sarahBy Libby Bonesteel, Mia Moore, and Joe Carroll
Beware, community members, of what has become a familiar routine: Gov. Scott takes to the microphone to decry high property taxes, pointing a finger at what he calls Vermont’s “failing” education system. His recent rhetoric suggests that schools are spending more while delivering less, citing a “40% tax increase” alongside claims of decreasing performance.
As the superintendent, board chair, and president of the teachers’ union from the Montpelier Roxbury Public Schools (MRPS) district, we feel compelled to correct the record. The narrative that our schools are failing is not only demoralizing and disrespectful to our educators — it is factually wrong. The narrative that local school boards are solely responsible for tax hikes ignores the math entirely.
The Myth of “Failing Schools”
The governor often relies on NAEP scores — a single test taken by a sample of students during two hours of one day — to judge our entire system. This is a narrow and misleading metric. When we look at the students in our classrooms, the story is one of success, not failure.
At MRPS, our students are outperforming the metrics that matter most.
- Academic Excellence: Our students score nearly 20 points higher than the state average in literacy and 16 points higher in math. While the national average SAT score is 1030, MRPS students average 1214.
- College and Career Readiness: Our graduation rate stands at 96%. Over the last three years, participation in advanced placement (AP) coursework has surged by 137%, with 86% of students scoring a 3 or higher on AP exams — well above the national average. Ninety-five percent of last year’s graduating class participated in at least one flexible pathway designed to expand horizons beyond the classroom, increase skills, and build confidence for wherever their future takes them. This is increasingly important as colleges put less emphasis on test scores and more emphasis on well-rounded students with a diverse set of experiences.
- Belonging: Our third through fifth grade students rank in the 90th percentile nationally in their sense of belonging at school. Our chronic absentee rate is just 14% compared to 24% nationwide — a metric that strongly suggests our students feel good coming to our schools. From the middle school’s sustainability kitchen cooking meals for local food shelves to the elementary school’s kindness club visiting local assisted-living homes to the high school’s harvest festival service projects, our students are learning what it means to be a caring, contributing part of their community.
These are not the statistics of a failing system. They are the results of a community that values education.
The Real Cost Drivers
We agree with the governor that property taxes are too high. However, blaming local school budgets for this crisis is a sleight of hand because it draws our attention away from real cost drivers of increased taxes. There are two massive drivers of the upcoming tax increase over which local boards have zero control.
First is the healthcare crisis, which local school districts have no control over because health insurance for school employees is negotiated at the state level, not by local districts. Since 2017, the cost of a family health plan has skyrocketed from roughly $17,000 to over $40,000 — a 135% increase in just eight years. We are paying double-digit premium hikes annually before we even buy a single book or hire a single teacher. This is a healthcare cost problem masquerading as an education spending problem. If the governor were truly serious about affordability, he would be laser-focused on the price of health insurance, not blaming schools for costs outside of our control.
Second is the fiscal cliff effect caused by lawmakers using one time money to reduce last year’s taxes. State leaders are predicting a painful tax increase for next year, but they often omit why. Nearly half of that projected increase (approx. 5.8%) exists simply because the state used one-time surplus funds to artificially buy down the tax rate last year. That subsidy is now gone. We are not just paying for next year’s schools; we are paying the bill that our state government deferred last year.
Enrollment and Opportunity
It is true that demographics are shifting. But at MRPS, our enrollment has held steady, down just three students since 2019. The real challenge isn’t that schools are “too big” or “too small.” It is that the state lacks a coherent vision for supporting them.
The governor rightly points out inequity in student opportunity across the state. We see this too. But the solution isn’t to starve successful schools; it is to replicate what works. At MRPS, we have embraced flexible pathways, from nature-based learning at the North Branch Nature Center for our youngest students to entrepreneurship programs at the high school level. Our system of support to ensure all students succeed academically and socially is second to none. We welcome the governor’s administration to visit our classrooms and witness our innovative programming rather than criticize them from a podium.
A Call for Partnership
We do not need more negative headlines. We need a state government that is willing to tackle the root causes of our challenges — housing scarcity, healthcare inflation, a dearth of community-based mental health supports, and lack of infrastructure and industry — rather than asking schools to solve societal problems on a shoestring budget.
The Montpelier Roxbury Public Schools are proof that public education in Vermont is vibrant, effective, and worth investing in. We are ready to be partners in solving unsustainable property tax increases, but that partnership must start with a true and full accounting of what is driving taxes up.
Libby Bonesteel is the superintendent of MRPS; Mia Moore is chair of the MRPS board; and Joe Carroll is the Montpelier Roxbury Education Association Union president.
The material presented here represents the opinion of the author and does not reflect the opinions of The Bridge. Commentaries may be submitted to editor@montpelierbridge.com. Preference is given to submissions by those who live in central Vermont. Submissions are encouraged to be 500 to 750 words in length.
