carolyn Partridge, Windham school board chair and Windham state representative

EXPERIENCES continued from page 9.

Rutland-Windsor SU is current engaged in an SU Joint Agreement study with two of our neighbors. We will, hopefully, be examin-ing how as a region we can provide a diversity of courses that meet a wider spectrum of inter-ests. Another area in which we may be able to collaborate is devel-opment of program op-portunities for students with special educational needs. Other areas of interest would be shared consultants and teachers with special-ized expertise in cur-riculum areas such as reading, mathematics, technology, etc.

Joan Frangiose, Rutland-Windsor SU

Superintendent

Send us your Act 153 experience! Email dcyprian@vtvsba.org

15

2011 VSBA Resolutions

VSBA Resolutions are the Association’s offi cial positions on important educational issues and are adopted by the membership for each biennium. These positions guide your Association Board of Directors and staff as they represent you in Montpelier and at the federal level. The 2011 annual meeting will be on October 20 at the Lake Morey Resort. Please check the current resolutions at www.vtvsba.org. If your board (not individual members-member school boards must approve a resolution for submission) has additional sug-gestions for resolutions, please submit them for consideration by the Resolution Committee no later than July 15, 2011.

Resolutions may cover any topic of signifi cant statewide or national concern. They address desired legislative or gov-ernmental initiatives. Please be concise and clear so the intent, as well as the requested action is understandable. It is the “Resolved” portion (or action requested) that is voted on, not the “Whereas” rationale, which should be used only to explain your board’s position.

NOTE: Resolutions may also be submitted from the fl oor at the business meeting, provided they are “in writing with suffi cient copies for voting delegates. A majority of the voting delegates present must approve a motion to allow the resolution to be introduced for discussion.” [VSBA Bylaws]

SPONSORING SCHOOL BOARD:___________________________________TOPIC OF CONCERN: __________________________________________WHEREAS:______________________________________________________(please explain why the action you are requesting should take place)_________________________________________________________________________AND WHEREAS:__________________________________________________(further explanation if necessary)______________________________________________________________________________________________________BE IT RESOLVED:________________________________________________(explain what action you desire)_______________________________________

RReessoolluuttiioonnss mmaayy aallssoo bbee ssuubbmmiitttteedd aatt wwwwww.vvttvvssbbaa..oorrgg

16

An innovative funding approach is being used by Vermont schools to turn energy-saving facility upgrades into budget cut-ters. The approach, called tax-exempt leasing (or municipal leasing), enables schools to make energy-effi ciency im-provements with no upfront costs. Ac-cording to Richard Donnelly of Effi ciency Vermont, tax-exempt leasing is a low-interest fi nancing mechanism that “can be structured so that resulting energy savings more than cover the loan payments. That creates a positive cash fl ow.”

Many Vermont school districts are already using tax-exempt leasing for capital expen-ditures such as school buses, computer equipment, and playground equipment. Some schools are also using this mecha-nism for leasehold improvements like lighting, heating, or ventilation equipment. When used for energy-saving building im-provements, a tax-exempt leasing agree-ment can be structured so that money a school saves on energy more than offsets loan payments. Tax-exempt leasing also enables schools to make energy-saving improvements without adding an expense to the annual budget and without creating a bond; loan payments are included as a line in the utility budget.

Vermont Schools Turn Facility Upgrades into Budget Cuttersby Amy Rubin, Effi ciency Vermont

“Making facility improvements doesn’t get more affordable than this,” says Donnelly. “Energy savings start immediately upon completion of upgrades, so the utility line on the budget is lower from day one. In-stead of waiting to fi nd money for improve-ments, schools can afford to upgrade and stop overpaying for energy now.”

Effi ciency Vermont works with schools to identify energy-saving projects and to determine if tax-exempt leasing or other methods are cost-effective funding ap-proaches. Call Richard Donnelly, toll-free, at 888-921-5990 extension 1129 to learn more and to get names of leasing com-panies. Or call Burlington Electric Depart-ment (BED) for assistance with schools in BED territory.

For an overview of tax-exempt leasing, visit www.aglf.org/faq.html.

A Free Energy Assessment of your school is available from the Vermont Superin-tendents Association’s School Energy Management Program. Contact Norm Etkind, Director, 229-1017 or by email at SEMP@vtvsa.org

Updating the School’s Policies?Please take a few minutes to look over some of the resources the VSBA can offer you.

Website: the VSBA website hosts several pages of information regarding • policies including general information about the upkeep and legal status of policies, model required policies and model best practice policies. (Available in Microsoft Word, Acrobat or as a link).A free fourteen and one half minute streaming video on our website • (Video link).

