It s a very unusual situation, said Finance Committee Chairwoman Cheryl Rivers, D-Windsor. I have a lot of faith that before we re all done we re going to come together and pass a bipartisan bill. There just are fundamental differences between the two committees and among senators of nearly every ideology about whether it s wiser to shift a little of education funding onto a broad-based state tax. More money is needed, some senators said, because Vermont permits towns to spend whatever they want on their schools and guarantees it will help them pay for it. At least it moves the process forward, Sen. Richard Sears, D-Bennington, said as the bill was voted out of the Appropriations Committee.
Local control is an extremely expensive proposition.
That s what we learned when we wrote the bill. Both plans were designed to ease the pressure on property wealthy towns that must share a portion of their local education property taxes with poorer towns. They both cap the amount gold towns would have to share. They also share the goal of simplifying the way state government gets property tax reduction payments to taxpayers. By some estimates, the two committees shared proposal in that area would enable the Tax Department to delete 14 pages from tax booklets.