 Good afternoon. Welcome to Senate Education. This Thursday, April 13th, we just got off the floor. We've made some shifts. We're going to start with serve, learn, and earn for about 10 minutes. We're working on our letter to the Appropriations Committee. The Appropriations Committee has asked us to consider this request. And so, with that, Mr. Knott, the floor is yours. Great. Thank you. The record on Breck and Knott, I'm the Executive Director for Montview Conservation Corps. I will try to be brief. I'm going to bounce through different parts of prepared remarks. And so, forgive me, it's a little, the flow isn't 100%. It's a little disjointed if we can get there. I think it's important to recognize and share that serve, learn, and earn is a workforce development and teaching coalition between four organizations, Vermont View Conservation Corps, Audubon, Vermont, Vermont Works for Women and Resource. It's helpful to think about serve, learn, and earn as filling a gap. So, we offer education, sort of paid service experiences for young adults, really between the ages of 16 and 24. That's VYCC's sweet spot. Other partners have other participants who are both younger and older. Some top-line numbers to illustrate and quantify our impact. This year, we expect that we'll have approximately 400 participants who are coming into our programs. Next year, with increased funding, we anticipate that we'll be able to enroll 500. In each of our programs, we have more applications than we actually have positions. So, at VYCC, we've received 340 applications for 190 positions. I've talked about a gap in that we're focused on the 16- to 24-year-old demographics. A couple of statistics before sharing a couple of education initiatives at VYCC that are relevant here. We have the highest high school graduation rate in the country, 91%, and we have one of the lowest college matriculation rates in the country at 38%. So, what's happening to all the folks who've graduated from high school and aren't going on to college? Well, first, college might not be for everyone. There's incredible life to be had, even if one hasn't gone to college. There are different pathways that we need to create. Pathways to college, pathways to careers. And there's a couple of different models that VYCC have developed over the last few years that I think may be of interest to this committee. We started with an understanding that the VYCC experience that a lot of learning can come out of that. So, we have crews that work often in really remote locations. So, if you're an 18-year-old and you've spent 14 weeks on a camping crew, you're working with people who are different than you. You have to complete a project that requires a lot of hard work, and you learn technical skills. It's intense. It's immersive. When you come out of that experience, you've learned an enormous amount. So, there's kind of an inherent teaching opportunity, learning opportunity. We looked at that and we said, there's probably more that we can do. If we took a real delivered look at our curriculum, our program designs, are the ways that we can codify that learning so that other accredited learning institutions can offer credit to our participants who've been enrolled in our programs. And two models. One is, we now partner with CCV. The New England Board of Higher Education really wanted to develop alternative pathways into higher education. And they helped us look at the BYCC experience and the training that we provide crew leaders. And last summer, we piloted this where if you're a crew leader at BYCC and you work with us for a summer, you'll earn 12 credits at CCV. Then 35 or 38 of our crew leaders completed all the paperwork to receive those credits. So, it's an example of innovation within the higher ed space that the YCC is part of. In fact, there's a great article about one of our crew leaders who moved from Kentucky, got credit and is now at Northern Vermont University. There's another model that our share, which is where we, along with Audubon, are working with UVM. There's a course called Ecological Restoration. And as part of that course, the students enrolled in that course have to work for a conservation organization in order to get credit for their course. The BYCC is one of those conservation organizations. Audubon's another. The Land Trust. I think there's a couple more. And in many ways, that's both helpful to the students in UVM, but also helpful for us because in fact, they're doing the recruiting because they've already enrolled the students. So, Mr. and I, I'm going to interrupt you. I just want to, so what would you say your elevator speech is to the appropriations committee and us? You guys are sort of a transition time for students. You mentioned just tell us how students really connect with you and then is it sort of like, then do they go to UVM or could it just end with all of you? I would say in every serve, learn, earn organization, we enroll Vermonters who are wanting to gain more skills prepared for either future learning opportunities for the workforce. And we give them an enormous amount of training and not only do we train them, but we pay them so it's accessible and at the end, Vermon has a stronger workforce because of the outcomes of our programs. That's great. So that would be almost put you on with, you might have, you might go to CCB for a certain class, you might go to all of you for a class, could go to Castleton for a, you know, it sort of just broadens that landscape of educational opportunities. Your focus would be opportunities connected to Audubon, connected to things in the environment generally. Yeah, I think I'll quickly speak up to Vermonters for women. We're really trying to get more women in a diverse population into the workforce. We need more workers and we need to reach untapped potential that's sitting across our state. And so we actually started middle school to build curiosity and confidence. Let's get chainsaws in hand, let's put them with welding equipment. Let's take them to the tech center so they know that. But we also know that girls and women are not finding those fields readily. They're not going into some of the fastest growing, highest wage, highest need jobs across Vermont. Tech centers still sit at less than 11% female enrollment. And if we look at some of our construction, infrastructure jobs, less than 3% are actually tools and hand or ready jobs. So our organization really tries to find those individuals that are motivated, that have those firm whole skills. If you've worked on a farm in Vermont, you can easily do any of these infrastructure jobs. You just need to find that pathway. So we are really trying to fill those gaps and make sure that they're finding those opportunities, making sure that they're accessed and that they're well supported, not just to the job offer, but throughout that so that they're retained. That's wonderful. And tell us the ask that you're asking appropriations. We've requested a $2.4 million appropriation. We're really encouraged by the way in which the house has moved that out of the house and over the Senate. And we're also asking that that be included in the base. The last two years we've received funding. It flows through Forest Parks and Recreation. That's been one time funds. Part