That's the assumption I made on drafting the bill that the conditional mergers which Go away after July 1st if they are not acted upon it seemed like that would be a Better state of affairs for Huntington and that if there was an intention to merge the tools are there to do it without us Treating Huntington in this to or the other condition so with that said welcome, and if you could just introduce yourself and And and then tell us what you want us to hear. Thank you Good afternoon. I'm Paul Susan chair of the Franklin School Board. Thank you for the opportunity To speak to each 39 when I submitted the testimony. I was submitting the testimony I think on Wednesday morning waiting until the last moment In crossed over your revision. So there's one sentence in paragraph 3 that I'm gonna get to what I'm gonna simply say It's not relevant. It's not pertinent. The rest of the testimony is a tag Just go through this quickly, and then I can answer questions Yes, please Thank you for the opportunity to testify regarding each 39. Name is Paul Susan chair of the Lincoln School Board To explain who we are and how we got to this point. I'm in school district going against Merger in 2011, 2014, 2016, and 2018. I think the school board remains responsible therefore for the governance of the Brewster Pierce Memorial School in Huntington grades pre-k4 19 students for 8th, 5th, 12th and 10th middle school in high school in the Mansfield Union School District MMMUSD Shit in East assesses Huntington for special ed transportation and administration And the very 28 2018 is Obviously, you know the state board of education. What if the Huntington School District be conditionally merged into the Mount Mansfield Union School District having on a comical vote More and by MMMUSD of the five towns within Shit in East and now the 4th of November 2019 Based on issues across this delegation constitutionality of the Huntington School District for our legal challenge in December 2018 And I should say I separate from the other two legal challenges that were filed. The defendants include the state board agency of Ed and due to the specific wording of the secretary's order Long before any thought was given to a legal challenge and this really goes back to 2016 We discussed significant obstacles regarding the timetable for a possible Merger for us Merger I'm first on town meeting day the MMMUSD budget was approved by Australian ballot Separate Huntington School District budget was approved from the floor. So we've got two different budgets Second there is no provision. This is important There's no provision in the state board order for updating and revising the 2014 art 2014 articles agreement Which presumably would be the basis for a vote And there's a problem because some of those articles have already expired an example of school closure Which had a four-year end up designation of school enrollment because of your residence which only had a Third and this in this really is an issue because of the petition from that you heard about from Andrew Paul yesterday for unification There's a serious question as to what happens if either a hummingbird vote fails as that's occurred in the Laurel North with Cambridge elementary Or if the vote is not held by July In both circumstances of the 2014 articles applies written on it and remain a non-member elementary school district And that's what happened in 14 and that's what happened And if I could just interject that is our understanding from the lawyers at AOE And our own lawyers that if a vote is not called by July 1st or if the vote fails And Huntington would remain as they are Modified So We've got questions. We've got questions about the ambiguity of how budget gets consolidated What role the electorate has in voting for a new consolidated budget whether and how the articles of agreement review What happens in the event of both fails? I would add to that also there's a question that I have about whether that coming or going is going to be by Australian ballot For and that's something that's gonna have to be worked out after it takes some additional time My next sentence is not relevant today because of your vision Because there's not a possible one-year extension So I'm not gonna read that and then there's this complex problem that the SU has in dissolving the supervisor union to school District in creating another one. It's all gonna take time obviously The Huntington school district has a voluntary stay with the state at the request of the state And we agree to it so that we could avoid legal following back and forth Until MMM USD warns about the court rules and the main argument We do not know whether or when and then the USD is gonna warn a vote or hold a vote Where do we know how the timetable associated with the courts who want to affect any of this? If a coming will go where to be held before July 1 of 19 and it were successful The Huntington school district is gonna move expeditiously to cooperate and smear the process. We have no interest in Being an obstacle to a process if there's a vote before July 1 of 19 Everything we can to make it happen and be smooth. However given the concerns the ambiguity and questions expressed above July 1 19 appears to be a difficult deadline I don't know if I can take out a possible difficult deadline to meet with integrity, with integrity, accuracy and community inclusion So I will leave it there If I might so my my underlying assumption was First that Huntington did not want to work The votes in Huntington the last one was 60% against merger 40% that being the case my my assumption was that Offering an extension which would not be an extension to Huntington Rather an extension to MMU of a year to consider A vote to add you Would not be in your best interests. I think that's right. I could the extension With the extension does as it creates another year where all of us are in purgatory The tension in the conflict Attention within our community is felt with the attention between MMUSD board and our board Their communities and our communities We're sending our kids 5 to 12 to their school district and we ended up having a legal challenge against the school district That is not So another year in that situation is something that we don't want. Yes, we would like to see a vote Happen before July 1 of 18 so that either we have merger on July 1 19. We have no Well, you will have that for a lot of certainty on July 2 forever more Yeah, because when we voted in 14 and 16 when we voted in 14 We didn't realize we went from 153 156 146 and 49 And then we voted again and it's 16 and we voted again in 18 So that would be our desire. Well, and as I say with us doing nothing with you You will have that on July 2nd. Either a vote will have been warned and won or a vote will have been warned and lost Or no vote will have been warned in which case the case the conditional order goes away So you're the reason why this doesn't address the conditional mergers the four of them outstanding It's because on July 1 they will have certainty one way or the other and the tools for determining how you move forward are Are I would say they're in your hands, but they're really in MMU's hands right now But so I thank you for clarifying it Seems as though we took the right path and not not giving an extension to MMU too Questions for for the witness Thank you all for coming I appreciate it make a trip I just I know you just got asked this question But I just want to make sure on the record that you are comfortable with the draft as it now stands for H39 and you feel that it needs the needs of the Huntington comfortable comfortable with the H39 draft as it currently stands for And I'm only speaking right Yes, right. I'm only speaking Thank you very much appreciate you coming. Thank you Okay, I believe now we've shifted so rather than Scott Thompson. I've been asked to have Mary Niles You need to leave I got three kids. Yeah, my attention in three different locations Thank you so much so I I There's a digital link that can be provided to our section nine. This is just the cover letter that went along with it Yes Can provide you that digital link to our pretty substantial section nine This is testimony I Appreciate the opportunity today. Thank you so much Um, I am Mary Niles. I'm chair of the Montgomery school board I want to make sure that it's known that my remarks today on mine alone I'm not speaking for the entirety of my school board, although we had a majority vote on our school board To join the lawsuit So but we are divided Board 3-2 have been until our most recent election on Monday where I think that balance has shifted a little more in favor of Maintaining our independent district status and our involvement in the ongoing lawsuit So I'm struck by the magnitude of this moment for our community This has been a long few years for us As in this case in many of the communities It's an odd deja vu. I'm sitting before another body tasked with making decisions That really kind of speak to the core of our community our school which we Are so proud of There's an interesting paternalism at play here where by those in position of power making decisions for our community Outsiders deciding what is best for us regardless of our self-assessment and our wishes and the wishes of the majority of our electorate on two separate occasions now This is an inherently top-down approach It's part of what so many of us object object to the notion that somehow the directives of back 46 Supercede the outcome of legally-worn folks Is it not compelling to you some of whom were likely instrumental in crafting and passing act 46? That's so many communities are an utter turmoil over forced merger There's too much dissent and confusion to meet the July 1st 2019 deadline And I understand that this isn't the forum necessarily to relitigate 46 a lot of ways it's water under the bridge But it feels really important because I haven't spoken to you all I've spoken to the SBE the Secretary of Education the AOE but not this body So as you prepare to weigh the merits of delay, please consider the following first and foremost the delay Which will be most efficacious for us as a no strings attached clean delay until July 2020 This allows the court process to unfold It's a complex case involving over 30 plaintiffs and while the preliminary injunction was not issued the case must still have its merits heard by the court all signs point for this ending of the Supreme Court The delay will afford districts time to accept the court's decision and work toward honoring it The delay spares organizational and consolidation efforts most notably the sale and acquisition of school properties the commingling of assets and debts and the merging of budgets which would then need to be entangled should the lawsuit prevail Unpacking merged boards budgets assets and debts would be far more onerous and cumbersome than a one-year delay I've yet to receive a single directive as to the legal process by which our multi-million dollar building is quote-unquote sold To the newly merged district for one dollar We have not had time to consult with counsel as to how exactly this will work And there's little clarity around who has the authority to authorize this sale in the first place We need time to understand how to proceed and with regard to property transfer and doing this under duress Seeds careless and just as a side note to that I've spoken with the chair of our select board And there's major confusion on the town level about who actually owns our school property Actually, it's the state Well, there's no deed that we've been able to produce yet that shows whether it's the town of Montgomery or this or the school district Well, the district's assets are owned by the state. Okay, so that should be Put on the table. Okay, people have a very proprietary Sense of their school building the state doesn't have any desire to assert ownership over it But that's the legal state of affairs, okay We have had what the lawyer for the town suggest otherwise But again, that is way above my pay grade when we start looking into the deeds and property and how this property Transfer and as I say that the state typically doesn't want to step in and act as though I see they are the owner of the building because we have delegated to the districts all of the duties and People pay their taxes people work on their buildings. They have a sense of ownership in them. That's great But but at the end of the day when push comes to shove legally it is the state's asset So I I hear you that it's a complicated issue. I wanted to just give you that that's straight from our legislative Council team in terms of Okay Well moving on then bearing in mind the many unknown surrounding force mergers We serve Montgomery's children best to honor the will of our electorate if we can delay a merger until 2020 a sea of complexities exists with or without such as the nature of education in the era back 46 Montgomery past its FY 1920 budget at our annual meeting just on March 11th without one dissenting vote There's no risk that delay impacts our ability to run our school to the highest of standards as we've been doing for years So while Emily Simmons resorts to fear monitoring in the AOE's continued push of the consolidation agenda Rest assured the Montgomery School District is on solid footing doing what we do best Educating our children at a high-performing Visually savvy school with a deeply invested and engaged board administration teaching and support staff and community The prudent path would be one of faultfulness and caution to err on the site of allowing more time to sort out the legal and Logistical complexities not less Please think deeply about the real tangible benefits of the delay as they far outweigh any of the drawbacks Please don't money the waters by establishing requirements in order to qualify for this respite Why complicate this further with tying the delay to ratifying merged boards? Why hold small school grants hostage when our school relies on this funding without it We have to make serious sacrifices and ultimately kids are most impacted Why does this process have to be so punitive its cruel politicking and immensely discouraging? I Understand the overarching trends which prompted the development passage and implementation of Act 46 The goals of providing quality equitable education at a palatable price point for taxpayers are laudable The tactic of consolidation and force merger is not We've maintained all long that our thriving school is not subject to the demographic and economic forces Which precipitated Act 46 and I would really encourage you to take the time to read our section 9 Montgomery has been highlighted in numerous articles over the last meant decade plus as to our kind of level of success that we achieve even with a 50% free and reduced lunch population living at or below the poverty level We meet the needs of our kids beautifully and our families were very responsive to that to our community You know, so I'll maybe leave it at that because I understand again not the time to relitigate the Act 46 There's more here in this testimony as well as the follow-up letter that I wrote to the SBE After we delivered that testimony last July over in Newark What has been slightly Demoralizing is how many times we've come before various boards and individuals in this process and felt somewhat silence Not many people even can find Montgomery on a map. We're a little out of sight out of mind We have had an incredibly strong argument around geographical isolation That has just been met with kind of utter kind of it just being ignored in The affidavit I just wrote as part of the lawsuit Follow-up to the corrected the defendant's corrected reply from the initial kind of proceedings of the case I talked more in depth about this geographical isolation point and it's