Here's an extraordinary fact: Vermont's public school students benefit from a lower ratio of full-time faculty and staff to students than that of the median independent (private) school. The National Association of Independent Schools' 2015-16 annual survey of 1,438 day school members reveals a median student to full time faculty and staff ratio of 5.1 to 1. In Vermont's public schools, that number is 4 to 1.
As a product of public schools, I'm proud of the substantial investment that our state makes in K-12 education. But as someone concerned about the danger that sky-high taxes pose for Vermont's future, I can't avoid pondering the question: How much is enough?
So what's the problem with our being up there with Connecticut, near the top of U.S. per-pupil expenditures every year?
Simply put, we're not as rich as they are, but we spend as if we were. Connecticut's median household income in 2015 was $71,346. Compare that with Vermont's $56,990, and you can see the rub.
At 20th in median family income, we invest way more of our comparatively modest resources in K-12 education than much wealthier states. And as school-age populations dwindle without corresponding staff reductions, that number is increasing fast.
Meanwhile, at a mere $2,990, we're investing less in every public higher-education student than any other state the nation ... but that's another story.
* * *
With these statistics in mind, it's hard to accept the scare tactics of recent commenters and demonstrators who liken Vermont ($23,557 spent per pupil in 2017) to Utah ($6,843) and other red states where education spending is a fraction of ours.
Governor Phil Scott and the Democratic supermajority in the state Legislature are now battling over how much we will spend on K-12 education. Since labor consumes the vast majority of school budgets, there are really only two ways to restrain spending: reducing growth in salaries or reducing growth in head count. At the moment, neither seems possible.
To the dismay of some of my friends and fellow Democrats, I find myself squarely on the governor's side.
* * *
Now that our public schools are staffed more lavishly than the private schools attended by the nation's wealthiest families, might we be spending enough? Not according to our legislative leaders, House Speaker Mitzi Johnson (D–South Hero) and Tim Ashe (D/P-Chittenden), whose work I support on many other issues.
Thanks to the deep-pocketed lobbying power of the Vermont–National Education Association (VT-NEA), the governor's proposal to save $100 million by bringing average staffing ratio to 5-to-1 (equivalent to that of most private schools) was angrily dismissed, never getting the consideration it deserved.
Excessive taxation can damage an economy pretty quickly. Although our clean environment, low crime rate, and beautiful scenery are attractive factors, business owners and investors are increasingly leery of states where taxes consume a disproportionate percentage of their earnings. When they vote with their feet, jobs and taxes go with them.
The website Business Insider ranks Vermont 48th in its analysis of best and worst places to start a business, noting high costs and few prospective employees. With fewer than 54 new businesses per 1,000 firm population in 2016, we came in second lowest of all 50 states in the number of startups. Having “tax free” New Hampshire right next door offering many of the same environmental benefits makes Vermont's prospects for economic growth even dimmer.
Demography is destiny, and trends in that realm don't support unrestrained spending. The taxable income of our second-oldest-in-the-nation population is rapidly declining.
“But what about all the wealthy retirees moving here?” respond my more optimistic friends. Not such happy news there, either. AARP's 2018 analysis of Best and Worst States to Retire evaluated affordability, quality of life and healthcare. Vermont comes in a dismal 39th, a low rating echoed by a similar Forbes analysis.
With the VT-NEA dominating Vermont politics, many see little likelihood of restraining K-12 spending. But Governor Scott's election and his brave stand for fiscal responsibility give me hope that we might learn to live within our means someday soon.
If not, we will have nobody to blame but ourselves.