Legislative
Update
Rep.
Anne Donahue
April
28, 2024
Sometimes the legislature is a pendulum of
careening objects… and that’s even before a bill moves from the House to the
Senate. Two weeks ago, a whole new education funding plan was unveiled in the Ways
and Means Committee and the initial announced plan was to vote it out in a mere
two days – far too fast for judicious consideration.
Two weeks later, we received the bill on
the House floor. It was stripped of any and all reforms, even short-term cost
containment for next year. Perhaps it was a straw man, only intended to draw in
negative reaction from those with vested interests and thereby create an excuse
for doing nothing this year to change factors that led to the crisis in
property taxes.
The core of the new bill is yet another study.
There have been 39 different studies on Education Fund reforms since 2000.
The new
Commission has 23 members and a huge array of tasks, almost guaranteeing that
its mandate cannot be achieved. Waiting for its recommendations means at
least two years before any proposals come forward to reform what everyone
agrees is a dysfunctional system. We know the status quo is failing.
It is now in the Senate hands to consider
whether to agree to our proposal.
What is not transparent within the
complexity of the current system is how much local taxpayers are held hostage
to what other towns want to spend. Without better cost-containment mechanisms
on upper-end spending, towns that maintain thrifty budgets end up paying for
those that want to spend more. It is what makes cutting a local tax increase so
difficult: for every dollar cut, the town only sees 25 cents reduced from the
budget impact on its own tax rate. Those who want to spend more have only to
contribute 25 cents locally per each dollar increase.
That is a key part of what is meant by the
structural change needed: We need mechanisms that prevent excessive spending by
individual districts from being included in the statewide funding that places
the cost on everyone. At the same time, maintaining enough sharing of costs to
protect equity is a core value.
The crumbs tossed to taxpayers in the
House bill were that we eased the homeowner tax increase slightly by creating several
new taxes and putting that revenue in the Ed Fund. In addition, an increase was
shifted onto all commercial property, landlord property, and camps or second
homes.
In the legislature, one often relies
heavily on colleagues who have developed an expertise in a particular area and
whose analysis one trusts. For me with education funding, that is Rep. Scott
Beck, who has been on either the Education or the Ways and Means Committee since
2015 and understands the system deeply. His words on the floor:
“There is nothing in this bill for
short-term or long-term cost containment, or structural reform... Our taxpayers
are going to get absolutely hammered this fall and we will not even be able to
tell them that we made a course correction. And then they are going to get
hammered again next year, and then this Commission will come… and tell [taxpayers]
we might make a change by fiscal year ‘28. Our taxpayers can’t handle any more;
it is unconscionable that we aren’t making structural reforms right now.”
One of the proposed amendments was an
interim “allowable spending” percentage for the next two years that, if
exceeded, would place a higher cost on the spending district. It was rejected.
One truly logical proposal was to suggest
that if were delaying reforms to avoid unintended consequences, we should at
least make the new taxes on computer software and short-term rentals temporary
– then reassess as part of those future comprehensive reforms. As I said in
explaining my vote of support, “We have a misfit when we refuse to initiate
even interim changes that actually address our Education Fund stressors – we
say we shouldn’t move that fast – yet reject a sunset on what should be solely
a stop-gap measure, not permanent new taxes.” That amendment was rejected
41-100.
I need to note that of the $200 million or
so in increases in the education budget statewide, close to $30 million was
caused by the legislature’s decision last year to fund universal school lunches.
I mention it because I supported that decision and need to be transparent about
it. Unlike some types of constituent input in the form of cut-and-paste emails,
I heard thoughtful and persuasive direct arguments in support from local
residents. We
knew that decision would be borne by the Education Fund.
***
Lots To Come
The Senate passed its version of the
budget this past week, with numerous changes from the House bill. That signals
that we are on schedule for ending the session by the end of the second week in
May, because it takes about two weeks to reconcile differences. There are too
many differences to sort out quickly. The Senate does rely on significantly
fewer tax increases. It also pared back the House expansion of the hotel
emergency housing program.
Although it budgeted a lower level than
the House for the increase in support for Medicare cost-sharing for low-income
elder Vermonters, it did still support the need for some increase. These
Vermonters actually experience a significant drop in health care support when
they go onto Medicare. I was glad to see it included, as it is something I have
been fighting for.
These two weeks will see bills passing at
dizzying speed. Many controversial bills I described in updates throughout the
session are coming back from the Senate with significant changes, so new
decisions (are they better? worse?) will need to be made before we wrap up. Among
those controversial bills include the changes to the Act 250 process and
whether it will help or hurt housing development (H.687); the changes to the
Renewable Energy Standard (H.289); and Fish and Wildlife Board changes (S. 258).
Still in play in the Senate but with time running out is my Right to Repair
bill for agricultural equipment (H. 81).
***
Right Person, Right Timing
One little “add on” in the Senate
Transportation bill was $2 million to purchase a large parcel of land in Berlin
for a new state central garage. The old one was destroyed in the July flood and
it would be senseless to rebuild on the same flood plain. I got a word of alarm
from a resident last weekend: The land is a 23-acre piece of the
state-designated town center that has been in development by Berlin for years.
The hope has been that it would be a growth area for desperately needed
multi-family housing.
I got in touch with Sen. Andy Perchlik who
was well positioned by being both one of our Washington County Senators and the
Chair of the Transportation Committee. It turned out the bill was already up
for a vote on the Senate floor, usually too late to initiate any change. But
Sen. Perchlik got a day’s delay on the bill to hear from both Town
Administrator Ture Nelson and the Secretary of the Agency of Transportation,
Joe Flynn.
There was quick consensus that though the
money should still be appropriated, it shouldn’t be tied to a designated piece
of land. That will allow the time and leeway for AOT to work with Berlin to
assess the best options for moving forward. The amendment was made on the
Senate floor the next day. Although the parcel seems to be well suited for the
state garage, Flynn said AOT has no desire to be somewhere it’s not wanted and is
in strong agreement that housing is the state’s highest priority. Rep. Ken
Goslant and I were able to sit in to hear the discussion and praise the
outcome, and I’ve talked to the House Transportation Committee to ensure smooth
support there.
***
Congrats
This year’s class of new Eagle Scouts were
presented on the House floor this week, and it was a joy to see one of our own
on the list, Jonathan Andrew Tenney of Northfield!
***
Thank you for your support and the honor
of representing you. Rep. Goslant and are available anytime to hear your
concerns and input at kgoslant@leg.state.vt.us or adonahue@leg.state.vt.us. My archive of
legislative updates is available at representativeannedonahue@blogspot.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment