Since the beginning of the 2025 legislative session, lawmakers in both the House and Senate have been working on their counterproposal to Gov. Phil Scott’s sweeping plan to overhaul public education.

But it’s become clear that the two chambers are moving in very different directions. And disagreement over how many school districts Vermont should have — and how quickly that redistricting process should happen — could squelch any grand bargains over education reform this year.

House Democrats are preparing to advance legislation that would set new parameters for school district sizes, including a minimum enrollment of 4,000 students. But instead of drawing district boundaries themselves, they plan to ask a new subcommittee on the Commission of the Future of Public Education to take the summer and fall to propose three maps, which lawmakers would take up in the next legislative session.

The House’s slower and more deliberative approach in H.454 has won the support of major public education advocacy organizations, including the Vermont-NEA. But it has frustrated the governor — and the chair of the Senate’s education committee, who has already drafted an alternate redistricting proposal.

At a press conference Thursday, House Committee on Education Chair Peter Conlon defended his chamber’s approach. While it was “tempting” to act more hastily, he argued, “the chance of unintended consequences that would just have to be corrected and changed in the next session is too great.”

“We need people with the time and experience to assure, for example, that every Vermont student has access to a career and technical education center and that a district line doesn’t inadvertently stick a mountain range in the way,” the Cornwall Democrat said.

The Senate has not yet technically advanced legislation, and is waiting for the House to send over their bill. But Sen. Seth Bongartz, who chairs the Senate education committee, has already drafted a map which would carve the state into nine large governance structures: six supervisory districts and three supervisory unions. Supervisory unions act as umbrella school districts in Vermont, with one centralized administrative office and superintendent overseeing independent districts with their own school boards.

The Bennington Democrat said he’s open to revisions to his map — but bullish on a timeline that redraws district lines this year.

“Not getting that done this year does set the process back significantly, and that’s concerning,” Bongartz said.

Instead of operating public schools, some districts in Vermont currently offer families vouchers, or tuition, which can be used at the public or private school of their choice. Because a school district cannot offer vouchers and operate a school, choice has historically presented an obstacle to regional consolidation. Bongartz’s somewhat complicated map is an attempt to solve this problem of choice in Vermont’s complicated educational landscape — mostly by much more lightly consolidating areas in which choice districts exist in large numbers.

Bongartz’s proposal would somewhat limit choice, and eliminate it entirely in some places, including Grand Isle County. But his plan is largely crafted to preserve much of the status-quo, particularly in the towns that have traditionally sent their students to the state’s four historic academies — Burr and Burton Academy, St. Johnsbury Academy, Thetford Academy and Lyndon Institute.

Bongartz, who once sat on the board of trustees at Burr and Burton, said his map sought to maintain tuitioning practices where they were “integral to the delivery system of education in Vermont.”

At least one key constituency has made clear they do not consider the Bongartz map to be the blueprint to a grand bargain.

“We are not interested in gerrymandering to preserve vouchers,” Darren Allen, a spokesperson for the Vermont-NEA, wrote in a text.

The House’s proposal, for now, is silent on where vouchers would continue to exist. Conlon said in an interview that he wanted to preserve tuitioning where existing private schools are basically the only option — including around the historic academies. But the choice debate, he said, should be kept for next year, when he thinks lawmakers should review their redistricting options.

Scott, meanwhile, says he wants new district boundaries now, not next year.

“We were elected to make tough decisions. It’s our problem to solve and our time to solve it,” he said in a statement Thursday, adding that he would call lawmakers back to Montpelier if he didn’t think their work was done.

“I will not support adjourning this session without a bill to transition to a new funding system, establish a new governance structure that unlocks transformation, and includes a specific implementation timeline,” Scott wrote.

The Vermont Republican Party is already attempting to capitalize on the moment to recruit candidates for 2026. In a press release Friday, Vermont GOP chair Paul Dame decried House Democrats’ “surrender on education reform.”

“If Democrats continually refuse to lead on this issue, Republicans will pick up the slack,” he wrote.