This commentary is by David F. Kelley, an attorney and a co-founder of Project Harmony (now PH International) who is chair of the Hazen Union School Board and coach of the debate team there and at Craftsbury Academy.
The authors of Act 46 said their goals were: 1. educational equity, 2. academic excellence, 3. efficiency, and 4. transparency. Only the Grinch who stole Christmas would oppose those goals.
But there is a serious disconnect between those goals and what Act 46 actually does. Act 46 does not reward equity. Act 46 does not reward academic excellence. It doesn’t reward efficiency, transparency or even making voters happy. Act 46 rewards school districts that adopt Montpelier’s “preferred structure.” Act 46 tells school districts we are going to give you money (and we’ll take it out of the state education fund) if you centralize your governance and adopt our “preferred stru...
Editor’s note: This commentary is by David F. Kelley, an attorney and a co-founder of Project Harmony (now PH International) who is a member of the Hazen Union School Board.
Students from wealthy families have always had school choice. Most students from poor families and even middle class families have not. But for over a century, in 90-some-odd small, rural towns throughout Vermont, school choice has been a great equalizer. From years of coaching high school debate I have come to appreciate the importance of choice in towns like Stannard, Walden and Wolcott. Act 46 is jeopardizing that tradition, and people need to understand the law if they want to save it.