It was a special meeting of the Brattleboro Selectboard, so we’ll have a special form of coverage – a quick version:
– No one appears to be running against incumbent Selectboard members, as was also the case last year.
– $7,000 of BMAC repair and maintenance costs were added back in to the budget for FY16.
– The FY16 general municipal budget was approved for presentation to Representative Town Meeting. It comes to a request for $15,721,494, or a 2% increase in property tax.
– It was voted to ask to spend $375,000 of the Unassigned Fund Balance for repairs for non-recurring repairs to the Elliot Street bridge, Green Street retaining wall, Municipal Center repairs, and possibly Union Hill improvements. Town Manager Elwell said, however, this would not be the total amount required to complete all four projects.
– The local option sales tax will be on the ballot for town voters, and as an article on the Representative Town Meeting agenda.
– A question about recycling bins on Fairground Road will not be on the ballot or agenda.
– The board voted in favor of putting the Futures Committee report and request for formation on the Representative Town meeting agenda.
– There was a second public hearing on Charter Change amendments.
– Articles for Representative Town Meeting, and ballot voting, were approved for warning.
Much of the time was spent debating powers of the people, Town Meeting Representatives, and Selectboard.
…
And there, compressed, is the result of over three hours of special meeting. I have all my notes, so ask questions if you’d like more info on anything in particular. I might add some key points too. Maybe.
Reps might want to take charge of agenda
It occurs to me that one of the changes to Representative Town Meeting that might be useful would be for Representative Town Meeting representatives to set the agenda for Representative Town Meeting from now on.
Other towns with RTM do this. The Selectboard’s role becomes that of providing the budget. That’s it. Reps decided their agenda.
Why this control over the substance of the meeting is given to the board, I’m not sure. It isn’t a Selectboard meeting. It is representatives, representing voters.
…
Of course, the divide between reps and voters might continue. It was on display last night. Some reps said they were going to vote for the 1% local option tax. Other non-reps said no to the additional tax and no to the budget as it stands. Very similar to the Rep/voter split last year.
….
Advisory only issues might be a reason people don’t bother to go to the polls. It doesn’t mean anything. No competition for candidates, no faith in the RTM system, and advisory-only votes seem to be dragging participation down more than anything. If the town budget was on the regular ballot, would more show up and vote? Maybe we need to give the voters some meat.
Selectboard overboard, "gatekeepers" again
Chris,
to my reading and to Spoon Agave’s reading (and by common sense) the RTM does set its own agenda. The selectboard can add to the RTM agenda, but when they see something on their desk, they grasp for complete authority over it, as they have done over the Futures Committee, the Pro-Democracy Amendments (PDA), the PAYT referendum, and other petitions. This selectboard interference discourages people from being involved in community and government.
The board has used advisory issues effectively, and so have the people. (In fact, if you check the records, you’ll find the highest turnout in recent history was for an advisory.) The people do have rights to petition for binding votes as well as advisory votes, but both those rights have been abridged by the 2012 RTM charter revisions. So, as it stands now, town government is effectively suppressing voter involvement.
Kurt Daims for
BrattleboroCommonSense.org
Pro-Democracy Amendments
A couple of questions
***The local option sales tax will be on the ballot for town voters, and as an article on the Representative Town Meeting agenda.***
How’s that going to work? Is the public question just a straw poll? What happens if RTM approves the tax and voters don’t? I sense danger.
***Much of the time was spent debating powers of the people, Town Meeting Representatives, and Selectboard.***
What was the general gist? Were they debating the meaning of the charter? Or were they discussing general philosophical points of democratic governance?
OK...
Good questions.
1. LOST – The general votership will be asked, advisory only, whether the town should enact a 1% local option sales tax on a ballot. Any outcome will have no official impact.
At Representative Town Meeting, there will be an article to see if the town shall enact a 1% local option tax. This will be the “official” vote with meaning.
2. Ahh, well, that was the three and a half hours. : )
I’ll give you some quotes:
On the FY16 Budget…
Kate O’connor, on voting against a budget with interest for bond payments included: “I do not think it is prudent to take out another bond for police fire facility until we have a plan for the police dept. don’t like idea of putting in for a property we don’t know about. public needs to be involved in process. i’d like to know the plan. ”
Donna Macomber, on why she supports adding the interest in, even if taxes go up: “My vote for the budget doesn’t disregard the tax increase burden, but make possible forward momentum on the Police Fire facility, which needs final approval of people of town. I support long term planning.”
David Gartenstein, on taking the Police Fire interest out at RTM: “The fundamental question is balancing the burden on taxpayers against the town;s operating and capital needs. I thought the rejection of the budget by referendum last year was because people think taxes are too high. Adding 8 cents to support the Police Fire facility is too much money. Work needs to be done, but our ability to pay is the core issue facing us.” he said he’d vote to send this budget to town meeting, but would move at the meeting to take the $140k back out.
George Reed-Savory, on repeating what happened before: “It occurs to me that we’re doing what we did last year. The budget was presented, town reps approved it, and the town voted against it.”
Ann Wright, on representation regarding budget decisions: “I have no faith in being represented by my representatives. I’m very uncomfortable with budget as presented tonight.”
On The Local Option Sales Tax…
David Schoales: “It’s the remedy we have. Things are always changing. Realities change. We need to keep bringing it up. Plenty are against the 1 % tax, but it is not for us to decide. It is for the representatives to decide. Our job is to provide that opportunity. It’s the right way to proceed.”
Macomber said not to fear the 1% tax because we sell better quality goods than in New Hampshire.
O’Connor said that it would be 7% difference with NH if enacted, not just 1%. She reminded people that with VY closing, disposable income in the community is changing.
John Allen, on why he’s for it when he was against it: “It isn’t our choice to make. It has to go to Representative Town meeting again. It is a hard question. It’s up to reps to discuss and to put it to rest. We just keep bringing it up. It bother me a little. If you dont get your way, you keep bringing it up until you get your way, but it should go before reps.”
