Councilors acknowledged the magnitude of the projects but backed them wholeheartedly, passing both measures with overwhelming support.
Councilor Dave Hartnett (D-North District) said voting on the high school made it “one of the best nights” for the council. But he acknowledged that the expense means “we’re going to have to sacrifice.”
Only Council President Kurt Wright (R-Ward 4) voted against the school renovation, which would create a three-story addition to Burlington High School and address long-standing accessibility issues. “I thought more public input was needed and would have been useful,” Wright said.
When the initiative passed 11-1, the audience broke into applause.
The funding would have a significant impact on taxpayers. Under the city’s proposed borrowing for these projects and others, a resident with a home valued at $250,000 would pay additional property taxes that would gradually increase to $550 a year by 2028. Currently, the average Burlingtonian pays $6,711 in property taxes.
Those projected tax increases include a bond for repairs to Memorial Auditorium, which is expected to be on the March ballot. That would cost the average homeowner $70 a year, according to city projections.
But it doesn’t include the $30 million wastewater investment. That would cost the average family $64 a year, but would be part of water bills, not property taxes. That bond would cover upgrades to the city’s three treatment plants, repairs to some pump stations, miles of new pipe and pollution prevention plans.
The council also approved a debt policy, which sets a limit on municipal and school borrowing.The debt policy ceiling limits the amount that can be borrowed to figures that won’t affect the city’s credit rating. The policy allows the city and the schools to borrow $192 million in fiscal year 2019 in general obligation bonds, which includes the school and the Memorial Auditorium bonds, but not the wastewater funds.
The combined bonds, if approved, would bring the city close to the cap — within $4 million in 2024 — and could limit borrowing in the future. The city currently has $52 million in debt; the school is still paying off an additional $30 million.
But councilors praised the policy as a guideline for spending. Councilor Karen Paul (D-Ward 6) said it would serve as a “roadmap” for future borrowing. “It enhances the quality of the decisions we make,” she said.
Mayor Miro Weinberger cautioned that a new debt policy won’t automatically mean more borrowing. That would be left up to the voters, he pointed out.
“I hope people understand that after this, the decision is ultimately theirs,” he said.
Correction, September 25, 2018: The projected tax impacts of the bonding would take place in gradual increments, as the story now notes. Also, a previous version of the story contained an erroneous figure about Memorial Auditorium’s potential cost to taxpayers. Lastly, a sentence that inaccurately stated an assertion by Michael Gaughan about the relative size of the Burlington High School bond has been removed.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
If taxation was progressive, these bond proposals wouldnt unfairly hit renters hardest.
Here comes Miro’s “Shock Doctrine”. These higher taxes will hit lower income residents the most, drive up rents and property taxes for what few lower middle class homeowners there are , which will help Miro do what he really wants: drive out the poor folks and gentrify the city.
I also can’t help but wonder, if BHS is in such disrepair for so long, what was former mayor/ vaudeville song and dance man Peter Clavelle doing the whole time he was in office besides not properly funding the city pension fund? Now he shills for that out of state parasite, Sinex.
Miro doesn’t mind spending other people’s money.. He should have been voted out during the last election
I don’t see how this can be described as an “addition” to the existing place. It looks like an entirely new structure (which it should be). But whatever it is, does it have to cost this much!?? Maybe Robert Miller would cut a deal for the city like he did for the NNE community center.
I love how misinformed people want to blame the mayor for the lack of up keep to the systems within the city. This has been something in the making for years and now it comes to a head. I don’t like the increases any more than anyone else but no one has come up with a different solution to the fix. I just hope the city uses the money wisely because I am not sure whether the city can continue to borrow. With these two new bond proposals the bond debt will be over $200 mil.
tax increases by 2028 going to be $550, that’s based on a 250K house. Not many of those in Burlington. Don’t forget to add the annual increase the school dept brings to the table. Your property tax increases over the past decade are primarily from the school taxes. The general city tax has not increased in years. Th Burlington schools are a expensive broken system and will only continue to get worse. Throwing more money at a broken system just makes it an expensive broken system.