Today, the Vermont House is expected to vote on H.454, a behemoth of a bill that attempts to re-write, re-do, and re-imagine Vermont’s convoluted education funding system.
It is a large and sprawling bill with a timeline that stretches from this spring to 2029 or 2030. That’s a long time wait for any potentially meaningful education tax relief.
But we recognize that it’s a big deal to try and reverse Act 60 and 68 with all its subsequent add-on pieces of legislation that were valiant attempts to make a bad piece of legislation better. It’s like turning the Titanic around.
This bill calls for the creation/recreation of a foundation formula to fund education, establishing a per-pupil base cost and state grant and a mechanism for districts to spend more.
A foundation formula was in place before the creation of Act 60 and 68 were prompted by a 1997 Vermont Supreme Court decision. That earlier foundation formula was never – repeat never – fully funded by the Legislature so it resulted in towns with a lot of property wealth having great schools and towns with less property wealth having underfunded schools.
This time, the state’s property wealth will continue to be socialized, a la Act 60/68 with details to be determined.
The bill also includes a provision that separates second homes and short-term rentals from commercial, long-term rental or homestead properties. That has led to talk of taxing second homeowners and short-term rental owners at a different or higher rate. That was supposed to be a function of Act 60/68 but it never materialized, at least not in our Valley.
We’re not sure it’s the best idea to use our base of second homeowners as a cash cow for failed education structuring and funding policies. Second homeowners have long-term relationships with our towns, and they are our neighbors and friends. They participate in all aspects of Valley life, contributing to our businesses, local causes and have been very generous during natural disasters.
They generally use fewer services, and they don’t deserve to pay for the state’s structural financial issues. Penalizing them is like the current presidential administration seeking to punish Canada. Just a bad idea. Let’s not treat friends that way.