Bob Stevens, on empty Brooks House storefronts burdened with additional tax: “There is little to no market for retail in our town. We’ll have to lower rents, then grand list will go down. You have to think of this as a flat economy – you can tip it up, or down. Think hard if this makes sense.”
Kathryn Turnas, on re-voting the 1% tax: “How many times do we have to vote it down? Will this be it? It’s been voted down twice already. Let it die.”
On rolloff bins at Fairground Road…
Schoales, on whether they should stay or go: “It is hard for us to decide without knowing – need to hear from town.”
On The Futures Committee Article…
Gartenstein: “The Charter establishes mechanism so citizens can get something on town mtg warning… There is a clear structure for gathering signatures to put something on warning by peititon. It isn’t so onerous. Daims has done it to put things on regularly. Agave could have done that last year. But, didn’t happen.”
Spoon Agave: “Suppose it said bring a proposal to vote to establish a committee – RTM could ask for that – would you have power to deny that? Suppose there was no request for a motion? In case law, selectboards can not put something on agenda if it is not germane to town business or if it is frivolous. That’s been the standard. Formation of a RTM committee is town business and not frivolous. Usual standards for rejecting aren’t there. By what standards are you rejecting it? It is town business, is not frivolous, and it creates the dialogue that you say is important, outside of the town plan.”
On Charter amendments…
(see last week’s coverage… very similar discussion, same objections)
When Kurt Daims had completed
When Kurt Daims had completed his presentation David Gardenstein gave his opinion of the Charter amendments. He is against the amendments. No other board member spoke for or against them. Dora took the floor and stated that as individuals every selectboard member was entitled to their personal opinion but that the board needed to remain neutral on this issue.
David Gardenstein requested that the town manager gather educational information regarding the Daims Charter Amendments. I would say that with all going on in this town there are higher more important priorities for the town manager and that David Gardenstein knows this. If he wants information gathered on this subject he should be doing it himself as any other voter in this town would have to do. Shame on him!
SELECTBOARD SETS ALL AGENDAS
Just like the board — under Gartenstein — tried to block RTM from putting the Futures Committee on their agenda, the board under Gartenstein will try to block the Pro-Democracy Amendments. Our attorney (that is Brattleboro Common Sense attorney) says this is the tendency of all selectboards. I’m not really trying to broaden the discussion, but I wonder, is that just human nature — taking power?
Thanks
Thanks, Chris. It’s a very interesting discussion.
The problem
The problem with using the 1% tax to reduce the property tax is that it is essentially a one-time benefit. After the first year, any tax increase will still fall on the property tax – unless sales volume can keep pace with spending increases (it can’t).
It is apparent from the conversations that some people don’t even know the town currently has a local option tax on booze & prepared food – they feel no benefit from it. Although the benefit is there, it has disappeared into the regular annual revenue.
If the town were to use the money for specific projects, say reinvestments that enhance the the town for both individuals and businesses, the benefit would not only be more transparent, it could also increase business in town – and increase revenue.
Although I understand the concern about Tax Free Big Box Land right next door, I don’t think people are going to change their shopping habits over an additional 1%.
not "the" problem, "a" problem..
The reason I say 1% LOST is a general and not a particular problem is that it’s indicative of the short circuited or labyrinthian way things are done here.
As you point out, people don’t know for the most part where their money goes in town spending. I looked on the town website and can’t find any FY budget linked anywhere, for this or any year.
–
I did a little digging on the school district site and was interested to learn that the Student Fund spends the price of building two skateparks each and every year for its programming. No idea what the town spends on Rec in addition to this.
(I also noted that not a single word related to the skate park is printed under the Town recreation department programs or activities, much less no fund raising opportunity. You wouldn’t know from the site that it’s even a notion much less a long sought element)
–
While 1% may not be enough to sway a shopping habit, people get the drift of things. They feel ignored or heard, they know when opacity or transparency prevails. The inability to plug into or grok our ‘quality of life vs. spending picture’ in an overall way is the bigger problem as I see it.
The current RTM cramping, and ongoing Selectboard battles with public trust show this is true too
Town Budgets
The town budgets for many Fiscal Years (FYs) are available on Brattleboro’s Finance Department page (linked below) – there’s the proposed FY16, the current FY15, and audited versions of FY10 through FY14. In my experience it takes a little while to explore town budget spreadsheets to see where things are, but once you get the hang of them it’s pretty clear where money’s coming from and going to (and Brattleboro does a pretty good job of laying things out).
(Perhaps the link to the main Finance page isn’t obvious because the department link also pops up a link to a subpage for grants, which can make it look like that’s the only option.)
Brattleboro Finance Department – http://www.brattleboro.org/index.asp?SEC=6D847C73-95FB-4ADC-8335-0A8D90080124&Type=B_BASIC
Thanks for helping
That indeed is what happened. When I saw the pop up without any budget link, I then went to search bar- put in FY budget, and when no results came in, I gave up.
Boom!
” Macomber said not to fear the 1% tax because we sell better quality goods than in New Hampshire.” Really? This is her justification for possibly instating the new tax? First of all, it’s a ridiculous comment to make because -while many beautiful, good quality products are made and sold in Brattleboro- New Hampshire has many, many fine artisans and shops that make and sell products that are equal to pretty much anything sold in Brattleboro. Not to mention the much larger variety of goods. Yes, Keene certainly has lots of big box stores but it also has several upscale shops and restaurants ; not to mention what the other neighboring towns may have to offer.
I love the stores in downtown Bratt and I shop there as much as I can. But, sometimes I just can’t find what I’m looking for in the ever dwindling retail businesses in town. To make a comment like that says to me that Ms. Macomber is not taking seriously the detrimental impact an additional tax on goods could have on this struggling town. Sometimes I feel like the top of my head will explode from some of the stupid, callous remarks that spew from the Selectboard’s collective mouth.
