By Christine Sullivan
As a local representative to the Act 46 subcommittee, I appreciate the myriad concerns being expressed regarding the impact this legislation will have on our schools and communities. However many of those exist, the reality is that the Legislature, responding to demands for relief from the continued increase in education taxes, has acted upon the belief that consolidation will bring cost savings. Rather than bemoan the different aspects of the legislation and the way it has been marketed, perhaps it would be better to take advantage of the opportunities it offers and use them as tools to improve the quality of education offered throughout the supervisory union and avoid the fiscal crises looming over most of our schools.
Act 46 does not offer the choice to opt out; it’s not if we consolidate, but when and on whose terms. If all the member districts of Washington West Supervisory Union (WWSU) decide to opt in before July 1, 2016, we can do so to our best financial advantage. A failure at accelerated merger still allows for conventional merger, which also offers financial benefits and the opportunity to merge our governance structure on our own terms. If we wait for the Agency of Education to make the decision for us, it is possible that the best opportunity to prevent negative outcomes for our local communities and schools will have passed as we will have lost the chance to access the tax incentives. Both scenarios offer efficiencies, but the first provides a window of time with tax savings in which to achieve them.
This past budget season was particularly frustrating due to the spending caps imposed by Act 46 and the continued decline in student enrollment throughout WWSU. While the Legislature passed some last-minute fixes in answer to the difficulties encountered in attempts to meet this cap, many of its members still assert that they have worked: They have kept education spending down. But at what cost? Does it really make sense to spend portions of your contingency fund in an effort to offset costs so that the penalties can be avoided? Should building maintenance be deferred so that per pupil spending can be kept low? (We’re now learning that this does not have good results.) It is counterintuitive that one of the lower spending districts in our supervisory union would cut its budget by over 7 percent and still have to present its taxpayers with an increase in education taxes. It hasn’t made sense since Act 60, but that is the reality of our education funding system.
It won’t get better next year. Contracts have already been negotiated and the cost of health insurance continues to rise. Contingency funds once spent are gone. A bond to pay for updates and repairs needed to keep a building open in one town could prove very costly to local taxpayers if merger fails. It will be easier to meet the looming challenges as a larger unit with tax incentives than isolated with none.
One way to address the problem is through increased student enrollment. In reality though, are the rising costs of property taxes likely to draw families with school-age children to our towns? The other option is cutting staff. However, most, if not all, of our schools operate with the leanest staff possible and a curriculum that meets, not exceeds, requirements. One of the only options would be cutting classroom teaching positions and combining more than two grades in one classroom. Again, history shows this does not provide the best educational outcome for our children. And, if we can’t provide the optimal educational outcomes in our schools, who is going to move to our towns? Thus continues the downward spiral. The story is not much better at our high school, where time and again proposed budget cuts have been met with opposition. Given the realities of budgets and property taxes, it doesn’t seem realistic we can preserve the valued “extras” forever. High school should be a rich educational experience, not bare bones.
The sad reality is that under our current education funding system, WWSU does not fare well. If we decide to control the things we can, see Act 46 and the incentives it offers as opportunities and move forward in a timely fashion, admittedly, we will be taking advantage of incentives that will run out. It’s a short-term fix but one that will allow the member towns of a new district financial stability as the board thoughtfully and carefully considers ways to achieve efficiencies and cost savings while focusing on creating a rich educational experience and improved student outcomes. The alternative is not as promising.
Christine Sullivan is a member of the Waitsfield Elementary School Board.
