First, openness

That’s a rotten situation. No one enforces Vermont’s open-meeting laws; if you think the law’s been violated, it’s up to you to take the public body to court. An enforcement system that depends on the citizenry should be simple to follow; there should be only one set of rules. It would be easy for the House and Senate to make themselves subject to the same open-meeting law that other state and municipal committees must follow. Transparency has been a watchword in state and local government in recent years, but the word has no meaning if the House and Senate can ignore the open-meeting law.

• The McAllister situation: In a column on Page 6, Paula Schramm explains clearly why state Sen. Norm McAllister has got to go. He has refused to resign, although he has admitted having sex with a 16-year-old employee of his, and with imposing sex on a tenant in exchange for housing. Schramm asks: “How can he ‘represent’ me if I am loath to approach him because of behavior that he admits to, and makes no apologies for?” McAllister is scheduled for trial in February in March; the Senate Rules Committee has voted to suspend him until the trial is over. That seems sensible. The Senate should be beyond reproach, and McAllister is not.

• The budget: For a decade or more, Vermont has had multimillion-dollar gaps between spending and revenues. Every year, the Legislature chips away at state services, payroll and programs to balance the books. However, the problem is structural: Vermont doesn’t raise enough money to accomplish what the Legislature is assigning the state government to do. The budget should be rebuilt sensibly, so that the annual slicing and dicing doesn’t continue to diminish the state’s ability to do its job.

• Act 46: The law, passed this year, takes a smart approach to reconciling rising school costs with declining enrollment. Vermont’s public schools have 20 percent fewer students than they did 20 years ago, but the budgets don’t reflect that fact. The key problem is duplication: Vermont operates about 300 schools in 277 school districts in 246 towns. In addition, 55 of those schools have fewer than 100 students, making efficient student-teacher ratios nearly impossible to achieve. The law pushes school districts to merge into larger organizations, with at least 900 students.

However, a spending cap attached to the law could have a devastating effect on school districts; essentially, they can’t cut costs fast enough to keep up with the requirements of Act 46. This portion of the law needs adjustments. The quality of Vermont’s school system is extraordinary, and it should not be gutted inadvertently by spending caps.

What’s needed is a sensible way to cut school costs over time, while pursuing the greater educational opportunities that larger school districts can bring. These are excellent goals, and the Legislature needs to adjust Act 46 to accomplish both parts of that mission.