School officials: Job cuts key to containing Harwood’s FY26 budget
December 16, 2024 | By Lisa Scagliotti The first of several public sessions to discuss public school funding for next year drew about two dozen people to the Crossett Brook Middle School cafeteria and even more online as Harwood school officials answered questions and shared details of the draft proposal that will eventually appear on the Town Meeting Day ballot in March. To rein in costs, school officials say they likely will need to cut 15-20 full-time jobs.
The meeting was held Thursday, Dec. 12, and its format was designed for attendees to get their questions answered and hear administrators explain the layers of considerations they must navigate to build a budget that will both meet voters’ approval and adequately run schools for the 2025-26 school year.
Some key details:
The Harwood Unified Union School District School Board has directed the administration to present a budget starting on July 1 that increases spending by no more than 2.75% over the current school year’s budget.
If the district made no changes to staffing or programming from this year, the new budget would increase by 7.3% or about $3.5 million, according to Finance Manager Lisa Estler. On a third vote last May, Harwood district voters approved a school budget of $47,892,873 for the current school year, which represented a 5.4% increase over 2023-24.
Given that more than 70% of the district’s budget is centered on staffing expenses, an FY26 budget that grows by less than 3% would need to rely on cutting 15-20 full-time equivalent positions.
Superintendent Mike Leichliter was joined by Harwood’s Director of Finance and Operations Lisa Estler, school board Chair Ashley Woods of Warren, and five other board members: Ben Clark and Steve Rosenberg from Moretown, Waterbury’s Corey Hackett and Dan Roscioli, and Bobbi Rood from Waitsfield.
An additional elected local official also in attendance was state Rep. Theresa Wood, D-Waterbury.
The Crossett Brook informational session had a workshop-like format and was the first of what school board members say will be several such gatherings before the budget is finalized in January for the March vote.
It began with attendees seated at tables where they used large pieces of paper and markers to write down questions they had about school funding in general and the 2025-26 budget in particular.
After a few minutes, they shared their lists with administrators and board members answering some and noted which others would be addressed in the presentation they were about to share.
Coming from across the district, attendees included some parents of current students, parents of recent graduates, and others who no longer or never have had students in Harwood schools.
Inquiries ran the gamut:
How are students counted? Estler answered that the student count for funding purposes is based on a two-year average which is now weighted based on values laid out in new rules that went into effect earlier this year. Various categories carry specified weights to reflect their educational cost. For example, high school students are weighted more than younger students; English-language learners and students in poverty are weighted more due to higher costs associated with services schools provide.
How does the Harwood district spending compare to the state per pupil average? Superintendent Leichliter answered that it is below, but close to the limit without going over and triggering a penalty. The current threshold if $15,926 per pupil; Harwood’s spending in the draft budget is $15,554.
How do early college programs for high school students affect enrollment and funding the district receives? “It does count against us,” Leichliter said, but noting that there is a maximum limit of five early college students the state will deduct from a district’s count and funding each year, regardless of how many students take advantage of the program which is paid for by the state education funds.
Does the school district have any control over health benefits for teachers and staff? Vermont manages health care for educators at the state level, Leichliter said. That issue is among topics being reviewed by a state commission on the future of Vermont public education where Leichliter is a member representing superintendents. Other areas the commission is discussing to find across-the-board savings include meal programs and the free-college program, he said.
Is the district looking at trimming transportation costs? Can bus routes be cut to save money? Leichliter noted that many buses are not full and some routes have been cut this year. The district is in the process of seeking bids for the bus contract for next year. In fact bids were due to be opened on Friday.
Could the district move its administrative offices out of leased space? The district’s lease for office space in Waitsfield runs out at the end of the 2025-26 school year, Leichliter said. “We’re looking to move out at the end of next school year,” he said, with central office staff ideally moving to space in buildings the district owns.
Are district officials concerned about changes at the federal level and whether a new administration might cut federal education funding. Leichliter said yes while Eslter pointed out that federal dollars make up less than 2% of Harwood’s revenue.