written in here as well You know this idea when they're looking at our school Suggesting that from border that border to border these kind of metrics that are rather meaningless in the winter in the mud season for us up there because they are not at all a reflection of our lived Experience on the daily the same way who's ever gone to Los Angeles. You can spend an hour trying to drive five miles City is staggering. I was out there for some college tours with one of my kids I was stunning and it's the same way it can take me You know 45 minutes from where I live on the back of the mountain to get to Sheldon Which has now been brought into not only our SU but into the newly merged and MVU district And just to clarify on the small school grants So the state board of education Redid the criteria for small school grants There's a 16-point scale geographic isolation is one half and the other half is excellence and instruction and Each year districts that qualify would have to apply and they'd be ranked in those things What this bill says is if you do manage to become operational by July 1st of this year You don't have to go through that process each year. You would Going forward you would automatically get your small school grants So it's not that people who take a delay won't get their small school grants They will have to demonstrate their excellence and instruction each year So you're not getting any more money or any less money whether you take the delay. It's just easier on the district sure And we qualified this year very high on the kind of ranking both from the geographical isolation Ankle as well as the kind of excellence side of it and You know for me, it doesn't feel and for us It doesn't feel burdensome to can to have to reapply for our small schools grants because I trust And you'll be I did a horribly trust that we will continue to qualify based on not only the metrics of geographical isolation by the excellence and if I could speak to the To the no strings or the clean idea because I assume other people will make the same argument I'll just give you my opinion because the committee has yet to vote on this bill, but the way I view it is There are plenty of people and plenty of people in educational institutions for instance Including the agency of education the superintendents other people as well as individual boards If you look at that map behind you everybody in orange has already satisfied act 46 if you go to those Districts they will argue many of them that we shouldn't allow any delay that this is just creating chaos So we should their way of looking at it is rip the band-aid off now. I Didn't agree with that and so I tried to think of a way to get everybody in gray who needed a delay But how can we satisfy the two communities at once? How can we satisfy the act 46? Impulses at the same time that we're allowing that to go forward So the draft that that we have in front of us Says AOE is requiring by July 1st that everybody go through about ten steps and become operational on July 1st This draft says you only have to go through the first two of those And ask for delay So this is much less onerous than what AOE is requiring But it is requiring something of districts and I hear you saying you wish it weren't But it's an attempt to give you what you need which is a year During which the case may resolve itself or may become clearer But still in all you'll have another year to be ready or if you have to merge So it's admittedly I wouldn't view it as a delay with strings, but rather there's a process That's in place that we are shortening for you In other words instead of having to take ten steps by July you have to take two and then you get a year off So Can you clarify for me what those two steps are then? So if if your community has yet to form a transitional board and I'm guessing you So we're in a unique situation where the where Bakersfield and Berkshire have been operational since November of 2017 they voted yes for merger Montgomery was considered advisable Sheldon wasn't even on that ballot which presents a kind of interesting Angle because Sheldon was thrust in by the AOE and then Subsequently by the SBE decision, but they actually were never on that initial ballot So there's the four communities. Yes. Have you created a transitional board with members from each of the four? No, so that would be the first step. They are Organizational though their board is the Bakersfield Berkshire and then BU northern Mountain Valley Union board is considered Operational right, but if they're under a state board order now to merge into The four districts right so so maybe the way it will work is they will send representatives from their merged District and then Montgomery and Sheldon will send representatives from theirs and the way it works in the default articles is The president of the school board With the head of the school board chair, whatever you call them and your clerk Automatically sit on this transitional board. So let's say in your case. There would be six or eight It's two members from every town. Yes with it's not proportional to town population. So it would be eight Yeah, so that transitional board of eight Forms and they warn an actual election in the four communities to elect a merged board a first merged board We call it the initial So you have a warning you have people campaign for seats and some of them may campaign as being against act 46 I don't care. Some may make campaign saying I'm gonna get on the board and Immediately vote to take the delay and then we're gonna table all other action Doesn't matter to me in order to get the delay. All you have to do is elect that first board and that's the the board that's empowered to ask for the delay again and at that point You can do nothing until the case resolves Because you won't have to come up with a merged budget You'll have a year where you can still have Individual budgets for your town, right? And I understand that I think the concern is that once that transitional board Has legal authority Yes, the initial board the new them board for the newly merged district has legal authority One the possibility exists that they would not you know that it would not be a unanimous vote toward delay It could potentially be split. I can't know what Sheldon's to Representatives nor what the Montgomery representatives. I think I believe I will likely be one of them on that board How that vote would go down so it's possible that it would not be in favor of a delay Which then again kind of puts Montgomery in this situation where we're having to proceed with merged board activity The and while we wait to see how the law student unfolds I mean, I think that's the kind of the chat the challenge and why that part of this Slightly amended kind of pared down. It's not ten must-dos. It's only two. That's still a pretty consequential Must-do that wouldn't necessarily guarantee the outcome that we would perform and the other thing just two things about the legal process So when judge mellow decided that there was no need for a preliminary injunction What he decided was that going forward would not be in a reputable harm to your district. That's his That's a superior court judge. That's what he decided and his logic is that By the time the decision gets handed down there will not be enough intermingling that he couldn't untangle So let's let's take what I asked you to do or the community what the draft asks it asks you to elect this initial board Let's say June 1st a judge Judge mellow rules that in fact he looked at it again and in spite of his preliminary Ruling which seemed to favor the state. He finds that your argument is compelling and act 46 should go Let's let's say you ruled that way At that point all you have to do is disband that initial board. They take a vote to disband And you're right back where you are now So you need to say that we won't have had to initiate the property these property transfers this co-mangling of debt Assets if you ask me what would make sense and what what I might do from Where I said I think it would it would knowing that you're gonna have to merge at some point anyway I think it would be Prudent to not stop with your initial board, but have them explore creating your first budget your first merge budget and Then if the ruling goes against you, you've got a budget that you're working But that's not required under this draft. The one that's required is that that initial board meet and take a vote on whether to do That's as far as this draft except that some other places are going to do a parallel thing So he takes you to your favorite in case Right one thing happens or in case you well, which is why we went ahead as a board and a town and you know And we learned our budget that was voted on on me. We know that we have a fully funded You know 2.7 million dollar budget for mock just for the Montgomery school district You know as of Monday Successful Enjoying talking to you, but we have a room for understood I mean I'm struck. I mean It's so interesting. I understand there's kind of legal stuff around what judge Mello's decision and this irreparable harm It's so interesting to think that what I think that's missed in that legal analysis of irreparable harm is that He and a lot we feel a lot of people aren't haven't seen on the ground the harm that is Actively being done in our community around merger the divisiveness the fracture The stress this is really it's an emotional situation for us to be in because As we present it over and over and over again that the mandates of act 46 Montgomery is meeting them Beautifully, we still go back and since I know we can't relitigate act 46 But I still I am harping on the fact that we do not feel as though we were heard from the outset In our school is phenomenal We don't necessarily see the ways in which this merger actually helps us get improved significantly and we see The harm tax wise the debt burden that we are going to incur as now emerged Community Sheldon just voted a 1.7 million dollar bond and puts us in the position We either inherit their decrepit building Owing to years of deferred maintenance or now we inherit this 1.7 million dollar bond Montgomery brings the least amount of debt to this equation We have funded our school so smartly for decades now so again I know there are probably way more Kind of legal arguments around this irreparable harm and if that's the threshold I understand that that's a little bit above my pay grade But what I see on the ground is Montgomery is a community that has been asking endlessly for people to hear us to see us to acknowledge What we're doing how well we're doing And essentially leave us alone We get So, thank you Andy Davis Browder world, okay It's a big state. It's a big state, but we found our way out here So can these sounds Nice My name is Andy Davis. I Live in Browderboro, Vermont. I'm a recently elected member of the Browderboro town school board Which has become a complicated thing to explain to people because we don't know how long this board Will be will function what running for it was a great experience And I think it revealed something about where we are with back 46 in our community I'll go into that in a minute I'm a town meeting rep you're familiar with Browderboro's unique form of representative town meeting Although I was elected to the town school board I won't be sworn in until after march 23rd because we don't change select board or school board until after our Representative town meeting which is not till the 23rd of march. You all are puzzled But that's a week different than your normal timing. We vote on one state march 5th That's when I was elected, but I won't be sworn in Until after representative town meeting the rep 150 rep Represent the voters of Browderboro's legally and make the decisions in place of an open town meeting It's unique, but it serves us For 32 years. I taught music in the public schools of Vermont and retired this past June 30th I have two children Very different who went through Browderboro town schools kindergarten to grade 12 My daughter has down syndrome. My son happened to be the valedictorian of his class and I feel like our schools served Both of them with distinction We don't have broken schools And we'll get back to that in a minute. We have a very functioning supervisory union And that's really a key piece of information in some of the previous Witness I found myself resonating with a lot of her testimony Um I'm a little disappointed when I hear people characterized those of us that have questioned Merger and forced merger as being anti-education or anti-school or In my experience the people that this whole Situation has brought me in contact with are well researched Well committed people who have spent years serving on boards serving their community in various ways We are not anti-school We're very pro school. We're very pro education. We identify what's working and we want to preserve What's valued in our community. I know it in here has ever I've said it but I hear that I'm not accusing you all but it's in the atmosphere I promise you it's in the atmosphere I come today with a plea as well as a position A call for help The meetings I although I have not been sworn in I've attended many school board meetings And the meetings I attend these days are really Focused on how do we maneuver? How do we hedge our bet? How do we design a two-pronged approach? With july 1st june 30th different rules coming down legislative changes, etc The board in grotto borough is now trying to find a Path that will both follow the law and the will of the community That's sort of being described as a kind of two-pronged approach to prepare for both situations Recently we had a postponed organizational meeting like a number of communities And someone stood up at that meeting on february 27th and asked what I thought was a very poignant question How can we possibly move forward and build something together for our communities and our children When we're not together as a community Although the vote to postpone was a decisive 50 to 22 That didn't resolve anything. It just caused more Conversation discussion even anger from some people anxiety and division And we now have a new meeting date set up for the organizational april 2nd And i'm not sure how that's going to go down I was the citizen who made the motion to delay I know that if I hadn't done it someone else would have But I was concerned as I did it that it might endanger my campaign because I was at that point a candidate for grotto borough town school board And some thought I had made a big mistake in putting myself in that public role I'm only going to mention the results not to Aggregate myself, but just to reveal something about where our electorate is I won overwhelmingly over the sitting Chair of the Browder borough school board who has been the chief spokesperson For the first forest merger in our community We need relief from you because our representatives here in mawfield. You have lovers that we don't have public votes Against the breakup of our supervisory union began early on when the town of bernon needed to get out of our supervisory union because they wanted to preserve choice Towns voted get a town voted against them leaving not because they Didn't want bernon to have choice They voted against that to hold The union together as a bulwark against this four town forest merger that would follow It was not a vote against bernon. It was not a vote against school choice. It was a vote for a five town Functioning supervisory union with a long history and a great track record Of collect we have probably collaborated on almost everything you can collaborate on And we're willing to do more And even while the merger articles were being put forward An ags committee of all five towns came together and produced that at the same time We don't