of our message here today is that this program has moved from test phase, proof of concept phase to actually now we have results. It's working and this is a smart investment for Vermont as it picks up all this workforce development strategy. So it should be funding that really allows us to plan and build upon for future years. How many students roughly? This upcoming year we expect 500. Any questions? The last piece on the funding that I would offer is it allows us to leverage other funds. So the $2.4 million, for example, is not the only revenue source. In fact, it's a relatively small piece of the budget. We bring in federal funds. We bring in private philanthropic dollars. So having state funds really allows us to match federal dollars or go to the philanthropic community and say, the state believes in us. You're not the only ones making this investment. Could you join us? So what's the total cost per seat for your students per year per term? That's hard because it's different for every organization. I'll share that at BYCC we're approximately a $4 million budget and we'll have 200 participants. Yeah, and so, yeah, roughly the average length of a service experience is 10 weeks and also those weeks is paid. And that can be dependent on organization. So the resource in Vermont works for women are similar, ours are seven-week training cohorts. We train cohorts of women in seven weeks they're paid during this time and then they're job-ready to go into the field directly after us. The cost per participant is different where it's full time there, ours are nights and weekends, the amount of hours that we need for individuals. David Mears with Audubon, Vermont. One of the things that the state funding has allowed us to do is we put the bulk of that funding into direct payments to our participants. So these young people, one of the things that we were finding was that really the best way to recruit young people is to give them a job and to give them something meaningful to do. And that's essentially what our model is. I mean, there's a lot of support structure around it, but the state funding has been sensual to our ability to pay them and to pay them at a competitive wage at a moment where Walmart and McDonald's are offering, you know, $17, $18 an hour jobs. Not a question for the comment. I would just say in the absence of organized apprenticeship program in this country, like these other countries have, I think you all fill just an incredibly important role. And as a former high school educator, a public school educator, I saw the work that you did. I could see it, you know, on a daily basis and really motivating my students and giving them a skill set that they really craved and needed. So I just thank you and I'm obviously really supportive of your work. Into that vein, we are definitely apprenticeship programs, but we work very closely to help build a more structured apprenticeship model. It's really helpful to hear from Sarah that she's had that connection to all of you. You know, as we look at our appropriations, things that the committee has asked us to review, we have things like school construction, high school, community college of Vermont, advertising for college universities, governor's institute, education, literacy network. We have a lot of work to do, and the state universities, you know, all of you, those are the key things. So we appreciate hearing your thoughts and your ideas and your work that you do. Thank you so much. Thanks for this time. Yeah, thank you. One last sentence. I'd also offer that an investment in these programs is also, it's not just an investment of people, it's an investment in infrastructure because the work that our crews are doing at BYCC, you know, they're working at State Parks, working after a recreation. So as you're thinking about that $20,000 for a participant, there's outcomes there that benefit this institute. I'd be remiss if I didn't put it in that project. Thank you for the CYCC crews in all of our counties. Yes, Summer. Thanks all for your time. Thank you. How's Liam? He's good. Thanks for asking me that. I can't wait this spring. Unbelievable. Time for him to run for the legislature. Yes. Okay. Thanks, everybody. So I'm working on this letter for Gene. Martin and I talked a little bit about it. They're kind of just shared with her. I just shared with all of you where we're at. And we just need to kind of give some priority to it. So, okay. Mr. Glowski, please. Thank you. Jess, I think it's okay to leave that open. Unless it gets louder, just... I know it's not that hot yet. It has been honoring. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thanks a lot. What time is that? 4. I know. Okay. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today on H483. I'm testifying today on behalf of the Education Equity Alliance, which consists of Vermont School Board Association, Vermont NEA, Vermont... Sorry to interrupt. I just want to let everybody also quickly know as you're going through your file, as I see people going through it, there are things following up yesterday from the library. There's a bunch of different lists in there that answers some questions. Sure. So, the Education Equity Alliance consists of the two organizations I mentioned, plus Vermont Superintendent's Association and the Vermont Principal's Association. Vermont communities, taxpayers, K-12 students, and schools are now at a defining crossroads. In June 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court set new rules in the Carson Be-Making Decision relating to taxpayer funding of private schools. As noted by the Vermont ACLU in testimony to the House Education Committee, at a practical level, the Carson Decision means that if a state chooses to subsidize private education, it generally must treat religious schools and non-religious schools the same. The ACLU explained to the House Education Committee that, quote, Carson marks a substantial shift in constitutional law, and therefore how we think about our traditions, specifically how we balance First Amendment rights to freely express one's religion with protecting against government establishment of religion. As a result of this decision, the Supreme Court has put Vermont in a very difficult position as it seeks to comply with the court's ruling while still upholding Vermont's own constitutional protections, democratic values, and traditions. The Supreme Court's decision opened the door to changes in Vermont's taxpayer-backed education fund through more funding of private schools, including religious schools. At the same time, the Compelled Support Clause in Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Vermont Constitution says that no person can be compelled to support any place of worship and carry two dictates of conscience. As elected officials, we take an oath to uphold the Vermont Constitution, and so you have to figure out if there is a way forward that will comply with the Supreme Court's ruling and the Vermont Constitution. We believe the way forward requires Vermont lawmakers to reset state laws governing the use of Vermont's education fund based on the following universally shared values. One, it's our duty to provide an equal education opportunity to all families. Two, all education fund dollars should