SURVEY: Do You Support A “Per Parcel” Supplementary Property Tax?

Do you support a $1 per month “Per Parcel” supplementary property tax to help pay for Lake download-1Champlain clean up? This tax would be placed on 360,000 Vermont properties, and raise $4.5 million of the estimated $50 million needed annually for the program.


{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }

shazzam January 11, 2018 at 4:49 pm

No – this is a slippery slope leading to what, $10 or $100 per in a few short years?
Define the solutions then examine how to pay for them.


Kyle Scanlon January 11, 2018 at 5:36 pm

As a small business owner I feel I am constantly under attack fending off new or increasing taxes. With that said, LakeChamplain is a disgrace, and the $1 per parcel increase does not bother me. I would, however, like the terms to be well defined, sunset dates implemented, etc. My obvious fear being that once a tax is imposed it rarely disappears. I worry that in time, without proper guidelines, this revenue stream could shift away from Lake Champlain cleanup, and be funneled into other areas.


H. Brooke Paige January 11, 2018 at 6:30 pm

This tax places no relationship between the parcel and the damage being addressed, for a parcel miles from a body of water, any tax is inappropriate while a lakefront property with a defective septic system should probably be assessed a tax of far more than a dollar a month.

Secondly, a dollar a month is just a trivial amount that doesn’t have any relationship to the problem being addressed – it has been selected because it sound like a pittance. Quick as a rabid rabbit, it won’t be a dollar a month, or five or ten – suddenly the property owner will find his “fair share” isn’t a dollar a month per parcel, rather ten dollars per parcel per month and will have no recourse but to submit to the environmental extortionists !


Steven Pike January 11, 2018 at 8:31 pm

Vermont has a static, aging population. Those who stay here are stubborn, or relatively well off, or rely on state welfare. My taxes have increased almost every year in spite of a shrinking school population. It is time for any new taxes or fees to be paid for with cuts to lower priority programs. In fact, Vermont should learn to live with the lower income taxes that will result from the federal tax cut. The legislature, will not do any such thing, of course. Instead of prudent belt-tightening, they will attempt to jack up taxes, impose frees, and make health care mandatory.


Ritva Burton January 12, 2018 at 1:16 am

How much will the huge corporate (very large) farms pay for cleaning up Lake .Champlain? From what I have seen in reports, they contribute most of the phosphorus pollution that flows into the lake and other waterways.


Tony January 17, 2018 at 11:53 am

The state legislature needs to take the approach of president trump by cutting 2 regulations for every 1 put in place. The same can be said for taxes.


Cris Ericson January 17, 2018 at 11:23 pm

There are dozens and dozens of sewage treatment plants around Lake Champlain dumping treated sewage into the Lake which contain remnants of prescription drugs passed through peoples’ intestines and out their toilets to the sewage treatment plants.
When I was a child, Lake Champlain was clear as a bell and their were as many cows as people in Vermont, 1960. So, I don’t believe the cause of phosphorous pollution is the farms, unless there has been a huge change in the chemicals in fertilizers.
I believe the problem is most likely the sewage treatment plants dumping treated sewage into the Lake from which one-third of Vermonters draw their drinking water.
The water sent to people to drink from their faucets goes from the Lake full of treated sewage, into a 2nd water treatment plant, which treats the organic lake water mixed with treated sewage with chloramines or monochloramines which raise the incident risks of cancer because they are combined with the organic Lake water and create trihalomethanes.
The bottom line is, it is time to re-route the treated sewage by pipe to other uses,
factories could use treated sewage water perhaps. Cris Ericson


Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post:

About Us

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.

Latest News

VT Left Wing Media Bias Unmasks Itself

July 24, 2020 By Rob Roper Dave Gram was a long time reporter for the Associated Press, is currently the host of what’s billed on WDEV as a...

Using Guns for Self Defense – 3 Recent Examples

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...

FERC ruling on solar subsidies could help Vermont ratepayers

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...

The Moderate Left’s Stand for Free Speech

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...

Trump’s Regulatory Bill of Rights

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...