Arlington Planning Commission
Minutes – 3/26/2026
Planning Commission members in attendance:
Jon Murray
Mary Anne Holmes
Jenna Tait
Sebastian Massey
Michael Murno
Garret Siegel
Joan Nash (Zoom, APC alternate)
Also in attendance: Cynthia Browning, Interim Town Administrator; Nicol Whalen; Don Keelan; Elizabeth Rossi; Ralph Rossi. Attending on Zoom: Doug Tait; Alexandra Ernst.
A motion was made by Michael Murno to approve the minutes from the last APC meeting (February 26, 2026), seconded by Mary Anne Holmes. Approved unanimously.
No Public Comments
New Business:
The Planning Commission welcomed Nicol Whalen, chair of the Southern Vermont Supervisory Union (SVSU) and a member of the Arlington School Board to present to the commission about the potential effects of Act 73, which targets school consolidation across the state, on the Arlington School System. Todd Wilkins, the chair of the Arlington School Board and also a member of the SVSU, was scheduled to attend but could not be present at the last minute.
Garret Siegel opened by noting that Act 73 has a stated aim of consolidating the state’s 119 school districts into 10 to 25 school districts. There are currently 52 supervisory unions and supervisory districts in the state. (A district can be a single town or single grade level; a Union is a combination of schools from different towns and/or different grade levels; see more info here.) As part of this law passed in 2025, a state task force was asked to prepare a plan mapping the proposed consolidation; however, after considerable work, the task force did not propose a map in the end but endorsed a plan calling for voluntary mergers. Currently, the Senate and House have offered two very different ideas for how to effectuate the mandated consolidation. The Senate has concentrated on structural redesign and has issued a map with 12 larger supervisory unions. The House has concentrated on efficiency and operational change. It has proposed the use of Cooperative Education Service Agencies, or CESA’s, which would regionalize special education, professional development and human resources.
Nicol Whalen opened by noting that the maps currently being worked on by both the Senate and the House are “not dissimilar.” It is really a difference in structure. The governor’s plan envisioned five governing regions in the state which Whalen characterized as “drastic.” The current plan that both the House and Senate are looking at would maintain the Southern Vermont Supervisory Union (SVSU) and the Bennington Rutland Supervisory Union (BRSU) as separate entities. A key difference between the Senate and House plans is one would be governed by Supervisory Districts and the other by Supervisory Unions. Given the different district structures within the SVSU, Supervisory Unions as a governing structure are viewed as a “key piece” for Arlington.
The issues for Arlington are 1) is the school big enough to be viable and 2) what role can Arlington’s schools play if there’s already a larger public high school (Mt. Anthony) in the Supervisory Union? Arlington’s elementary school is probably safe under any expected consolidation plan. The class numbers are large enough. Other metrics like quality and viability will also be applied to evaluating the elementary school. There is more of a question with the middle school and especially the high school as the minimum class size targets are not currently being met. Arlington has many blended classes between different grades. The biggest question is the proposed district/union big enough to support two high schools? AMHS, which is owned by the Arlington School Board and not the Supervisory Union, is certainly safe for the next three years as school consolidation is worked through, but it is less clear if it will be five to ten years from now. “Our goal is to continue to work towards making sure that we do have a high school,” Whalen noted, “but it needs to be large enough with exceptional education offerings. And every time that they put us through some configuration of changing governing structure, it completely takes the focus off of education and makes it all about how you are structured and how you operate.”
Act 46, which was passed in 2015 with the intent to manage the consolidation of school districts into larger units, does not allow for the merger of unlike districts. The Act preserved Arlington as a Pre-K to 12 district. There are currently 15 students who come to AMHS to study from Mt. Anthony High School, but there is no school choice allowed to independent schools without tuition being paid by those that choose to send their children out of district. Nicol noted that the Senate map seems to aim to preserve school choice in districts that have it and does not aim to bring a new public school to districts with an independent high school. The Senate plan had originally suggested a county-wide school union, effectively a merging of the BRSU & SVSU, but that component is no longer part of their plan. The underlying question is if there is no school choice, which way does the town choose to go as it centers on the future?
Many attendees noted that the inability to choose where one’s child can attend high school is a real problem and, besides quality of education, could also affect property values. There was some discussion of the potential impact of having to send students to Mt. Anthony on Arlington’s Grand List and whether a real estate disclosure problem may be consequent to the discussed school consolidation. Don Keelan questioned whether home sellers could face liability issues if he or she did not disclose the school situation to a potential buyer.
One area where Nicol saw some opportunity for Arlington is the possibility that the school can offer a sort of satellite program from the tech center in Bennington to expand Northwards. It is currently hard for BBA, which is in the BRSU, to access the tech center in Bennington due to its distance from Manchester. Career and technical education may offer a way to keep Arlington’s high school going. The school facilities are certainly equipped to handle extra volume. Whalen also noted that there is a high number of autism students in the state and very limited resources in Vermont for students with high needs. The state is effectively paying to send those students to Massachusetts. While the BRSU is currently considering an autism program at the Mount Tabor School Building, there is potential under a CESA structure for a similar program here in Arlington.
Nicol said that while both the House and Senate plans made it through crossover, they were accorded an extension to continue to work on their plans. It is at least two or three years before structural changes can occur. There are specific actions that can be taken as we move forward. Most important is the need to inform the public in a timely manner. Secondly, it will be necessary to figure out how to advocate for maintaining/ establishing choice as an option. It was suggested that the district should look to current students who choose Arlington and to catalog why they have made that choice. Nicole talked about “leveraging [Arlington’s] uniqueness” within the SVSU.
A general discussion then proceeded to note that there is a real need for integration between the School Board, the Planning Commission as well as the Select Board to coordinate and communicate better. Todd Wilkins had suggested the formation of a Schools Task Force at this year’s town meeting, and several members of the Planning Commission noted an interest to serve on any task force that is set up.
The Planning Commission and attending public enthusiastically thanked Nicol Whalen for participating in the evening’s meeting.
Please note that the Arlington School Board meets on the second Wednesday of every month at 5:30pm and is open to the public.
Additional New Business:
Garret noted that he was going to present on an Act 59 listening session that took place on March 19th at the Arlington Commons which he attended with Mary Anne Holmes and Joan Nash but given time constraints would wait until our next meeting where time permits. Act 59 is the Community Resilience & Biodiversity Protection Act. Its main goal is to conserve 30% of Vermont’s total land by 2030 and 50% by 2050.
Old Business:
Garret passed out copies of a first draft, written by Jenna Tait, of the long-discussed Arlington Welcome Letter to new homeowners. It was agreed that the letter was a great beginning but should be kept to a single page if possible. It was agreed that the letter with additional links should also be made available on the town’s soon to be revised website. Besides proposing a couple of changes to the text, it was agreed that Garret would share Jenna’s document from Google Docs so that additional commentary and suggestions could be added on a second page. Cynthia Browning noted that the letter could be used for more than just new homeowners and that there was perhaps value in having it readily available to anyone at Town Hall.
Land Use Administrator’s Report:
There was insufficient time to look at the LUA report covering 12/20/25 through 3/12/26. This report is the last report prepared by Joan Nash in her old role as Arlington Land Use Administrator. The report will be reviewed at our next meeting.
Next meeting:
The next meeting of the APC will take place on April 23rd at 7pm at Town Hall. The agenda and Zoom link to the meeting will be posted to the town website as usual for those who cannot attend in person.
A motion was made to adjourn the meeting at 9:09 pm by Jenna Tait and was seconded by Jon Murray.