Consolidation/reconfiguration in the spotlight
The answer to one question opened up a whole discussion about the overall structure of the district and future costs well beyond the 2025-26 budget. Attendees at one table asked what happened to interest from several years ago in closing the Fayston school and consolidating its enrollment among other schools.
Leichliter said enrollment in the past few years at Fayston has grown, so the discussion around reconfiguring the district and using fewer school facilities does not presume that Fayston would be a school to close.
That topic now is the focus of a new study the school board recently approved and a new committee the board has decided to create.
“We are looking at consolidation – period,” said board Chair Ashley Woods. But we can’t do it without the feasibility study.”
At its Nov. 6 meeting, the board unanimously approved spending $48,500 to have the Burlington architectural firm TruexCullins begin the background work for a master plan for the district’s facilities for the next 30 years. The firm presented a four-phase proposal and the work commissioned so far covers the first two phases.
The architects will look at the needs of each school, what their strengths are, etc., Woods said, with the direction to report back to the school board in January. “The plan is to have a plan next year and the year after,” she said.
TruexCullins has been working with the school district since 2015 on building-related planning although no significant building projects have been undertaken during the decade. Just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the focus was on merging the middle schools and expanding Crossett Brook Middle School along with significant renovations to Harwood Union High School. Voters overwhelmingly rejected a $59.5 million bond proposal for that project in November 2021.
Last fall, TruexCullins architects again were called upon to help shape a new project that would have made major updates and repairs to Harwood. A series of public meetings was held to get community input on a long list of renovations. That effort was put on hold in the spring, however, after voters rejected the 2024-25 school budget in March and tax increases just to fund school operations were in the double digits.
Now the firm is being asked to do an updated review of all of the Harwood school buildings to determine their condition, building needs and associated costs, in order to make recommendations for how to potentially reconfigure the district with fewer school buildings and ultimately reduce building-related costs in the future.
TruexCullins recommends a specific committee structure as part of the process it laid out in its proposal. The school board last week approved forming a new Building Use & Visioning Committee for the task. The committee so far includes board members J.B. Weir of Waitsfield, Ben Clark of Moretown and Vice Chair Cindy Senning of Duxbury. Woods and the superintendent will also be part of that group. The goal is to add a member of the public as well, Woods said.
The new committee will meet for the first time this Thursday at 6 p.m. via Zoom only. It will discuss its role and timeline.
Leichliter in explaining the process said this effort will not recommend facility changes to incorporate into the 2025-26 school year’s plans. “It won’t happen for next year. It’s a process that will take time, but that is under way,” he told the gathering at Crossett Brook last week.
The detailed look is needed, he said, to determine which facilities are worth investing in and which may be too expensive to maintain long-term. For example, Leichliter noted that the district’s largest elementary school, Brookside Primary School in Waterbury, is also the oldest school building in the district and “the building with the most needs after Harwood,” he said.
Estler cautioned that consolidation or reconfiguration may come with up-front costs, so some savings may take time to realize. She offered an example of how Waitsfield Elementary School is at its capacity now and could not accommodate many more students should another valley school close.
School officials acknowledged that consolidating facilities will have pros and cons. A benefit could be long-term cost savings while cons could be losses of community centers and longer travel for some students to get to and from school.
Attendee Matt Lillard asked about past studies that looked at building capacities and conditions – are school officials using any of the data the district already collected and paid for? Woods replied that the architects are “not starting from scratch.” In fact, she said, TruexCullins’ history with the district was a key reason to hire them for the latest study.
And given recent trends that saw education property taxes in the Harwood district increase by double digits this year, “More people want to consider consolidation now,” Woods said. “We’re going to turn those rocks over thoroughly.”
Budget slideshow crunches the numbers
Leading into Estler’s slides, Leichliter addressed another audience question: Are higher taxes leading to better test scores? Leichliter said that state standardized test have recently changed, so comparisons are hard to make yet.
But he did point to the latest school rankings by U.S. News and World Report which does state-by-state lists ranking schools based in part on test scores. The report shows that three of the top Vermont elementary schools are in the Harwood district: Waitsfield Elementary at number 3, Warren Elementary at number 9, and Moretown Elementary at number 10. Fayston Elementary ranked 23rd and Brookside Primary was 65th. For middle schools, Crossett Brook ranked 16th, and Harwood MS was 30th. Harwood Union High School was ranked 12th on the list of best high schools.
“We are performing well,” Leichliter said.
Estler then walked through her slide presentation which is posted on the district’s business office webpage under budget development.
Looking to next year, the district will need to find cuts to afford cost increases that are growing faster than inflation, Estler said. To maintain the same level of education and staffing currently in place this year, the budget would cost $51.4 million which is $3.5 million higher than what voters approved on the third budget vote in May.
The current draft budget calls for voters to approve a budget of $49,209,927 for next school year which represents an increase of just 2.75% over this year’s $47,892,873.
That compares to preliminary information shared by the state showing that school districts around Vermont have begun working on draft budgets with increases averaging 6.1%. The state tax commissioner already has projected that the average education property tax increase next year will be 5.9%.
The only way the district can keep the increase under 3%, Eslter said, will be to trim the equivalent of 15-20 full-time positions. This year’s budget relied on staffing cuts as well but trimming some 27.5 full-time equivalent positions for 2024-25 relied mainly on retirements and resignations. Only six layoffs were necessary for this year. Estler and Leichliter said they so far have not received word of more than a couple of retirements coming up at the end of this school year which means most of the cuts for 2025-26 will need to come from layoffs.
Rep. Wood asked if school officials are looking to increase class sizes if they need to reduce teachers. Leichliter said yes, but small classes make that a challenge, he noted.
Looking at the past several years of budgets and inflation figures, Eslter shared a slide showing that Harwood’s budgets have generally mirrored inflationary increases but this year’s increase of under 3% will be less than inflation.
Estler pointed out that the draft budget also represents an increase of just 2% in educational funding that the district receives from tax dollars. The district has other revenue sources such as grants and federal funding for expenses such as special education. Estler projects that those sources will account for just over $8 million in FY26, up from $7.5 million this year.
Several slides and much of the discussion revolved around Vermont’s complex education funding formula and the recent calls to update it. Leichliter noted some ideas being discussed in the state commission he’s serving on such as creating a foundation formula as other states currently use. The formula sets limits on how much growth school budgets may have each year, he said. The state commission is expected to share its recommendations soon, ahead of the legislative session that convenes in January.
One slide used data from the 2022-23 school year to listed the education tax revenue generated by each town in the Harwood district which totaled over $50.7 million. Harwood that year only needed $42.6 million to fund its budget. That meant that $8.1 million of local taxes – 16 cents of every dollar collected – was retained by the state to distribute to other school districts with lower taxing capacity.
School board members expressed their frustration at the task ahead. Waitsfield member Bobbi Rood said she understands the need to lower per-pupil costs, but she worries about the impact. “What are we sacrificing in terms of quality?” she said. “Nobody wants to sacrifice quality. Nobody wants to fire teachers.”
Attendee Tamatha Hasse thanked the board members for their work in tackling the thorny issue. “You are volunteers,” she said.
While critical of the circumstances and the growing tax burden on the public, attendee Chris Viens also gave the elected officials credit. “I commend the school board for what they’ve done,” he said. “Let’s hope that the state legislature comes up with some ideas that are going to end this problem for a lot of the people that are suffering.”
Board member Ben Clark closed out the session offering a message of reassurance to community members that the school board behind the scenes is taking its charge very seriously.
“We are really hard at work trying to think about how we can do the very best we can do with the very least amount of tax dollars we can get away with,” he said. “We’re balancing the tax bills with the care of the kids, and we’re trying figure out a way forward. But we’re trying to do all of that with this background noise of the state and their formulas and changing targets...We’re really hard at work behind the scenes trying to get business done for you.”
Mad River Valley Television recorded the informational meeting at Crossett Brook. See that recording online here.