feel that was heard I don't want to go into the particulars our representative town meeting voted against some kind of forced imposition of the way we govern our schools in 2014 in 2015 in 2017 In 2017 when the articles of merger for the preferred merger were put before the population In all four towns those articles were defeated by more than two to one in all four towns And then as I just told you the story about the most recent opportunity people had to weigh in which was our school board In which we now have a new board with a new balance which is tilting away from the four town merger Why Why this opposition to the merger? I mean that's the obvious question The alternative governance structure is still viewed in our area as the best way to preserve a functioning union That has gone on for years and years and could become Even more collaborative. We have special education at the su level transportation meals Teacher in service and training We're doing all of this The other and there's a feeling that that AGS did not get a fair hearing And that is lingering And that is holding the community apart People don't want to move forward with the forced merger Knowing that we didn't get our real listening to On what we can do with five towns that historically work together We didn't get that because at the end A kind of merger mania seemed to take hold And we're just going to throw everybody in the merger pot And that has led to This feeling that We need our day in court And we are not going to come together and be able to build some new structure Until we've had that day in court. We don't know what The outcome as you so well articulated. We don't know But we need that day in court if I could just We say a couple of words so You've had one day in court so far So The preliminary injunction was was one decision and there'll be a decision on merits Then they'll probably be in a pen and understand that so if you look into the judge's decision One of the things he dealt with at some length was The the feeling or the rumor or the belief that the state board never considered people's Alternative government instructions that they didn't read them or they didn't spend any time talking about them the judge Categorically rejected that argument. He said the record is replete with information that they had hundreds of hours of them Going through discussions about local votes and alternative governance instructions So that doesn't change the belief that Your proposal was undervalued. I get that but I just don't I I would recommend everybody that you read that 25 page decision because there are many things that I feel In the communities in gray that are at law. I feel there are many things that are regarded as fact that the judge It's not that he determines facts But he does determine how the superior court interprets the record And so that was one of the things that he tried to put to rest I imagine in his final decision. He will say much the same I will read that I appreciate that There is a difference. So sometimes the there's the public perception which you have which you've uh, You know mentioned there which is real and I would say something similar happened with our study committee which once it got on the preferred merger bandwagon There was a often oh, we already looked into that. Oh, we already looked into that. This went on for the whole process Which was essentially sowing the seeds undermining public support in the process There was a point where our study committee had discretionary funds And this was confirmed by the head of the study committee That they had to decide how to spend some discretionary funds They were choosing between an attorney or a public facilitator They went with the attorney our process Sowed the seeds of undermining support for this direction and we're now sowing those I'm close to the end here. I'm not I hope we have time for a little conversation or a question And this ties in perfectly with where we are right now in the conversation I understand that act 46 I wasn't here obviously in in long period, but it was a very complicated bill to assemble To gain support for to get through Just turn just in terms of the pieces of of it and I know that my senator Said that one of the reasons that they were willing to support act 46 was because of components life section nine And some flexibility in implementation So I have a very Strong belief that if components are put into legislation Which helped gain support for that legislation in the political process here in mafioa And then those components are not weighted very Taken as seriously in the implementation phase that that's a serious serious undermining incompetence of this process We Read and studied section nine. It seemed like the right way and we never felt Those of us that were trying to Move that direction we never felt heard And that's partly what the world we're living in right now and I I I get that okay Let me just finish up what I'm just going to end by saying Um why I believe a delay and my preference that I'm speaking here is Is for a clean delay I have a lot of respect for anyone who's seeking compromise I really mean that okay, and I'm intrigued by what's going on in this process But I prepared my comments to speak in favor of of a clean delay Or even our administrators our financial officer when asked at the Preliminaries of the organizational meeting. Well, how much time would you really need to settle this up? He said well a year would be a normal Amount of time to work with which is what we do in this building at the house right now, right? So didn't get our superintendent has expressed anxiety over how do we get this thing on the ground by? July 1st, so that's one thing that a delay Helps us with to As has already been I won't belabor it the day in court time for the court. I think people will digest what the court says I think that will put some finality on things one way or the other just and I'm going to have to interrupt there again Because I think people have the idea that when a law is passed you have a right to a day in court Which you do but then they also believe that you have a right to have that law not enforced Until your case is run its course Sometimes cases take five years Sometimes they take three years, but unless the judge grants a stay Then the law proceeds right so just so people aren't feeling Like this is different from we have many many laws that we passed last year Some of which are we're being sued for and they are going forward And when those decisions are announced, then you know the dispositions. I understand so I do understand that and I appreciate that And the third thing Besides the administrative the day in court Is just time for the community to digest which direction we're going in and to try to Be together before we're Creating something new going forward I'm going to end by just saying this A delay bill for all forced mergers is an opportunity To bring integrity back into this process It's in the best interest of reaching the goals of act 46 Until we begin until we as a community in Broward world can see The act as a tool to help us fulfill our community aspirations Then we won't be together On the other hand if people begin to see the full promise of the legislation in relation to vermont values and traditions Then I think we'll find a path forward Please work out a delay bill with the vermont house And the last thing i'll say is that Your community your county is very important to me You have two senators who are at value very very highly When I looked at what the house did and this committee looked very closely at it One of the things that left out to me was your community was not addressed And the reasons why you weren't addressed did not seem fair to me So I set it as one of my goals To make sure that you and communities like you had access to a delay In order to do that I'm also in this draft Envisioning a couple of steps that are Easily undone if the court rules in your favor, but to show that there is Good good faith in moving taking a couple of steps forward in order to get that delay So thank you any questions for the for the witness Thank you very much. Thank you appreciate it. Thank you for your work Miles Did I pronounce that correctly you did sir Well I'm not sure if you were listening Okay, so I said that the conditional mergers were deliberately left out of this draft Because it seemed to me that If you were a town As I understand war will has already worked out in line. Is that correct? First of all, my name's Miles Tutto from Orwell. Yeah Miss Hardy. Thank you for coming. Thank you for inviting me to be here today Or well, yes has followed the process We have a unique situation In the town of Orwell voted three times Not to merge Townspeople voted Overwhelmingly not to merge our school board did not support the town's position It goes back in the 18th centuries and Allen would have had something different to how we would handle that situation, but we are Well, we may think it but we Don't move down that road. Yeah The town was very frustrated Uh, we were never included in the process because in the state hearing when they went before the board They would only listen to the school board and the school board presented no alternative plan Because they didn't believe they didn't didn't want Or will stay Stay alone But we as a community want that and so we've been very frustrated All along in the whole process. How many kids in your District in Orwell in Orwell that believed around 135 students in the school right now If the community is growing the school is growing It's an outstanding school with some of the highest outcomes With one of the lowest costs in the state And we're being forced to merge with communities that the outcomes are as good and they have higher costs Which doesn't make any sense to Most of us hold from Mars And so we have to be included the citizens do because the school board isn't here arguing the case because they want to merge Well, the citizens have to be included in delay so we could delay It's forced merger Now let me try to understand better so the the board ruled November 28th that you were conditionally merged And then there was a vote warned That that coal mingled deal, which I don't know where it came from and all of a sudden Orwell said we don't even want to vote on that You know, we don't but Whoever the powers to be whoever's lord mont pillier has said that you have to do this So so there was a there was that vote and and the vote went out The vote was positive that the other towns would allow us in okay. We don't want to be in So I'll be there. Okay.  Well, we're gonna be forced to merge Yeah, yeah, so and we don't want that Understood. Um, I think there are lots of places where people lost a vote And I understand you saying you didn't like the coal mingle nature of the vote, but If you did it any other way a community that didn't want to merge would never Merge that's the point So our outcomes are excellent and our costs are low and I I'll just go back to I've been here Sitting at this table for a better part of 10 years now And one of the things that we have heard Over and over and over again is This is a system built for 130 000 kids. We now have 77 000 And the system never never managed to to react to that So we were asked to address that in major legislation in a way that would keep as much Autonomy at as local level as possible. And so what we we never went down the road of We're gonna close schools never thought about that. We never went down the road of saying we're gonna Force schools themselves to be larger So we went down the road of saying Our small schools are the root of a great system All we're going to do is take the invisible boundary around that school the district boundary And expand it so it includes three schools and with that Slight adjustment in the invisible boundary All of a sudden they can share students. They can share teachers. They can share everything And I know that some schools have done that even without merger But I was on school board for four years at the end of the day My responsibility was my kids and my buildings And I wasn't going to vote for something That would maybe help the next community's kids I was going to vote only for my kids. So By Moving those boundaries the invisible boundary again, if you look at that map behind you everybody in orange has Satisfied at 46 And when we talk to those communities They are happy with the results by and large not that you can't find One district or one Person or one board member but by and large they're happy So I I hear you but I in this bill. There's no way we could We could undo your vote and unmerge you At this point. I'm asking you to include it change it. That's what I'm saying. We can't do that. You can't do that No, you're already you already Satisfied the one condition to be merged somebody forced that upon us It was your your Local communities vote. No, it wasn't we voted three times not to murder. Well or we'll did yeah That's what we're talking about or will school dress right? Yes I It just it doesn't make any sense. It would never had our our day in So it's be court to plead our case I mean at our school meeting was Was like a funeral but this last so you elected your school board members Right, correct and they went to the state and said they didn't want a section nine proposal correct Okay, but we can we can't you elected them They acted on your behalf and and then you can vote them out. That's your it takes time And you have a five-member board and it you know, they're staggered members It takes time vote them out and change the board and this is all happening so fast You don't have time to change the board. I'll tell you another version of this that we get all the time So just now we had the town meeting votes. They passed overwhelmingly 95 percent or 97 percent of state school budgets passed But every year we will get people who come in and say It's not fair. There's a lot of people in my town who didn't want the school budget to pass But it did so what they will come in and they'll Chin up their representatives to bring out something and send it to us that will in effect lower their taxes Even though their community voted to raise taxes So I think to the extent we we can here We should be dealing with people who need the delay And and that's all this bill will deal with but I can't see any circumstance where we could undo A vote that you have and lost well the legislature could do what they want. They created act 46 They could create act 47 says stop force mergers It could do that Thank you So much for coming and for your time and I hear your frustration loud and clear And I heard your frustration at your town meeting last week that I attended And um I'm sorry that we can't address what you and and Uh, at least half the citizens in Orwell have said they have wanted in three previous votes I know that each vote has been quite close in the town of Orwell and it's been a very device of issue Um, we've tried our best to come up with a compromise that meets the needs of as many districts as we can But because Orwell had that vote there because this late valley Towns Districts had that vote. It's something that we can't undo at this point. And so I'm I'm really sorry and I'm I appreciate that you came and I I want you to know that I Did my best to make sure your voice was heard. I appreciate that Just a couple come on comments and I'll leave you to your business You stated earlier recommended to some towns to pass a parallel budgets In case this lawsuit gets That's one way to do this one We tried to do that at our school meeting But someone from the department education or the secretary of the state sent a message minutes before the school meeting to rule out of order anybody that tried to Put a parallel budget on the table to be in