be subject to consistent transparency and accountability. And three, all taxpayer-funded schools must treat students and staff equitably free from unlawful discrimination. Based on these shared values, the Education Equity Alliance believes H483 is a useful step forward. Even as we recognize, it does not fully address the challenges we face, especially passing mustard with the conservative majority of the U.S. Supreme Court. Vermont is paying private schools to provide a public education. H483 is a step toward ensuring that those schools are held to the same set of standards as Vermont public schools, and that Vermonters' hard-earned tax dollars are used as equitably, transparently, and with as much accountability as possible. Transparency and accountability are built into the public education system through Vermont's laws, rules, and regulations. Every weekday evening throughout Vermont, publicly elected school boards are meeting to govern our public school districts. Their agendas are posted ahead of time with specific notice about the topics that will be covered. Their meetings are open to the public. Community members have the right to attend and the opportunity to speak to the board by providing public comment. Beyond public comment, school boards engage their communities to establish the mission and vision of the district, and they use the mission to guide decision-making, including important decisions about how Vermonters' tax dollars are used in the district's budget. After school boards approve budgets, the voters have the final say by voting the budget up or down. School boards are accountable to the voters. As CEOs of their districts, superintendents develop the work plan to achieve the school board's mission. They manage services, programs, and resources for the quality of learning supported by the voter-approved budget. Annually, superintendents must attest to dozens of specific assurances in more than 20 specific categories related to a host of laws and regulations intended to assure fidelity in the administration and operation of Vermont's publicly-funded schools. Superintendents are accountable to the school board and to the state for operating within statutes and regulations. Principles serve as instructional leaders developing school-building-specific practices that support the educational mission of the district. Principles are accountable to the superintendent. And finally, public school teachers use data to inform their teaching and to make teaching responsive to individual needs based upon what is best for students. They implement high-quality learning opportunities that engage students and move all students toward meeting ambitious goals connected to the educational mission of the district. In addition to teachers being accountable to their superintendent, all public schools employ teachers who are licensed by the state, and licensing requirements are updated regularly to ensure evolving student needs are front and center. While H-483 does not make private schools receiving public tuition accountable to the voters, it does provide increased accountability to taxpayers, the state, and to the school district that is paying the tuition. Accountability measures include, one, several reporting requirements, including requirements for reporting attendance, academic progress, state mandated assessments, and enrollment changes. Two, attestation requirements related to non-discrimination, compliance with Vermont's Public Accommodation Act, and compliance with the prohibition on the use of public funds to subsidize the tuition of private pay students. Additionally, H-483 includes important anti-discrimination measures, including requiring private schools receiving public tuition to adopt and implement policies and procedures to comply with the Vermont Public Accommodations Act and Vermont Fair Employment Practices Act. It also amends the Public Accommodations Act to clarify that it applies to all schools whose services are offered to the general public. And it doesn't allow private schools to use an admissions process that includes mandatory interviews, academic entrance exams, academic history, mandatory campus visits, or consideration of ability to pay for any costs or fees. We support these anti-discrimination measures as an important step in the right direction. Vermont Public Schools have always been required to comply with the VPAA. They are also required to follow civil rights statutes, including Title VI, prohibiting recipients of federal funds from discriminating on the basis of race, color, and national origin. The Equal Educational Opportunities Act requiring states and local school districts to take appropriate action to overcome language barriers that would be equal participation by students in its instructional programs. Title IX, which prohibits recipients of federal funds from discriminating on the basis of sex. Section 504, which requires recipients of federal funds to ensure that students with disabilities have non-discriminatory access to all programming. The Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires entities that offer public accommodations to ensure that students with disabilities have non-discriminatory access to all programming. And the IDEA, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which requires public schools to provide students with disabilities a free appropriate public education and related services to meet their needs. Vermont Public Schools are focused on providing a safe, supportive learning environment for each and every student. This includes supporting gay, straight alliance networks and other affinity groups for LGBTQ students. These groups often work with building administration to address individual or group concerns and needs. Vermont Public Schools regularly respond to the myriad of needs of their LGBTQ students, including taking steps to ensure students' preferred names and pronouns are used by teachers, staff and students that school nurses are adequately trained to respond to all students' needs and that appropriate bathroom and locker room facilities are available. Yesterday, a young trans man and his father testified in the House Health Care Committee about the amazing support he received from his public high school throughout his high school years. You can watch that powerful testimony and I've linked it in the written testimony, the link to the YouTube video. There are many private schools in Vermont with a business model that depends on taxpayer-funded tuition. H483 does not change that equation. Those schools can still be subsidized by the taxpayers as long as they comply with the requirements in the bill. It is appropriate to ask them for a certain level of accountability, especially when taxpayers are funding private schools at the level of $50 to $60 million per year. We already expect similar and often greater accountability from other recipients of tax dollars. Also, there are many private schools that assert that they are already meeting many of the bill's requirements. I'm attaching data to this testimony that I received from the Agency of Education showing a summary of tuition pupil counts by Supervisory Union. School districts tuition to four groupings, which are Vermont Public Schools, Vermont Private