Reps float petition for repeal of Acts 60 and 68 this session

by Hilary Niles vtdigger.org
Two Republican lawmakers have started a petition to repeal Act 60 and Act 68, the education finance laws that established Vermont’s public school funding structure.
Representatives Heidi Scheuermann, R-Stowe, and Patti Komline, R-Dorset, have proposed the repeal Acts 60 and 68. They want to retire the funding structure by July 1, 2016. A new funding mechanism would be hashed out in the next year or so, potentially for implementation in the 2016-17 school year, they say.

Rep. Patti Komline, R-Dorset. Photo by Roger Crowley/for VTDigger
Komline and Scheuermann hope to attach the repeal/replace proposal to the education finance bill currently under consideration in the House Committee on Ways and Means, of which Komline is a member. Scheuermann proposed an amendment with similar language in 2013.
Scheuermann credits legislative leaders and Gov. Peter Shumlin for prioritizing the debate about education finance this year. “The fact that it’s now out there, that yes, indeed, it needs to be reformed, that’s positive and I’m excited about that,” she said.
Shumlin and some legislative leaders are less excited about Scheuermann and Komline’s petition.
“The governor is keenly aware that many Vermonters feel their property taxes are too high,” Shumlin’s press secretary said by email Tuesday afternoon. “That said, he does not believe it is productive to propose a gimmick to repeal Vermont’s entire funding system without a well-developed, thoughtful alternative plan that continues to ensure excellence and equity in education.”
His sentiment echoed that of Rep. Janet Ancel, D-Calais, the chair of House Ways and Means.
“We’ve made it clear that every constructive proposal is on the table,” Ancel said Tuesday morning. “I think repealing the way we fund education in our state without knowing what we’re going to replace it with is irresponsible.”
She’s also not convinced the current structure needs replacing. “It’s not that I think everything is perfect — not even close. But fundamentally, I think that Act 68 still works,” Ancel said.
“At its best, (the petition) is an effort to make a discussion happen. But the discussion is already happening,” Ancel said. “At its worst, it’s just politics, and that isn’t really helpful.”

Reps. Heidi Scheuermann, R-Stowe, and Paul Ralston, D-Middlebury. Photo by Hilary Niles/VTDigger
Scheuermann did not blink at the suggestion the petition was politically motivated. She and Komline characterized the petition in interviews less as a literal proposal and more as a call to action, or a way for taxpayers to send a message to their elected representatives.
“It’s about the policy and making sure we do what’s right for Vermonters,” Scheuermann said.
“Whether you reform it or repeal it, it needs drastic changes,” Komline said. “The reform that’s been talked about in (House Ways and Means) is like nibbling.”
Steve Jeffrey, executive director of the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, said his members have not developed an official position about the repeal/replace proposal, but they are very interested in the discussion.
“Our members continue to be concerned that almost 70 percent of the education bill is paid for from property taxes,” Jeffrey said. “That’s up from about 61 percent back when we adopted Act 68. So we do need to do something better than the current system to control our over-reliance on the property tax.”
Darren Allen, communications director for the Vermont chapter of the National Education Association, said his organization doesn’t buy the proposition that the system is fundamentally flawed.
He says he knows education is not cheap. Vermont NEA members, who are also taxpayers, appreciate concerns about the increase in state and local property tax rates for education spending.
“There’s been a lot of conversation about how to take a system that’s one of the fairest in the country and make it better,” he said. “And that’s a discussion we should have every year.”
As for the notion of repealing Acts 60 and 68, Allen said: “We don’t give it much credence,” Allen said.
Part of what Komline and Scheuermann want to accomplish is a streamlining of the financing formula for a clearer connection between school budget votes and property tax bills.
In H.378, Scheuermann has proposed consolidating supervisory unions into “education districts,” which would share boundaries with Vermont’s regional technical centers. These would form the basis for regional property taxes to fund local school budgets.
Komline wants to focus on per-pupil spending. She’d also like to establish a baseline, or “essential” level of education to be paid for collectively by the state. Local towns or school districts would pay the difference.
Komline and Scheuermann say their efforts will be worthwhile if it pushes along the legislative debate about education finance reform.
So far about 1,000 taxpayers have signed the online petition, Komline said Tuesday afternoon — about half of them are Vermont residents.