by Paul Bean

One of the biggest topics in the recent debate between Lt. Governor candidates was affordability – no surprise considering last session’s 14.8% property tax increase, the new childcare payroll tax, 20% increase in DMV costs, just to name a few.

At the World’s Fair in Tunbridge on Thursday September 12, Republican challenger John Rodgers and current Lt. Governor Democrat-Progressive David Zuckerman squared off in their first debate of the 2024 election cycle. The Debate was moderated by WDEV’s Kevin Ellis, host of the radio program Vermont Viewpoint. 

Rodgers, a life-long Democrat turned Republican who served in the Vermont House for eight years and the Senate for another eight, made his case for why he would be a better choice than incumbent Lt Governor Dave Zuckerman. 

Rodgers: “I am running for Lt. Governor because I see that Dave and the Progressives have made it unaffordable to live in Vermont,” said Rodgers. “I am worried about my grandkids being able to work and afford a house here in Vermont. A double digit increase in property taxes is completely unsustainable. Their energy policies have been regressive, taking money from poor people to give to affluent people. 

“Four years ago I really thought I was done. After the last two years and the crushing burden they have put on Vermont taxpayers, I just couldn’t sit silent anymore.”

Ellis asked what the Lt. Governor could do about affordability.

Rodgers: “One of the biggest complaints I hear when traveling around the state is the property tax increase. The legislature wouldn’t have had 38 studies if there wasn’t a problem with property taxes and they’ve neglected to do anything about it. Dave was outspoken when the Governor Vetoed the yield bill…People are going to be crushed by the burden and forced out of their homes because they can’t afford to stay there. The education system, the entire system needs to be started from scratch, built from the ground up, and the very premise needs to be that we need to build our kids the best education system we can afford.” 

Zuckerman: “Let’s be really clear, when the governor vetoed that bill, what it meant was there would be a 30% increase on all businesses, all farms, all rental properties, everything other than homeowner properties. It also would have used up all our reserves. We would have had to borrow $90 million to fund the schools that local voters voted to fund. 

“One of the pieces that is really disingenuous frankly is to simply say just lower the taxes or the state raised the taxes. The bill that gets passed every year by the legislature reflects the vote of the voters all across the state in their local budget. It’s called the yield bill.” 

The yield bill is the annual property tax legislation that helps set statewide education tax rates. This bill was vetoed by the Governor and his veto was overridden in June. This bill raised property taxes by 14% percent on average around the state. 

Rodgers: …“Go back to the premise. 38 studies done by the legislature and nothing has been done. Why did they study it?  They studied it because there was a problem. They were given solutions, they neglected the solutions, it is squarely on the legislature.

“I am not saying I agree with all the Governor’s solutions. The legislature failed and when Dave puts the blame on the taxpayers, that is wrong.”

Zuckerman: “That’s not what I did.”

Rodgers: “It’s clearly the legislature’s fault that they have not dealt with the cost of education and in restructuring it as many of the studies have said they need to do.” 

Ellis: “Do you have a proposal for fixing it?”

Rodgers: “Well as a guy who has to work seven days a week and hasn’t been in the legislature in years I am probably not the first person you should ask for a proposal. If I had had the Lt. Governor’s office for as long as Dave has had it, I would have a proposal, I would be working with legislators on a fix…. 

“They have not taken the solutions of the (38) studies that have been offered in them… we need to provide our students with the best education we possibly can at a rate that Vermonters can afford and the liberals in the legislature have built a system that Vermonters cannot afford.”

Zuckerman: “I just want to point out a couple things. John’s talking as if he wasn’t in the legislature as all those studies happened. I’m not sure why he didn’t solve the problem while he was there. I actually met with the Governor back in 2017…I actually had thought of the idea when I was a legislator just as John could have done, of looking at our human services budget, which is supposed to cover a lot of the cost of schools like it does in other states, and it doesn’t happen here…If he wants to twist my words and say that I am blaming tax-payers and Vermonters for our tax rates, that’s just a twisting of words, that’s just what, apparently, the party that he’s choosing to be a part of teaches people how to do in debate.”

Despite the accusations of “word twisting” and blame placing, Rodgers and Zuckerman both agree there is a problem with education funding, and they even agreed on a potential solution. Both of them cite the high percentage of second homes in Vermont and how those homes pay less property taxes.

Zuckerman: “We also have around 58,000 second homes in this state and in 90 towns they pay a lower tax rate then primary residences! I would look at a progressive property tax on second homes, that gets to a higher and higher rate on higher value homes, and put that money into the ed system, putting some relief on ordinary taxpayers.”

Rodgers: I think Dave just made an interesting point when he’s talking about taxing second homeowners. One of the things we don’t tax currently, and it’s a huge ripoff to the state, are people who declare a small amount of income, but have millions of dollars invested…Unearned income… We have people with multi-million dollar properties getting rebates. 

“That’s something the legislature could easily fix… those folks don’t need the rebates…My farm payment is $50,000 a year. My property taxes are $22,000 a year…by the time you paid your insurance, and utlities, to stay on the farm that’s been in my family since the early 1800s I have to make $100,000 before I eat.”