place in case You know, the whole thing goes flop. Yeah I'm not sure why and it could have been because it wasn't warned properly or any number of reasons why they might have waited The beauty of town meetings Is you can do things from the floor. It's not like Burlington and all these big cities That's that's one of the great things about small towns is you can decide things right there on the floor Yeah, I just mean I can't speak for a year or why they might have said I just want to say one more thing. I completely agree that the Orwell school is a great school and I am Barely confident that after you are over this hump, it will continue to be a great school You have an amazing principal and a really amazing program there And you should feel really proud of that We all are that's why we want to maintain autonomy and authority over it because The other where you're going it doesn't work anywhere near as good as we They don't want to join the Orwell that'd be fine The effect on your communities, I don't think anybody in legislature really Realized the effect on like I said that school means like funeral Well, and the meetings that they're all going to be not fair. Hey, and nobody's going to go if you look around this room I've I've done this a hundred times on So I've heard So many people tell me they don't feel hurt So I I just want to say to you I I have listened as much as a human can possibly listen. I'll leave them every year. We've had the room full many times So in in in terms of the communities that are at issue This is maybe my fifth time hearing from members of your community about your Very individual problems. Well, let me ask you one more question. Yeah, what do we tell our children? When they're aware of the democratic process and civics they learn all about these stuff and they ask you The town voted three times not to merge Why is someone Dipting and forcing us to do it when democracy isn't acting And that's what they're seeing and that's what and that's the way the public feels Well, I would and that's probably I'd say one thing which is what the town voted on were Proposals designed by your study committee to merge As far as i'm concerned, they never had the Yes or no on whether to merge that was always in act 46 In the end game in the hands of the secretary But I that's not democratic, you know if each one of you have been through an election Yeah And you all got elected and what if somebody want billiard said Sir, you're not gonna be in that on the and then stay set and we're gonna put somebody else in there We're gonna ignore the vote and that's what's happening. I understand that's your opinion. Thank you, sir So, uh, scott thompson Excuse me, very well, thank you Now for instance, this is not the first time you and I spoke. No I'm a repeat offender Thank you very much, mr. Chairman while i'm handing these around Thanks, I'm scott thompson. I represent callus on the u32 board And on this occasion I'm basically speaking for myself because It's hard to know who i'm speaking for anymore I was honored as you mentioned to be able to address your committee in its 2017 vintage Um, and i'm very grateful for the opportunity to do so again today grateful And a little bit perplexed at the same time, you know as looking around the room and way down the corridor Everyone here speaks English We all basically look as though We're cut from similar cloth and yet listening to the discussion It's as though we inhabit two very different planets um on one planet everything is for the best in the best of all possible government systems and perhaps strong on tactics work to force deviance into submission On the other planet Getting yourself accused of violating children or being a nazi Just means it's another day of forced merger work where citizens respond to strong arm tactics in a manner diametrically opposed to what the apparent intention is and you know where town clerks and election volunteers are growing under the burden of frantic uncoordinated warnings and what's shaping up to be the spring of way too many votes so with this kind of thing going on I I worry that communication of any kind might be very nearly impossible but I figure the difficulty of it is the most urgent and important reason to try to bridge it as much as possible at least maybe bring those planets within Hailing distance of each other if nothing else so I guess with that I'm going to approach this in my classic way backwards and look first at the second half of of this handout I know there's been a discussion of the denial of the preliminary injunction I should just point out that Perhaps some of the understanding should be nuanced to take account of for example uh The judge having written that the court is troubled by the debt issue And that um because it hasn't yet been briefed by the parties He had nothing further to say about it So at this point although troubled He has to consider that the effects as speculative so I'm just inviting you for a moment to um come speculate with me in the etymological sense of the term to observe comfortably and um the numbers here Are taken from the audit reports and there's only one assumption that I ask That needs to be accepted which is that As the towns grow or shrink in population or well They do so in roughly the same proportion as they are today So with that we come to a um Basically the total line shows a divergence of an inequity between Countess and Worcester the two forward towns East Montpelier the second wealthiest town of um Close to six million dollars over a period of 19 years um Because it's where's the six how I'm missing the six friend Right if callus and Worcester together are roughly the same size as east Montpelier. Yeah So Callus and Worcester together are going up by 3.5 say They're They're disadvantaged the extra that they're paying 2.1 million plus 1.4 million I'm sorry. I don't know where you are Way to the right yes My apologies Yes, I promise not to get too far down here But the important point is that it's not just that Worcester and Callus are paying more The counterpart to that is that east Montpelier Is paying less So that inequity includes both the more the Callus and Worcester are paying and the less So that essentially that um That is the difference between what merger does versus non-merge Now I know um This may be part of the reason why the parties have not briefed the judge because um I'm the world's worst explainer of things, but um The what I did try to do is translate it into chimden And show that total column As if each of the towns were brollington Were the same size as brollington And what those amounts would look like if that were the case Just so that you have a sense of Of magnitude of this um The essential point is that It would be as if asking brollington to undertake Were to impose on brollington without a vote without any money without any improvements the obligation To pay off over a period of 20 years a 45 million dollar bond And I know brollington had a 70 million dollar bond recently that was big news all over It was Approved overwhelmingly, but they got money for So I'm not sure they got money for the school. Um, the brilliant in the high school by Basically they bonded so that's to improve their service. But what do you mean they got? I mean, I'm from brollington. What do you mean? We got the money Here there's paying off 20 thinning of this Oh, yeah See what I mean. I'm demonstrating my Yeah What this is all leading to is that um, uh, this debt business is not some It's not some phony You know made up thing. I know there's um There's a notion going around that it can be solved in the articles of agreement. Um This is a common misconception If it could have been solved in the articles of agreement you think that Don't use a savage who have come up with a language for one thing Um, and if anybody tells you that it can be solved in the articles of agreement, please Say to them that your friends in washington central would be Overjoyed to see the actual language and if they can provide that We'll embrace them on both cheeks and salute their genius in public But for now I have a feeling that We may be in a similar situation to two years ago where if you recall the legislature I think Correct me if I'm not pleased. We have the idea that act 49 would be kind of the final Uh, the final word the final legislative word on school district consolidation And um, of course Um I Think it's not inconceivable That even though the age 39 as it is now, um with your committee may Be intended to kind of So things up, you know Basically, you know pending action by the courts, of course But um It wouldn't surprise me if School district consolidation were on the agenda again The next year in some form whether it's debt Whether it's any number of other of these little bony nuggets of contention And if I can just jump in there with a couple of things so I feel redundant, but again if you look at the map behind you This has been a process everybody who's uh marked in gold Has satisfied act 46 in one way or another some of those came from act 49 from the changes been made When we are back here next year there will be more of those in gold. I don't think everybody will be Will be moved when we are here next year because This committee is trying to get you a year to let So, um, I don't want anybody to lose sight of the fact that the only place in the building That has been willing to grant a year delay is this room. So Um, I understand people are not necessarily perfectly happy with the condition that comes with those delays But elsewhere in the building that it possibly doesn't even exist So there's that so when we come back next year, my goal is to make sure We're not in groundhog day At the exact same place So that's why the bill says at the very least communities have to form that first Initial board and then they can make the decision to delay Then let's say June 1st comes And the judge rules and let's say his ruling is very similar to his preliminary injunction ruling And he says act 46 is on firm footing and the merger should go forward At that point, I would hope that many of the districts that have been waiting for that moment would go forward Some of them might say hell. No, we're gonna wait for the supreme court But this body next year Uh, is not going to act to delay The merger process any further. So it's presented in this bill as a final delay. Whereas in act 49 it was presented as A delay to get to the end. So I'm I hear what you're saying and and in a worst-case scenario, you're right Well, I understand thank you for that. Yeah, um The bill that you have with your committee right now, um, I'm not speaking directly to it because On my side, it doesn't contextualize So I'm kind of speaking around it which takes me back up to the top of this To I suppose That handy four letter mnemonic for For a process and I think Does it end in stupid? It does not It's in value like That's another four letter mnemonic. Okay. Yeah, there's no shortage, but um This I think will have no bearing whatsoever on what you're doing because When I'm saying here I doubt if it contextualizes in on your plan Um, so essentially what I would like to do is offer this As a gift from my planet to you words, um, I come in peace And you always have Thanks, um, but from the from the planet forced merger reality on the ground and What I try to do is convey a thumbnail for a way for the state to governing this matter with wisdom with caring and with humility in the face of a human reality just so far outstrips our individual powers of comprehension so, um There's a double gift in it too. If you have this for next years around Then you don't have to have it back You don't have to copy them anyway Well, thank you, sir. Any any questions? Scott. Thanks for your testimony and we started that But do you have I know you since the Bill that we're looking at is from this other planet as you say so it's hard for you to like Really weigh in on it, but I wonder if you've given thought to it as compared to the house Which for your districts other districts didn't get a delay, but your district didn't get a delay in the house version so I don't know if you at least have an opinion on those two um, I may I um You want to have a dance?  Welcome to our planet I'm too excited. Yes, um but That's a choice too bad for you. Yeah my own my own attitude at this point is fatalistic And it's with the people. I mean with the people of our communities. They're gonna do things like that You know may not be what I would do there, um, they're very much engaged and very much you know Reacted to everything that's happening Well, I was gonna make a comment about the little debt question. Uh, one of the one of the school districts in our senate districts Um, had you know, they the four towns got together and one town had quite a lot of debt The other three said well, it's them now, but it'll be us later So, you know, and I personally made property taxes for another town's debt that they incurred You know, but I'm sure that at some point in the school, you know in the town where I live Will need You know to incur debt too. Yeah, and that that is um, that was a major point in the statewide proposal That you know the school that has no bond today will need a new roof tomorrow and all of that um, it doesn't It doesn't solve the problem because there are schools that need new roofs that don't need to bond Actually with stirring cows or for the examples of having replaced their roofs without bonding in stages um, and that the other thing that I might just say to that is that um in my desultory Adventures In trying to figure out what's going on with this. I haven't yet run across any state That forces mergers that in turn force the Taking on other towns bonded and dead ends Every one that I've come across in Kansas, Montana, michigan, utah um And it goes on from there They all have provisions for isolating that debt and having it paid off by the so-called Disorganized discreet um, so You know, I think it's just Kind of a technical Yeah issue. Well, the last thing I want to say is Two years ago when we did act 49. I heard I heard from you. I heard from janet ancel I heard from the representatives and so we deliberately included in act 49 language That forced the state board to consider differential levels of debt when they made their decisions So I hear you guys. Are you shaking your hand? Is that not true? well We talked about it my point was rather that we added it to the law And they did discuss it. It's in the record So my my point being that again if if you don't feel heard Sometimes I don't know why I would share this but sometimes my wife will say to me You don't say I love you as much as you used to and I say I say I love you every morning Which I did but she somehow stopped hearing me So I just want to make sure that you bring to consciousness that we spoke before and I put in legislation to Help deal with your problem. The state board made a decision that All things being equal the debt issue was not enough to prevent the merger I we didn't make that decision But we were there for these few years ago and we're we're here this year to offer the delay Thank you Thank you. Thanks. Okay So Devin Batchelder Devin here Welcome My name is Devin Batchelder. I'm a school member in Franklin And I I'm speaking as a private citizen today. You know, so we're gone sending me here. Um, so Others have I've already talked about a lot of the benefits of the delay from a practical perspective And a delay will afford those districts You know, I agree with those arguments that they've presented but rather than reiterate some of that, um, I do want to talk about another perspective Whether you're from a district that has merged or a district would be forced to merge or a district that's been passed over It's vital that we remember that