VT/NH
Yes, on the surface her remark is pretty silly. I personally would try to keep my head from exploding over it because it does not deserve such a rash response. I did not hear her remark as anything but an attempt to say that we do have reasons for people to shop on this side of the river. She may have been comparing Brattleboro with WalMart.
I lived in NH for a number of years and I know that NH collects taxes and runs their government and social services from tax collection. They are not ‘tax free’ they simply exploit their neighboring states for the cross border benefit of selling things to out of staters (“tax-free”). Then they tax the business owners instead of the purchaser. All that NH does is run things so they get as much revenue as possible from people who visit but don’t stay. We rarely cross over the river to shop. I avoid stores that tout themselves to be “tax-free”. We pay our Vermont Use Tax at the end of the year for any taxable items that we bought out of state.
If we are so upset by 1% we should be head-exploding livid over the 6% we send to Montpelier. We did not create this situation. I think the state government could consider sending 1 of the 6 percents back to the towns and/or counties along the Connecticutt River.
Are you as upset over the local option taxes we already have in Brattleboro? We have a rooms and meals local option tax in Brattleboro. Both Dover and Wilmington have local option sales taxes and they are lauding the rise in their local economies. Here is a very recent article from the Deerfield Valley News:
http://www.dvalnews.com/view/full_story/26158395/article-Sales-tax-returns-show-growth-in-local-business-on-the-rise
Andy
You're right. There are far
You’re right. There are far worse “head exploding” comments that come from our esteemed Selectboard. And, if, as you say her comment was referring to Wal-Mart than ,again, a stupid comment since an entire state can’t be defined or dismissed because they allowed a business like Wal-Mart to operate there.
I’m well aware of all the excessive taxes we pay by living in this town. When I moved here several years ago I did so knowing that the taxes were high. But, when I came to visit the town before making the move I was struck by how vibrant and energized the Main Street area was. Every storefront was filled with interesting businesses; there were Five (!)bookstores within a 2 block radius; there was ( and still is) a busy, wonderful library with people engaged in many different activities. It seemed like a place where I could live happily and be able to get pretty much anything I needed in downtown stores. Not the case anymore. One after another local businesses have closed and more often than not have either not been replaced or been replaced with a shop that sells more ” gift ” items. Beautiful, fun items to be sure but not things one would need everyday. The new retail spaces at the Brook House sit empty without even a “Coming Soon ” sign in their windows. Have you ever tried buying a decent spool of thread or a magazine or a pad of paper in downtown Brattleboro? Small businesses struggle every day to stay open all over the country and certainly in this town. Why does the town government want to make it even harder for them to stay open or for new businesses to come in? A new tax – even one as “small” as 1 percent is going to result in more empty storefronts and more reasons to shop in New Hampshire.
Trying to have a conversation
The true ‘head exploding’ reality I was referring to was the Vermont State Sales Tax at 6%. The option of adding 1% for the benefit of local municipalities is the only remedy the state legislature has provided. We have already adopted the local option rooms and meals tax in Brattleboro raising the tax on lodging and prepared foods from 9% to 10%. Alcohol served in a restaurant is up to 11% with the 1% local option tax. New Hampshire has a 9% rooms and meals tax.
New Hampshire – my old stomping grounds – is the master of raking tax revenue off of visitors. NH is surrounded by the sales tax states of Maine, Massachusetts and Vermont. They have set up liquor stores at their toll plazas, liquor stores at every entrance to the state and they are fine with every business proclaiming themselves as ‘tax free’ when the state of NH charges every business in the state a tax on business profits paid for by sales to the very people who think they are not paying any taxes.
Yes, Brattleboro is in a bind. But characterizing our select board as wanting to charge outsiders for the privilege of visiting us by adding a penny to the sales tax is silly. Every municipality and state is trying its best to raise money in the least painful way possible. You can’t rail against property taxes and rents and then also rail against the only other legal source of revenue for the town. Just because something has been discussed before doesn’t mean it cannot be looked at again. The US House Republicans have voted against the Affordable Care Act about 50 times and they are apt to bring it up again. That is democracy.
I think downtown landlords and merchants need to consider the question: Do our businesses really serve the people of Brattleboro? Some of them do and some of them are over priced and oddly out of character with our local culture. The owners of Sam’s should consider how many of us are pleased to shop locally – at Sam’s. In a recent Reformer article they bash their local customers by telling us how much better Keene is. I am not a tourist and I spend most of my shopping dollars in Brattleboro. Brattleboro merchants are located in more than the downtown area. If Brattleboro ‘ain’t what it used to be then we can all look at our own shopping habits for part of the answer.
By the way, Brattleboro still has 3 bookstores within a two block radius. One of the ‘five’ was destroyed by a fire and one went out of business – and is now a fine brewery. A Brattleboro resident of modest means said to me last week when asked for his opinion on adopting the 1% local option sales tax, “Well, we have to.” I would agree that in a best of all possible worlds we should not have to. We do not live in an ideal world. Relieve property taxes and rents by adopting this modest tax just as Dover and Wilmington have. Their economies are looking up.
I have not read a compelling reason not to consider it again.
Andy
Other ways to look at it
We don’t “have to” do anything. If we did, there would be no reason to have a meeting.
If the problem is identified as trying to raise money, then a new tax looks like the only option.
If the problem is identified as being unable to afford our lifestyle, solutions might involve cutting back and reducing spending, doing projects in phases, or altering plans.
One compelling reason for not considering it again is that you are representing people who do not want it considered again. (Of course, you might also represent people who do… so who will you choose to represent? A problem with RTM…)
Will reps in your district be doing anything to canvas those being represented before making decisions for them? Or is it all guesswork, and who you know personally?
Some may enjoy a Main street without Sam’s, but I won’t.
We can choose whatever we’d like to do, but we can’t choose the reaction to it. We can add a new tax, but customers and businesses are free to choose to go elsewhere as a result. And these people won’t be on the street telling us that “we have to” add another tax. They won’t be here.
