By Kevin Losty
I am responding to whoever wrote the article Warren Voters Pass Budget in the March 7 Valley Reporter. As it was me who voiced my opposition at the Warren Town Meeting. There seems to be confusion about me questioning why the town of Warren should give away taxpayers’ dollars to a private organization year after year and whether that is appropriate or even legal. The town of Warren receives a stipend from the National Forest Service in lieu of taxes for land it owns in communities throughout the U.S. The stipend, which as far as I can see, does not come with many strict rules. It gives towns, like Warren, with National Forest land, a fair amount of leeway on how they can spend it. Fire safety, education and access improvement are sited in the NFS website. Nowhere, in the NFS website, does it say donate the annual stipend to charitable organizations in their community.
The Warren Select Board sells this to the community that this is “for the children.” Under those terms it is impossible to open a debate publicly, without looking like you are against, well children I guess, or the PTO. I am for children and for the PTO. What I am against is the town giving away money without debating whether there are better uses of the $24,304 it is handing out, with no stipulations on how it is used. Could that money be used to build a path from Warren to Waitsfield so kids and adults could safely ride a bike to meet their friends at Lareau swim hole, or the covered bridge without getting run over by a truck on Route 100? Could it be used to improve the grounds of Blueberry Lake littered with geese excrement. Improve parking at Warren Falls? I don’t know, it is not open for debate, I guess.
In response to my question of whether the PTO needs taxpayers’ dollars stands. The Waitsfield PTO budget is wholly funded through member fundraising efforts. The Valley Reporter sites the 2023/2024 budget as carrying forward $4,421 in this year’s budget. If you look at last year’s budget, the PTO had cash of $106,618.53 and expenses of $59,349. That’s $47,269 including the $30,528.78 in CDs. It is not accounted for in this year’s finished budget. That is what I brought up in the school meeting, not what value they are to the community.
If the town of Warren is considering a $500,000 playground as sited in your article, shouldn’t the town handle researching this, not the PTO? Can the town afford to give $40,000 to the Mad River Valley Recreation District, who in turn doles out grants to other organizations, when it needs to upgrade its dangerous playsets? If it was the PTO who chose the existing playsets last time, should they be trusted again? These seem to be legitimate questions to a select board who is elected to serve its taxpayers, not the PTO, particularly when property taxes could go up 30 to 40% in one year.
The culture of government in Vermont needs to change. It all starts locally, and it starts with questions of what is appropriate and what is not. The PTO should not be used to offset school and town budget decisions, nor should they act as agents for the town to avoid putting items like playgrounds in either the school or town budget. A couple of people at the meeting whispered to me that we do this because of ACT 60. If that is the case, then let’s change ACT 60. Let’s elect leaders who want to change inefficient and wasteful government spending while still improving our human experience. Grants and stipends given to the town of Warren are taxpayer’s dollars. This was a common theme from Mr. Acklund and other board members. They seem to continuously argue that “no taxpayers’ dollars are wasted” when questions of how grant money is used compared to money raised in property taxes, I contend it is all taxpayer’s dollars.
Lastly, with no clear vision of how the state of Vermont or Warren is going to grow its younger population through affordable housing and job opportunities, maybe we should be investing in senior services, not playgrounds.
Kevin Losty lives in Warren.