we all want the same thing We want to look back at act 46 and we're all done We want to look back at the process and declare that it has been a success The success in improving student outcomes increasing access to educational opportunities And improving the efficiency of our schools In that effort, we're all on the same team In that spirit, I want to talk about the opportunity that a delay presents To this committee in terms of improving the final outcomes of the act 46 implementation process And what you should know about me is I tend to reduce everything down to mathematical models, which my wife hates So you and Corey get along We have a similar background in that. Yes, that's true So I believe Excuse me that the process as written in legislation actually provided an opportunity for an exceptional Result, but that the manner in which a particular part of the process was implemented Will lead to suboptimal results So just to get a little technical here, we'll hit the math quickly and then I think where this stems from is how we understand the conclusions that are reached in what's referred to In section one g and h of act 46 is national literature The literature on the benefits of larger district sizes books in terms of academic outcomes and financial efficiencies is fairly easy to find Many studies demonstrate The fact that larger districts tend to have higher academic performance And lower cost for equalized people however the phrase tend to is very important in that When it's omitted and we say that larger districts have higher academic performance and lower cost for equalized people We're left that believe in creating a larger district Will result in higher academic achievement and lower cost for equalized people Looking at cost for equalized people for a moment If we understand the literature to mean that the larger district will result in lower cost for equalized people Then we could plot schools on a chart that looks like the one that's in that Where the increase in the number of equalized people's results in a lower cost for equalized people in virtually every case This would suggest that by merging any districts We could achieve the lower cost This is the thinking that leads us to implement the one size fits all approach When viewed this way, it's easy to forget That we're trying to accomplish the five goals laid out in act 46 And instead we say large size equals low cost and we say large size equals higher achievement When you do this Increased district size becomes the only goal However, what the data actually looks like is in that second graph. It's certainly not right along that trend line This is pulled from the agency of education website The downward trend still exists. So it's still correct to say that larger districts tend To have a lower cost for people, but the relationship is not as definitive as the prior statement The same relationship exists when it comes back to academic achievement There's a graph in here From a study published by Illinois State University showing student achievements for Against the rank order of the district size that positive trend exists, but not all points fall along that trend line Cost data is what I'm going to talk about for the rest because it's easier to to pull and work with But the trend line is important because it represents our best guess of what the results of any merger would be For instance, if three smaller districts were to be merged into a district of a thousand equalized pupils We would expect the cost for equalized people in that new district to be slightly higher than $15,500 In most cases the move along this line to the right represents an improvement Which is why the national literature concludes that there are advantages to larger districts It's also why many communities throughout Vermont have elected to form merged districts either in the past Or as part of this process which we can see on the map up here We would expect that more of them would want to do that because they've judged that those in those situations improvements would be expected If we strictly adhere to this model and merge districts wherever possible What we expect is for the new districts to fall along that trend line But further to the right under lower end And this is the movement to the right Which represents the savings that we expect to realize however we can do better And the amendment stat 46 that are in act 49 told us how This is where the real power and wisdom of the section nine process can be found In general, we expect merged districts to move to the trend line In most cases this results in a lower cost But what if the proposed mergers between districts that already have A cost that's below the expected cost of the resulting merged district Likewise, what if the academic achievement is currently better than what we would expect post merger To provide a real world example Using that cost data again in my home district in franklin I highlighted the districts of franklin, high gate, sheldon and swanson on that next graph That one of the red Diamond red Yeah, the red diamonds of those four districts the weighted average cost for pupils among those four districts as it stands as when this data was published as 12,568 dollars But we would expect a cost for equalized pupil to be 13,685 Dollars given the costs are given the size of the resulting Three town merged district As proposed In this case that move towards the trend line produces unfavorable results As I stated before the literature agrees that an association exists because more often than not this move toward the trend line will be favorable It's understandable that the agency of education the state board of education Was strictly here to the model because we would expect it to produce favorable results in aggregate By moving everyone toward the average we would expect to achieve some savings or higher education outcomes That's a good one here But this level of savings actually represents sort of the minimum level of success that could be achieved Because it implements the good along with the bad It moves everyone towards that expected Value toward that average I would describe this approach as an average implementation Resulting in an average overall governance structure and an average educational delivery system Act 46 provides a means by which we can move districts toward that trend line when that move is favorable and section 9 Provides a way to avoid moving districts toward that trend line when that move is unfavorable Can I just can I just um ask Are you suggesting then that we Replay the section nine process with the legislature letting them? Uh, that would be one potential solution. I would I would I'm I'm suggesting that Uh, this body. I'm asking that this body would to would Would exercise this role in providing oversight of this process and realize that there's a better way to do this There's a better outcome to be had and that may Require either the state board Looking at these again with more clear instructions from this group or this group itself This body itself for viewing those those section 9 proposals So making this distinction and acting accordingly was what would transform an average implementation into an exceptional one This is the difference between merging wherever possible And merging wherever necessary Realizing this opportunity Could be what differentiates for post merger system from other places like Maine and West Virginia Where the one size fits all models implemented And where mergers where mergers are cut or curry wherever possible and where the overall success is highly questionable We all want act 46 to succeed. We all want a sustainable education and delivery system We all want more efficient schools and better outcomes for our kids The section nine process And the alternative governance structures We're meant to go hand in glove with the district mergers To produce the best possible statewide system Section nine allows the districts to feel that they are exceptions to the model in terms of cost and or educational opportunity To identify themselves And present their case that merging would not be the best model in that district at this point in our history When this part of the process is overlooked As it has been in the opinion of multiple districts here today We become average Why would we pursue average policy? Why would we advocate? For an average result Why be average when the tools information and the legal framework have been provided to us so that we can be better than that? If even one district Is properly identified and allowed to continue to operate with better than expected outcomes and with better than expected costs Then we as a whole are better than average The more districts that we properly identify and allow us to continue to achieve the exceptional results The greater this difference between ourselves and average will become The districts that continue to push back against forced mergers could be viewed by some as stubborn and uncooperative However, what these districts are in fact doing is sending out a warning signal to the legislature Attempting to call your attention to the fact that there is a better way of implementing this law They're calling your attention to the fact that we're leaving opportunities on the table By moving all districts towards the average The legislature and the agency of education the state board of education would be wise to pause and listen Not to summarily dismiss these concerns or these voices They'd be wise not to dismiss your fellow Vermonters But rather to see this feedback for the opportunity that it is Because likely it's the final decision regarding these districts that will determine whether we end up with an average or an exceptional public education system in the state As a lifelong Vermonter and as a taxpayer as a school board member in Franklin and as a father of three young children I find it unacceptable that we would look at the tools in front of us See that we have an opportunity to build an exceptional educational system And yet we would settle for being average I urge this committee to issue a delay A no strings attached delay for all districts that are being forced to merge To give the state board of education another opportunity to take a look at the section on proposals with clear guidance Or for the legislature itself to take on that role We need to have an open and honest dialogue Between the reviewers and the submitting districts to find these opportunities that I described We've had two districts so far and I'll be the third to say that we have not felt heard during those section nine proposals we did not feel that we had that back and forth on our Alternative government structure proposals. I have read that legal decision and I understand that what the state board did meant the legal bar But that doesn't necessarily mean that it's good policy And this this body here I think has the vested interest and I hope would hold them that to a higher bar Because what we're after is the best possible end result not simply meeting a legal bar Only in this way can we ensure that we best meet the goals of act 46 street school Each region in the state of Vermont We can do better. We should do better We must be better We cannot settle for being average I very much appreciate that was a very moving statement of something that we all agree with which is that we want to have exceptional education and Educator kids as well as we possibly can What I would say is I've spoken with both the old secretary of ed new secretary of ed And the state board at great length many many times about how they were conducting the process because I had my eye on it all the way through And I know that state board and the secretary Let's take secretary hoke up because she had the most to do with that Again, they spent hundreds of hours Going through the files going through the proposals And doing what they believe to be Not moving to create average schools, but moving to create exceptional schools Now I can see that you don't you don't agree with that But again, I would I would If if you're tempted to dismiss The process that the state AOE and the state board went through It was laborious and they went up and down the state three or four times holding here in us As well as individual meetings with boards So um I I hope you won't go to your grave thinking that they wanted average Outcomes for our kids. I understand that they did not and that they were doing what they thought was best Unfortunately, I do disagree that I believe the results have put us in that position fair enough And it's it's unfortunate that that when we did reach out to the state board to have that Open dialogue about our particular Alternative from the structural structure proposal. We did not receive a response from them Which which Certainly did not help us to believe that there was did you meet with secretary hoke on or Donna Russo savage we did have an initial meeting prior to Barbara had them meeting he'll speak next Yeah, let him speak to that. Okay Senator hard And Has talked about your situation, so I understand I'm trying to remember the math the white on the map those districts in white were mind being those are georgia Fairfax So one one way to look at this visually just since you were highly visual here If you look at that map orange is already satisfied Gray is on the border to merge and white was examined and analyzed and left as they were So if you look I'm sorry. Yeah, if you look at the ratio Of gray to white it's pretty deep And if you look at the number about half the ones considered by the secretary and the state board Were not asked to work the other half for it So again when judge mellow looked at this he said There wasn't he did not find it persuasive the argument that the state board had forced everybody to merge because If you look at the numbers They didn't it's so I just want to follow up on this. So the white districts They're not required. Got an a section nine Some of them might have might have put forward a section nine proposal that was um at the state board ruled was Uh Good enough that they didn't have to merge And then other people weren't merged I'm sorry Excuse ma'am ma'am ma'am ma'am ma'am You're gonna have to leave if you won't observe the chair So what I'm saying is The ones in white Were left as they were and the state board sometimes considered Um The section nine proposal they did not Some people objected to the fact that they did not positively accept section nine proposals So if they liked the section nine proposal, they left the district as it was But there were also cases where people's operating systems were different And given that the operating systems were different. They were not allowed to merge them So that's some of the white as well That's the majority of the white 36 of those were not possible to merge due to The structural differences. Yep. I love your mathematical Thank you very much. Can I speak? I'm sorry. Sheldon wasn't here isn't here I know you received her in testimony, but just since they're a member of Franklin Northwest I I do want to point out potentially a fatal flaw in the language of age 39 is drafted now that requires the unified forwards to to vote on Whether there's a delay or not I can see a very real possibility that the Montgomery Sheldon Bankersfield Berkshire group would vote to delay And that the Franklin Northwestern Supervisor Union group Swanton Highgate Franklin may not And so If we move forward front Swanton Highgate Franklin Then Sheldon's out, but if that other group were to To delay and they're not accepting Sheldon I I'm having a hard time So Sheldon Sheldon was moved. They were not only moved They're moved supervisor union. So they're depending if His point is if you have delay and not a delay depending on which if they're supervisor union choose not to delay And merge