Informational Goals of Act 73 Vermont’s 2025 education transformation law restructures education governance, finance, and district design to standardize funding and establish new accountability rules statewide. Aims to address Vermont’s high cost-per-pupil and declining test scores. Seeks to ensure students have multiple high school programming opportunities. Focuses on consolidating districts to improve efficiency and equity. Governor acknowledges that only elementary schools are the “heart” of communities, and this Act 73 targets high schools primarily. Seeks to proactively address Vermont’s declining student population. Establishes the School District Redistricting Task Force (up to three proposed maps by Dec. 1, 2025; implementation July 1, 2028). Intended to improve equity, efficiency, and consistency across districts. Legislative approval and public vote are required for key sections to move forward. State balancing of local vs. state control in decision-making. Effects on Administrators and Teachers Many superintendents and administrators will lose jobs by 2028 due to district consolidation. Teacher layoffs expected as schools close. The state is saying that it will not take accountability for these layoffs or closures and that it will be the new school boards’ decisions. Larger class sizes and standardized class minimums could increase workload and reduce individual attention to students. Teachers face uncertainty around contracts, pay, and healthcare (potential statewide standardization). Job losses could lead to teachers leaving Vermont, worsening the statewide teacher shortage. Questions about who will manage larger districts, how roles/hierarchy will change, and how advocacy for staff and students will continue across wider regions. Teachers’ healthcare costs have risen sharply without matching pay increases. Larger class sizes may limit elective offerings. AOE has addressed AP course class sizes.  Administrative consolidation may reduce institutional knowledge and efficiency long-term, as positions are often rehired later.  Teachers in small schools currently know every student; loss of that community connection is a major concern. Property Tax (Old and New Systems) Old System: Each school board created its own budget funding partly from local property taxes. Quarry Valley School District is among the lowest cost-per-pupil Supervisory Union in the state ($11,000/student). Vermont received money from the federal government to help keep taxes from rising. These funds were distributed to all school systems.  New System (Act 73): Moves from pupil-weighting to a foundation formula — every student would receive a base of $15,033 per year. Students with extra needs (economic disadvantage, ESL, special ed.) get up to 5% more ($751.65). The Legislature is saying that add-ons could double the cost-per-pupil, but the state is saying that there is a cap of 5% of the $15,033, which is an additional $751.55.  Taxpayers do not vote on per-student funding; the state assigns amounts. Three new income classifications: homestead, nonhomestead residential, nonresidential). Takes effect January 2027 (pending passage). Regional reappraisal districts established; reassessments every six years. This is causing property taxes to increase for many people across the state, even before Act 73.  Expected 25% increase in property tax rates for some communities, including QV. Wealthier districts may lower their taxes (and gain the potential programming benefits of Act 73) while poorer ones rise — potentially increasing inequality.  Act 73 Financial Plan Implementation Foundation formula begins FY 2029 (July 2028) if prerequisites are met. Redistricting Task Force maps (due Dec. 1, 2025) determine district boundaries for financial changes. Only one map has been made. The Task Force only has four more meetings before it needs to present its three maps and the opinions of the people to the Legislature.  Governor’s document excludes transportation, capital expenses, and special education — major cost omissions. These costs are typically included in a school budget.  Legislators claim these will be handled locally, but this could raise overall costs. Savings from the layoffs of administrators may not offset the long-term costs of implementation due to an increase in property taxes.  The state has not released comprehensive fiscal impact data; local districts are unsure of actual budget outcomes. Unclear how budgeting will occur with fluctuating student numbers under the foundation formula. Communities will no longer vote on school budgets, only on additional funds for students who are economically disadvantaged, English learners, or in special education. Each student may receive up to 5% ($751.65) of the $15,033 base amount for these services. However, if local voters reject the extra funding—especially in areas with rising taxes—students may lose access to these additional supports. Academic Information AOE must update Education Quality Standards by August 2026:  Increase minimum class sizes (3-year rolling average), Standardize graduation requirements statewide. Overhaul of graduation requirements is looking to have a drastic negative impact on the Fine Arts,  known to help improve student well-being, overall knowledge, and soft skills.  