Schools, Out-of-State Public Schools, and Out-of-State Private Schools. Included in the Out-of-State Private Schools are four and four countries that are receiving Vermont taxpayer dollars. Two in Quebec, one in Japan, and one in Sweden. I won't go further into the data, but I think it's very useful to look at to understand the context of H483 and would encourage you to take a look at it. It should be posted on your website. Additionally, today, we are requesting that the committee schedule time to hear from Neil Odell, president of the VSBA. Whether your Senate district includes school districts that operate all grades, school districts that tuition some grades, school districts that tuition all grades, or a mixture of all of the above, it's important to understand Vermont's history of subsidizing private education, how it affects the education fund, how it affects school budgets statewide, and how it affects all of our tax bills. Mr. Odell has developed informative presentations on his local board and community exploring the history and financing of tuitioning in Vermont, and I've provided links in my written testimony. I'm sure he would be happy to summarize the pertinent information for this committee. Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify on H483. As I said at the beginning, we find ourselves at a crossroads, and through a confidence of history and decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court, we are called upon to align our state constitutional values and laws. This is no small task. However, we are fortunate to live in a state whose founders ensured the right to public education in our state constitution, while also saying no taxpayer should be compelled to support religion. Every day, public schools welcome all students to support and nurture their education and development as they grow to be healthy and productive citizens in our democracy. Taxpayers and students deserve nothing less, and we believe H483 is a modest step as we address the challenges ahead. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Kurski. Any questions? Please start. A quick question about Neil Odell and the sentence after you mentioned it. Would we also be able to get a list or a map of the percentage of students and the number of students that go to each private school that are publicly liter tuition? Would you have that in mind? Map? I'm not sure if you would have a map, but I... That's what I submitted. It should be on your website. Yes, there's a summary, and then it's broken down into four different PDFs by those groupings of in-state private and out-of-state private and in-state and out-of-state public. Mr. Odell doesn't have it. I think AOP may have it also, but I could be wrong, but Mr. Odell doesn't have it. AOP, I think, has that info, right? Yes, I got it from AOP. You got it from AOP? Okay, great. Sir, please, please. If I could. This whole school environment of tuition to the schools is kind of a new concept for me. So far, what I see is kind of a symbiotic relationship between the districts that don't have their own schools, which need some sort of school support, and those schools which exist in those districts, which benefit from having those students tuitioned in. So my question is if the schools don't accept the premise of the bill, where will the students go in the future? Did the four different organizations at least touch on that? What type of scenario potentially creating if one or many of those schools decide not to support this initiative, this bill? I think what we've heard is that many of the schools say that they are doing a lot of these things already, and that it is not this bill is not onerous. I think it's a modest step. So I think we're not going to see a big change in that area. We also do, you know, we have we certainly have room in public schools to accommodate more students because overall the state student population is declining. So essentially it's a modest. Yes. Please. So hypothetically, let's say maybe not today, but in the near term, there's a school which has fewer seats available than there are students who need to be placed. The school needs to determine how to accommodate the subset of students. Did the four organizations have a recommendation on how to address how the school would evaluate the attendance if there's more students fewer seats doing any kind of admissions criteria review or what's the solution on how they solve something random like a lottery? Yeah, well the bill itself requires that the schools set a capacity limit or they may set a capacity limit on the number of publicly funded students that they're going to accept. And then it goes on to require that the school establish a non-discriminatory selection process when the number of publicly funded students applicants exceeds anything else. That's in the bill. Yes, that's in the bill. How can you be non discriminatory when you have to base the admissions on something or it's pure luck it's a lottery. I'm just wondering what your four organizations are advocating. Is it something that should just boil down to a lottery? Or should the school have any kind of review of academic past academic performance or any other criteria? Our position is that it should be something like a lottery. Other questions? Can you help me? One of the things that's out there is that there's in some public schools there are 10 admissions process. Is that just completely false that there's no way a public school could ever turn away a student. We're having folks from Hanover come in next week in some other school districts. Can you just help me with that? Because that sort of could be legend in the hallway. Right, right. What House Ed heard from Peter Burroughs who is superintendent in Absent Central School District was that they admit all students that are coming in from non-operating districts. And that they've been told by their legal counsel that that's what they need to do. Do you know if there's a state law suit that says that that is the law of the land from Vermont that no matter what public schools have to take a student. If for example there was a student that perhaps some might say belongs in a needs a therapeutic school but public school absolutely has to take that student. Do you know if that's on the books? Well I would say indirectly all Vermont's anti-discrimination laws of the Public Accommodations Act and then all of the federal non-discrimination laws that public schools have. So that's where it all comes from. So there's no way a school could ever say we're sorry, Brian Jr. does not fit here. No, I don't think there is a way that they say that. Okay, thank you. Are you talking about kids within that district or kids without? I'm thinking kids within the district. I hold into a district. They have to take. No matter what. Yes. Okay. Great, thank you. And then the other question that I had and I mentioned this just I think all of us during our fire drill that sort of interview process one of the things I just want to avoid happening is if again I always get Brian Jr. who doesn't exist if I were to bring him to a school and didn't have an interview process, am I prohibited from having an interview process? I'm just trying to find the right fit for him in terms of like an independent school. Other