Vermont
Opinion — Peter Langella: We're having the wrong conversation about school funding
This commentary is by Peter Langella of Moretown, a public high school and college educator.
Imagine that education in Vermont is a game of chess.
Over the years, many pieces have been taken away from the board. Student enrollment has declined, but there has also been a steady stream of cuts and consolidations, spiking during Act 46 mergers and now again over the past two years.
Conversely, many other pieces have been added that don’t mesh with the original rules of the game. This is because the United States (and Vermont, under Gov. Scott and his vetoes) has rejected many social foundations and safety nets; and schools, admirably, have often tried to fill the gap by employing special educators, social workers, psychologists, intensive paraeducators, behavior interventionists and a plethora of other important and helpful humans.
So when legislators and bureaucrats talk about “right-sizing,” they are mostly trying to play a conventional game of educational chess based on Carnegie Units, the metric developed in 1906 that awards academic credit based on the number of “seat time” hours in a given course, especially at the high school level. This is the “Reading, wRiting, aRithmetic” model many of today’s decision-makers experienced as students.
Simply put, it’s stagnant, outdated and inequitable.
So, Vermont has a choice. We can react to this education funding crisis by further cutting and consolidating, trying to put all the pieces back the way they were and play chess by the original rules, or we can flip the board over and play a new game — completely transforming our model of public education.
READ MORE
The possibilities abound. We have so many creative and empathetic people here. We also have so many amazing students, who are truly our resident experts on what school is and what it can be.
We could harness that, but we aren’t, at least not at a statewide level. For example, the Commission on the Future of Public Education, by statute, was supposed to “represent the State’s geographic, gender, racial, and ethnic diversity,” and it knows it failed on multiple levels of its most basic charge. There also aren’t any current educators or school employees who are part of the group, and there are no students, who repeatedly lack power, access and representation in official spaces where their future is being decided, especially when they come from marginalized backgrounds.
On a more micro level, this isn’t happening in most districts or schools, either. Like many around the state, the district I work in had its budget defeated last year. The school board moved quickly to adopt a new number, and district and building administrators were tasked with identifying cuts.
Instead of having a more transformational conversation, they cut librarians, drama teachers, music teachers, business teachers, French teachers, personalized learning coordinators, restorative practices coordinators, mentoring coordinators, instructional coaches, intensive paraeducators and JV sports programs.
It was and is horrendous.
Imagine something better. Imagine flipping that chessboard over and looking at an open canvas. Before talking about tax rates, yield bills and common levels of appraisal; imagine centering teaching and learning. Imagine a visioning process where we, all of us, collectively redefine what school can be.
I’m not naive enough to think it would fit my exact hopes, and I’m not idealistic enough to think it wouldn’t include some cuts and consolidations. But at least it would be intentional.
The current narrative around this crisis is reactionary. The state is trying to force its way back to the chessboard, and it’s being falsely portrayed as the harder choice.
The harder choice, in actuality, is to transform. Create a bold vision and initiate a brand new game of school — creative, holistic, inclusive — that could serve as an example for the entire country.
BOLTON, Vt. (WCAX) – A wrong-way driver was safely stopped on Interstate 89 overnight Sunday.
Vermont State Police say just before 12:30 a.m., they stopped the car near marker 77, near Bolton.
The driver, Denise Lear, 60, of Revere, was charged with driving under the influence and gross negligent operation.
Lear is expected in court Monday.
Copyright 2026 WCAX. All rights reserved.
Score: UAlbany 4, Vermont 14
Location: Virtue Field | Burlington, Vt.
Records: UAlbany (10-5, 5-1 America East) | Vermont (8-6, 4-1 America East)
Short Story: UAlbany women’s lacrosse fell to the Vermont Catamounts on Saturday afternoon.
Key Stats
- Grace Cincebox recorded a total of 14 saves with 13 goals allowed for a .565 save percentage.
- Ravan Marsell led the Great Danes with two points on one goal and one assist.
- Four different UAlbany players scored in the contest.
- Reggie Williams was the team’s leader with three ground balls.
- Delilah Mile caused a team high three turnovers.
How It Happened
- The Catamounts came out of the gates hard and heavy, scoring all three goals between both sides in the first quarter.
- Vermont would take an 8-0 lead in the second quarter before Amanda Williamson found the back of the net on a women-down goal to put the Great Danes on the board and make it 8-1.
- The Great Danes would allow one more goal in the first half to trail 9-1 after 30-minutes of play.
- Grace Cincebox would enter the half with 10 saves.
- Riley Forthofer started the Great Danes off in the second half to make it a 9-2 game, before Vermont put up three more goals to take a 12-2 lead entering the final quarter of play.
- Mya Carroll and Ravan Marsell both scored on back-to-back free-position goals to make it a 12-4 game.
- The Catamounts finished the game with two more goals to take the win 14-4.
Up Next
The Great Danes will next have a bye week and wait to see the outcome of next week’s Vermont vs UMass Lowell game to see who will host the America East Tournament.
Social Central: Stay up to date with UAlbany women’s lacrosse by following the team on Instagram (@UAlbanyWLax), Facebook (UAlbany Women’s Lacrosse), and X (@UAlbanyWLax) for all of the latest news and highlights throughout the year.
Is creativity the missing key to better health?
Research suggests creative activities like art, music and crafts may benefit mental health as much as other key health habits.
Here’s another reason Vermont is the best New England state: It’s home to one of the top 5 happiest cities in the United States.
Plus, it has another within the top 15.
Massachusetts, on the other hand, doesn’t even break the top 50. Nor, does Connecticut or Rhode Island.