All rules apply to independent schools receiving public tuition. Secretary of Education gains expanded rule-making authority. GRCSU test scores are increasing, not declining — contradicting legislative assumptions. Larger districts may restrict local programming flexibility and elective options due to larger class sizes and fewer teachers.  Questions about whether new structures actually improve student outcomes or access to advanced programs. Healthcare Concerns Teacher healthcare costs have increased significantly while pay remains stagnant. Healthcare negotiations occur at the state level, limiting teacher input. $340 million of school budgets statewide go toward healthcare costs. The government has not addressed healthcare reform, focusing instead on district consolidation, which has negative consequences for students.  Blue Cross Blue Shield of Vermont merged with Michigan due to the small state population, highlighting instability in the healthcare market. Healthcare accounts for ~20% of GRCSU’s budget. Other Concerns The state is not providing sufficient data or financial transparency in documentation. Worries over loss of local control and erosion of community identity. Snow days and local decision-making could become impractical under larger geographic districts. Larger districts mean voting for unknown board members from faraway towns. Class size rules may force closures even if the state claims otherwise. Questions about transportation costs and student commute times. Homeschooling may increase as schools consolidate. Lack of economic studies on the statewide impact of layoffs and closures. Many believe Act 73 repeats mistakes of Act 46 — “repackaged” consolidation effort on a larger level.  The Act is a “living document”, meaning rules will continue to evolve. GRCSU Specific Information GRCSU is fiscally conservative yet offers diverse programs and extracurriculars. The QV cost-per-pupil is currently $11,000. This would mean that QV’s property taxes would increase drastically based on the new foundation formula ($15,033 cost-per-pupil).  First Redistricting Task Force map places GRCSU in a region centered on Stafford Technical Center, including: Otter Valley, Rutland City, Mill River, and Fair Haven.  GRCSU may need to merge with nearby SUs to meet the 4,000–8,000 student target. GRCSU’s model would preserve local voting and community decision-making. Concerns that the governor’s earlier map placed GRCSU with Bennington — undesirable due to travel distance. GRCSU schools currently have capacity for all local high school students. Benefits of Small Schools Small schools provide personalized education — teachers know every student. Schools that serve all age levels act as the heartbeat of small towns and foster strong community ties. Allow for individualized instruction, easier communication with families, and greater community involvement. Loss of small schools may weaken local economies and community identity. Parents rely on community networks (pickup, after-school support). Larger class sizes could harm student learning and well-being. How Can Act 73 Be Repealed? If the Redistricting Task Force fails to produce three maps by December 2025, Act 73 is automatically repealed. If the Legislature rejects the maps or fails to adopt them in January 2026, Act 73 is repealed and would restart from scratch. Communities can influence repeal by contacting legislators and voicing opposition. Attend public hearings run by the Redistricting Task Force (e.g., Oct. 22 meeting at Rutland High School). Encourage local advocacy through communication with the Redistricting Task Force and state representatives. Email the information in the petition to the Redistricting Task Force: ADM.Redistricting@vermont.gov  Timeline July 1, 2025: Governor signs Act 73 into law. Aug. 1, 2025: Redistricting Task Force begins work. Sept. 1, 2025: School Construction Advisory Board convenes. Oct. 1, 2025: School District Voting Ward Working Group meets. Dec. 1, 2025: Task Force submits up to three map proposals. Dec. 15, 2025: Construction debt report due to the Legislature. Jan. 2026: Supplemental construction/debt transfer. June 30, 2026: Redistricting Task Force sunsets. Aug. 2026: Update Education Quality Standards (class sizes, graduation standards). Jan. 2027: New property tax classifications take effect. July 1, 2028: New district structure targeted implementation. FY 2029: Foundation formula and new funding model begin (if prerequisites are met).