The proposal passed 8-4 Tuesday night after debate about what should and shouldn’t go into the spending plan for the 2017-18 school year. Several board members voted no because they wanted more items to be funded.
The tax increase would translate to $210 on a house assessed at $231,500 for households that do not qualify for income-based tax breaks under the state education funding formula.
Most Burlington households do qualify for the tax break, though, and they would see a smaller increase or in some cases even a decrease. A household earning $50,000 would see a drop of roughly $31 dollars in property taxes, for example, according to projections by the Burlington school district. See updated district projections here.
The March 7 ballot will include a separate school repair proposal to allow bonding of $19 million, which would be tapped over a period of 10 years. That would supplement annual bonding of $2 million that the school board can harness without voter approval.
The projected 5.25 percent tax increase assumes the bond passes and includes debt service for the first year of bonding, according to district projections.
The proposed $85.5 million budget is up about $1.5 million dollars from the $83.9 million budget that voters approved last year. Last year’s property tax increase was significantly lower — an estimated 1.72 percent. That generated kudos from taxpayers weary of large increases but boos from many parents who worried about cuts to school librarians, social workers and other positions. Some of those positions would be restored in the proposed budget.
The budget would translate to education spending of $15,067 per equalized pupil, an estimated 6.61 percent increase from the current amount.
In some budget materials for the public leading up to Tuesday night’s vote, the school board emphasized the proposed $73.9 million general fund budget because it is the primary driver for tax forecasts. But under state law, the total budget, including grants, must be placed on the ballot. This year that’s $85.5 million.
The board had to make some tough decisions, including whether to support a larger proposal that would have increased taxes a bit more — by about 5.88 percent, according to Mark Porter, school board chair. Initially the board had projected a tax increase of around 3.5 percent. But numbers used in that estimate turned out to be off, and needed to be adjusted after new information from the state came in Monday, Porter said in an email to Seven Days.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
As a state, Vermont has the 4th highest spending per K-12 pupil of all states. Vermont has the highest ratio of spending per pupil to median income. Meaning, not only do we spend more per pupil than 46 other states, we spend a greater percentage of our income than ANY other state. And, oh by the way, our results are average relative to other states on most metrics.
Now BSD wants another 5.25% on top of the >85% increase we’ve had since the 2006 tax year.
This is grossly unfair to those that are net tax payers and completely unsustainable by any reasonable argument.
Chip Morgan: I’m also holding my breath over a tax hike for schools, and I share your concern. But I think it’s important for the discussion, which will probably be contentious from this point forward, to look at our school budget in a broad context of the facts on where we rank. To say our results on most metrics are average relative to other states depends, of course, on the metrics. Contrary information is out there, and here’s one example: the last major NEA study had Vermont with the lowest student-to-teacher ratio in the country. Number 1. If you think that’s good for learning, then that’s a positive distinction. Source: http://www.nea.org/home/rankings-and-estim…
I could cherry-pick statistics that reflect favorably and unfavorably on our schools, but I have to say, having looked at the research, Vermont is better than average on many metrics. I’m with you on the sting that comes with the new budget. Here’s hoping we can let the facts guide the way to the March ballot.
This report that puts Vermont at number 12 overall. That’s the top 25%, if my math is right (with apologies to the South Burlington school system for my weakness in this area. Totally my fault.): http://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-…
I care about Vermont’s kids and am proud of our education system but I really cannot keep up with these increases. I pay taxes on multiple Burlington properties and I will be voting no. The amount of money being paid to the schools has gotten way past the point of being sane or reasonable. I think if we gave the schools a hundred million dollars, next year they would ask for more and explain why it wasn’t enough.
I’m sure they could spend two hundred million dollars if we gave them the chance. The teacher’s union and everyone else tries to suck up as much money as they can out of the mountain of cash they receive each year. Everyone is making out like a bandit except the people who matter most…the kids. I’m sure they are getting short shrift and are the least able to advocate for their portion from the unions, contractors, administrators, and all the others pushing and shoving to get their “fair” share.
Here we go with more teacher hate from Penelope. The taxes on your multiple properties (what a burden you carry) are not high because of teachers alone. However, I do agree with you that property taxes in this area are out of control vs what jobs pay.
Nuts ! The budget goes up over 5 % with increased bonds ,these bonds being nothing more then deferring current costs to future tax payers . Nuts ! The vote being 8 to 4 with some of the 4 voting against because the spending increases were NOT big enough . Nuts !
$85,500,000/3800 students=$22,368 dollars spent per student. This is nuts, and the financial hole these spends and accounting shell games are creating pretty much ensures there will be no city worth living in for our children. To cover, taxes will go up, home values down, taxes will need to go up more, and home values down more – a slow but vicious collapse to the bottom. Its time to cut the administrative fluff and ancillary programs, and focus instead on core academics.
Townie: Here’s a link to an analysis Dr. Art Woolf did in 2014 of Vermont’s school’s performance:
https://vtdigger.org/2014/04/15/art-woolf-…
He concludes, “Vermonts education systems performance is, at best, about average for the nation and a case could be made that its not as good as the national average. Thats far below what most Vermont policymakers, parents, and taxpayers believe to be the case. Vermont does not get a better performing education system in return for its very high education expenditures. We should all be concerned about why that is the case.”