Monday’s the big day, or so they tell us. The full House and Senate are scheduled to vote on the education reform Grand Bargain, which will never take effect in its current form even if it survives the big votes.

Still, major drama. The vote is not a sure thing by any means, despite the unified support of Gov. Phil Scott and Democratic and Republican legislative leadership. Many members of both parties realize the bill would negatively impact their local schools — districts in Democratic areas could see significant spending cuts, while rural Republican districts could see a wave of school closures and higher property taxes. The Democrats are also hearing it bigly from school officials and labor union constituencies.

Maybe legislative leadership can crack the whip firmly enough to scratch out a win, if only with the threat of a midsummer return to the Statehouse at the behest of Gov. Phil Scott. But as I wrote previously, leadership’s best argument is that they can all come back next year and overhaul the overhaul. In other words, hold your nose and vote for it, just so we can declare victory and get the hell out of here. Inspiring.

Let’s start with the Vermont-NEA, the teachers’ union that’s a major supplier of funding and grassroots support for the Vermont Democratic Party. Union president Don Tinney has sent a letter to his members warning of the bill’s “unintended consequences” and its “sweeping consolidation of power…that removes the democratic process” from the education system.”

Perhaps more to the point, the VT-NEA has just announced an Educator Candidate School á la Emerge Vermont, specifically aimed at training its members (and it’s only open to VT-NEA members) to run for public office. As if perhaps they’ve concluded that they can’t trust the Vermont Democratic Party or its elected officials to support public education, and rather than depend on the good graces of people like, name out of a hat, Phil Baruth, they’d better get seats at the table for more of their own people.

Speaking of Random Lawmaker Baruth, the Winooski School District has issued a statement castigating Senate leadership for appointing two (of its three) members of the House-Senate conference committee who have “serious conflicts of interest” and are “openly and aggressively representing the interests of private schools.” That’s a reference to Senate Education Committee chair Seth Bongartz (former longtime board member at Burr and Burton Academy) and Senate Minority Leader Scott Beck (longtime staffer at St. Johnsbury Academy). The Winooski communiqué urges a “No” vote on the education reform bill and stated that “We hold the Senate leadership accountable” for the process that led to the bill.

Right next door in Burlington, Superintendent Tom Flanagan wrote a blistering epistle describing the bill as “not careful reform designed to achieve equity, affordability and quality, [but] political maneuvering that protects privilege and preserves inequities.”

In South Burlington, superintendent VIolet Nichols sent a memo to teachers and staff saying that the bill “would continue to decimate [South Burlington] schools.”

Next comes the Champlain Valley School District, where Superintendent Adam Bunting and Board Chair Meghan Metzler have both sent letters to the “CVSD Community” urging “No” votes on the ed bill. Metzler described the bill as “rushed from the beginning” and “amended repeatedly…to serve interests that do not align with what’s best for students.”

And from the other side of the state, the Windsor Southeast Supervisory Union issued a letter slamming the Senate side of the process and again pointed to Beck’s and Bongartz’ conflicts of interest.

Safe to say there’s broad and unified opposition to the bill in the public education community. If Democratic leaders persist in advancing the bill, they risk alienating a key constituency that sees support for public education as a core principle of the VDP.

As I’ve noted before, smart legislative leaders never bring a bill to a vote until they know the outcome. Now, if they believe they have the votes, those tallies will come quickly. If they’re not sure, Monday could be a day full of procedural delays as they try to get their reluctant ducks in a row.

And if they’re pretty sure they’re going to lose? They could give up on arm-twisting and go straight to a vote, just to get the thing over with. A dramatically lopsided defeat is in the realm of possibility. It that’s the way things unfold, leadership could throw their hands in the air and say, “Well, we tried.”

No matter what the outcome, they will have done some measure of damage to their relations with a core constituency and they will have failed to uphold one of their most frequently repeated articles of faith: That a strong public education system is a foundation for a vibrant, successful, inclusive society. Whatever happens on Monday, maybe they (or some of them, anyway) should re-evaluate their approach to education reform in light of that bedrock principle.