Act 46 (H.361): An Introduction Some early highlights of the education bill signed into law on 6/2/15

Purposes To promote greater equity across the state. To promote quality--EQS. To bend the cost curve to temper the increases in cost- per-student. To create greater flexibility in the administration of the education system. To strengthen and retain small schools as part of larger districts.

General Strategy Create somewhat larger districts with a single board (supervisory district) or, where necessary, a multi-board structure (supervisory union) with as few boards “as practicable.” Current patterns of choice and operating are protected.

Elements of Approach Boards talk with each other and neighbors and initiate action. Incentives kick in for creating unified districts early on. Financial pressures begin to apply with loss of ADM Hold Harmless and Small Schools phase- out. AOE quality reviews begin and will influence process. Ultimately, AOE/State Board can decide on realignment in fall, 2018—effective July, 2019.

Incentives for Action Goal: Early response by regions ready to act. Incentives Available: Accelerated Incentives vote by 7/1/16 Regular RED Incentives by 7/1/17 Keep Small Schools Grants as “Merger Grants” Keep ADM Hold Harmless

Timetable June 2015 Bill signed into law. FY’16-FY’17 Incentives available “Protections” begin to disappear FY’17-FY’18 “Cost control” mechanisms Nov. 30, 2017Deadline for merger activity or “alternative proposal” June 1, 2018 Secretary’s proposed realignment Nov. 30, 2018Board plan adopted July 1, 2019Implementation

Recommended Approach Focus on the outcomes-- what is the bill trying to achieve? Where do you stand with the key outcomes? What actions can get you closest to the desired outcomes? Put your energy into doing things that will best benefit students and taxpayers. Understand the financial environment—possible incentives, impact of loss of “buffers”, impact of “cost controls”.

Act 46: Four Possible Approaches 1.Create a single district and assure maximum incentives. (Where complex, could involve giving up current choice or operating patterns) 2.Create a different structure between now and July 1, 2017 in a way that takes advantage of existing support grants and incentives. (Could involve a RED within an SU or other types of structures.) 3.Develop a plan to achieve quality and cost objectives through changes in the SU operation and configuration and submit a plan to secretary by November 30, Do nothing and take your chances.

Considerations for Districts If you are in an SU that is aligned with a union high school boundary or are otherwise potentially fully aligned, consider seeking the accelerated incentives. If you are in an SU that has a union high school and one or two other districts, consider changes that would allow the SU to become a PreK-12 District. Seek early incentives.

Considerations for Districts #2 If you are in a complex SU that has a mix of choice and non-choice and/or various district operating configurations, focus on the outcomes and back into structural and operational changes that could best achieve the objectives.

Considerations for Districts #3 Decide whether you need to make structural changes. Seek Act 153/156 Incentives as appropriate. (Recognize deadline of 7/1/17). If no structural changes have been approved by your electorate by 7/1/17 make the case for how you will operate and achieve the desired outcomes—proposal due by 11/30/17.

Special Considerations for Grand Isle SU All districts above average spending– possible tax consequences in FY’17. Three districts with small schools grants that would be at risk. Two districts to be affected by loss of ADM hold harmless provision. State Board unlikely to allow SU to be broken up unless part of comprehensive plan. Maximum incentives available only if adjust operating/choice patterns to align. And likely need special legislative action to allow new district to be under 900 students.