vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

Political notes from Free Press staff writers Terri Hallenbeck, Sam Hemingway and Nancy Remsen

3.05.2007

Keeping the pressure on

Just in case taxpayers needed prompting tonight or tomorrow at Town Meeting, the folks at Revolt and Repeal have bought radio and newspaper advertising with some questions they suggest Vermonters ask their legislators. Legislators, of course, make guest appearances at most town and school district meetings.

Missed the ads? Follow this link and hit one of the last two buttons on the menu running down the left column.

Revolt and Repeal was set up last summer by a group of Republican House members who advocate repealing the existing school funding statutes (Act 60 and 68) and starting over. They have taken a lot of criticism for failing to specify how to replace the current funding scheme.

Anyway, earlier this winter with considerable fanfare, the Democratic House Speaker and Senate President Pro Tempore joined the Republican Governor to announce they had agreed on a "framework" for studying how to curb growth in property taxes. Note they didn't agree on how to curb taxes, just how to study how to curb taxes.

Over the past two weeks, Gov. Jim Douglas has expressed dissatisfaction with the progress toward finding some remedies to school spending growth, which is related to property tax increases. Revolt and Repeal has joined the Douglas chorus.

The radio ad uses silence to make a point about Revolt and Repeal's view of the Legislature's progress. It states that lawmakers failed to repay money due the Education Fund because of an error last year. The budget adjustment bill, which has passed the House and Senate, but in different forms, included money due the fund this year -- in what is called a waterfall. That's surplus that's not yet a sure bet. That's why the ad criticizes lawmakers, said Rep. Rick Hube, R-South Londonderry. "There is no guarantee there will be water in the waterfall."

Hube said the ad campaign is intended to keep pressure on the Legislature, which is controlled by Democrats.

So if you feel the urge to make your legislators squirm, try asking what they've done for you so far this session. Don't expect to leave quickly after you ask, however, because lawmakers have plenty of talking points. There won't be radio silence.

-- Nancy Remsen

posted by vt.Buzz | 4:29 PM |

Comments:

If you look at the legislators' ideas, what they are likely to do this year is pass a bill that will reduce the level at which the tax penalty kicks in from 125% of the state average to somewhere in the 115-120% range, caps the maximum income sensitivity rebate, and perhaps has the state picking up a little bit more of the cost of special ed.

What does Jim Douglas do when this bill comes to his desk? He can't veto it, because it will reduce taxes for some people in some towns -- those that now spend more than 115% of the state average. The last thing Douglas wants to do is veto a bill that would hold down property taxes, even though it has much less tax reduction than he wants. He could let it sit on his desk for 5 days and become law without his signature.

The only way there will be major change in the way we pay for education is either (1) Douglas is re-elected and the Republicans retake control of the legislature - an unlikely scenario or (2) a Democrat defeats Douglas for governor. But if the Dems control everything in Montpelier, Vermont will have the highest taxes in the country within two years.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:58 PM, March 05, 2007

Money in the "waterfall" is no more than an empty promise. Glad to see that someone is pointing this fact out. Even the Freeps editorial board recognizes that this is a do nothing legislature. I've heard it stated that the motto for this crop of lawmakers is to distract, divide and do-nothing...and how much are we paying them?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:14 PM, March 05, 2007

Can we send Act 60/68 to Iraq?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:31 PM, March 05, 2007

At least you all didn't pick up a copy of the free press this weekend to see your representative at town meeting knitting. Not even old at that.

Why can't she be there taking notes on the issues that people care about? I want to see a legislator who is there paying attention to what's going on. Then when they get back to the golden dome, they might have a clue.

Better yet a plan to do something.

Rednalsi

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:11 PM, March 05, 2007

This wasn't the same legislator that admitted to knitting while driving (steers with her knees) is it? The Leader of the majority?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:33 PM, March 05, 2007

Finally someone hears our plea to work on issues that are important to us in Vermont

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:01 PM, March 05, 2007

Between the knitting and medical marijuana, its pretty clear that our legislators are two preoccupied with anything BUT property tax reform. Can we impeach Gaye Symington for malfeasance?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:12 PM, March 05, 2007

Hube for Governor!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:39 AM, March 06, 2007

Revolt and Repeal are a bunch of hypocrits.

Their published goal was to open discussion about property taxes so that we could get it fixed in a decent way in one to two years and not have some shoot from the hip legislation that is just as bad as what we have now.

It seems like they got what they wanted from Douglas, Symington, and Shumlin.

BUT, now they are saying they want a quick fix?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:57 AM, March 06, 2007

The irony is that the 4 originators of revolt and repeal are just as guilty as the rest of the legislature and Douglas when it comes to last year's funding of the education fund.

The 4 (Adam, etc) did absolutely nothing to make sure the law was followed.

Wait!

Revolt and Repeal ARE a bunch of hypocrits.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:03 AM, March 06, 2007

"I've heard it stated that the motto for this crop of lawmakers is to distract, divide and do-nothing...and how much are we paying them?

Douglas makes $143,000.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:05 AM, March 06, 2007

How is establishing a deadline of 7/1/09 to develop a new system "shooting from the hip"?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:13 AM, March 06, 2007

"How is establishing a deadline of 7/1/09 to develop a new system "shooting from the hip"?"

