Representative Conlon spoke for H.483 on behalf of the House Education Committee. He called it a “long and thoughtful bill drafting process” that focused on “core values that should be attached to every dollar spent on public education.” He voiced concern that the town tuitioning program had “strayed” from its original purpose and that it was hard to imagine that the founders of the system intended their dollars to go across oceans. This was the justification for the 25-mile radius in his mind.

On Wednesday in the House Education Committee, Chairman Conlon asked Legislative Counsel to review if H.483 conflicted with the 2200 series rules. Legislative Counsel did not believe that there were any conflicts, however there are some provisions in the rules that are not in statute and vice versa.

The House Education Committee met briefly on Tuesday to review two changes to the committee amendment being offered on H.483. The first change was to remove the Vermont School Boards Association (VSBA) model policy for admissions for publicly tuitioned students to public schools (the language was maintained for independent schools). Concerns had been raised about the model policy, and VSBA is currently re-evaluating it. However, the rationale for removal of this requirement was the that title of the bill only referenced independent schools.

Chairman Conlon shared with the House Education Committee on Tuesday that over the weekend some technical changes relating to H.483 came to light.

The Senate Education Committee heard from Senator Hardy on Wednesday about S.66. She described the bill as being about the changing education landscape in light of recent US Supreme Court rulings (Carson v. Makin, etc.). She stated that the bill prioritizes the designation of public schools only for public tuitioning of students (regardless of whether one is within a practical distance). However, it does allow for tuitioning to independent schools that meet three parts of a four-part test intended to carve out the four historic academies (St. Johnsbury, Burr and Burton, Thetford, Lyndon Institute). She highlighted that her desire is to “really prioritize public schools” and that there are areas of our state where we have “divested from public education and communities don’t have the options for public schools that they once had.”

Returning on Friday, the House Education Committee heard from Mark Tucker (Superintendent, Caledonia Central Supervisory Union). His supervisory union tuitions nearly all high school students. He likes many of the provisions in the bill around equity and non-discrimination. He would like to see more done about special education billing and some of the reporting requirements. He also likes the notification requirements for dismissal of students from independent schools. Tucker pushed back on some of the attestations that independent schools suggested. He already has to make many of these with AOE.

The House Education Committee returned on Thursday to review draft 2.1 of their committee bill. The main portion of the bill essentially codifies the rule 2200 series for approved independent schools eligible to receive public tuition. After testimony earlier in the week, the new draft does not specify the frequency of attendance reporting. It instead defers to the Agency of Education (AOE) to create a format and interval for this reporting.

On Wednesday the House Education Committee came back to this topic, hearing from Sue Ceglowski (Executive Director, Vermont School Boards Association) who shared that she was testifying on behalf of the Education Equity Alliance. She called the current situation following the Carson v. Makin decision a “defining crossroads.” She believes that there are equity and accountability gaps in Vermont’s current “parallel education systems.” An issue she pointed to was “increased pressures” from expanded access to public tuition.

Dan French (Secretary of Education) shared with the House Education Committee on Tuesday that the Agency of Education did not fully support the bill. The main reason is because they just embarked on rulemaking with the State Board of Education (SBE), which he described as “yeoman’s work… to bring forward a much-improved regulatory framework for independent schools.”

He is concerned about changing the rules before they even go into full effect. His preference would be to see the new 2200 series rules go into effect and then make adjustments as necessary.

The House Education Committee took up their draft bill again on Friday, which would primarily look at strengthening anti-discrimination protections for independent schools. Chairman Conlon led off by saying that he wants to support Vermont’s anti-discrimination policies, like the public Accommodations Act. Notably, the new draft would also pause approval of further independent schools. He also reiterated that the purpose of the public tuitioning program, which is to fulfill our obligation to Vermont students where a public school does not exist or it is unpractical to operate one.