It’s much easier to keep existing customers than to try to round up new ones. Pushing away customers is bad business, and costly.
“Let’s see, should we go to Brattleboro for the day, or Keene? Brattleboro has quality goods, but we have to pay for parking, and meals cost more. And drinks cost more. And their products now cost more with the LOST. And traffic is often a mess. And there are many empty storefronts. And last time I went I got a parking ticket. You know, let’s just skip Brattleboro. It’s nice, but too expensive to visit nowadays.”
Or
“Hey, let’s go to Brattleboro. I’ll cover the cost of parking and a potential ticket. We can split a sandwich and save some money there. We can walk around, but not buy anything. Things are cheaper online anyway.”
…
But why stop with a measly 1%. We need far more, right?
We could demand a toll from everyone entering town.
We could sell admission tickets, at a cost of 1% of whatever you plan to spend in town. (Oh, wait, that is our current plan.)
We could force everyone to use a local currency, which tourists and out of town users would pay a premium to access.
We have license plate trackers. We could set police at our borders, take note of all traffic in, and send them a bill for services rendered.
We could charge people by the hour to visit (oh, wait, that’s in our parking fees and fines).
….
Assume we already passed the 1% local option sales tax a year ago. What new revenue source would you be advocating for this year? Or the year after?
The problem is our costs are becoming beyond our ability to pay.
A long-term approach would sound more sensible to my ear. The 1% tax is uninspired and risky, in my view.
other other ways to look at it
To be perfectly honest, I don’t care whether Brattleboro has a 1% sales tax or not. But to put some perspective on it, if one were to spend $10,000 per year on taxable goods in Brattleboro (a number that I consider absurdly high), the 1% tax would cost you an extra $100 per year.
It’s hardly going to lead to the downfall of Western Capitalism, and it’s a way of spreading the burden of municipal funding beyond property owners and renters.
But I agree that it’s no more than a temporary and minor relief from property tax hikes – and it will do nothing to prevent future property tax hikes.
I think Chris is right when he suggests the town needs to do some soul-searching about its spending and taxing habits. But what do you cut? For FY 2016, if I have this right, Brattleboro is cutting a half-million in solid waste expenses from the budget – a move that shifts more burden onto those with low incomes – and there’s STILL a tax increase?
What else are people willing to cut? And where is the burden for that cut going to fall?
To do, or not to do, that is the question
I have no problem with ‘soul searching’ our taxing and spending habits. I think reducing spending is a good idea. If I thought we were living beyond our means I would have no problem speaking against the profligate spending. Unfortunately, every year we pick over the budget in this town and it is tough to find places to cut. NOBODY likes a decrease in services (i.e. PAYT) even if that decrease will have long term benefits for town finances.
The town has done a huge amount of work in recent years on energy efficiency (more to be done). The street lighting was changed over to save money. Our town employees have tried to hold down costs. Just look at the condition of our sidewalks… budget restraint, maintenance cuts and deferred projects all have been part of the picture.
And yet, I hear people on iBrattleboro advocating public financing of the skatepark… Last year, with much regret, RTM cut the social service spending in the town budget. The view was expressed by some that the town already supports these non-profit agencies and organizations by giving them tax breaks or exemptions.
Yes, Chris, if the problem is defined as needing more revenue then new taxes make sense. If the problem is defined as reducing spending then there is still something to “do”: Name the reductions in services, the reductions in staff, or the reductions in infra structure maintenance that will accomplish that. Those discussions are difficult – and often end in a dead end because we do not spend opulently in this town.
Should we pay our police less? Wait another 20 years before beginning a rational response to the significant problems at the municipal center, the fire station and the police station. Yes, by all means, let’s cut unnecessary spending. Please name it, and be specific.
This coming Tuesday night, February 10, will be the annual Brattleboro Union High School annual meeting. This an “open” meeting. Any legal voter in Brattleboro – not to mention the other four towns in the BUHS district – can attend to discuss the nearly $28,000,000 proposed budget. Not a RTM event. You are ALL welcome to a traditional Vermont town meeting to discuss, question, amend, approve or defeat this proposed budget. About one third of all the local taxes we pay in Brattleboro are for BUHS, BAMS and the Career Center. Hope to see all of you there.
Andy
Good idea!
***This coming Tuesday night, February 10, will be the annual Brattleboro Union High School annual meeting. You are ALL welcome to a traditional Vermont town meeting to discuss, question, amend, approve or defeat this proposed budget. About one third of all the local taxes we pay in Brattleboro are for BUHS, BAMS and the Career Center.***
People who would like to return to a traditional Vermont Town Meeting can try their hand at participatory democracy at the annual school district meeting!
I don’t know about all local taxes, but the education tax is more than half of the total tax homestead property tax rate in Brattleboro. For the current FY the breakdown is $1.65 for education and $1.16 for municipal (roughly). I’m always amazed at how little attention Brattleboro residents give their school budget. That’s where most of the spending and taxing happens!
Not quite a real town meeting
Actually, its just an informational meeting. To take action on any school matters one must become a Representative and go to a different meeting.
You can go and listen, and say things, though. Just don’t expect to vote on anything.
…
I agree 1% doesn’t break the bank. It adds another straw to all of our camel’s backs, though. And it is a mighty perception issue, when we are already known for being expensive.
And, then what? It just puts off hard decisions.
Not an informational meeting
It is a meeting of Brattleboro Union High School District, which includes BUHS, BAMS, and Windham Career Center, and is distinct from the Brattleboro School District.
I haven’t been to one, but it appears that voters actually get to discuss and vote on the BUHS budget and other articles.
http://www.wssu.k12.vt.us/schools/15_warning_articles.pdf
The “legal voters of the district” includes voters of Brattleboro and other BUHS member towns. As much as Brattleboro likes to think it’s in charge of Guilford, Vernon, Dummerston, and Putney, I don’t think RTM members can actually vote at their meeting except as regular private citizens.
