Vermont Task Force Rebels: Ditches Mandated School Maps for 'Voluntary' Overhaul
The task force has failed to perform its statutory duty and will not be delivering a legally compliant map. This hands the Vermont General Assembly a political crisis when it convenes in January.
A Vermont state task force has voted to reject its primary legal mandate to deliver new school district maps. Instead, it has approved a “voluntary” 10-year merger plan, a move that reportedly “flouts Act 73’s directive.”
This decision, made by the Act 73 School District Redistricting Task Force, places the Vermont General Assembly in a difficult position. The core reforms of Act 73, a major education law passed in 2025, are tied to the creation of these maps. Most significantly, a new education funding formula will not go into effect unless the legislature adopts a new district structure.
The task force’s vote brings a complex, behind-the-scenes policy conflict—involving allegations of segregation, conflicts of interest, and deep political divisions—into public view.
The Task Force’s Mandate vs. Its Decision
The School District Redistricting Task Force was not created to debate the merits of redistricting; it was created to implement it.
Under the Act 73 law, the group was legally required to “present up to three district maps” to the General Assembly by a December 1, 2025, deadline. The law was specific: the maps were to collapse Vermont’s 119 existing school districts into new, larger districts of 4,000 to 8,000 students.
Instead, the task force majority approved a 170-page proposal for a 10-year “voluntary” plan. This plan encourages, but does not require, mergers and would be incentivized by access to state construction aid.
The move prompted task force member Dave Wolk, an appointee of Governor Phil Scott, to question the legality of the vote, asking, “But is it a map as directed to us by the Legislature?”
Two Competing Visions for Reform
The task force’s vote was a choice between two fundamentally different approaches to education reform.
The Approved “Voluntary” Plan This proposal, co-authored by former Vermont Secretary of Education Rebecca Holcombe and former superintendent Jay Badams, rejects the state-mandated consolidation model. Instead, it proposes creating five regional “Cooperative Education Service Areas,” or CESAs.
This model is based on the Boards of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) used in other rural states like New York. The goal is not to merge district governance, but to have districts collaborate to share high-cost, low-frequency services like special education, transportation, and business office functions. Proponents argue this model is better researched for rural areas and has more public support.
The Rejected “Mandated” Map The only proposal that attempted to fulfill the Act 73 mandate was co-authored by Sen. Scott Beck (R-Caledonia) and Dave Wolk. Their map proposed creating 13-14 new districts organized around the state’s existing Career and Technical Education (CTE) regions.
This proposal was supported by Vermont Education Secretary Zoie Saunders, who stated it was the “only proposal that aligns with the intent of Act 73.”
The “Fatal Flaws” of the Rejected Map
The task force majority’s “rebellion” against its mandate was fueled by what members saw as two “fatal flaws” in the Beck/Wolk map.
1. “Segregation” Allegations The map drew “a number of concerns” for its proposal to merge nearly 22,000 students in Chittenden County into a single district.
This criticism was most forcefully stated in public testimony from Marlon Verasamy, an Essex-Westford School Board vice-chair. Verasamy wrote, “To be very frank, the proposed Burlington district feels like segregation: A grossly disproportionately sized district that silos the majority of New Americans and students of color into one district in the state.” He argued it would force marginalized communities “to do more with less resources.”
2. “School Choice” Conflict of Interest Other task force members sharply criticized the map for its handling of “school choice,” or town tuitioning. Task Force Co-chair Edye Graning said the “care taken to preserve tuitioning choice in some regions... is really hard to stomach.”
This accusation was aimed at the map’s co-author, Sen. Scott Beck. Public records confirm that Sen. Beck is a classroom teacher at St. Johnsbury Academy. St. Johnsbury Academy is one of 18 private, “approved independent schools” in Vermont that receives public tuition dollars.
Critics, including Rep. Graning, implied a direct conflict of interest: that Sen. Beck had co-authored a state map explicitly designed to “honor ‘school choice where it presently exists’” in a way that would protect the financial viability of his own private-school employer.
A Clash with the Administration
The debate also exposed a deep rift between the task force and the Scott administration’s Education Secretary, Zoie Saunders.
Saunders argued the task force’s voluntary plan would create “an additional layer of bureaucracy and also cost.” Co-chair Graning immediately pushed back, stating she was “incredibly distraught when the secretary came in and said misinformation.”
This conflict is defined by Saunders’ controversial political history.
A Rejected Nomination: After Governor Phil Scott appointed Saunders in March 2024, the Vermont Senate rejected her nomination.
An “Interim” Appointment: “Within minutes” of the rejection, Gov. Scott re-appointed her as interim Secretary, a move seen as bypassing the Senate’s authority.
A “Toxic” Background: Opposition to Saunders was fueled by her professional history as a former “for-profit charter school executive” with Charter Schools USA.
The task force majority, dominated by public education veterans like former Secretary Holcombe, does not view Saunders as a neutral administrator. They largely view her as an ideological opponent, and her demands for compliance with Act 73 were interpreted as an attack on the public school system.
What Happens Next
The task force has failed to perform its statutory duty and will not be delivering a legally compliant map. This hands the Vermont General Assembly a political crisis when it convenes in January.
The central issue is that the Act 73 funding formula is inextricably linked to the adoption of new maps. By approving a plan with no maps, the task force is essentially recommending that the legislature take an “off-ramp” that would nullify the law’s primary financial reforms.
The legislature is now faced with three options:
Accept the Task Force’s Plan: It can adopt the “voluntary” BOCES-style plan, but this would mean failing to adopt a map and thereby killing the new funding formula.
Reject the Task Force’s Plan: It could try to adopt a map anyway. The only one available is the Beck/Wolk plan, which is now considered politically toxic due to the “segregation” allegations and the author’s conflict of interest.
Restart the Process: The legislature could admit that the implementation of Act 73 has failed and go back to the drawing board, a process that would consume more time and political capital.
Marlon is on the Essex Westford school board. Not Winooski.