By Mike Mrowicki
Editor’s note: Mike Mrowicki is a state Representative for the Windham 4 District of Putney and Dummerston.
For those experiencing sticker shock from viewing their property tax bills this year, you’re not alone. I get it. Or, I got it, as our tax bill soared on a 1,000-square-foot house on 2 acres, 5 miles from town on a dirt road.
My wife and I both work two jobs to keep food on the table and a roof overhead, and to pay our property taxes. Like most folks, any sudden increase, like needing a new medicine, a car repair, or a rise in property taxes, just plain hurts and quickly unbalances our budget.
I know our district school boards work hard to present a budget that tries to balance the competing needs of providing quality education at a cost we can afford. Our schools are under a lot of pressure this year because when they put their budgets together, they face line items like a 14% increase in health care insurance, which was brokered at the state level.
What’s the Legislature’s role here?
The 2024 Legislature that concluded in May formed a commission to dig into the cost drivers that push school budgets and whether there’s a better way to fund education. We can also look at the formulas and metrics used to calculate taxes and values, as this is a quickly changing real estate market. Along with inflation, these are considerations that need to be updated.
However, we need a willing partner to solve the dilemma of affordability, where school funding is only one part of a big puzzle.
While Gov. Phil Scott talks a lot about affordability, there hasn’t been much action, especially since many of us see “affordability” as the cost of food, shelter, transportation, health care, child care, etc. What has been done in the last eight years of his tenure to address the big picture of affordability?
Regarding property taxes, we need a better plan to bring property taxes down than the governor’s plan to borrow money that would have to be paid back next year on top of next year’s tax, leaving a $230 million hole to start off next year. That plan goes against Rule No. 1: when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.
Yet all we hear from him or his office is how the Legislature is the problem and taxes are the only reason life isn’t more affordable. Health insurance companies were granted a 19% increase for next year—an increase that will touch every budget in Vermont, be it state, local, or family. Where’s the governor’s plan to address this?
Despite moans of uninformed discontent from the governor’s office to the contrary, clean heat is cheaper heat, summarized by the latest Dept. of Public Service report in which their optimized scenario of implementing the Global Warming Solutions Act showed $2.1 billion in societal net benefits, and many families would see lower heating costs.
Then there’s housing, an issue tied to so much of our economy; from workforce housing we need to keep our economy going to keeping people from being put out into the streets. While we wait for a plan from the governor, families exiting the motel program receive tents, and jobs go unfilled because qualified candidates can’t find housing.
The Legislature wants to work with the governor on these and other issues, but that means agreeing to show up. Just before the veto session in June, the governor called a meeting with legislative leaders to hash out an agreement on school funding.
Ostensibly, this was a meeting of the “deciders” from each branch to avert the veto session.
When Governor Scott blew off the meeting by not showing up, it certainly raised the question of whether he wants the issue to campaign on, more than an actual solution.
Where else have we heard that scenario lately?
All this is playing out against a nationwide backdrop of the growing and ongoing disparities between the super-rich and, well, everybody else. With the Trump Tax giveaways, they pay less, so we pay more. Our economic landscape has devolved into a dichotomy of “have nots” and “have yachts,” which makes paying everyday bills harder to swallow, right down to ground level, with things like local property taxes. It’s time we helped level this landscape with a fair share tax policy.
Regarding property taxes and funding education, it’s obvious the largest part of that local bill is for educating our children, and our children are our future. Seems to me that politicizing their education has proven to be counterproductive. Would it depoliticize education costs if we unhitched them from property taxes with a straight income tax proposal? Would that also simplify the formula so most Vermonters could understand how we arrive at their tax rates? We can do better, but I won’t pretend there are easy answers.
We need to hear the plan from our well-paid chief executive, other than just vetoing bills.
“Veni, Vidi, Veto” is not a plan.
We’re ready to work together and find that balance between a quality education at a price we can afford, and all the other parts that comprise the big picture of affordability. Both we and our children deserve no less.