than this bill you certainly wouldn't be prohibited. So I can still say hey, I'm looking for the right fit. Compass School might be the right place for the school. I can still say the school can have that I'd like to have that interview. I'd like to visit campus. I want to see how the kid what he or she thinks of the school. That's still okay. You would certainly still go visit the campus. Yes. And have an interview and show the grades. I don't know the answer. I could check with Ledge Council also. Yeah, I would check with Ledge Council on that question. Because what I just don't want to have as an unintended consequence is Brian Jr. gets there and it's a nightmare because his grades weren't looked at. They didn't like this. He really wanted to be on the football team but they never, they don't have all that kind of thing is what I'm just trying to get at. Yeah, please. I would say, you know, Brian Jr. wanted to be on the football team. You know, you want to do your research on the school. You know, go to their website. Give him a phone call. I mean the example that I use was when we moved to Rhode Island we took a tour of a few different public schools. They weren't required but, you know, we talked to the principal, we walked around the school and then we ended up you know, it was 12 so I don't remember exactly what happened but we ended up going to the school that I ended up going to. So you had a tour. Yeah, got a tour, talked to the principal and it's you know, I would also say there's some degree of responsibility on the parents to look at, alright our kid wants to play football. Let's make sure that the school offers football. Yeah, I just want to make sure the parents can do that. Yesterday from Ledge Council and we're going to get her on it sounded like maybe this, they couldn't look at Brian's grades. You know, I just want to make sure that, yeah, that's all. That's it, great. Yeah, certainly do. I'm hesitating. I guess I would just say one of the benefits or one of the beauties of the public school is that if it's not a right fit, perhaps you as a citizen of that town, of that district, et cetera, can help to make it the right fit. That's to me, you know, running for and having that school board is like a governing body and being able to vote in that, or even run yourself. Just give you a certain amount of say and a certain amount of ability to act and make change. So in terms of the governance structure, it just allows for that more readily. Anything else from Ms. Glewski? No, except you did want to hear from me on H1. Yes, well let's stay on this for one second. I'm just seeing if there's anything else that we talked about yesterday that was the question. Under the Public Accommodations Act on page 20 did you have any changes or edits to that? We're getting and we'll hear more from the agency of education that they are saying that we might need to make a little some changes to that. I'm not sure you're hearing anything. Just looking at my notes a school that does not offer services to the general public is not anything, any red flags there for you? I guess that would really be my only question. We got a call from the agency we're gonna have them in next week but you've looked at the bill carefully. Anything that you see as a concern right now? No, we don't identify a red flag there. Okay, okay. That's it. What else? What's our machine? Okay. I thought that would go a lot longer. 165. Okay. And this is Universal School Meals which we're hoping to move tomorrow. Yes, and my testimony is very short on this and I'm testifying just for the Vermont School Board Association on this topic. We have a resolution that passed last fall on Universal Meals. It's very short. It says BSBA supports Universal School Meals in Vermont Schools. The funding should come from a source other than the Education Fund. We do understand that the current proposal provides Universal Meals funded by the Education Fund without a dedicated revenue stream. So, given that context we urge the General Assembly to identify and implement a dedicated revenue stream for the program. As noted in the fiscal note for H165 dated March 31, 2023, and I know you're hearing from joint fiscal I think later today. They said without adjusting any non-property tax revenue streams, establishing a Universal School Meals program as an ongoing obligation of the Education Fund would require increasing property taxes to fund the program and keep the Education Fund balanced. So, the quote ends there and I would just end by saying funding the program through increased property taxes is likely to cause significant challenges for school districts to pass budgets funding their core educational programs in the future. So, we're encouraging a dedicated revenue stream. And that concludes my testimony on that bill. If you don't mind, I'm just going to I do have a friend in the room that I'm going to call on Miss Horton. Can you say a word or two about what's happening at the federal level for funding possibilities in the future? Yes. Just so that we can all think about this right now. Yes. I'm going to call on Miss Horton. Universal School Meals has in the last couple of years become really a national movement and many states right now more than half of all states are actively debating universal school meals or have already passed permanent universal school meals bills of various kinds. And at the federal level this is happening because Congress has not acted to implement federal universal school meals program but those calls are strong and will not go away. In the short term USDA has taken administrative action that they have the power to take without congressional action. We've actually been urging them to take this administrative action for a decade. It's taken that long but they finally have taken it and what they have done is they have lowered the eligibility threshold to allow schools to use the community eligibility provision which is CEP is what it is mostly known for known as and that is one way that schools can enter into universal school meals and provide universal school meals within the federal rules and have a different way of determining what their federal meal reimbursement will be and that way of determining first of all is administratively much easier for schools and it eliminates school meal applications for families and it tends to provide schools with a better federal reimbursement rate than any other method. So they have lowered the threshold, they are proposing to do so and the intention of USDA is to implement this for next school year and what that means is that many more schools in Vermont are going to be able to use CEP to provide universal meals and it's going to increase the amount of federal reimbursement that will come to cover the costs of meals in more Vermont schools and that will lower the costs for the state. That's in combination with a second option that Vermont has applied for and received approval from USDA to do and that is to directly certify students for free and reduced price school meals using already existing Medicaid data that the state has. So that also means that we identify right now 35% of students in our schools as being eligible for free or reduced price school meals. Medicaid data it's looking like