So it looks like you can go, discuss, opine, propose amendments, make points of order on parliamentary procedure, and vote on the BUHS budget and other BUHS matters on the warning.
RTM would vote on the Brattleboro School District Budget, which would include the town’s assessment resulting from the BUHS district annual meeting, as well as other town school district spending and elementary school budgets.
It is a real meeting with power to approve, amend or defeat
Chris,
The RTM has power to deal with the Brattleboro Town (K-6) school budget. This meeting is the BUHS District 6 meeting with real power to approve, amend or defeat the high school budget. Voters can attend and participate from the five towns of District #6: Brattleboro, Vernon, Guilford, Dummerston and Putney. Check it out.
Andy
My mistake.
My error. Sorry. I was thinking of the local school board.
I’ve been to it myself! Duh….
New Thread Anyone?
Perhaps someone could start a new thread to talk about school issues? BUHS, the Brattleboro school district, and the municipality are all a little different. While they all end up combining to form a town tax bill, school spending isn’t really in the same category as town and selectboard issues.
I think town issues get more attention (even though they don’t amount to as much money) because they’re more understandable – we can directly relate spending on a police-fire project, pay-as-you-throw trash, library hours, recreation and skateparks, etc. to property taxes (and/or other sources like user fees or a local option sales tax).
For schools, on the other hand (59% of the property tax bill), there’s no clear, direct relationship between spending and taxes. For example, if I am reading the report and doing some convoluted math correctly (which is a big IF), even though the BUHS budget is going down by $163,325, the owner of a $200,000 house in Brattleboro will see an estimated increase of $39 in their property tax bill for FY16 (just from BUHS). I’m not saying that’s right or wrong or good or bad, I just think that’s worthy of some (separate) discussion.
The Play's the Thing, Conscience is King
I was very bolstered to hear that some people on iBrattleboro were advocating for public funding for a skatepark. It’s nice to have company, I thought it was just me. By your comment, Andy, unless I’m reading it wrong, you’ve put it out there… in open ended ellipses… in juxtaposition to other funding challenges, as if it were the most trivial and superfluous of expenses, and in the light of our larger concerns, almost a joke to bring up.
I’m a taxpayer too, and have always considered the skatepark to be sort of a bellwether issue. It’s a capital project that provides a healthy and creative outlet for countless kids. It’s multi generational, it requires little maintenance or equipment..on and on, the plusses have been expounded on. It certainly doesn’t seem ludicrous to try to bring up the idea to find novel funding solutions. Especially as what we have now is to saddle the burden on the backs of a few battle weary volunteers who’ve fastidiously tried to squeeze all good will and spare change from an apparently supportive but strapped citizenry.
Nobody considers it preposterous, for example, to ask for publicly funded new Zambonis, or maintenance to the ball fields that also have specified uses for a select group. I just think, in public process, one should be able to bring things up without worry of ridicule.
Which brings me to the School Budget meeting. It would be useful to have all spending specified in an easy to read pie chart, showing what goes for recreation, administrative retreats, unsupported technologies, archaic textbooks…and the like. Schools being the lion’s share of tax spending in town, it’d be good to know that every effort towards clarity and frugality has been made.
And in case it has escaped your notice, it’s a daunting prospect to speak out in contrast to the interests of the status quo. If I can venture an analogy (AND I KNOW IT’S NOT THE SAME) it’d be like getting up at the NFL annual meeting and saying… “what about parity with women’s sport spending, and what about the concussions, and the unreported domestic abuse or violence issues, and also persecution against current gay players who know that coming out will be perilous to both career and maybe their safety, and tax-payer funded stadiums , etc, etc.. Sure, somebody COULD say those things, challenge the establishment…but it’s disingenuous to say, “just step right up and participate in ‘democratic process’, citizen.”
I know that times are tight, but it seems the means and methods of audit and address are limited and not that expansive. I don’t hear much along the lines of..for example.. Marijuana revenue, taxation of churches or other tax exempt institutions..I’m sure if one were really delving creatively, the list of possible revenue sources would grow, as would the list of things that might make the town more attractive to current and would be residents and potential business, like skateparks, and a political system where more than 15% partcipate. That would grow the grand list, rather than the perpetual squeeze play it seems we’re engaged in.
unless I’m reading it wrong
“…unless I’m reading it wrong…”
Yes, you are reading it wrong. My least favorite part of iBrattleboro is people taking a comment from another person and spinning it into some totally unintended direction. If you re-read my post you will see it does not say that the skatepark is “trivial”, “superfluous” or “a joke” (your words).
The “Zambonis” at the ice rink are paid for by user fees and fundraising. The ball fields at West River Park were also funded by private fundraising. I have no problem with public funding of recreational facilities such as a skatepark. It would be, however, difficult in the current financial climate. Just because something is desirable does not make it immediately possible.
I believe that there may be an article coming up at RTM on whether the town should contribute $20,000 to the skatepark project. Contact your reps if you think it is a good idea.
Yes, I agree that it is a “daunting prospect to speak out in contrast to the interests of the status quo.” Daunting, but essential.
Andy
Please clarify
I also read your open ended comment about publicly funding the skatepark as somewhat diminishing the importance of the issue. It also seems to me you were unnecessarily harsh towards the responder, who was trying to understand your perspective, and to further conversation about helping to realize the long effort towards getting a skatepark for Brattleboro youth. As a rep, I would think you would encourage citizens to engage on issues that matter to them. Maybe you can clear up what exactly you meant?
Clarification
My mention of the skatepark was part of a discussion on the balance between local taxes and town services. I would love to see the town publicly finance all kinds of creative and life affirming projects such as the skatepark. I am also ready to contribute personally to the skatepark.
The reality is that we are constantly trying to cover the costs of basic services without larger tax increases than the ones we already have. My mention of the skatepark was simply to illustrate that some people want the town doing more while others want to see the town doing less. The person responding to me did not understand my point and took it as a putdown of the skatepark. That was a misread of my post. In addition, the same person said that ballfields and zambonis are part of the town budget when, in fact, those recreation projects have been supported for years with private donations and user fees.