The personal finance website analyzed 182 of the largest cities in the country, and ranked Boston 63rd overall. Although the city is home to some of the nation’s top universities, high-ranking hospitals, and well-regarded companies, it didn’t break the top 50.
To get the rankings, WalletHub compared the cities using 29 metrics, including life-satisfaction index, depression rate, poverty rate, job security, and acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. Each metric was graded on a 100-point scale, and cities were assigned an overall happiness score.
Here’s a look at how the cities ranked.
South Burlington is No. 4 happiest city, Burlington is No. 11
South Burlington came on top for Vermont in WalletHub’s list of the happiest cities in the United States, ranking at No. 4. In scored very high for emotional and physical well-being coming in at the No. 4 spot, which made up for coming in No. 48 for community and environment. It was No. 9 for income and employment ranking. That gave it a total happiness of score of 70.15
Burlington wasn’t far behind at all, taking the No. 11 spot on the list and a happiness score of 67.54. It’s highest score was for income and employment ranking where it came second. It ranked No. 13 for community and environment and No. 21 for emotional and physical well-being.
Happiest cities in the US, per WalletHub
Here are the 25 happiest cities in the U.S., and their happiness scores, according to WalletHub’s 2026 list:
- Fremont, California – 74.09
- Bismarck, North Dakota – 73.11
- Scottsdale, Arizona – 71.36
- South Burlington, Vermont – 70.15
- Fargo, North Dakota – 69.36
- Overland Park, Kansas – 68.45
- Charleston, South Carolina – 68.44
- Irvine, California – 67.99
- Gilbert, Arizona – 67.96
- San Jose, California – 67.79
- Burlington, Vermont – 67.54
- Madison, Wisconsin – 66.35
- Columbia, Maryland – 66.28
- Chandler, Arizona – 65.69
- Seattle, Washington – 65.62
- Plano, Texas – 65.34
- San Francisco, California – 64.99
- Lincoln, Nebraska – 64.90
- Portland, Maine – 64.59
- Tempe, Arizona – 64.30
- San Diego, California – 64.30
- Raleigh, North Carolina – 63.47
- Peoria, Arizona – 63.38
- Durham, North Carolina – 62.84
- Huntington Beach, California – 62.80
Least happy cities in the US, per WalletHub
Here are the 25 least happy cities in the U.S., and their happiness scores, according to WalletHub’s 2026 list:
- Detroit, Michigan (#182 overall) – 29.55
- Memphis, Tennessee (#181 overall) – 34.39
- Shreveport, Louisiana (#180 overall) – 34.93
- Cleveland, Ohio (#179 overall) – 36.50
- Huntington, West Virginia (#178 overall) – 37.20
- Toledo, Ohio (#177 overall) – 37.21
- Augusta, Georgia (#176 overall) – 38.24
- Fort Smith, Arkansas (#175 overall) – 38.66
- Dover, Delaware (#174 overall) – 39.08
- Akron, Ohio (#173 overall) – 40.11
- Baltimore, Maryland (#172 overall) – 40.28
- Birmingham, Alabama (#171 overall) – 40.37
- Baton Rouge, Louisiana (#170 overall) – 40.47
- Columbus, Georgia (#169 overall) – 40.61
- Montgomery, Alabama (#168 overall) – 41.35
- Gulfport, Mississippi (#167 overall) – 41.65
- Charleston, West Virginia (#166 overall) – 42.18
- Jackson, Mississippi (#165 overall) – 42.60
- St. Louis, Missouri (#164 overall) – 43.53
- Knoxville, Tennessee (#163 overall) – 44.04
- Wilmington, Delaware (#162 overall) – 44.34
- Little Rock, Arkansas (#161 overall) – 44.48
- Mobile, Alabama (#160 overall) – 44.85
- New Orleans, Louisiana (#159 overall) – 45.19
- Tulsa, Oklahoma (#158 overall) – 45.33
Where New England cities ranked
Here are the 12 happiest cities in New England, and their happiness scores, according to WalletHub’s 2026 list:
- South Burlington, Vermont (#6 overall) – 70.15
- Burlington, Vermont (#11 overall) – 67.54
- Portland, Maine (#19 overall) – 64.59
- Nashua, New Hampshire (#27 overall) – 62.49
- Manchester, New Hampshire (#51 overall) – 59.10
- Boston, Massachusetts (#63 overall) – 56.88
- Warwick, Rhode Island (#66 overall) – 56.59
- New Haven, Connecticut (#95 overall) – 54.14
- Bridgeport, Connecticut (#96 overall) – 54.01
- Providence, Rhode Island (#98 overall) – 53.52
- Worcester, Massachusetts (#116 overall) – 50.12
- Lewiston, Maine (#145 overall) – 47.28
-
Lifestyle3 minutes agoPhotos: How overfishing in Southeast Asia is an ecological and human crisis
-
Technology15 minutes agoBlue Origin successfully reused its New Glenn rocket
-
World21 minutes agoDistress call captures tanker under fire, Iran shuts Hormuz trapping thousands of sailors
-
Politics27 minutes agoTrump ally diGenova tapped to lead DOJ probe into Brennan over Russia probe origins
-
Health33 minutes agoExperts reveal why ‘nonnamaxxing’ trend may improve mental, physical health
-
Sports39 minutes ago‘Demon’ Finn Balor settles score with Dominik Mysterio at WrestleMania 42
-
Technology45 minutes agoiPhone and Samsung flashlight tricks you should know
-
Business51 minutes agoDavid Ellison hits CinemaCon, vowing to make more movies with Paramount-Warner Bros.