He reiterated his call for a special legislative session beginning next Wednesday, and for talks with top lawmakers before then to try to find agreement on tax and spending plans he would find acceptable.
Scott sought to lower the political temperature, which rose last week to levels unusual for Vermont. At the same time, he shifted blame for the current standoff onto the legislature. He said that lawmakers knowingly “passed bills I would veto,” and mused that it might be a “political calculation, I don’t know.”
Well, they might have simply done the best they could based on different values and goals, and come to different conclusions.
Scott asserted that finding common ground shouldn’t be difficult. “We are actually very close in what we are trying to achieve,” he said. But the distance, he said repeatedly, must be traveled by the legislature. And not only on taxes and spending, but also on his five-year plan to curb school spending.
“It’s close, from my perspective, because some of the issues that we believe that are in the plan, to implement the plan, are issues that they’ve worked on,” Scott said. “So if we put it all together and understand that I’m not going to sign anything with a tax or fee in it, then we can make progress.”
Which sounds like his five-year plan isn’t really negotiable either.
At the same hour as Scott’s press conference, Senate President Pro Tempore Tim Ashe (D/P-Chittenden) sent him a letter indicating the legislature is not prepared to bend any further.
Ashe urged Scott to sign the budget and tax bills, which he said “struck all the right notes.” He called Scott’s plan to keep property tax rates level by using $34 million in one-time money “governing on a credit card.” Ashe said Scott’s “practice of vetoing the budget is bad governance,” pointing out that Vermont has had only two budget vetoes in its history, one of which was signed by Scott last year — and he has threatened to veto this year’s budget, as well.
Ashe rejected the idea of negotiating taxes and budgets outside of normal legislative practice and out of the public eye, as happened with the big bills last year. He wrote that Senate leaders are willing to meet with the governor on Monday “to discuss the logistics of the upcoming special session,” not to negotiate on taxes, spending or any other issue.
House Speaker Mitzi Johnson (D-South Hero) expressed similar intent in a Wednesday afternoon interview. She said that House leaders have agreed to meet with Scott Thursday afternoon, but only to discuss logistics. “Given the overwhelming support the budget and tax bills received [in the legislature], we want to make sure everyone is involved,” she said. “It must be an open process.”
Scott wants the special session to focus on one issue — what he calls “the additional $34 million in tax burden on Vermonters … If we do that and not open up everything else, I believe that we can come to consensus.”
“Consensus” meaning, again, that lawmakers come around to his viewpoint.
When a reporter pointed out that the state Constitution created the executive and legislative branches as separate but equal, Scott indicated that he is first among equals. “The governor gets to decide what’s best for Vermonters,” he asserted.
Sounds like a great starting point for a brief, agreeable special session.
Scott was implicitly critical of a provision in the legislature’s budget to spend $33 million in unanticipated revenue to pay down the state’s pension obligations, a move that Johnson insists will save $100 million in interest costs. The governor said that if lawmakers want to boost the pension funds, they should wait until his five-year school funding plan starts producing savings. But by his own projections, that won’t begin for three more years, and a lot can happen between now and then.
Johnson countered that past underfunding of state pensions has created a fiscal problem that’s only going to get worse, unless it’s addressed now.
There was one curious exchange in the press conference that shone a light on the administration’s disengagement from the legislative process. WCAX-TV’s Neal Goswami asked how many votes Scott had in the legislature for his five-year school savings plan.
“I have no idea,” Scott replied.
“Your office hasn’t reached out to lawmakers?” Goswami asked. Scott repeated that he didn’t know.
“Your shop has no idea?” Goswami asked, with a touch of incredulity.
Scott shifted back to blaming lawmakers. “Obviously, they have gotten together to decide they didn’t want to do that at the time,” he said.
So his team didn’t even bother conducting a straw poll because they presumed defeat. Vote counting is part of the process in dealing with a legislative body. You find out how much support you have, hopefully you find out how you might convince the recalcitrant and it helps you craft a tactical approach to winning approval.
Was it not worth bothering with? Did they start out assuming they were going to lose and proceed straight to the blame game?
Well, yes. Scott came right out and said his staff didn’t engage in the usual horse-trading in the legislature’s closing days because leadership was convinced there was a need to raise taxes. Quoting imaginary lawmakers, he said, “We have to raise taxes and fees; we have no other way to accomplish this.”
It’s amazing how well he knows what’s in the Democratic majority’s minds, considering that he rarely seems to talk with them.
Read Ashe’s full letter here:
Disclosure: Tim Ashe is the domestic partner of Seven Days publisher and coeditor Paula Routly. Find our conflict-of-interest policy here: sevendaysvt.com/disclosure.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
I just watched the Governors press conferance on Facebook and thought he did a tremendous job of explaining his position. It kills me how John Walters does his darndest to paint the Governor in as negative light as possible. Between John and Taylor Dobbs, I think its time for Sevendays to reevaluate the effectiveness of their conflict of interest policy. Carrying Tim Ashes water through your articles like you do is disgusting! VTers deserve better.