I never said it was. Read the post.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:23 AM, March 06, 2007

I'd like to suggest the following outline of an approach that I think could be a sensible solution. It is simple, relatively inexpensive and fairly transparent. It virtually eliminates the kind of complex administrative issues inherent in our current system.

1. Education funding: each year the state legislature would determine a base-line funding for all Vermont public schools, e.g. $8,000 per pupil. If a local school board needed more than that, the town would vote the incremental amount as part of its municipal budget. This gives towns back control over it's local tax rate. Tuition payments would be set via a state-defined surcharge on the sending community's per pupil base rate.

2. The cost of the state-wide education base rate would be funded via a modified California system of property tax assessment. That is, when a property is sold at fair market value, that value becomes a base assessment until sold again. If a property is not sold at fair market, such as a divorce, bankruptcy, any forced sale, etc., a certified real estate appraiser would be appointed by the state to appraise the property, which value would become the new base value. An appeals process would resolve conflicts much as under current law. Property values would automatically be indexed to the Consumer Price Index annually on a date certain. This method is relatively inexpensive to administer and reasonably predictable. It virtually eliminates thousands of costly staff hours at the local level from town clerks, listers, attorneys and boards of civil authority.

3. I strongly urge that the legislature stay away from mitigating property taxes by land use or income sensitivity. While well-intentioned, such regulations inevitably become overly complex and very bureaucratic, i.e. expensive. Witness the increased cost of the current use program. Such issues as "fairness" should be addressed through the income tax law exclusively, in my opinion.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:52 PM, March 06, 2007

Stowe voted to Revolt & Repeal!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:53 PM, March 06, 2007

Impeach Symington!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:02 PM, March 06, 2007

And Shumlin too.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:48 PM, March 06, 2007

As long as we're impeaching for crimes and misdemeaners why not throw Angelo Dorta, Joel Cook, Paul Cillo and William Mathis into the mix...these are the people who are stifling any real action on property tax relief. Symington/Shumlin/Ancel et al answer to these people only. Real Vermonters don't matter

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:28 PM, March 06, 2007

The Town of Brandon passed a town meeting resolution calling for repeal of Act 60!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:51 PM, March 06, 2007

The suggestion that the assessment on a property remains fixed between fair market sales is definitely worth considering. One of the big problems with the Act 60/68 system is the Current Level of Appraisal, which bases property taxes on a property value that is calculated on the basis of paper gains. Many town school boards keep their budget increases below 4%, only to find that taxes go up 10% or more because of the CLA. The CLA is especially problematic right now, because the numbers used to calculate it are based on previous years' property sales, but in much of Vermont the real estate market is now in a downturn and properties sold for fair market value today would not get what they would have sold for 1-3 years ago.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:54 PM, March 06, 2007

Apparently no one can see the forest because of the trees! As someone who has been around for a while, I can tell you that 99% of Vermont's problems started in the 70's as liberal flatlanders poured into the state, eventually electing Kunin, Dean etc., who in turn stacked the Supreme Courts with their lackies and bootlickers. Get rid of the liberals in the state and Vermont could solve it's own problems!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:43 AM, March 07, 2007

Bubba weighing in with his/her always shallow opinion. My first grader can form more coherent thoughts than Bubba.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:24 AM, March 07, 2007

"eventually electing Kunin, Dean etc., who in turn stacked the Supreme Courts with their lackies and bootlickers."

Yea, um Dick Snelling and Jim Douglas are in that mix too.

You think that Dick and Jim stacked the court with liberal judges?

Remember, the Chief Justice who wrote the Baker v State decision was a REPUBLICAN.

The chair of the legislative committee that wrote the Civil Unions law was a REPUBLICAN.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:13 PM, March 07, 2007

Did I say anything about Republicans?Some of the worst in Vermont have been "Republicans"! For example, Dean Davis, Jim "Turncoat" Jeffords, etc. Like democrats in the south that turned republican because they couldn't stand the take over of their party by the far-left weenies, there have always been far-left "Republicans" in Vermont that only used the designation to get elected. Look at that piece of garbage , Vince Illuzi who is getting paid off to stop WalMart even though his constituints sorely need one!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:41 PM, March 07, 2007

Vince boy will tell you he "is an R/D". He is the darling of the Humane Society of the United States..a far left organization if there ever was one..he was recently seen at a Democratic Party fund-raiser held at the Chef's Table in Montpelier. Sure makes one wonder just where he stands and why. Obviously the Dems love him because he is more often on the far left than he is in even the middle. You don't have to look any further than his showboating last week when he brought in Cindy Sheehan to testify on a resolution that had passed 3 weeks ago - unheard of to take "testimony" on an issue that has already been voted on by the full Senate.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:53 PM, March 07, 2007

Illuzi has always been a slime ball that would do anything for a buck. He really belongs in the democrat party with the rest of the trial lawyers.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:08 AM, March 08, 2007

Moderator,

This has no place here:

"look at that piece of garbage , Vince Illuzi w"

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:02 AM, March 08, 2007

Isn't Brian Doobie interested in anything that goes on in this state?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:38 PM, March 08, 2007