The conversation on this thread has been about the Selectboard meeting and the budget and the upcoming articles about a local option sales tax. We are facing some necessary expenses in this town around our public safety infra-structure (police/fire), mandated repairs to the municipal center, the cost shift that goes with PAYT and the ongoing challenges of running this town with a flat lined grand list.
If you don’t want new revenue or you want increased services, then please be specific about what you want to leave behind. I would love to hear from residents of District 2 on how to fund the town without new revenue.
Andy
" If Brattleboro 'ain't what
” If Brattleboro ‘ain’t what it used to be then we can all look at our own shopping habits for part of the answer.”
I think if we’re going to lay the blame for the decline of businesses on our ‘shopping habits’ then we need to look at why those shopping habits have changed.Of the people that I know in this town there isn’t a single person who wouldn’t like to be able to do more of their shopping in Brattleboro. The reason people are going to New Hampshire or shopping online more is because the number of downtown businesses that offer affordable,practical goods has diminished to almost none. Main Street -as recently as 8 years ago when I moved here- was practically a one stop shopping area. Of course,people would go to larger stores or supermarkets for some things but most of anyone’s errands could be done on Main Street and the surrounding streets. Businesses closed because it’s too expensive to operate a small business in this town without charging higher prices. And when you charge higher prices that people can’t afford then they go elsewhere to shop. Brattleboro is not a small business friendly town. This isn’t a wealthy town. The people who live here are – for the most part- hard working families struggling to get by and live a decent life in a place where property taxes and exorbitant rents alone are beating them down. That way of life is being nickeled and dimed out of existence by the constant proposal of more taxes-
whether it’s an additional sales tax or an overpriced police and fire project. I’d be surprised if any of the downtown businesses think the 1% increase is a good idea. Long term (or not so long term) it’s going to translate to more empty storefronts and fewer reasons for anyone – particularly tourists- to bother coming here.
And, personally, I don’t believe for one second that a 1% tax is going to result in anyone’s rent being decreased. And, again just my opinion, I’d rather have another bookstore or somewhere that I could buy stationary supplies or a toy for my grandchild that didn’t cost 3 days salary rather than a brewery- no matter how fine it may be.
More complete quote
Here’a a more complete version:
“I agree with David that it needs to be put to the town, but I hear concern from merchants. I can’t imagine where anyone could match our downtown merchants. There is a lot of fear about passage of a 1% local option tax would do. I care very much, and we’d shoot ourselves in the foot to make it more difficult on businesses, but what prevents us is fear. The quality of goods here is stellar. I shop in New Hampshire and it’s not the same kind of goods. We might want to consider shifting our mindset.”
Thanks for clarifying the
Thanks for clarifying the entire comment, Chris. To me it’s still a stupid and untrue comment.Of course if you shop in big chain stores much of their inventory is going to be cheaply made- probably in a different country and most certainly by underpaid, expired workers. Don’t shop in those stores. I’ve never shopped at Wal-Mart and I can’t imagine that I ever will. But the neighboring NH towns like Keene have some wonderful shops with goods of excellent quality. Main Street in Keene has many more choices than Main Street in Brattleboro. I’m not pitting one against the other. I’m just saying that Macomber’ s argument for the one percent tax is ridiculous. If her ” we have better stuff than New Hampshire” is the best argument to be had for adding an additional tax then this should not even be discussed as possibility.Come up with some strong, accurate reasons why a tax that has already been voted down should be put into effect or stop talking about it. The Selectboard has a history of trying to shove proposals down the town’s throat- even when everyone has screamed”We don’t want it”. They need to listen to the people they represent and act accordingly.
The camel's back
The comment makes sense, I suppose, when you think of how members of this board feel we are a special place that outsiders need to pay us to visit. “We’re a hub town” is a mantra that guides them, and the feeling seems to be we’re so special that others would want to pay us special fees to use the uniquer things we offer, such as roads.
Therefore, it isn’t hard to see how offering more ways for those outsiders to pay us would then be appealing.
But – I agree – the comment seems to have nothing but truthiness to back it up.
Most people outside of town, already think Brattleboro is expensive and many have already changed their shopping habits. Adding another straw to this camel’s back really seems shortsighted.
My pro-business short list would be to eliminated the local business tax, reject the 1% local option tax again, and offer free parking. That would bring us back to being competitive with similar surrounding destinations.
Instead, we seem to be in a death spiral of thinking up new fees and obstacles for shoppers and businesses, reducing competitiveness, and as Bob Stevens said, leading ultimately to a decrease in the Grand List.
If we loosen those reigns maybe things will start to grow again. We tighten them at our own peril.
Charter changes
Kurt Daims emailed to ask that I write more about the Charter Changes. Here are a few quotes, though I refer you to the previous meeting for a description of the changes.
Gartenstein started things off by saying they’d hold the second public hearing, and discuss a statement by the board.
Daims moved that they adjourn the hearing to a date certain. Gartenstein said he didn’t have the authority to make motions at meeting. Daims countered that it was a hearing, not a meeting. Annette Cappy said it had to be tonight, or couldn’t be on the ballot. They went ahead with the hearing.
Gartenstein, on 16 year old vote: “Town attorney says we can keep it off the ballot as illegal, but it will be on the ballot. Can’t become law, though.”
Gartenstein, on term limits: “Term limits would destroy representative town meeting. Emptying it is distructive. Maybe we should have more representatives, or end Representative Town Meeting. This proposed change is anti-democratic.”
Gartenstein, on changing the election date: “We have local elections in March, and town meetings in March. These [proposed changes] are a risk of being destructive of town government. I can’t support any of them.”
Daims disagreed. On why people don’t run for RTM: “People do not run becuase they don’t want to be a part of it as presently composed. They want a different attitude and flavor, not that same body year after year. We want democracy for everyone.”
