PASSED
in the State House of Representatives
on April 1, 2015, by a vote of 88-55
. Purpose: The “Ed Bill” is the year’s principle piece of comprehensive education legislation. This was the House’s attempt at reform in the wake of election calls for property tax relief. .
Analysis: Those voting YES on this bill approved a $16 million increase in property taxes, setting the statewide homestead property tax rate at $0.98 (flat), and raising the nonresidential property tax rate to $1.525. The bill also places mandates on school districts in regard to consolidating into Pre-K- 12 of no fewer than 1100 students and puts in place a complicated formula for capping school budgets, which could not be triggered until 2018. .
Those voting NO on H.361 see this as a failure to answer the pleas of citizens for meaningful tax relief, while launching a serious assault on local control and the democratic process. As Rep. Cynthia Browning argued on the floor, consolidation mandates force publicly elected school boards to ask permission, seek waivers from, and be subject to an unelected body, the State Board of Education. .
This bill offers no short term relief from higher property taxes, and any long term prospects for savings are, according to the the Joint Fiscal Office, contingent upon increasing the State’s average pupil-to-staff ratio from 4.7 to between 4.8 and 4.9 — something that the bill does not directly address. .
As Recorded in the House Journal, Wednesday, April 1, 2015:“Shall the bill be read a third time? was decided in the affirmative. Yeas, 88. Nays, 55.” (Read the Journal, p.1716-1740.) . Related Materials: JFO Fiscal Note, H361
While I am in agreement with Ms. Browning on the independence/local control issue,
I am afraid that in Arlington the effectiveness of local control has us on a spending spree. With school budget increases of 10% and 7.55% respectively in the past two years alone and the lack of voter participation, 66 of 1700 registered voters attended the Town Meeting /School Budget, plus the past voting of unaudited budgets,
perhaps we are not suited to run our own school district?
The unintended consequences of Act 60/68 was voter apathy when tied to runaway budget increases . There is no reason to pay attention to the process when so many voters are not affected financially by reason of “pre-bates”.
The Ethan Allen Institute is Vermont’s free-market public policy research and education organization. Founded in 1993, we are one of fifty-plus similar but independent state-level, public policy organizations around the country which exchange ideas and information through the State Policy Network. Read more...
July 24, 2020 By John McClaughry The Heritage Foundation’s Daily Signal last week published eleven news stories about citizens using a firearm to stop a crime. Here are...
July 21, 2020 By John McClaughry Last Thursday, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission finalized its updates to the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA), in what the majority...
July 17, 2020 By David Flemming Harper’s Magazine, a long-running monthly magazine of literature, politics, culture, finance, and the arts, is hardly what you would call a ‘politically...
July 16, 2020 by John McClaughry “President Trump [last May] issued an executive order entitled ‘Regulatory Relief to Support Economic Recovery.’ The executive order includes a regulatory bill...
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
While I am in agreement with Ms. Browning on the independence/local control issue,
I am afraid that in Arlington the effectiveness of local control has us on a spending spree. With school budget increases of 10% and 7.55% respectively in the past two years alone and the lack of voter participation, 66 of 1700 registered voters attended the Town Meeting /School Budget, plus the past voting of unaudited budgets,
perhaps we are not suited to run our own school district?
The unintended consequences of Act 60/68 was voter apathy when tied to runaway budget increases . There is no reason to pay attention to the process when so many voters are not affected financially by reason of “pre-bates”.