By Steve Zonies
The third proposed education budget passed by a 59% majority. Forty-one percent voted against it. That is a significant percentage. Sadly, only 35% of registered voters exercised their privilege. Burned-out, were they?
Another way to look at this: (59% x 35% =) 20.6% of eligible voters decided this financial fate for 100% of all property owners.
Based on research obtained while writing my first letter to the editor, this will (might) have the following consequences:
- Vermont’s effective tax rate will (probably) bump us up from the fifth highest to fourth, third or close to the most expensive state in which to live. Time and calculations will tell.
- Also, this will possibly/probably give us the dubious bragging rights to claim being very close to the highest property-taxed state in our nation; despite currently being…
- Eighteenth from the bottom of the barrel in per-capita income levels.
- We were the 15th most expensive state with least disposable income. That ratio, too, will worsen.
- 80% of property taxes is spent on education. We get few public services for the remaining 20%. Those calculations might also change.
Explanations from those in favor of the revised budget cite increased costs for building maintenance, extracurricular activities, public education dollars for private school vouchers, health care, inflation, ‘free’ meals, aging buildings, retirement funding, blah, blah, blah blah, blah ad nauseum. The clueless jack-booted thugs in Montpelier don’t seem to realize or care, that we taxpayers are also having to absorb similar increases, also beyond our control, for non-discretionary expenses like food, health care, health insurance, housing, all insurances, fuel, electricity, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. However, we can’t reciprocally mug them for our essential needs.
So many programs offered are far more than schools’ purview.
Again, it’s important to know that I believe in supporting education and am willing to pay for it; however, the numbers prove Vermont’s education system fails miserably in its primary responsibility of ”readin’, writin’ and 'rithmatic.”. With the highest cost and teacher/student ratios per pupil, Vermont ranks 25th in SAT scores.
Waitsfield’s public wastewater treatment plant will be constructed with public funds; however, usage will be paid by its users, even though everyone ‘uses’ it indirectly through restaurants, post office, stores, etc. So, perhaps some of schools’ extracurricular activities would/could/should be at least partially funded by those families that ‘use’ them?
Remember, too, that the “Picus, Odden and Associates” study concluded that “There is no direct linkage between funding and student performance. The continued increase in education expenditure per pupil does not necessarily equate to improved student performance.” Before flushing more tax dollars down Montpelier’s toilet, prove to me that it’ll be spent wisely and effectively. I have always been intolerant of inefficiency, waste, incompetency, and the “Peter Principal.”
Also, even more importantly, because this outrageous property tax increase passed, there’s no incentive for our “representatives” to improve the logic and formulas. (Quite the misnomer, huh? They did not represent ~40% of Vermonters.) Another point against them -- they eliminated the 5% ceiling. How about an annual CPI cap?
It’s my suspicion that those Vermonters who have lived here decades were mostly against the double-digit increase, while teachers (of course), students (of course), others employed by the educational system (of course), and the wealthy, voted ‘for’ the proposed budget. I suspect that most, if not all of the newcomers (with children of school age) voted in favor. They want to get as much out of the system as they can while others pay for it. To quote Maggie Thatcher, “The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” Consider, too, that newcomers are probably employed, which also fills the state’s income tax coffers. Old timers, mostly retired, who pay taxes only (?!) on property, sales, gas, Social Security income, etc. might be forced to exodus en masse. Is that part of their dastardly plan?
So, with all of the above in mind, this unhappy taxpayer would like to see a list of those legislators who:
- Were in favor of H.877 and the proposed budget.
- Did nothing to change Act 127 and education funding.
- Overrode our governor’s veto and passed the budget.
- Voted for removing the 5% cap.
- Are considering eliminating the public’s vote for future education budgets.
With that list at the next elections, let’s “throw the bums ooouuut!”
Zonies lives in Fayston.
