Baruth says Senate will look at school spending cost containment
By Guy Page
The Vermont House of Representatives gave final approval Wednesday, April 24 to H.887, a rapid-response bill to the unprecedented rejection of local school budgets due to unhappiness with a proposed 20% property tax increase.
The bill would raise property taxes 15% for homesteads, 18% for non-homestead properties like second homes, apartment buildings, and businesses, and would create a new ‘Cloud’ tax on internet services and a tax on short-term rental stays.
Provisions for short-term and long-term cost containment supported by Republicans were stripped out of the final bill by the Democrat-controlled House Ways and Means Committee. In its place was the creation of a 21-member panel to study school funding alternatives.
Senate Pro Tem Philip Baruth (D-Chittenden) said the Senate is working on restoring some of the cost containment measures. Gov. Phil Scott said yesterday any school funding bill advocating for new taxes also should offer education spending control, or face a possible veto.
The final vote was 101-39. Not a single Republican voted for H.887. Several offered strong criticism during the floor debate.
Rep. Ashley Bartley (Fairfax) explained her vote:
“This bill is not a solution, it is only a Band-Aid that won’t even stop the bleed.”
Rep. Gina Galfetti (Barre Town)
I voted no on this bill because this body had many, many, opportunities tosave Vermonter’s money last session; instead most chose to engage in reckless spending – spending that has continued this session and resulted in this onerous and unnecessary tax hike imposed on struggling Vermonters.”
Rep. Casey Toof (St. Albans Town):
“I vote no because this is just another tax, spend, and study bill.”
Several Democrats spoke in favor:
Rep. Chip Troiano (Stannard):
“I vote yes. Raising revenues to offset school property tax increases is the right thing to do. We cannot shortchange our students with unacceptable budget cuts.”
Rep. Erin Brady (Williston):
“I voted yes because we must transform our system in Vermont into a rightsized, strong public education system that supports all students and uses ourprecious statewide resources sustainably and efficiently. Coherent change that truly supports students and schools with a common vision and much needed financial predictability will take time and extraordinarily political will by all of us. In this bill, the Commission on the Future of Public Education is an important and real incremental step toward true transformation.”
April 24 roll call on third and final reading of H.887
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Education, Legislation
“I voted yes because we must transform our system in Vermont into a rightsized, strong public education system that supports all students and uses ourprecious statewide resources sustainably and efficiently”
So why did you vote Yes??
Erin Brady must have had too much of the newly legalized green stuff if she thinks this is how it will go.
I think Erin is responding to really referencing The Vermont Community Schools Act (A67 – Community Schools.
https://education.vermont.gov/student-learning/flexible-pathways/Act-67-Community-Schools-Grant-Summaries#:~:text=This%20three%2Dyear%20federally%2Dfunded,and%20opportunities%2C%20active%20family%20and
I’m not sure what you are getting at Christine?
Maybe I am missing something here. It appears that our legislature is aggressively raising property taxes to pay for school budgets, while the schools have also increased their budgets, which many towns have already voted yes on. Is this an example of double taxation? How do these entities balance the contradiction in taxation?
Virtually ever tax levied is “double taxation”. In this case, it seems more like this legislature has decided to pillage and plunder the taxpayer, at the direction of the lobbyist and donor that actually are represented by this legislature.
‘Education Funding’ is an all encompassing enormous basket of taxes, fees and even lottery proceeds that have been so disfigured, formulated and doled out as to enable copious amounts of graft and special interest money to be paid, quite legally to “insure equal and appropriate education to Vermont students”.
While the Education Funding problem has been around for a hundred years, the Brigham Decision in 1997 instigated our current problem. In the same way the federal Affordable Care Act ballooned healthcare costs to crisis levels, so too has the effect of Brigham and almost 30 years of legislative meddling got Vermont here. Education, like Healthcare and Climate Change™ is a booming industry, with government happily complicit to collect and control tax dollars to feed these well represented industries.