17

A new law passed by Vermont legislators during the 2009-2010 legislative session is expected to make nutritious food more accessible to low-income children this summer. Schools that operate a summer enrichment program for 15 or more hours per week will be required to provide meals or snacks to students using one of two federal programs: the Summer Food Ser-vice Program or the Na-tional School Lunch Pro-gram Seam-less Summer Option. Both p r o g r a m s r e i m b u r s e schools for providing nu-tritious snacks a n d m e a l s to chi ldren. The new law a p p l i e s t o schools where 50% or more of the children qualify for free or reduced price meals for at least one month during the preceding school year.

Emily Glover, Child Nutrition Advocate at Hunger Free Vermont, believes that the new law will help strengthen the safety net for vulnerable children during the sum-mer. “Over 30,000 children rely on free or reduced price meals provided by the school. When schools close for the sum-mer, many of these children lose access to consistent, balanced meals.”

Summer nutrition programs do more than feed hungry children; they also attract

New Law Expands the Availability of Meals in Summer Enrichment Programs

children to enrichment programs where food is served. According to the Food Research and Action Center, summer programs keep children and teens “safe, learning, engaged and active during the summer months, reducing the loss of learning that often happens to children during the long summer break.” The com-bination of healthy meals and quality sum-

mer program-ming ensures children are ready to learn when they re-turn to school in the fall.

In an effort to assist schools and commu-nity organi-zations with their summer m e a l p r o -grams, Hun-ger Free Ver-mont is part-nering with the Vermont

Department of Education to offer a series of webinars. The webinars are designed to support new summer food programs, as well as established programs looking for new and innovative ideas.

To learn more about the new law or for assistance with summer meal programs, contact Emily Glover at 865-0255 or eg-

lover@hungerfreevt.org.To register for a webinar, visit http://www.hungerfreevt.

org/sfsp_webinars.php.

mmcrewtuin

Inaanzthmggmnth

18

September 1 - Franklin Region, BFA St Albans

September 6 - Lamoille Region, Green Mountain Tech Center

September 8 - Chittenden/Grand Isle Region, Winooski High School

September 12 - Bennington Region, Southwest Vt Career Dev. Center

September 15 - Orange/Washington Region, VSBA Conference Room

September 19 - Rutland Region, Rutland High School

September 22 - Addison Region, Mt. Abraham Union High School

September 26 - Orleans/Essex Region, No. Country Union High School

October 3 - Caledonia/Essex Region, Lyndon Town School

October 6 - Windsor Region, Woodstock Union High School

October 10 - Windham Region, Leland & Gray Union High School

VSBA Regional Meetings

Please consider attending the meeting in your area. Also, consider these dates when scheduling board meetings around holidays in September. The regional meetings are FREE of any charge. The meetings will

begin at 5:00 with a light dinner, continue into regional elections and regional discussions followed by a workshop/discussion time regarding statewide issues.

VSBA, like all membership organizations, depends on participation from you — local school board members — for its strength and vitality. The primary purpose of VSBA’s regional meetings is to provide you the opportunity to provide important input and representation to the Association by electing members from your region to serve on the VSBA Board of Directors and Resolutions Committee. The VSBA Board provides direction and support for the programs and services offered to the member boards, while the Resolutions Committee recommends positions on various issues that the Association membership acts upon at the Annual Meeting.

Please mark these dates on your calendars and the calendar in your school district and supervisory union to ensure there are no confl icting meetings

19

WebinarsApril 18 or 267:00 - 8:30pm

New School Board MemberOrientation

SCHOOL BOARD ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES AND RELATIONSHIPS

The VSBA is offering a course to new school board members to help you better prepare for your new role. To make this more convenient for participants, we are trying this new webinar format. You will be able to log on through your computer or one at your school.

Choose the day that works best for you and register on our website. After you have registered we will send you the steps involved with

logging in.

• G e t t i n g O f f t o a G o o d S t a r t

• B o a r d - S u p e r i n t e n d e n t R o l e s

• P o l i c y L e a d e r s h i p

• R u n n i n g E f f e c t i v e M e e t i n g s

• C o l l e c t i v e B a r g a i n i n g

• B u d g e t D e v e l o p m e n t P r o c e s s

Thanks also for the information I have recently received from the VSBA. It’s been so helpful in getting started trying to understand what it is I need to know in order to do my job well. I’m realizing what a daunting task is before me, but so far, I’m loving it!Lauren WobbyNew Board Member in 2004

2 Prospect Street, Suite 4Montpelier, VT 05602

(802) 223-3580 (800) 244-8722www.vtvsba.org

Vermont School Boards Association

Please visit our website or call to register

Non-

Profi

t Org

.U.

S. P

ostag

e Pa

idPe

rmit #

222

Barre

, VT

0564

1

Verm

ont S

choo

l Boa

rds

Ass

ocia

tion

2 P

rosp

ect S

treet

Sui

te 4

Mon

tpel

ier,

VT

0560

2-35

79w

ww

.vtv

sba.

org