according to the agency of education it's possible that up to 53% of students will be identified starting next year as eligible for free or reduced price school meals statewide. That's an incredibly significant change and it is again going to increase the amount of federal funding that will come for universal to cover the costs of school meals in Vermont and therefore decrease the amount of state funding. Now the Joint Physical Office has not incorporated either of these changes into the financial calculations that they are presenting and that's understandable because the proposed rule is moving through that process and the Medicaid direct cert hasn't started yet and so the data is it's a model right now it's estimates from DBA and from the agency of education. Understandably but if you take those models and you apply them I think what is safe to say and what the agency of education did say in their official report to the legislature this year is that we can actually expect to the cost of the universal school meals program to decline from its current cost which is 27 million it's projected to come in around 27 million dollars this year in the next over in the next couple of years as these additional changes take place so that is what I can say we'll get a fiscal note and you can address this one and make sure we're just having this conversation a little bit Mr. Kloski if we're not to find another source do you want us to stop it? No Okay Can you clarify what you mean? So if we cannot find another source of funding besides the education fund would you want us to stop it? It certainly will be advocating in future years to find a source. Completely agree and I understand it's a challenging question I'm just trying to get one of the things we haven't really heard out there is that it's important and I'm sure you're seeing it as well in your members we have Mr. Kloski do you mind saying we do have Beth I think zooming in I just want to clarify the question to get an answer St. James how are you? I'm okay how are you? I just want to make sure we're okay with this on back to 43 if a parent wanted to have an interview let's take a school where maybe there's a school for students with certain disabilities or any school but I'm thinking in particular a school that might accommodate students with special education needs if they wanted to have an interview they wanted the child's transcript looked at if they wanted to have a campus tour there's nothing in the bill that would prohibit that So Beth St. James office of legislative council I have two comments one is the bill is prohibiting a school from requiring mandatory interviews entrance exams academic entrance exams academic history or mandatory campus visits as part of an admissions policy but it does not place any prohibitions on the family asking for any of those things thank you I'm sorry you're so tiny from this far away I can't tell when you're done talking um I think the bill as drafted prohibits the use of those things um prohibits an admissions process that uses those things so I think even though the bill prohibits the school from asking for those things it also prohibits the admissions process from taking into account those like an interview that a student had so if the student reaches out and says I want to know if the school is the right fit for me this bill doesn't prohibit that but it would prohibit the school from using that voluntary process um you know if it was a I guess it's I think it's just a slippery slope so the bill as drafted prohibits a family from reaching out and asking to do those things it prohibits the school from using an admissions process that requires those things um you know I think you'd have to think about what your goals are and what your intent is in this language and I know you all didn't propose this language but it is what is in front of you so you would have to think about what your intent is and if this language meets your goals or your intent because I can see how all of those voluntary requests would start to get around um if the goal was to prohibit an admissions process from using these things period I can see how the language is drafted could be a slippery slope what makes me feel better though you did say yesterday if a child is on a what's it called IEP then and they're being placed there then that match up seems like it would likely happen an IEP or a 504 not a 504 just the IEP well so Act 173 and this H483 incorporates the language from Act 173 that goes into effect on July 1 but Act 173 just requires the admissions of students on an IEP if they are placed there so not a section 504 plan you are requiring schools to comply with the Vermont Public Accommodation Act which prohibits um discrimination on the basis of disability but the language that's specific to a type of support plan is only related to an IEP thank you thanks Mr. Klaus I just have one question it's either for Mr. Klaus or I'm not sure which one of these numbers but I see students for school meals being in one of three categories my simple thinking one there's those that qualify for free meals there are those that suffer from food insecurity and there are those that can afford their meals already and they're not either of the other two categories is that a good framework to start um I would say that it's not quite that cut and dry because what we know from um data pandemic is that there are students who qualify for free meals or reduce price meals so in Vermont at this point either of those categories result in a free meal so um but who don't eat the meals so they are actually still experiencing hunger and food insecurity at school um even if they qualify um and then there are a group of students I think what you were saying is that don't qualify for free or reduced price food meals and are suffering from food insecurity and that's about 25 thousand of our students um and then there are students whose families can't afford to pay for their meals and whether or not they are actually putting funding on the students in the student's meal account that's what I value to say so my question is um the food insecurity group whether they are on free meals or not is there some data behind that is there can you offer some kind of background some source that would be helpful to understand how that was developed and what what population that is do you mean can I show you the numbers of students in those different categories food insecurity specifically the food insecurity the part about not being they are not in the free school meals program already we've got to be driven there you go pseudo emergencies they don't qualify for queer meals that missing middle is what I said the missing middle I'd like to just see something to back that up data wise source or the number or something you know rather than just saying it I think it would be helpful to kind of like see some information in terms of yes I think I can provide you with what you need I just want to make sure I'm understanding what you're asking for so in terms of how food insecurity is determined how it's determined that they are food insecure or at risk of being insecure and just the number if you have any drill down information on counties or whatever anything that would help anything would be helpful just