come here. They'll be left without a supervisor union to provide that So we're we're not the state board has the power to move supervisor union. So that's not covered by what we're doing No, that's what I'm suggesting is that if there were to be a new unified district of Swanton Highgate Franklin Then we're we're essentially moving Sheldon out of Our districts are not part of our districts. We're off doing our own thing Um, I'm I'm sorry. Is is Sheldon? Franklin Northwest Supervisory Union Swanton Highgate Franklin Sheldon. Well, let's emerge your the supervisor union thing is confusing me So let's let's just say who's under order to merge Swanton Highgate Franklin Okay, and so and then Sheldon's required to merge with Montgomery Supervisory, you know in a new district district. Okay, so that's a different situation and so Where does Sheldon go? If part only part of that process most of all Okay, so And so The other required merger is Sheldon and who? So those four, okay, so what we are saying is Swanton Highgate and Franklin would form their initial board And then they could take a delay if they wanted to And the others Sheldon Montgomery Berkshire And They could do the same thing So I'm not there's a possibility that one of those two would not take the delay Yes, so So it essentially orphans Sheldon if I don't understand how it orphans Sheldon. I'm sorry Well, the the the order is to move Sheldon to the the new for Yes, they're currently in the Franklin, so they're there would be a warned vote for those four towns including Sheldon And so I so they delay imagine they delay. Yes. So now they're not accepting Sheldon into the The Franklin D. Supervisor union or district Okay, the supervisory union is a different question. It's we're not we're not The state board doesn't need to have permission to change your supervisory unions. So in that situation You I guess you would say they would move Sheldon to the new supervisor union without merging them into a new district I we're not dealing with what the state board has said or done with supervisory unions. I'm saying that Those two situations that you laid out one with four towns number three They would each elect a an initial board and then they could decide To move forward or not. So if Sheldon elects the initial board as part of that four town merger Yes, they no longer have a voice in the Swanton Franklin high gate plan which includes removing Sheldon from the Franklin Northwest Supervisor union. No, they they have Their supervisory union is not affected by this So even if they if I'm taking your word that they are in a supervisory union with the other three And if they are the state board has the power to Alter the supervisory union boundary to reflect the new districts, which I assume is what they are doing So I can't see a situation where Sheldon is Orphan because they will only let them out of their SU If they're going to put them in another one Because the SU is where you deliver special ed and transportation so I don't I'm happy to talk with you later, but I can't so far. I can't see why there's a An orphan problem. Yeah, uh Maybe we should maybe I'm happy to once we're done the testimony if you want to hang around Okay, or maybe you can communicate it to Cory in the talk I appreciate your testimony. Thank you Paul Berger Welcome, mr. Berger. Good afternoon. Thank you. Thank you for inviting me here. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you today I feel a little disadvantaged having been in the hall. I haven't been able to hear all of the back and forth So if I repeat something or tread on the ground that have already been covered Pardon that and But from what I have heard and I do know What I intended to say It also has a link to our alternative government structure proposal and I included our executive summary as well But what I'm hearing and what I've observed so far to do Every person that sat at this end of the table has had concerns with the way the alternative government structure proposal situation was handled the way that was implemented I understand you've had conversations with the state board's education the agency of education and they assure you that everything was handled Just fine. I'm not sure how many people have to stand at this end of the table and tell you that it was not handled We were the boots on the ground. We are the ones that spent Hundreds of hours in committee coming up with our alternative government structure proposals Only to be called cranky and resistant by the state board of education If you know We had that you can go to the october 17th meeting at 246. Oh, he's a time stammer john carol called sad We've been treated as people that sat on the sideline and Hope that this will go away that we can weather the storm and have this involved Nothing to be further from the truth We worked hard To meet foreign compliant with the law the way that we understood the law in section nine with a part of back 46 In section nine allowed four districts of that didn't fit the mold to be able to provide an alternative government structure proposal Their needs and provide a way to meet the goals of back 46 We did the pre 706 study and We found out for after having public forums with our committees and with our communities That was not an option for our our voters. They let it be known plain and simple for that today at no interest in And it's for a variety of very good reasons not the use of which is community history culture and past Issues that communities have had with each other even in recent times On top of that when you look at the disparity in the size and the cost per pupil in our schools You end up with the smallest school, which according to your model shouldn't happen But our smallest school is franklin. It's also the most efficiently run schools as far as cost per pupil And it's also also the highest achieving school So it's an anomaly amongst all of your models And and it stands to prove that one size is not fit all When we looked at the numbers as a committee across all of our Communities we found that the numbers show that tax rates would go up Significantly in franklin because of that disparity the cost per pupil cost of educating their kids If I remember goal five of that 46 is to deliver education at a cost that the taxpayers involves value And I don't know anyone that values increased taxes We brought that to the agency of ed when we met with secretary holman and discussed that concern And Even though we show the numbers in her analysis, which it wasn't actually her analysis It was the acting secretary's analysis when it came out in the initial plan That was dismissed our numbers were Authenticity of our numbers was brought into question It was a question of whether the computation took into account, you know potential savings that could be realized by creative use of our resources and the More flexibility of a larger district Well, I'm here to say that that completely discounts all the work that they have done to that point with creative use of their their resources Sharing positions across districts sharing contracts sharing bulk purchasing all that had already been done There's a reason that our school spends less than two percent of the other schools in the state of Vermont because we've been efficient We've been responsible there were no A no additional savings that we could find So our computation were real tax numbers based on historical data And the only thing different was a merged budget and a merged model And it bore out that the tax rates would go up when we presented that concern again It was dismissed I responded to that in writing to the state board of education And then gave oral testimony to them in July the last year in Newark to the same effect again. It was dismissed And and we want to talk about Bolts that we had You want to talk about communities and people who are I'll admit we ended up that cranking because we did get there when we were cranking because We felt nobody's listening to the student's entire process We we were doing our best in good faith to come up with a way to meet the goals of the law and We ran up against the brick wall at every step of the process When we had Bolts in our community that were unanimous not in just one community But three of the communities affected unanimous let that sink in for a moment. You guys are in politics You know what a unanimous vote means and how rare that is not in just one community three communities People supported they did not want budget. They realized that it was not the best option for our children and They supported our alternative So sir, I Hear you I my heart goes out to you. I'm I'm listening But we have a room full of witnesses So far you haven't spoken to the bill that we have in front of us So the thing that you might have missed since you had to be out in the hall was I said if you spend your time talking about the The passage of act 46 or about how the state board operated Then unfortunately you'll get to the end and you won't have said anything about the legislation that works. I understand and yeah But everyone that sat here has not been heard and they feel like they need to be heard And if you want to spend your time that way you can I understand and I appreciate that flexibility But um, I think the committee needs to know that the process was not carried out in the way that it seems would have represented to you I understand you have your map up here. You have your color coded diagrams I understand also that half of those white or over half of those white blocks were because you couldn't merge them because it was physically possible to do so Um, I know that none of those were were act 40 or section 9 proposals So let me get to the time. Let me get to why we need to delay because that's important Trying to give you some background on why the voters in our districts are upset You have a lot of angry people a lot of frustrated They're cranky. So mr. Carroll is not far off the mark when you call this cranky with good reasons Um We're looking now at Having to bring a a condensed timeline To bring a vote on a connector at your budget my june 4th to these voters These voters have continuously been ignored. They feel frustrated. They have gone to the meetings in written letters We try to have an open dialogue with the state board of education is ignored When you bring them a budget vote People who are frustrated tend to take out their their feelings at the ballot box And my real concern is that if you bring them a merged budget On june 4th, they're going to vote their displeasure in the whole process Regardless of how responsible the budget this bill doesn't ask you to do that This bill makes it so you don't have to bring a merged budget by july of this year And and I understand that portion portion of the bill Um, but I also understand the conditions behind that to get to that point. You have to merge You have to elect a unified board to me. It's like carrying out and be hanging before you get the result of your appeal Well, we don't say you have to merge We say that you have to elect that first board and that board has the authority to give you the delay And that's your people that you will elect and To me that money is the water because then you're still Got a divided process that you're trying to follow We're we're trying to focus on two separate paths right now. We're trying to focus on an individual You know budget for our school as if it were one If we have a chance to win the lawsuit So that's part of that focus part of our focus is in merged budget You're talking about Trying to prevent chaos by by introducing, you know, I know that that's the argument that the agency that is providing you is that there's chaos and we need to just move forward to to finish that I'm here to tell you that if you push forward and don't give A just a straight clean delay for everyone that wants one anyone that's in a forced merger that does not agree with that I'm saying if you're a forced merger and you want to go ahead and you're prepared to and all the entities within that district are Good to go More power to you. That's great If that's what you want to do then go forward if you're not in that situation and any one Entity in that group does not want to move forward Then they should be allowed to time allow time for the court to make this decision allow time for The process to happen and if we get an unfavorable decision Time to process that and time to move forward and implement this in a powerful way not in a rushed hastily We don't want to move forward with hastily prepared budgets that are not well thought out We don't want to move forward with Articles of agreement that have been forced on us because we did not have a chance to go over those articles and change those into ways that work for our communities and Getting back to that boat process community outreach we're going to need to be able to spend a lot of time healing our communities and Discussing them and getting them on board so that we can move forward in a productive way and so Just to take it in two parts. So This bill that we're working on Reflects agreement with you that you need more time. So If you took this delay, you'd have between now in july and then an additional year so I don't know what that is 18 months or something good enough time So it seems like our remaining disagreement is whether the state should just grant that or whether the state should Try somehow to be Moving communities to a place where next year, we won't have people say Honestly, we don't have time to merge, right? So My concern is twofold one is to make sure you have the time you need And the other is to make sure that next year You don't sit in the chair and say honestly, we can't do it by july 1st so What this bill tries to do is Ask communities to take a couple of steps And then if you win your case Then you can just disband that first merged board and no harm no foul If you lose your case And it's clear you're going to have to present a merged budget. You've got a board in place to begin work I would vote or put that around. I just said we're we're We're really close in the same place. Yep Our disagreement is around the steps you have to take to to qualify for that. Yes On my view of that Just for conversation sake He's granted one year delay and we get to that point There's no harm no foul if we get an unfavorable decision and we have to move forward We've been in full compliance with the law and you mean if your initial board decided not to take it away No, I'm saying if we get an unfavorable decision, oh, and of course legal channels. Yeah And we're required to move forward and we would do that. I mean we've we've taken every step In which case you would have a board ready to go Uh, matter of having a board ready to go. It's not a major hurdle. That's an organizational meeting and And okay, but if it's not a major hurdle, what do we are? The fact that you're requiring us to take that step before we're legally required to That's what it comes down to. I think ultimately um I understand that there's this feeling that if the state says You know, I'm going to get up and get in my car and go to work If the state tells me to get up and get in my car to go to work I don't like it right because I want to feel free in my life and Generally, we try our best in this building to never Tell people what to do if we can avoid it. I know it doesn't seem that way But in this case We we had catastrophic demographic problems that we're dealing with and so Over the course of a decade. We've been trying to figure out a way to do this So unfortunately, we're at a point where It's it's now moved into the courts. The courts do not seem to be looking favorably on challenges to it, so Understood, but but all I'm saying is I really don't think there's any Granted it's a it's a step that you