Residents blast Vt. budget options
|
|
Dr. William Mathis, superintendent of Rutland Northeast Supervisory of Brandon, testifies Wednesday at the Statehouse in Montpelier. The Associated Press |
Toolbox
BY Louis Porter VERMONT PRESS BUREAU - Published: May 28, 2009
MONTPELIER — School board members, store owners and residents lined up at a public hearing Wednesday at the Statehouse to decry provisions in the state budget as it passed the Legislature or in the alternative proposed by Gov. James Douglas.
The first of two public hearings, the all-afternoon meeting was a critique of the budget alternatives proposed by the administration. But with the governor holding his own competing meeting in Williston — and with administration officials deciding not to attend the hearings at the Statehouse — the day became as much about those decisions as about the budget.
A series of people, including retired teachers, school superintendents, school board members and some other citizens came to object to a proposal by the Douglas administration to move some obligations — including the commitment to pay retirement for Vermont's teachers — to the Education Fund.
That will result in higher property taxes, said Frank Davis, a retired teacher from Derby Line.
"It's regressive and unfair," he said. "It means that landlords will pass it on to the renters, who are low income, often, or fixed income."
Davis said that as a justice of the peace he hears property tax appeals, and some of the stories of people who cannot afford to pay their taxes are terrible.
Lawmakers approved a spending plan for fiscal year 2010 that raises too much in new taxes to win Gov. James Douglas' support; the governor pledged to veto that plan and presented an alternative budget that relies more heavily on spending cuts.
A June 2 special session has been called to either approve a compromise spending plan all can accept, or to allow lawmakers to either support or override a gubernatorial veto if it comes to that.
Part of the administration's proposed alternative budget would cap school spending per pupil for the fiscal year that begins in July in an attempt to eliminate that shift onto property taxes.
But Ray Mullineaux, a board member of North Bennington Graded School, said that plan could also cause problems for schools. The school stretched to cut 6.3 percent out of its proposed budget this year, meaning it could now face a tougher time than schools that spent more on their budgets if the governor's plan is approved, Mulleaux said.
"We will be held to a higher standard than schools whose budget went up," he said.
And Leo LaDouceur, a Barnard farmer, said he is unimpressed with the administration's record of holding the line on property taxes. Decades ago he paid $189 a year on his farm. Now that cost is about $12,000 a year, and as he gets older he is having a harder time working the land.
"He (Douglas) always says we are going to help the taxpayers," he said. "What has he done?"
Not all of the scorn of those testifying was reserved for the governor's alternative budget proposal, despite that being the announced subject of the hearing.
Grocer Bill MacDonald, whose Waits River store is not far from New Hampshire, said he couldn't afford to come to the hearing and he couldn't afford not to come. That's because tobacco and liquor tax increases — which are in both the legislative and the administration's budget proposals — will hurt his business and residents, MacDonald said.
"It's sending people to New Hampshire," he said. "You are sending your dollars across the river."
Shawn Shouldice, state director for the National Federation of Independent Businesses, said lawmakers' budget was bad for small businesses.
"Small business owners are wondering how the Legislature can propose a bigger burden that increases taxes while so many employers are struggling, reducing employee hours, cutting benefits and laying off employees," she told legislators during the joint House and Senate hearing.
Much of the discussion by lawmakers was not about the budget details, but about the decision by administration officials not to testify about their proposal.
"They made it clear it was their alternative to the Legislature's budget and we had hoped we would have the opportunity to ask them questions about what they are planning," said House Speaker Shap Smith.
But Douglas, who went to a meeting with workers at a Williston construction company, disagreed.
"To characterize today's hearings as a hearing on my budget is absurd. My budget is not before them," the governor said. "The question before the House on Tuesday is their budget, yea or nay."
Douglas said if his veto of the budget is not overridden as he hopes, "everything is on the table" he said.
Workers and employers he has talked to have been supportive of his objections to the legislators' budget, Douglas said.
As for concerns about property taxes, he shares them but has been stopped from limiting school spending by the Legislature, Douglas said.
"I understand the dilemma this landowner and others across the state are facing," he said. "The governor does not have authority unilaterally to do anything."
Rep. Patti Komline, R-Dorset, the Republican leader in the House, said that setting the budget alternative offered by the administration against the one passed by lawmakers — which Douglas has promised to veto — is unfair. That's because legislators could decline to override the veto (two-thirds of those present would have to vote for such an override) and then begin work on a new compromise proposal instead of adopting the Douglas alternative.
"I wish we were having public hearings on the bill we are actually voting on next week. We are not voting on the governor's budget," she said. "It's not an either-or proposal."
But others disagreed. The question is really about which of two competing budgets should be approved, said Senate President Pro Tem Peter Shumlin, D-Windham.
"I think it is a real disservice to Vermonters that the governor refused to come and explain his budget proposal," he said. "No governor in Vermont history has vetoed a budget. If he thinks he has a better idea, why is he afraid to come and explain it?"
Commissioner of Finance James Reardon was asked by lawmakers to testify as a witness, but in the end declined.
"It has become apparent to me that these public hearings are designed to disparage the governor's alternative budget approach rather than work toward the agreement that Vermonters expect," Reardon said in a statement explaining why he was declining to testify at the hearing.
28