I dont think Scott understands: Vermonters did NOT elect him King.
Scott is a simpleton whose tactics appeal to simpletons. It’s the Trump effect of non-negotiation and bullying right here in Vermont. Never mind that his position is half-baked and would kill public schools… which we need to recruit and retain all these out-of-staters Scott says we need to keep our economy from shrinking to nothing.
Re: “It’s amazing how well he knows what’s in the Democratic majority’s minds, considering that he rarely seems to talk with them. “
Actually John, I suspect he might have just read one of your previous articles illuminating their strategy. You know, the one with the picture you took of their off -campus meeting with the white board setting forth their agenda.
This should not be that difficult. As a town official in a town responsible for putting together the annual budget I would love to have the problem of what to do with a large surplus. Given a large surplus one thing for sure is that voters would not approve an increase in property taxes. Property taxes already high are hard for many to pay.
Likewise at a time with a large surplus for the legislature to ask Vermonters to increase statewide property taxes by over 30 million dollars is quite a stretch. The first thing to do is to use the surplus to help fund the expenses in the proposed 2019 budget. Then use the remaining surplus to help address previous legislative under funding of the Teachers Retirement Fund. Governor Scott is right . We must hold the line on property tax increases.
I am not sure the Governor understands what compromise means. Here is the definition for his perusal.
compromise
kmprmz/Submit
noun
1.
an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.
“an ability to listen to two sides in a dispute, and devise a compromise acceptable to both”
synonyms: agreement, understanding, settlement, terms, deal, trade-off, bargain; More
verb
1.
settle a dispute by mutual concession.
“in the end we compromised and deferred the issue”
synonyms: meet each other halfway, come to an understanding, make a deal, make concessions, find a happy medium, strike a balance; give and take
“we compromised”
@John Freitag
Let me get this straight. You would not put before you voters a budget that raises taxes a little while saving three times the surplus in interest cost to your town in the long run. Pretty short sighted on your part and I am glad that I don’t live in your town!!!
Sen. Randy Brock (R-Franklin), a noted fiscal conservative who ran for lieutenant governor alongside Scott in 2016, voted for the spending bill on Saturday night and called it “a responsible budget.” He observed that the spending increase is less than 1 percent, which more than meets Scott’s benchmark of keeping budget growth below the rate of economic expansion. “It’s a very, very tiny increase percentagewise in the overall budget,” Brock said. “I think that’s important.”
He pointed to the budget’s investment of more than $30 million into state pension funds, which would save three times that much in interest costs. “That’s really big,” he said. And it’s about to be vetoed by the governor.
Brad,
I am not sure you understand the severity of the property tax crisis many Vermonters are facing. If there are surplus funds in our town after covering existing expenses, we try to make investments that will save money down the road. Voters ,at least in our community, have made it clear that they have reached the limit on how high property taxes can go. At the same time Strafford is noted for its volunteerism, beauty, and for having one of the top elementary schools in the state. Check out our website: http://www.straffordvt.org
There are many unpleasant tasks that face those of us in town government. Putting neighbors property up for tax sales is certainly among the worst. Again, there is nothing wrong with using surplus to reduce interest payments on obligations, just like paying extra on your mortgage will save a good deal down the road. However before you can do this you first have to pay your day to day bills. Using the state surplus to pay for proposed spending and then putting what is left into the Teachers Retirement Fund before raising property taxes is a reasonable and fiscally responsible course of action.
@John Freitag
So are you saying that you would rather have a one year with no tax increase then save a boatload in the long run?
I pay property taxes in Vermont. I also know that there are a lot of people out there that are getting tax relief in the form of tax rebates. Wonder how much that rebate brings down their cost per $100?
Brad,
At a time of a large surplus and very high property taxes, the responsible course of action is first use the surplus to cover proposed spending and then put remaining surplus funds into shoring up reserve funds or paying off previous obligations in a quicker manner.
While you may be getting a rebate on the over 2 cent increase, those like the family who owns and run the General Store in our town will not. They and all other small business property owners and non-residential property owners will be seeing a over 5 cent property tax increase. These continued increases are unsustainable and for many are a real hardship.
Certainly politicians can this fall campaign on raising property taxes to pay off the Teacher Pension Fund obligations in a more expedient fashion. I do not recall any running on that platform in the last election. Right now we are faced with balancing revenues and expenditures for the 2019 budget year. Using part of the surplus to avoid a property tax increase is both reasonable and is consistent with the promises made by Governor Scott when he was elected.