Twenty major reports calling for state mandated consolidation of Vermont schools were flung on the trash heap in the twentieth century. The twentyfirst century opened with Richard Cate presenting the twenty-first report. It also failed.

The twenty-second plan, to eliminate local boards and collapse Vermont’s town districts into 12 to 24 mega-districts, has now been placed on the state board table. Meanwhile, Commissioner Armando Vilaseca touts consolidation in practically every speech.

Before, yet again, embarking on such an ill-starred journey, we should ask why the previous efforts have suffered such ignominious defeats. The reasons are straightforward.

First, any effort to take-away the democratic powers and authorities of citizens immediately runs into a vociferous back-lash. Second, none of the plans show we can save money. Third, the citizens instinctively understand that the vital bond of communities, parents and children is essential for quality education.

Democracy - The recent Council on the Future of Vermont reports that citizens see the school as the heart of their town. They value local schools, in their communities, where their children and the town’s children attend together. They value the election of local school board members. They value the ability to be able to call their neighbor to register a concern or a complaint and get something done. They value locally developed school budgets, voted by them. Whether mega-banks, megabusiness or mega-government, people are wary of distant decisions by far-away people where their voice is lost in voice-mail purgatory. The proposed replacement of school boards with toothless “community school councils” is a pale and wane substitute.

Money – Despite Commissioner Vilaseca’s oft-repeated claim, there is no evidence that consolidation saves money. In fact, in the short term, it costs more, Dr. David Silvernail, a national expert, told the Vermont Education Funding and Effectiveness Committee.

Some business groups tout consolidation as it works in their environment. However, schools are more labor intensive and are, by nature, less automated. When schools consolidate, it often will cost more as teachers bargain up toward the higher paying school’s salaries. Savings in abandoning a local school (which often becomes a real estate albatross) are offset by higher transportation costs and building renovations. Parents are faced with the cost and inconvenience of going to a more distant school for events.

As for consolidating central offices, they consume only 2.4 per cent of education dollars. Saving a great deal from such a relatively small percentage is an even smaller savings. The minuscule savings are easily swallowed-up by the annual increase in health premiums.

Education as Community - Vermonters, as well as citizens across the nation, understand that schools are far more than just test scores. They intuitively know what the research says. Small schools raise student achievement, reduce violence and disruption, combat anonymity and isolation, increase attendance and graduation rates, elevate teacher satisfaction, improve school climate, operate more cost-effectively, weaken the effects of poverty and increase parentcommunity involvement. These civic knowledges are vital to the core purposes of schools. Perhaps it is because Vermont schools embrace these characteristics that our performance is so high, our child well-being measures so positive and our citizens support their school budgets so well.

The Commissioner has to show that consolidation will not diminish democratic participation, will save money, and enhance student learning and civic virtues to such a degree that citizens will swap-off part of their democratic power. There is little evidence that this case can be made.

Local towns and schools should, however, band together for greater efficiencies and better programs. More than 30 successful and productive examples have occurred in recent years. (Full disclosure requires me to report that I have been involved in very successful and not so successful local consolidation efforts).

Likewise, we can increase school efficiency while maintaining our democratic linkages in our communities. School business operations, special services, transportation, curriculum and professional development are needlessly fragmented. Centralizing these functions is simple and expedient.

The Council on the Future of Vermont said the state’s number one priority is affirming Vermont’s identity. The second concern is promoting community and the third is building Vermont unity in a society increasingly economically and cybersegregated. There are good ways to achieve and sustain these values. One would be in strengthening, rather than weakening, the bonds between towns, citizens, and generations in the democratic governance of our schools.

MICHAEL MATHIS

Goshen

Mr. Mathis was formerly superintendent of public schools in Rutland and now serves as the Managing Director of the Education and the Public Interest Center.