Newspapers headlines across Vermont foretell another year of rising property taxes. "School taxes expected to increase by 19 cents" in Rutland is just one of many stories reported on the Rutland Herald's front page in recent weeks. Across Vermont, even as school budgets are level funded or trimmed, taxes are rising steeply. Yet Rutland Herald editorial writers, joined by former school superintendent Bill Mathis, remain blind to these front page stories which chronicle the failure of Vermont's education funding system for taxpayers.

Statistics from across Rutland County make clear our education funding system is broken and in desperate need of reform. These last two years, Rutland school enrollment dropped from 2,751 to 2,581, while property taxes increased by $2.6 million, or 14 percent.

As this scenario of lower enrollments and double-digit tax increases unfolds in Wallingford (up 19 percent), Poultney (up 15 percent), Mendon (up 19 percent), Chittenden (up 28 percent), Rutland Town (up 11 percent), Fair Haven (up 14 percent) and similarly all across Vermont, the Rutland Herald hangs tough, telling voters it's not the fault of Act 60 or Act 68; it's about equity and local control.

Equity and local control are important principles for Vermont's education funding system, but are not the cause for increasing property tax bills.

When the editorial writers run out of lofty rhetoric to shield Act 60 and Act 68, they turn to politics and blame Gov. Douglas. But here again, their arguments are hollow and misinformed. The governor has been the strongest voice in Montpelier to curb school spending growth and keep school property taxes down. Over the last five years, he has made yearly proposals to curb education spending that include a 60 percent majority vote for budgets growing faster than inflation; a 3.5 percent cap on per-pupil spending growth; and a freeze on spending growth.

Further, the governor opposed efforts to expand property tax subsidies to higher-income homeowners because the more the state pays in subsidies, the higher the school tax rates are for all taxpayers to fund these subsidies. For fiscal 2011, the $26 million increased cost of these subsidies equates to a 2 cent increase in property tax rates for everybody else. The editors fail or refuse to acknowledge this connection. With the governor's proposal, higher-income homeowners would receive a lower subsidy, but all homeowners and property owners would benefit from lower property tax rates.

Bill Mathis' recent editorial commentary is another example that misinforms readers. Mathis cobbles together numbers to try to prove the governor's proposals raise property taxes. He cites $6.9 million in Medicaid funds and $18.4 million in General Funds that flow to the Education Fund to relieve property taxes but were cut by the Legislature and redirected back to the General Fund. These cuts equate to more than a 2 cent property tax increase. While Mr. Mathis points at the governor, the hard fact is these cuts were done solely by the Legislature in last year's budget bill. Mr. Mathis might recall that this is the budget bill the governor vetoed and the Legislature overrode. The governor cannot be blamed for the consequences of a bill he vetoed.

The facts are clear. Since 1997, our state's student population has declined by over 11.5 percent — that's 13,000 students — yet school staff has increased by 23 percent. Vermont has the most generous ratio of pupils to teachers in the nation at 10.8 to 1. Given this reality, Gov. Douglas has outlined an ambitious education reform proposal, including normalizing school staff levels, increasing cost sharing for teacher health insurance to 20 percent, and encouraging school consolidation. With such measures, property tax payers get a significant break while our children's educational opportunities are enhanced.

As the property tax crisis grows, it's fair to ask who wants to find solutions and who opposes change. Since Herald editors uncritically defend our current education funding system, they decidedly fall into the latter category. Their reactionary defense of our current byzantine education funding system and expensive tax subsidies neither improves education nor protects the wallets of Vermont taxpayers. The consequence of this stubborn mindset only makes the problem worse. If you think this year's property tax increases are bad, wait until next year when property taxes rise once more. What excuses will the Herald's editors have then?



Tom Pelham is the deputy secretary of administration and former tax commissioner in the Douglas administration and former finance commissioner in the Dean administration.