vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

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

3.05.2007

Town meeting talk

Tomorrow you all will stop the normal course of your lives, huddle up with your neighbors and decide whether that new fire truck is really needed. Right? Well, you should.

You spend enough time – on this blog, in your living rooms and at diners – griping about the people you elect to make decisions for you. This time, you get to make the decisions yourself. If your town still does it the right way, you can bicker over any item in the town or school budget, take it out, add to it. Few in the world get this kind of local control. But you do.

While you’re there, you’ll see the annual – in fact it’s the 39th annual – Sen. Bill Doyle Town Meeting Say Survey. It’ll give you a chance to voice your opinion on some things you don’t have direct control over.

Here’s a glance at what’s on this year’s survey:

Should drivers be prohibited from using cell phones while driving?

Should the Vermont Legislature permit same-sex marriage?

Do you believe Vermont is an affordable place in which to live?

Should school tax increase be kept at the rate of inflation?

You can even pick your choice for president in 2008.

Then you can gripe about the one who wins. But if you don’t go to town meeting, the first person you should gripe about is yourself.

- Terri Hallenbeck

posted by vt.Buzz | 1:29 PM |

Comments:

Is it my imagination, or have I been hearing a lot of radio ads for Revolt and Repeal?

They seem to be asking some tough questions of our legislators - I wonder if that will translate into some tough questions from constituents....

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:14 PM, March 05, 2007

Doyle's questionarie is cute ... but not very scientific.

I know Republicans don't like science ... but in this case it can result in some really crappy information.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:55 PM, March 05, 2007

I agree. What is it about this grade school survey that is so fascinating? Seems kind of trivial if you ask me. Guess it does give the masses something to do during Town Meeting, outside of nodding off. Maybe next year, the senator will include questions like:

Should Vermont roads be paved or dirt?

Should Vermont trees be green or should we paint them all vibrant colors?

Instead of water fountains, should Vermont switch to maple sugar fountains?

Is the sky blue?

etc. etc.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:09 PM, March 05, 2007

There have been a bunch of ads by Revolt and Repeal.

Its too bad R&R offers absolutely no fixes for the problem they are identifying. All R&R amounts to is a bunch of complaining.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:23 PM, March 05, 2007

I thought Revolt and Repeal was deemed dead and buried?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:24 PM, March 05, 2007

They have been running ads on WDEV. The ads are typical republican fare.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:28 PM, March 05, 2007

Revolt and Repeal's approach is simplistic, but the legislative leadership has dropped the ball on the property tax issue and allowed Gov. Douglas and R&R to reclaim the initiative on this topic.

The D's who run the legislature should have put together a draft bill on education finance by last week so their members could take it to town meetings tonight and tomorrow and get reactions to the proposal.

Perhaps when the legislators return to Montpelier after their Town Meeting break they should spend more time on property taxes and less time on the Iraq War and how people die.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:33 PM, March 05, 2007

The legislature DOES have some property tax initiatives. You'd know this if you read the Vermont Guardian, which puts the rest of the media (loosly defined) to shame. Here's a link:

http://www.vermontguardian.com/local/032007/HouseReport.shtml

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:53 PM, March 05, 2007

Please tell me how those so-called initiatives are going to really trim my property tax bill? Don't hold your breath waiting for the legislature to bring forth meaningful tax reform, they are too beholden to VT-NEA, Superintendants Assoc. and Paul Cillo.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:11 PM, March 05, 2007

I think the legislature has basically said its not going to offer up solutions that would decrease quality of education.

The property tax problem is overstated anyway. You have to figure in income sensitivity.

Anybody with income sensitivity will see a reduction in their property tax bills this year due to rebates going directly to towns instead of individuals.

I don't see moving completely away from property tax financed education. If we decide not to collect property tax on out of state second home owners, we will need to either 1) tax middle and above income earners at a very high percentage or 2) move the income sensitivity threshold down. Number 1 drives business owners out of state and number 2 makes income sensitive people pay more than what they do currently.

Don't get me wrong, but the biggest problem with property taxes is income sensitivity. I really don't think the state should be in the business of protecting ownership of land holdings that have passed down generations or any other similar land ownership protection.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:37 PM, March 05, 2007

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 | 4:55 PM, March 05, 2007

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:55 PM, March 05, 2007

Revolt & Repeal!!!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:28 PM, March 05, 2007

You all ought to be ashamed of yourselves picking on Doyle like that. The old man that he is, if you ironed him out he'd be twice the politician.

Really is a great guy, and does a unique service to the state of Vermont teaching politics at Johnson State College.

The beauty of the Doyle poll is its simplicity. Not everyone who goes to town meeting has the benefit of a formal education. The survey is a simple checklist, working with statistics that everyone can understand.

It is the yearly pulse of the state of Vermont tested at town meeting. Though simple questions they appeal to a large audience.

If only government was so simple to fund. Check off what amount of money from your taxes is allowed to be used on certain items. Say defense, education, foreign aid, programs and other budget items.

Democracy by checkbook, now wouldn't that be something.

Rednalsi

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:55 PM, March 05, 2007

Obviously most of the "anonymous" bloggers are deadbeats that probably pay little or no property taxes, or worse, are VT-NEA teachers that couldn't survive in private enterprise or a scenario in which competence was rewarded. This is what Vermont has become and I see no solution until the state sinks lower than Bangladesh (if it hasn't already).

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:09 PM, March 05, 2007

Nobody is picking on Doyle.

It's just that his "poll" is so unscientific that it results in really bad and unrelable information.

He admits that he often uses this bad information to make decisions.

The media report on the results of the poll as if it were zogby. It isn't.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:38 AM, March 06, 2007

"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"

Yeah right. I don't see much coming from republicans with regard to ideas. For example: Revolt and Repeal.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:34 AM, March 06, 2007

"Yeah right. I don't see much coming from republicans with regard to ideas. For example: Revolt and Repeal."

Are you saying that,as an obvious democrat, you would actually listen to a republican proposal seriously? If they had a good idea it would be dissed because you wouldn't dare to give one ounce of credit to them.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:59 PM, March 06, 2007

The Republicans would need to come up with an idea for it to be "dissed". Which is unlikely.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:16 PM, March 06, 2007

"Are you saying that,as an obvious democrat, you would actually listen to a republican proposal seriously?"

Nice assumption.

I suppose first we would need a republican to actually produce an idea.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:26 PM, March 06, 2007

Ummm... the Republicans have come up with several ideas - all have been "dissed".

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:02 PM, March 06, 2007

examples?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:31 AM, March 07, 2007

Here is one from an Republican. 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 | 4:39 PM, March 07, 2007

Besides cut and paste of anonymous postings, what examples do you have of a good republican idea being "dissed" soley by democrats?

Tell me what ideas have Revolt and Repeal and the other republicans in the legislature brought forward?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:09 AM, March 08, 2007