Ellis: “You were talking about a tax on second homes. I might have heard agreement on that. I heard the other day the 80% of the homes in Stowe are second homes…How do you fix housing?”

Rodgers: “It’s not easy but you don’t put further restrictions on and added costs on people that want to live in rural areas which is exactly what the legislature just did.”

Ellis: This is the Act 250 bill the legislature just past?

Rodgers: “Yes.”

Ellis: “How do you feel about that bill?”

Rodgers: “I don’t like that bill. It encourages a path that avoids Act 250 for development in many municipalities dumping raw sewage into our lakes and rivers. I don’t believe there should be any development in any place that’s dumping raw sewage into lakes and rivers. 

“We’re supposed to be this environmental state. The people in charge of the legislature pretend to be environmentalists, yet nobody wants to talk about those sewer overflows and what it’s doing to our water quality here in Vermont. Back to housing, one of your major drivers in the cost of housing is property tax. Property tax isn’t just on our housing, it is on the electric utilities… it on all our local businesses, the municipalities…”

While Rodgers and Zuckerman both remained focused on the issues at hand, both didn’t neglect to take playful shots at each other:

Zuckerman: “Well I am glad my opponent is sounding more and more progressive every day.”

Rodgers: “A Progressive Republican.”

Zuckerman: “But you won’t say the words that are actually critical there, which is that there are wealthy people who can afford to pay more…What my opponent says is we need to do something about the combined sewer overflow, but he doesn’t talk about where the money is going to come from, the hundreds of millions of dollars to upgrade those facilities, and replace all the sewer lines from 100 years ago… 

“I’ve been out spoken for years, just as Bernie has, wealthy people are laughing all the way to the bank…The tax system nationwide, and the tax system in Vermont still concentrates wealth in the hands of the few, and leaves everybody else with the bill. 

“And sure, we can elect someone who just wants to promise you everything and have no specifics, or you could go with someone who’s been an outspoken leader pointing out that we have a disparate system. And I’ve been saying that for years. We don’t always win John, but if you try sometimes you just might find, you get what you need…”

Following the lovely Rolling Stone reference by Zuckerman and his advocacy for the rich to be paying more, Rodgers made the point that Zuckerman might be and has always been one of the wealthy people he is seeking to tax: 

Rodgers: “I would just like to say you’re being dishonest Dave and he is twistin’ a lot of my words.”

Zuckerman: “Those were your words.”

Rodgers: “You’re twistin’ them.”

Zuckerman: “Allright keep going.”

Rodgers: “I did not grow up a rich kid and some people say that you’re wealthy, I grew up poor. The reason I can represent average Vermonters better than Dave is because I am an average Vermonter. I started with nothing…”

In a separate question talking about how difficult it is to be both a farmer and a legislator, Zuckerman took the opportunity to defend his financial background and made the point that there are different kinds of privilege:

Zuckerman: When I started in the legislature, I had just bought, and yes I had $12,000 help from my mom for a down payment on a duplex so I could actually get the loan. So there’s no doubt, privilege is real. 

“Owning it is also real. You also grew up on owned land. A lot of people don’t even have that. So we all have different levels of privilege. 

“But what I did in that property that I bought, I lived with housemates to help make it affordable, and I got up at 4:30 in the morning and worked on the farm in the Intervale for 3 or 4 hours, I’d go back and I’d suit up to go to down to Montpellier and work until 4 or 5 o’clock, drive back to Burlington, make a quick pasta dinner, and go back to the farm. 

Prior to Zuckerman’s defense, Rodgers had made the point that during the most vital times of his farming season are also some of the most important times of the campaign season and that when he is making time to campaign he is taking a financial hit too and is forced to neglect time on the farm. 

In their closing statements, both made appeals to the voters as to why they are the best fit to serve as Lt. Governor.

Rodgers: …“I am running to actually represent working Vermonters because I am a working Vermonter. I grew up here, I grew up on a dairy farm, I’ve worked in agriculture, forestry, and construction my entire life, and as I travel around the state of Vermont, alls I here from Vermonters is the legislature is out of touch, they’re not listening to their constituents, they’re not listening to voters, and the cost of living is crushing Vermonters. 

“Dave has been there for years, and he just said he agreed with every single tax and spend policy that the supermajority forwarded. I do not. We can do better. We can meet all our goals without crushing average Vermonters.” 

Zuckerman: I’ve worked for Vermonters as a public servant for 24 years. Working in the vein of having been inspired by Bernie (Sanders) as someone who has been fighting for progressive economic policies that working Vermonters can get a better shake. I’ve been working to do that with the other policies at the same time. 

“Whether it’s making sure we have good schools so that kids have a better future, whether it’s investing in childcare so that families can actually go out to work and afford to have child care for their kids, which is one of those bills. So that Vermonters have food when they go to school. So that they’re not only well-fed and can learn well, but so that they’re not disrupting the classroom so that the other kids don’t learn as well. 

“So I’ve been working for a long time on issues like income inequality, climate issues which were facing the huge cost of inaction here in Vermont, and more and I hope folks will give me a chance to do it again.”