it's all been verbal and I'm not I like verbal but I don't necessarily believe everything I hear yes I do have that data and I will provide it to the whole committee and with some citations and some information I don't think we need to move quite yet we're told I think somebody said you're going to be very brief do you want to do it right from there? Sure great let me sum it up this way there's nothing that I would say that would prevent you from moving the bill tomorrow the testimony that I would present is similar to what Mr. Glaff you presented at the outset of these deliberations well don't we all know you when we Jeffrey sorry thank you I was so eager to get through Jeff Francis from our superintendent association at the outset of the deliberation around universal school meals we took a position that was if the general assembly was inclined to move to enact that bill that there should be a dedicated funding source we still would like to see that things important because it's additive in terms of what we're providing to our school systems we also were paying attention to competing demands on the education fund when you last at this deliberation there was a utilization of the reserves on the education fund the perceptions around the big costs associated with PCB remediation and you know at least relatively equal amounts in terms of what we're going to be necessitated the general assembly suspended its deliberations we came through the pandemic the federal government made universal school meals part of the it's program not ours and now we're back in a situation where the federal government looks like it's maybe taking some action in that direction but hasn't done that yet so here we are in a month I in preparing for testimony in the house talked to some folks and they actually made persuasive arguments to me that even in the actions of a federal program that it would be useful for schools to continue to provide universal school meals one for the benefits that are espoused in testimony but two you could create complications in communities that have been providing universal school meals to go in reverse as it were and when I talked to folks about it and it was anecdotal like few superintendents few people that were working in food service they saw two possibilities one would be communities that wanted to have universal school meals and others that did not so it seems that based on all the work that's been done the promise for hope for a federal program the fact that there are benefits within the learning process in school communities the universal ality around school meals that age 60 once you try should be supported and the caveat would be because it is additive there should be a revenue source but in the absence of a revenue source I would respond to senator week's question is that you should proceed with the bill and hope that there is a way to reduce the cost over time through practice and federal education policy so that's a summary of my thinking on it thank you we have during fiscal for a very short period of time any questions I'm just looking around for either miss Siglowski or Mr. Francis at this point no I'll have a comment somewhere go ahead shoot it are you sure? yeah well if it's on this topic go for it well it's all I was going to say was that I do think I'm going to vote yes to enforce the school meals but caveat is we in this committee over the last couple months we've seen the incredible pressures that are placed on the Ed fund and the incredible needs that we have in our schools I think we need to keep that in our minds as we go out and interact with our constituents as much as I am here at their behest I also believe it is part of my job to educate them I think I am going to keep reiterating all of what we're providing out of the Ed fund whether it be PCB remediation whether it be mental health services whether it be free free universal school meals etc etc sports school construction I mean we are there is a lot of pressure on that fund and I think it's important for folks who tend to like to vilify their school budgets that we educate them about all that is in there that's my concern my two cents just to comment on Mr. Francis's point I don't think we should be passing any bill unless there's an agency identified to be responsible there's a funding source the agency is the agency of Ed with Rosie Cooper yeah I appreciate it anything else? thank you Mr. Richter please thank you both thank you yeah it was blowing it was always there yeah sometimes Mr. Richter you have given us a fiscal note on this bill I believe it's in our file for today yeah so for the record I'm really right there with the direct fiscal office see you all again first of all watching at home the fiscal note is posted on the committee's page under my white name so I think I'll just start big picture the fiscal summary and then I can address a couple of things that I've heard over the course of testimony questions that have come up or maybe some clarifications and then we can go from there however it would be helpful the committee seems well-versed in the bill so I won't walk through the bill summary but really big picture fiscal impact so JFO estimates that this bill will cost $29 million from the Education Fund in fiscal year 2024 absent any other changes in policy this means that the base homestead yield and or the base uniform not homestead tax rate will need to be adjusted to account for the anticipated cost of the program I can talk in whatever level of detail would be helpful when thinking about how this would impact the Education Fund and property taxes but just big picture thinking $29 million is approximately 3 cent increase on both the homestead and the not homestead property tax rate so the other part of the big picture fiscal impact as currently drafted the bill itself does not include an appropriation for the provision of universal school meals as it came over from the house the house passed budget the big bill H494 included an appropriation for the $29 million in fiscal year 2024 for the universal meal supplement so that's big picture I'm happy to talk about that in more detail I also would like to just touch on a few things that I've heard over the course of the conversation I think would be helpful clarification so this estimate if you go to the appendix which is on the third page of the fiscal month this sort of walks through how is this how is this estimate then determined so JFO estimated $29 million last year and as you've heard from AOE based on data from the first month of universal meals in October it was coming in around $27 million I don't have an updated number at this point but it was pretty similar to what was originally estimated for the cost of universal meals there were a number of factors cited by AOE that were suppressing participation in universal meals so just having that background in our mind when we look at the appendix and we look at what is the range, potential range that we're thinking about for the cost of universal school meals over time we're estimating a range of $30 million so I do want to say that the estimate of $29 million for FY24 does factor in the anticipated changes that we will be seeing with the direct certification from Medicaid so that is factored with the