would be required to take But once you've elected that board Your elected people are going to decide whether to take the delay or not After that they could table any further action And and then if the decision goes in your favor They can have a meeting in this bank And I I can't see how that harms Anybody on the other hand What does it do in terms of having you queued up and ready to go if you do happen to merge? Then you have elected representatives who can speak for your interests in creating that budget I think the biggest issue and the reason why we were hesitant to that is the distrust Around the ags process. We don't feel that we've had a fair shake which has caused us to lose our faith in the entire process So requiring us to take these additional steps just to grant us a delay feels like it's more of a Usher than further down the chute so that it's higher but then you get back out. Let me ask you this How do you feel about the house bill? The house bill I think again, you're opening a can of worms because we had people that felt they had to present a 706 study And brought it to the voters and even if it was loaded down these folks are not eligible for a delay According to that, right? I think that's unfair because they were the community spoke They were presenting something that they felt was a normal procedure and I don't think that it was I I agree with you this committee agreed I think just a cleaned away of one year without conditions Well, I I understand to to you and people who are testifying similarly It seems like clean is clear But there are other people who believe that no delay should be given And for those people it seems like the state is in in that case just Abandoning the process now are those people in this room or are those people? Other communities that have only taken to clarify I would say that there are on the map there are plenty of communities that feel that way So if they have voted and they have merged and they are together and enjoying the The benefits that have been promised to them Then what hard does it cause them if you grant a delay to the other people that are waiting to get this sorted out? All I'm saying is that this bill is attempting to Square a circle find out a middle ground. It's not going to make people on either side Of the furthest side. It's happy What I'm trying to do is make it equitable to the extent possible get people their delay and satisfy at least a little bit the Urge to prepare to move a budget forward So bob the question I have in and we've talked about this for a while obviously In the front which I have but to ultimately move to you any kind of delay or to get any of these schools any kind of delay There has to be a compromise. Would you guys rather see something like what the language is? in What senator brief is proposed or nothing at all? I mean that's kind of I think you know Andy and I are Or with you guys in her scent, but again, we we work with numbers too We have to figure out how do we move something through the building and and I think the reality for us is Um, this is the best honestly iteration. We've seen out that there can't be adjustments made around over the next couple days, but What would you rather see a student nothing at all or to give you that that delay? That's hard to say. I really feel that as we move further down that process And and it's still your option because under this bill If you don't want to elect that initial board You don't have to but what what would happen is you would be expected to merge by july 1st 19 and if you didn't there's a provision that Creates a default budget for you because you're essentially saying we're we're not going to do anything At that point aoe would create your budget So I think the other path which this bill provides A very modest step you vote for your year delay and then you are fully Legally allowed to not do anything until you figure out what's going on with your purpose Well, I understand that you guys have to deal with compromises. I get that But from everyone I've seen said at this end of the day so far today. Nobody is on board with that compromise Okay, well the house the house bill is a possibility and that maybe We'll wind up in a conference probably with the senate and that is a possibility So if people would prefer the house bill So if you're from rattleboro, that would mean you get no delay If you're from orleans, that would mean you get no delay The whole list of people who get no delay That could still happen If I were you, I'd be pulling for us to pass this bill because it's much More sympathetic to your interests. I think if you're pulled back, I understand I was just gonna say I understand what you're used to further down the shoot analogy thing from The town I had a large slaughter facility. I understand that A metaphor but So the metaphor is like we're asking you to take a couple of steps to what you see as a clip And you don't you don't want to take your steps to get towards the cliff even if we're saying take two steps to get to the cliff To get this delay But as corey said This isn't kind of what we're dealing with We don't we don't want to push you towards the cliff but we're But we're trying to get something because the option really is this house bill nothing which Which you're gonna fight with a we come July 1st, which is fine But that's kind of what we're trying to figure out is like what's The best And I really have enjoyed Honestly, I've enjoyed talking with you, but we have we have to have the other witnesses I get it. So I let me just pull through it. I hope that you guys push forward with a delay option Yep, and I want to echo everyone else that says disabled and urge you to consider some sort of process to review In section 9 the form of unamerics because I assure you you're coming from the game ground That was not done Understood. Thank you. Thank you Cheryl Charles We're very patient We'll get out my testimony and share it with you But on our little chair the roof and the researchers committee. Thank you for the opportunity to be here. Thank you. I'll pass that around. That's my testimony and in addition This is a summary of our section 9 I'll introduce myself. I'll work with The testimony that you're being provided. I won't read all of it I will attempt to summarize it as I move around Absolutely. I urge you to read it all Um, I'm a I'm a member of the school board in west minster. I've done that role. This is my fourth year I'm also a member of the board of the Wyndham northeast Supervisory union when you look at the map that you guys have been considering We're down here in all of that sea of gray. I got it. Wyndham northeast Includes the white box, which is rocking him. Okay, and then the three boxes of us in gray By those being asked to merge the southern most three correct. Yeah West and south. Yeah, right like that. I am an educated by background I um started as a high school teacher of american government and american history as a as a by the way, but I've worked k12 and actually pre k through 12th grade Actually have a phd in curriculum instruction. So my diagram is all about education We've heard actually not from you all but from some others some criticism of some of the local boards as not being well prepared informed all of that Two of the five of us on the west minster board do have phd's in education. The others three Are engaged and informed and dedicated and they are parents of children currently in our schools So just to give you that perspective I've worked for decades nationally and internationally to try to improve the quality of education for children for families for communities and actually with western for the environment that supports us all too So that's just a bit about my background and my grandson who's six years old Is now a kindergarten at the west minster center school and his little sister is right behind So she'll be here soon Consistent with the last number of people you've heard from I will state clearly that I'm opposed to this forced as our Most of the members of our town As well as the members of our school board. We're a unified board. Actually, we're a unified supervisory union So we believe that only a delay will allow time for the court to act and I know that you all Are in support of the delay. I mean for more accurate. So I appreciate that fully But we believe that a delay is necessary to allow time for the court to act And for our boards and our communities to embrace the court's decision Whatever it ends up being in the end We have been very supportive of this process throughout and we will continue to be We Did it go through The full process. I'm skipping a few sections here But as a community and as the boards again throughout our supervisory union We strongly support the goals of act 46 and we have every step of the way I've been a member of the west minster school board throughout this process I worked on the study committee. I was a member of that So I helped prepare the articles that we took to our four towns for a vote when we took The articles of agreement to our town Three out of the four towns resoundingly defeated 74 defeated that vote in west minster Overall the sum of all the voters in the four towns 62 of all voters rejected the merger We therefore looked at the law because I can't stress how much We have read the law and reread the law and looked at the opportunity Through the section nine the alternative government structure proposal took it really really seriously and we thought That the law met what it said there that we could thoughtfully prepare Our case to be in an alternative Please know That we were not trying to protect the status quo We were not digging in our heels to resist change that would improve the lives of our children We sincerely work together as representatives of the four towns To find new and effective ways to make improvements and we continue to do so with increased efficiency Transparency accountability and program changes that allow for even more cooperation between high quality services And equitable educational opportunities to children in all four towns So we developed obviously what we think was an outstanding alternative government's proposal We submitted it in a timely manner We met with then superintendent secretary of education Rebecca Holcomb and staff We were pleased then that the acting secretary's reportive findings did not recommend a forced merger for our towns We presented to the state board of education on two occasions. We have representatives from all of our towns there All of us, you know United as I'm making this point And we got no serious questions really about the merit of our alternative government's proposal And then we were stunned to see the results of the november 20th Ruling that three of our four towns Would be forced to merge Creating one much smaller school district Rather than our current highly efficient and effective supervisory union of four towns Would the supervisory union go away? If you have the merger wouldn't they ask you to stay? That's not it's not clear to us. What's going to be the consequence of that. It's not clear Okay, yeah So, you know voters and actions grassland and westminster who overwhelmingly, you know, they were we were the three three of the four towns that decisively voted against the merger Um, we have saying, you know, the law asked for us to vote the law made no mention that no votes wouldn't be Considered or were unacceptable. So to us it makes no sense to ignore the will of voters And we think it's subsequently arose trust and how our elected officials And the government system works overall Part of the rationale offered to us by the state board's action in november was that we all we we had gone through all the steps That we had a study committee that voted the people we then Developed our alternative governance for this proposal thereby suggesting This is the board that we were ready for a merger of three of the four towns But our voters never voted on a possible merger of Athens That's right We voted on a possible merger of the four towns and our high school So the forced merger of our three small town schools will result in a new school district of only about 250 Whereas our alternative governance proposal for the four towns and our high school Brings up to 900 or more I want you to consider that We don't see how the forced merger benefits children or taxpayers And the previous speakers talked a little bit about indebtedness, but that's an issue we're facing As well We have different levels of indebtedness and the three panels being forced to merge Westminster carries a debt because we built a new high school in gymnasium some years ago Athens and Grafton do not they have far lower tax rates than we do And I just want to repeat because I It's natural, but um I I feel as though the bulk of the testimony we're getting today is about People feeling as though the order is unfair to merge and it should have been done differently And that's really not what we're considering. You're welcome to spend your time that way I I would be very interested to know what you think of the bill we're considering and whether that would help you or Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. My spirit around this though was to give you I thought perhaps some information You didn't have in this in your deliberation process Part of the state board's decisions suggested that we would be well prepared to develop a consolidated budget for the three towns I don't want to address some reasons that that's not the case right now um, one of them is because of the interconnectedness between our Supervisory union budget our local budgets and the state's economy system The west minster school board we work as a committee on our budget So we start early and we work for many months to prepare for presenting Our budget to the to the town meeting in march All of the school systems you I'm sure you know this but all the school systems in vermont are being asked to prepare for a new building system a new accounting system West minster actually our whole supervisory union Volunteered to be among the few towns that participated in a pilot that's going on right now We were one of three towns that went live on Our three communities that went live january 1 2019 The process is not going smoothly We have a really experienced long-term business manager and team And they are having to create and maintain two sets of books in the process because they're being asked to create a new chart of kills And the payroll system and it's not all in place. So they're struggling, but they're doing it. They're very good Add to that that the state has a new data gathering and data analysis system To determine the number of equalized pupils in a district We working with our business manager for the months of the process of developing the budget kept getting different numbers from the state And as late as the friday afternoon march 1st before our town meeting on march 7th We got new numbers literally The afternoon before we were moving into town meeting So that um has us not have all the confidence in the world That we would like to have in working with our partners at the state level So we think that if for no other reason than to verify the numbers on the system If we're being asked to develop budgets and all the data budgets and if you're putting in numbers that are romeos Makes no sense that we're going to get a quality product out of all of this so we Again we request the delay for many reasons, but this is one Think that any forced merger should be pushed out to 2020 to let the courts work on this process And we think that that will be a delay and I again, I think the settlement has to agree with a delay That that will be a much less chaotic process that will let us thoughtfully respond to what the courts decide And we'll continue