O’Connor, on the comments about RTM reps: “It does a disservice to town meeting reps to say they are a stodgy bunch. I can find people who enjoy town meeting. Blanket statements about everyone hating it aren’t true.”
Schoales, on term limits: ” I’d love term limits, but democracy doesn’t work that way. People should vote for who they want. I like town meeting tradition. It is not quaint. It is most basic form of democracy – to toy with it and move elections around… we should strengthen it.”
Gartenstein, on making a statement: “The Selectboard has the authority to engage in public education efforts on items of potential impact. I will propose we actively be involved, and should begin an effort to gather information on the potential revisions and circulate it.” He asked the Town Manager “to do the homework as to what form that could take.”
Dora Bouboulis, on taking a public stand: “I encourage you to stay neutral as a body on this. If you want a larger voter turnout [and opposite outcome], then take a stand against it. I suggest you don’t take a stand.”
Selectboard "gatekeepers" again, attorney's opinion
Ms. Bouboulis and others are right. The board should stay out. Selectboard members can speak as individuals like anyone else.
Mr. Gartenstein wants to use the power of the selectboard to amplify his own opinions over the town.
EXCERPTS OF LEGAL OPINION
Re: Pro-Democracy Amendments Article I, Brattleboro January 29, 2015
Paul Gillies, legal counsel to Brattleboro Common Sense
September 25, 2014
In Chapter II, Section 42, there’s the basic right of those who reach the full age of 18 to vote in general and state elections. The section would prohibit a charter from setting a higher age for local elections, because the constitution is the expression of rights, limiting government from interfering with what it guarantees, but it can’t be read to prohibit municipal charters (which are essentially state statutes) that provide rights to younger persons.
September 26, 2014
State law gives voters the right to propose amendments to a town charter, and is written to ensure that the town doesn’t get to interfere with that process. 17 V.S.A. § 2645. It was written specifically to prevent efforts to prevent selectboards and councils from keeping new ideas from being voted.
There will be a time and place for a discussion of its constitutionality—in the legislature, when the proposal becomes a bill—but the idea of a town deciding not to warn a petitioned charter amendment is not, I believe, part of the town’s authority (as it might, for instance, exercise in the case of other petitioned articles, where there’s no legal basis for it).
February 2, 2015
The issue is whether the selectboard has the authority to take a political position on a pending charter amendment, proposed by petition. Individual voters can take positions, including those opposed or in favor of the proposition, but should the board as a representative of the town encourage or discourage voting on a voter-inspired petition? I think it is something to be avoided. The idea of a petition to amend the charter is to take a proposal directly to the voters. The law limits the board’s role to ministerial steps, warning hearings the vote, and nothing more. By its silence, the statute (2645) could be read to proscribe interference with the vote, including resolutions commenting on what is to be voted. It might be local lobbying.
********
Contact BrattleboroCommonSense.org. Promote voter participation and free speech. Volunteer for the Pro-Democracy Amendments.
Incentivizing trips to Keene
Theres a contradiction floating around in these notes that needs to be called out and the discussion here has thankfully done so, but I’d like to make a comparison.
Lets compare Pay as you throw to the 1% local option tax:
The purpose of PAYT is to incentivize people to reduce the amount of trash they generate by imposing a direct fee on that trash by volume/weight. I think most people would agree that by charging $2-$3 per bag of trash, PAYT seeks to alter people’s daily habits and encourage them to spend more time/effort composting and recycling in order to save a few bucks.
Now I personally support PAYT in concept (though I have issues with the proposed implementation, particularly the stealth tax increase). I support PAYT in concept because I believe that as an incentive/penalty it *WILL* work. I would bet that there would be a measurable decrease in trash generated vs. compost/recycling.
What drives me nuts is the same people who understand that, keep repeating this nonsense refrain to themselves that an additional 1% sales tax will not incentivize people to drive across the river to NH more than they already do.
This is cognitive dissonance people.
You are expecting people to alter daily habits with regard to their trash to save maybe $5-$10 a month at best, but you don’t expect them to drive to Keene for a major purchase to save 7%? Do you think the value of purchases made in-town by “patriotic” individuals intentionally purchasing in Brattleboro to support the town will be greater than the value of purchases that will be pushed across the river by this incremental increase to an already significant difference in sales tax? Surely 1% is not sufficient to force a mass migration of shopping, but it certainly doesn’t help.
One $500 purchase, perhaps that once or twice a year purchase for many households would become $535 this side of the river, equivalent to one garbage bag a month that you expect people not to generate because of a fee.
If you think PAYT will be effective in altering people’s waste habits, then you must acknowledge that an additional 1% sales tax will be effective in pushing even more purchasing across the river. I can’t speak to the scale of the shift, but I think its pretty obvious that it will be greater than 0, and its certainly heading in the wrong direction.
apples, oranges and market forces
You have a well argued point on how money can and does drive decisions. Please consider there are some fundamental differences between PAYT and a Local Option Tax.
PAYT is essentially a utility model. Like water, sewage, electricity or other utilities, PAYT will have a direct relationship between amount of use and cost. Put out twice as many bags and pay twice as much.
Shopping involves a more complex set of factors and choices.
I do not employ blind ‘patriotism’ when I shop from brick and mortar stores in my own community. I enjoy the knowledge that my bicycle, washing machine, computer or whatever will have service back up if I need it. When I buy a book at my neighborhood bookstore I am contributing towards having a neighborhood bookstore. This works in many different ways for different products. I like buying from people I know, my neighbors who often give back to the community in many ways. There is value in those decisions. They represent self serving investments.
For many smaller purchases that come up it is not practical to drive to Keene. For office supplies my regular schedule takes me by Baker’s, Newton Business and Staples. My time is worth something so contributing 1.20 to Vermont and .20 to the town on a $20 ink cartridge would not be enough to take me to Keene – gas and one hour round trip.
