|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by Dustin Degree
Does anyone seriously believe a 7% property tax increase—in a state that already carries one of the highest property tax burdens in the country—amounts to “relief” for Vermonters?
Vermont’s House Majority Leader Lori Houghton (D-Essex) says it does.
Following a recent vote, she described the House majority’s tax hike as a “careful balance” between tax relief, education quality, and fiscal responsibility. It’s meant to sound reassuring—an acknowledgment of tradeoffs, a signal they’re doing the best they can.
You can read the statement here: https://vermontdailychronicle.com/houghton-house-dems-defend-sustainable-7-property-tax-bill/
But it doesn’t reflect reality.
And that disconnect—between what’s said in Montpelier and what Vermonter’s experience in their daily lives—points to a deeper problem.
Step back and look at the past three decades—nearly one-third of a century—and a clear pattern emerges: sustained one-party dominance, rising costs driven by policy decisions, and economic pressure that has fallen hardest on working families and the communities
Montpelier has left behind.
That context matters. Because it exposes how shallow claims of “balance” really are.
A system that produces tax increases year after year is not delivering relief—no matter how it’s described. For many families, especially in rural counties and working communities, these increases are not manageable. Worse, they are painful and demoralizing. Combined with decades-old regulatory policies, they are hollowing out communities and pushing families down the economic ladder.
That’s not balance. That’s a trajectory.
And despite these rising costs, Vermonters are not seeing better outcomes—especially in education.
Even with sustained increases in spending, assessments show many Vermont students are not proficient in core subjects like math and English. At the same time, families are seeing fewer opportunities—fewer extracurriculars, fewer programs, and fewer of the experiences that once defined our schools.
For years, taxpayers have been asked to pay more while the system delivers less.
The issue isn’t simply funding. It’s that the system has not adapted to long-term changes—declining enrollment, shifting demographics, and the need for more flexible, efficient models. Those structural realities have gone largely unaddressed.
Continuing down this path—funding a system with rising costs and diminishing returns without meaningful reform—is not fiscal responsibility. It’s deferral. And over time, this deferral has become a steady decline.
Supporters of the current approach emphasize good intentions: supporting children, educators, and communities. Those goals are shared by everyone. But intentions don’t produce results—and they don’t justify decades of evidence showing this system is leaving too many Vermonters behind.
This is not about one leader or one vote.
It’s about recognizing that the current path is not working—and that continuing it year after year will only deepen the challenges we already face.
Vermont can do better.
We can build an education system that delivers both excellence and affordability. We can revitalize communities and create opportunities in parts of the state that have been under increasing economic strain.
But that will require something different than what we’ve seen for most of the past three decades.
Since 1992, Democrats have held a legislative majority in 15 of 17 election cycles. Since 2004, they have maintained near-continuous control of both chambers. The direction Vermont has taken is not an accident, it is the result of long-term governing choices.
Changing course requires a House majority with humility to confront these hard truths, embrace structural reform, and move beyond the policies that have driven Vermont’s affordability crisis.
Governor Scott has consistently called for that kind of positive change—focused on affordability, economic growth, and better outcomes for working families. And he has put forward detailed plans to achieve it.
We’ll know soon whether the House majority is prepared to finally be an ally in this work.
If not, the conversation Vermonters will have won’t just be about policy.
It will be about whether a more balanced, more moderate governing majority is needed to change the state’s direction.
Dustin Degree is communications director for Governor Phil Scott, former deputy commissioner of labor, and was previously a member of the House of Representatives and State Senate representing Franklin County and Alburgh.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Commentary, Taxes
How can we continue to vote in folks who are determined to abuse us?
it you want relief you have to reduce the Union’s power! an how similar to Vt state employee union who has the power to stop going into the office, absurd.
analogus to the super majority over the years, there is little balance at the negoiation table. these two unions are so heavy handed and powerful, we need to break their stronghold on the public.
I agree John. Any educational reform plan that doesn’t start with getting rid of the NEA should be discarded immediately. We will never improve student outcomes and reduce spending unless we make current NEA members state employees. How can smart people in the legislature and at the Education Department think that the unaffordable high cost for poor outcomes is acceptable for Vermonters?
Looks like the shock of higher gas prices, higher property taxes, higher food costs, and hyper inflation will be felt by all this summer.
We’ve just been notified by mail that our NEK town’s property appraisals just got increased 100% across the entire town practically…All this on top of higher property tax increases as well as the double whammy of Education tax increases to come…It’s beginning to get unbearable for us low income retiree’s.
Mr Degree
You said: “sustained one-party dominance, rising costs driven by policy decisions, and economic pressure that has fallen hardest on working families and the communities Montpelier has left behind.”
The list of the Dems/Progs mistakes, poor thinking or not thinking about how their bill benefit Vermonters is all the evidence Democrat and Independent voters need to cross over and vote in three or more Senate Republicans They did a miraculous crossover, in 2024, and elected 6 new Republican Senators.
And a note to Republican candidates: tell us why we will all benefit from a Senate Republican Majority.
One thing that is not often mentioned in the school cost debate is the sheer volume of rules and regulations that schools have to follow. As an example, I know someone who works in a public school who had to have three different background checks done for three different job duties. This is just the tip of the iceberg and one of the reasons why administrative level staffing has risen just to take care of assuring compliance with the myriad of legal requirements. Schools are no longer educational institutions but have become social service agencies.
“As an example, I know someone who works in a public school who had to have three different background checks done for three different job duties.”
But by golly, they fight tooth and nail to have no requirements for voter ID.
Good commentary by Dustin Degree. I’m glad that he mentions that it has been three decades of decline. I stopped voting for school budgets about three decades ago. It wasn’t because I didn’t care about the children. It was because I did care about the children especially mine. High property tax was making it difficult to feed our family. Teachers were receiving benefits , like health insurance, that we couldn’t afford. I went to school board meetings urging teachers to pay more for their health insurance. I witnessed a school board member tell a taxpayer, “I’m sorry you aren’t intelligent enough to get a better paying job, so you can afford to pay your property taxes.” Wow, that really encouraged people to speak up. It wasn’t just the costs. The students were losing great programs . Our school had a wonderful industrial arts program. There was wood working, printing, electricity and home economics. All these were eliminated. Band uniforms and trips were eliminated. All the while property taxes continued to rise. If we complained about the school budget , we were told that busing and sports would also be eliminated. Notes were sent home with the children to encourage parents to vote for the school budget to show they cared about the children. One thing that bothered me is that the teachers didn’t care how difficult it was for the taxpayer and they refused to share the burden of health insurance costs. I no longer have children in school but I still keep track of the ever increasing costs and the decline in students test scores. And I will continue to vote no on school budgets.
The democrats have been running VT since the 70’s and act 250. During that time I have seen many companies that were here before the seventies, close down and leave, Schools have become so expensive and the scores so much lower. Keep voting for democrats and this downward spiral will continue, or vote all republican, and maybe return to affordability and prosperity and fun.