to work together I'm glad to hear that Let me ask you if you could just quickly speak To the logic of the house bill So the house bill said So there's all these communities that want to delay have get it Based on the fact that they set up at one point a study committee or brought a proposal to their voters Do you want to just react to that because Brattleboro was one that was not given a delay We were not Yeah, right. Sorry. Yes. Um, you were not either and The the logic was that you were further down the path and you could Do it in ways that communities who hadn't done those things Couldn't right do you want to quickly speak to that? We don't agree with the logic We think we need more time and one example is the problem with the state budget system Yeah, yeah, we're acting with ours. How about how about specifically the The thinking that because you had a study committee because you produced a proposal You were further along and ready or well, that was a that was a proposal for four talents in a supervisory union Not these three talents. Yeah With, you know lower tax rates in two of the three and actually pressed more than The lowest poverty levels in the state in Athens Uh, it's and that's not what we work on So that does that logic doesn't work for me. I I thought you would say that. Um, we as a committee we felt the same way So our intention was to try to get you what what you have very carefully argued for which is the need for more time How do you feel about the idea of electing That first initial board to make the decision about whether to delay We too would prefer not to go that way with no surprise to you We appreciate your efforts. We just rather not even step into that until the courts have decided Is there a reason other than just we'd rather not take a step? Is there is there a practical reason we think it adds more confusion right now? Yeah, we're negotiations with Just literally toward the end of negotiations with teachers. I'll be on the negotiation changing the staff, you know, those will be commitments from our district That would continue of course fair enough fair enough It it just seems more elegant more fair. Okay, not to do fair enough. Um, any questions Thank you so much. I appreciate that you you came all the way and you waited a long time I have one more document to give you my colleague Jack Breyer is on the Grafton school board and he submitted his testimony in writing Is not here, but I just want to give it to you as well Thank you So much Sonia's falling Hey, I'm sorry I understand. Yep. Yeah One of the reasons why I was Trying to move in along is that we will tend to lose senators as we get later, so What's that? Is there actually I believe you might be the only person today to argue for no delay Well, I'm feeling a little bit like an underdog But I'm going to give you my my argument. Um, and as I apologize I'm going to read mine because I don't want to forget anything or spend some time on this so My name is Sonia's falling and I serve as the board chair in very city and it's been in the very city elementary and middle school board for the last Eight years I provided a testimony to the house education committee back in january and I also sent an email to all of you Regarding my position on delaying the implementation of act 46, and I want to thank you for allowing me to test it To present my testimony in person So although our district falls under the umbrella of a forced merger Our community supports being merged and following the timeline as outlined in act 46 This is evident from the fact that the voters of the city of berry have supported the merger in two separate votes The first in november 2016 and the second in november 2018 In addition to the support of the voters of very city is important to take into consideration the number of voters in Very town that also voted in favor of their merger Over the course of the last two votes in both communities and the re-votes in very town The majority of voters actually voted in favor Of a merger and I included a table at the end. Yeah Most importantly, I would note that in the last re-vote in very town more people voted to merge than not to merge But there were not enough votes to overturn the original results of the vote in november One of the most unfortunate consequences of this final result is that we didn't get any of the incentive money It has been frustrating that even though very city has been on board from the start We are only one part of the equation We will continue to move forward regardless in hope that as our communities are healing these wounds. We can all find common ground While I recognize that there are some communities that feel that they need more time That is not the case for us even with the defeated vote and re-votes our supervisor union has been slowly moving forward With the possibility that we may be forced to merge knowing that we may have a small window of time to accomplish that merger Our understanding of the law led us to believe that we would be forced to merge the state board of education's decision in november confirmed that to be true After that decision, we move forward with a transitional board, which has already held a vote to amend the default articles of agreement We have won an election for april with a slate of candidates for the new board of the very union school district We were viewing a draft of a consolidated budget and are working toward the consolidation of policies We hope the new board will want our first consolidated budget vote for many At this point it will take more time and energy to undo the consolidation work that has already taken place if we have to delay Specifically with regard with regards to our consolidated budget It will also delay the inevitable outcome of merging our districts with no benefits to our students or our communities I also understand that some districts may be struggling to comply with the law as it was written But I ask you to take into consideration that all of us have had the last 40 years to prepare for this By delaying the implementation of these force mergers you are suggesting that some districts need special treatment While the majority of districts have gone through the process of voluntary murder or in the process of complying with the constraints of a force merger You are also suggesting that some districts can continue to delay the intended efficiencies of act 46 Which includes larger economies of scale and cooperation This may be the most important piece of the puzzle in my opinion Since I believe we can all recognize that every school budget has an impact on every other district and budget in the state When the joint fiscal office recently recommended the change to the projected yield amount due to the increase in FY 20 budgets across the state That impacts all of us Our consolidated budget that has not been finalized or presented to voters yet Will have an additional one or two cents added to the tax rate without us adding a dime To the overall spending due to the budgets of every other district We all need act 46 to be implemented without delays so we can all read through the outputs I have also seen that there is some discussion in this committee about a compromise that allows new boards to decide for themselves Whether they should delay or not in all honesty. This seems like another application of your responsibility The Vermont legislature passed act 46 and pushed a very difficult task of forcing mergers Forcing districts to merge to the state board of education It seems like you're trying to punt again and pass the tough decisions off to the new boards While you recognize you can't make everyone happy You need to do what is best and right for our students and our taxpayers We continue to hear about rising costs and education spending But we have yet to have a full year of every district following act 46 While our districts may meet many of the goals of act 46 Including some of the lowest per people spending in the state I believe that with every district moving toward consolidation and efficiency We can start to see results and I ask you wasn't that one of the main reasons that this law was enacted in the first place When making your decision, I hope you recognize that the public education system in Vermont has been a political lightning rod for at least the past eight years Some of the new initiatives and laws that come to mind But I have lived through Include the consolidation of special education and transportation under the supervisory union umbrella For free pay, proficiency based graduation requirements, flexible pathways and most recently act 173 that addresses special education services and funding In addition, our business office is in the process of the mandated switch to a unified chartered accounts in the statewide school district data management system Our schools and the business of running our schools has been constantly under some mandate or change for many years All of these laws and mandates have the very best of intentions for the students and taxpayers Each one hopes to address either inequities rise in cost for the quality of education for our students The same to the set of act 46 With this in mind, I ask that you please recognize that we need to keep moving forward We have too much work to do to spend the time and energy undoing the work that we've already done Please do what is best for our students and what is best for our taxpayers? Do what is best for our communities? Please be clear and decisive and do not push this decision to the new boards or just push it off another year Let us continue to move forward together. Thank you. Thank you. I I appreciate that perspective. We haven't heard today If I could just ask you so kudos to your districts for Moving forward on the process in in a in a very methodical way. I think that's great Um Nothing in this bill would Force you to take a delay. You could obviously you could continue on your same path Is it a worry that the newly elected board might decide to take a delay because it's an option? Yes, okay I think um, if I look at the state of candidates, I think the You know, it's unknown who will be elected because there are some contested races. Um, and there the the Candidates for berry city. I think are primarily in favor, but there are some candidates in berry town for or not So depending on the makeup of that board, we could be faced once again with berry city versus berry town and it just becomes very sticky because You know, we're continuing to move forward and that could just You know, I have to say berry has been something that I won't speak for others But I I have thought a lot about your situation when I've talked to Jeff Francis and Nicole mace They talk about berry as a community who has been doing great work that they don't want to see bumped off the track and I have Thought a lot about that. I can't see a way other than naming berry Literally in which we sometimes do in certain circumstances Other than naming berry and saying you don't get a delay and under any circumstances keep going I can't see a way to Provide the other communities that need their delay We looked for ways to create a category of people That obviously didn't need the delay or shouldn't have the delay and we just couldn't find a logical way to do that so I suppose if I take myself as the person who Mostly drafted that legislation What I was thinking was That newly elected merge board, which you've already warned That election, which is great That that body is going to be a representative body And they're going to represent the will of the people It's the will of the people is to take another year to do it Unfortunately In your case, maybe that will delay things, but it will be because of that local democratic vote And the other people will also take their democratic votes and most of them I think judging from today will be glad To have that board representative and asking for a delay But the idea is to As much as possible stay with the democratic process that's outlined in the default articles And to be true to our word once that merge board is elected It's empowered And it has the ability to to make the choice I I hear you that they might make a choice that you feel would set the work back, but it would be The choice of representative elected officials Speaking on behalf of the communities So my concern with Pushing the decision to an elected board Is that the people In this, you know in our case our candidates have already submitted petitions And we have a state of candidates and and absentee ballots are going out in the mail. I think that's me So but that's not to say that there couldn't be a write-in campaign and i'm concerned about People who only have this one position in mind And have no experience or concern about how to run a school or the best I know I'm those are my concerns and every every elected official in here. I'll I'll just look at the senators This happens all the time you get you get people who run on one issue For senate for house for school board for city council Because there's a a scum plant on the river and they want to close it down And they're like i'm the anti scum plant person and people will run saying i'm the anti merger person And that's how democracy works Some people run and say i'm gonna be the candidate who does the thoughtful thing And gets us through this tough transition and i'm going to continue on the road to completing You know to completing our merger work by mayor jim and and the voters will The voters will pick and Yeah, yeah, are they all at large? There's one there's one seat that's at large and there's foreign very city and foreign very town. Yeah The house version Right And I know that the house thought a lot about it and credited your situation and wanted to make sure that That you could move through ours is ours is dice here because we are Devolving some of that decision to the to the local merge board Very is it small enough to get the small school? We have another Thank you so much. Thank you. I appreciate your The willingness to come So I believe we have two more witnesses It's Actually three because we have a witness on another topic But john pendall Very again So some of what you will hear will parallel some of what sonia said her perspective is as a school board member in my perspective In speaking about barriers as a superintendent And i'll pick up I think a few to address a few of the things that you brought up in your discussion just now so My name is john pendall fault. I am the superintendent of the very supervisory union And i'm going to start this by saying thank you for hearing my testimony on behalf of the very supervisory union But also as a resident of the washington central supervisory union and as a member of the law school board's association So i'll begin by speaking as the superintendent of the very supervisory union in preparation for today I reviewed the testimony I provided to the house side committee on january 23rd of this year on age 39 As well as what I provided in 2017 on various progress on that 46 I felt that information provided then is relevant for today. So I attached it to today's testimony As you're hopefully aware, very has been continuously engaged in efforts to implement at 46 for more than three and a half years While we did not succeed in achieving a voluntary merger We have accepted the state board of educations order to merge and are actively and rapidly moving forward Towards the july 1st 2019 date to begin operation as the very unified union school district We held one of the first organizational meetings in the state for our new union district on january 10th Just two days after our last fair our last failed voluntary merger reconsideration vote We successfully voted to amend our default articles of agreement on february 19th and have warned elections for our new distri