Elections have consequence, Vermont’s super-majority legislature seems to happily provide many such consequences to the Vermont taxpayer- and thru this property tax increase to all Vermont residents, owners and renters alike.
i am setting aside some of my precious resources to pay for my next increase in my property taxes//// there will be no other purchases made until this is paid///
When democrats can’t come up with solid, objective reasoning for their tax increases or additional social spending, they spout out the tried and true: “it’s the right thing to do”…
Or, “it’s for the children”.
Absolutely
Response to Brian: This type of new inclusive school model would require significant funds to establish and maintain. Our legislature and the Department of Education are obviously aligned to another agenda or roadmap, which has nothing to do with the concerns of taxpayers. The legislature never informs the public about its true intentions nor the entities pulling the strings. Read the act as schools will become responsible for providing all types of services not just education.
https://www.undp.org/sustainable-development-goals/quality-education
It’s not a secret, they are going Agenda 2030 all in. They are following it right along, including the part about bankrupting you so you are state dependent too.
My favorite one is when they created a bunch more regulations and rules surrounding childcare centers then a few years later after they had “regulated” most of the small childcare centers out of business cried how the state must do something to help childcare and effectively inserted themselves into that vertical market as the purse strings and made parents dependant upon their money and therefore controlled the winning and losing childcare centers.
Also note: You can reply in line now if you reply to the one above where you intend on posting. That way it stays in line and is more readable. I almost didn’t see your reply.
Brian, I hope I replied correctly this time. The link you provided is exactly what I was referencing. Here is a great short discussion with Mike Benz, who discusses the foreign policy establishment against domestic populism. This establishment will only allow democracy when it supports their international objectives and relationships. The Vermont legislature refusing to abide to the will of voters is a perfect example of how they restrain democracy.
https://youtu.be/SYJKCRa6HEA?si=FpkaFMbGDtPKOQom
These REPRESENTATIVES (or suppose to be) who voted YES for this are just spoiled ignorant children. It ISNT the right thing to do. But they don’t care. They are beholden to the special interests and lobbyist NOT those that voted for them. Tsk, tsk demo/progs.
Look at the ” yea ” votes, these are the ones you elected to represent your concerns, especially financial as you can see………………..They don’t care, it’s all about them and their agenda !!
Keep working, as you are the money tree, to fund bloated budgets, if you are sick of it, then vote them out.
Of the 291,000 votes cast in the 2022 Vermont election, 120,000 were employed in the health, education, and government sectors. Another 20,000 or so worked in the utilities sector. And it’s very likely, then, that a significant additional voting group were workers retired from those same sectors. So, all told, when more than half of Vermont’s electorate is voting to perpetuate its employment and retirement benefits (not to mention those who rely on doing business with them), the legislators for whom they vote do their bidding.
So… I am sick of it. But there’s not a darn thing I can do about this tyranny of the majority – let alone the tyranny of a super-majority.
bribery and blackmail are a dirty business//// ops, i almost forgot//// these are criminal acts that need to be prosecuted//// you will never be able to vote these crooks out of office//// the entire system is rigged///
Vermont is a beautiful place…for rich people. Raising property taxes 18 plus percent in one year will discourage economic development, is sure to convince young middle class families to move away and make it increasingly difficult for poor and lower middle class folks (who don’t have the cash for a move) to survive. The Legislature seems committed to the idea that Vermont should be the prettiest state east of the Mississippi, and at the same time, an economic nightmare. I’m glad I’m rich and can afford such taxpayer abuse. I’ve always liked the motto, “Green Mountain State.” But I suggest a change. “Afford Stowe or Go Away!”
And this is why after living all my 54 years in Vermont I’m getting out. Native vermonters are being pushed out.
I am 73 years old and a 2nd generation Vermonter and my wife is fourth generation Vermonter and we are both between a rock and a hard place, can’t afford to move and yet can’t afford to live here. There is talk that our town in the near future will be going through property reappraisals, so with that and 15% tax hike I’m finished,,,, as the saying goes “you can’t get blood from a rock”….