Prices vary. The argument that the 6% sales tax (or 7%…) raises all prices by that amount is false. I have checked prices at Perkins (Chesterfield) and True Value (Brattleboro) and found that some items are cheaper in Brattleboro even with the sales tax. Many local merchants have rewards programs that further reduce costs. Loyalty is another value that can be measured at the bottom line.
We already have a Local Option Tax of 1% on rooms, meals and alcoholic beverages. People pay these additional taxes without considering a drive to NH if they want to dine at Chelsea Royal or at a downtown restaurant. New Hampshire also has rooms, meals and alcoholic beverage taxes.
One of the fundamental reasons for a local option tax is to broaden the base of who is contributing to the costs of running this town. Tonight the Latchis will be filled to capacity for the college acapella fundraiser for the BMAC. Many of these will be visitors who will gladly enjoy eating, drinking and shopping in Brattleboro. Few of them will even consider zipping over to Keene before the show.
I won’t belabor the point I’ve made before that Vermont Use Tax is due on items purchased across the river and brought back to Vermont to be used. State law I believe.
Andy
I've heard the arguments here
I’ve heard the arguments here that since Use Tax is due anyway, its not *actually* cheaper to shop across the river, but we all know that the use tax as it stands is practically unenforceable and the reality is that a tiny fraction of buyers actually voluntarily report their NH purchases and pay said use tax. Thus the use tax argument is nothing more than a stern wagging of a finger and is likely to remain so for some time.
I’ve also occasionally noticed that sticker prices can be higher on the NH side but I’ve just as often noted parity or a decrease. If the revenue that would otherwise be generated from a sales tax in NH is being raised via other taxes, obviously those businesses would be increasing their sticker price above what it would otherwise be to cover those taxes. That said, volume, volume, volume. In which location is a retail store catering to the local population rather than tourists likely to see greater volume?
Now I’m a math kinda guy myself, but if I had to hazard a guess, just the *impression*, whether true or not, that one is saving 6%-7% by crossing the river will likely be enough to send purchases eastward, whether or not the price actually ends up being cheaper, equal or higher. The perception matters (as much as it drives me nuts that people don’t take 10 seconds to do the math).
Please understand, I am the sort of fellow who tries to support local business when practical. I am frustrated that I need to drive long distances to get items that used to be available locally. I am frustrated that I am forced to order online more and more, I’d rather pay what I pay in shipping to a local business.
I will pay a small and reasonable premium for the service I receive from a local supplier (I will not pay a 50%-200% markup, though) I do however recognize that I am in the vast minority. Our ideals should not blind us to the reality on the ground.
You are correct about the gas and time to make the drive on small purchases, which is why I was pretty specific about people making the pilgrimage for large purchases or for “Get it all done for a while” shopping days to grab what the family needs for a while.
Let me give you an example, this was a decade or so ago but I once needed to make a fairly sizable purchase from a business that had locations in both VT and NH. When it came time to get down to the numbers the fellow offered, without prompting, to write the ticket up under the NH location, load the items onto their box truck and they’d meet me just across a bridge and load it onto my pickup in order to save a few hundred on sales tax. There would be a relatively tiny “delivery” charge and “They did it all the time”.
When local business owners, especially those who have locations across the river and who *look at their data* are telling you whats happening, they need to be listened to.
I care very little about the opinions of well-intentioned people describing the ideal of patriotic buying habits and I place far, far more value in the actual hard data that local businesses spend a great deal of time and effort analyzing to try to stay afloat and/or make more money. If they are telling you that large purchases have been and will continue to be pushed across the river, that really needs to be heard and considered as a practical reality rather than being overruled by unicorn-land.
Lastly, you talk about the meals and rooms tax. I will counter by saying you are conflating the portion of our local economy that caters to and relies on tourists and those with disposable income vs. the majority of local residents seeking to make purchases intended for day-to-day life.
As was said above, do we want our main-street to consist of gift shops and the like or do we want to be able to buy daily essentials without having to take a 30 minute car ride?
I would guess that supporters see a 1% option tax as a way to capture revenue from tourists, given Brattleboro’s fairly advantageous location for flatlanders heading north.
I would love to see some data (if it exists) that divides these estimates of how much revenue a 1% tax would generate into what we can generally label “tourism” and “locals”, particularly locals who do not have the extra income or free time to ponder these matters and attend numerous meetings about them.
You may very well capture tourist dollars, but you are going to hurt the average Brattleboro resident who never rents a room and can afford to go out to eat once or twice a year at best. Not every business in town caters to the well-to-do, and we need to remember that incremental cost increases matter a lot more when you are already counting nickels.
Good reply
All very well said. And I would encourage you to send your post to Montpelier. The statewide sales tax is not something we have the power to deal with here in Brattleboro town politics. We can add a penny for local needs – that is our current ‘option’. The 6% issue is not going to change anytime soon.
Your story:
When it came time to get down to the numbers the fellow offered, without prompting, to write the ticket up under the NH location, load the items onto their box truck and they’d meet me just across a bridge and load it onto my pickup in order to save a few hundred on sales tax. There would be a relatively tiny “delivery” charge and “They did it all the time”
This story could help explain some of our tax shortfalls at the state level.
I think it is a sad commentary on democracy that referencing state law is termed finger ‘wagging’. Sales and Use Tax is part of filing a legal return. Are you excusing folks who sign their name to an inaccurate tax return? As the old books of wisdom have said many times: “Those who live by the bottom line die by the bottom line.
I agree we do have a problem with the kind of stores that come and go in Brattleboro on Main Street. Too many businesses – certainly not all – cater to tourists and affluent shoppers. A Chelsea Royal type diner on Main Street would be hopping with locals. We used to have Mann’s Department Store. Economies of scale (volume), internet shopping and the automobile have eroded this type of small town store that had nearly everything.
Just trying to find solutions to the real problems we face. I agree that more data would be helpful regarding the proceeds from a 1% local option tax. We do know that none of the current 6% stays in Brattleboro.
Andy