estimate. The reason that the estimate is the same of $29 million as it was last year because we're saying, okay, fewer people or fewer children qualified for free and reduced price meals of October this year than have prior to the pandemic so we're anticipating that there will be an increase with the direct certification of free and reduced children. We're also estimating that there's going to be continued increased participation because we're seeing increased participation over time with the universal meals as well as if some of the factors that are suppressing participation get sorted out we might see more children eating more meals so we have a range for the future of $20 million to $31 million that really bottom portion of the range assumes that 53% qualified for free and reduced price meals that you've heard does including both the direct certification as well as the proposed federal change and the October 2022 participation rates that we saw the first month of universal meals and then the 31 is saying, okay, we're going to have the same participation rates that we saw in October 2022 or sorry, we're going to have the same free and reduced price eligibility that we saw in October of 2022 and we're seeing a 5% increasing participation so pause there, I'm happy to talk to any of the any of the cards of the fiscal note or the education fund that would be helpful for the committee yes, no, I'm good no, just the none of this takes into consideration potential future changes coming down from the federal government correct? this does so when you're looking at the percentage of students when you're looking at this in the appendix, this green and blue table that you have here, you see that it's a range of 20 to 31 million and there's a lot of factors out there that we don't know so we can think about a range going into the future so that 20 million that's factoring in those proposed federal rule changes so the those proposed that's the likely lowest amount that we would spend in the years to come and I will say something that's really important to keep in mind when interpreting this range is A, it doesn't adjust for inflation past FY 2024 I did adjust the estimate for the estimated inflation for the coming year but depending on what happens with inflation of course that range could vary only the upper end of the range is only including a 5% increase in participation so just some things to keep in mind when I stepped out I thought this would recover this or this even in the note but one of the things that we've looked at in my morning committee in agriculture are the possible benefits to farmers and we have a percentage that in there that we're trying to build in to have predictability to people who want to farm people who want to come to the state did you look at that at all in any way it's a great question this estimate does not touch on that because that has been the local food incentive grant has traditionally been an appropriation or maybe one time I'm not very familiar with that but I think the school district funds that need to purchase local foods we're requiring a certain percentage and our hope is eventually you might get 10%, 20% it's X number of years I know there's a 50x30 goal from New England 30% of our food I'm looking at Ms. Wharton we're trying to get more farmers in predictability if you want to basically grow carrots we're hoping that you're going to grow them and have a local school buy them there's another piece that I just don't want to say personally certainly and I think that it's helpful to keep in that's very helpful to keep in mind and I also think it's helpful to keep in mind that this 29 million is encompassing the cost of paying that supplement which is the difference between the rate and the pay rate yeah my question is for Ms. Wharton I should have asked you this a long time ago but I want to do it now so cafeteria we talked about the stigma of having that lunch that's sort of prefabbed and then the ala cart for example as two different options under this program will that sort of prefab lunch I don't know what to call it will it still require like a fruit and a veg and a milk yes it will yes because that is the best could I just get clarification on prefab so like the already what kids are getting you mean like the the federally reimbursable meal is what we are talking about and so it's not pre made up there's still choice that's available to students but certain components have to be taken by the student in order for that meal to be reimbursable by the feds and so the answer is yes to your question that those components are required students don't have to take every single one but they have to take a certain number of the offered components but under universal school meals all a cart can go away and all students can be asked to take a federally reimbursable meal and so that first of all that makes the meals a lot healthier for all students and second of all it provides that predictability for for farmers it has everybody kind of choosing from the same menu of food options in the school and for reimbursable meals that are taken the more federal funding so that's actually advantageous I need to go talk to the feds because sorry the federal government there's a lot of ways to create it as you know because a kid doesn't want an apple although I know we've talked about sharing tables but I keep hearing yeah I keep hearing more and more about how food, not only food production but food waste is a big part of our global warming crisis so that is an issue that I keep thinking about but I like to share table ideas and hopefully there's a way we can educate folks about schools mandated to the Congress they are and I will just say that not that that gets to the solution right that's not really the solution we want but I would just say that school meal program managers and directors have gotten very very creative with how to address this challenge and so there are a lot of really smart and creative models out there in Vermont how to address that challenge I will say that actually a lack of enough time to eat is probably the single biggest driver of food waste in schools that is a different topic for a different year that's 100% on that last point my own daughter has to deal with that she's a slow eater and then there's always she's also very social how much time do you have to eat I can't remember on the top of my head but not enough when we have exchange students come they insist on an hour they just will not go to their class they will stay and eat for an hour what is it usually we are teaching 20 minutes by the time you scan the line it can be like 15 so we have one school that was here they said they want to take the meal right to their classroom yeah there's a lot of at the school just curious over the past year with the universal school meals programs in Vermont let's call it pre-fab meal but we understand it's a federally mandated meal variety was that the case is that what we realized over the past year yeah okay thank you great job great yes we're degrading here I like A pluses I'm MVP she is the most valuable player wow we have more shit she is getting a lot of yeah you're close thank you what about you thank you really appreciate it can we just take a couple minutes and come back