McDonald calls on Shumlin to Take Immediate Action on Recovery, Outlines five-point action plan
Montpelier, VT – Today Vermont Republican Chair Pat McDonald noted that “the impact of Tropical Storm Irene will, by necessity, reorder the state’s priorities in a major way.” Rebuilding Vermont and ensuring that Vermonters and businesses are back on solid ground will need to be the State’s primary focus going forward.
While Vermont will receive funding from the federal government, that will not do it all. Prior to Irene, Vermont’s economy was stagnant – in a holding pattern. Governor Shumlin’s recent statement that, “Vermont was in trouble financially before Irene” reveals the fiscally imprudent trajectory that Vermont was already on before the storm. In response, McDonald calls upon Governor Shumlin and the Legislature to reject new taxes on Vermonters, as suggested by some, and focus on realigning priorities. McDonald said, “The Governor should begin immediately to work with the Legislature to re-prioritize the current year budget and to begin implementing economic strategies and cost saving reforms to help get Vermont’s economy on a stronger footing and to pay for the costs of the storm”.
Chairwoman McDonald outlined a five-point action plan to get Vermont back on track quickly:
- Propose that the Governor call a special session of the legislature to begin re-prioritizing the current year budget (SFY12). Not having the final numbers from the flood should not preclude doing the preliminary work that will be required. Legislators could agree to return to Montpelier at no cost to the State. Citizen Legislators who have work and family commitments need enough advance notice, so that they can plan to be in Montpelier, so it is essential that the Governor fix a date now, with enough notice for Legislators to plan for.
- Encourage the Governor to complete work on a comprehensive recovery plan that can be presented to the Legislature ahead of the special session, so that it can be acted upon quickly. The plan should include strategies to aggressively jump-start Vermont’s economic recovery by getting Vermonters back to work and providing businesses with opportunities to grow.
- As proposed by Rep. Oliver Olsen, the Governor should call upon the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board (VHCB) to embargo all unspent appropriations in VHCB’s fiscal 2012 budget, so that the Legislature has the opportunity to reallocate these funds were they are needed most – rebuilding Vermont and putting Vermonters back to work and back into their homes.
- In advance of a special session, the Governor should implement a freeze of all other non-essential, non storm-related state spending across state agencies, and should use his influence to encourage taxpayer funded non-governmental organizations to do the same – and prepare to return some taxpayer dollars to the state treasury.
- Encourage the Governor to take immediate steps to implement education finance reforms. Storm-related damage will put enormous pressure on local property taxes in many communities, so it is critical that the Governor take action now and send a clear message that spending needs to come down – before school boards start budgeting for next year.
The Governor and the Legislature should also review the proposed reforms in financing K-12 that have been presented over the years, particularly suggested changes in staffing levels. As we know, Vermont has the lowest ratio of pupils to teachers in the country at 9.8 to 1 while the national average is 15.2 to l. Given the magnitude of spending ($1.4B) in education, there has to be room for thoughtful cost containment while continuing to strengthen the quality of education and providing Vermont’s teachers the support they need.
Vermont’s recovery requires a comprehensive look at all proposals that have been brought forth in prior years and new ideas from Vermonters and businesses alike should be solicited for consideration. Raising taxes should always be the last option.
Permalink |
I believe it was Republican Lt. Gov. Phil Scott who rightfully suggested that we are going to have to look at raising some taxes to help Vermonters ravaged by Irene.
It should be noted that over the past three years or so the legislature has already cut nearly a quarter of a billion in state spending. That’s a lot of cutting and there is probably very little room left to cut without eliminating entire programs.
It appears as though some are looking to emulate our Tea Party friends in Washington. There tactics have no place in Vermont. I would hope that would be obvious.
Permalink |
Sorry, should be “their tactics”. It’s early.
Permalink |
Bob….Please go to this JFO link for a fact check on your highly flawed assertion above that “over the past three years or so the legislature has already cut nearly a quarter of a billion in state spending.”
http://www.leg.state.vt.us/jfo/appropriations/fy_2012/FY08_-_FY12_Total_Appropriations_Comparison_COC.pdf
You will find that state spending (yellowed line) from FY 2008 to FY 2012 grew by $585.6 million and from FY 2009 to FY 2012 by $313.4 million. Exclusive of federal funds and state education funds (which have also grown), state spending grew from FY2008 to FY2012 by $139 million.
Clearly, you are way of the mark here. Tom
Permalink |
Fabulous. The Republican Party wants to use Irene as an excuse to promote all of the proposals Vermonters have clearly rejected already. If we wanted to “realign priorities” in the manner suggested, why did Vermonters elect Peter Shumlin and retain a Democratically controlled legislature?
That “Vermont was in trouble financially before Irene” does not make us unique. And in the context of the recession and what’s going on in Washington, there is no evidence that Vermont has been on a “fiscally imprudent trajectory” (unless you want to talk about Jim Douglas’ counterproductive layoffs in the middle of a recession). Indeed, by most measures, Vermont is better off than many other states.
As for Ms. McDonald’s five point plan:
1. Asking legislators to work “at no cost to the state” sounds great but why should they work for free? There would be a cost for those who would have to leave work. And BTW – Why is that OK but asking more from wealthy Vermonters isn’t?
2. I’m curious why it is VHCB that should return unspent funds. Why not Tourism & Marketing? Or how `bout VEPC (stop accepting applications). Why not tell National Life that we have to reduce our rent payments for a while?
3. Asking taxpayer funded non-governmental organizations to return some taxpayer dollars also sounds great. But wait, many of those organizations provide direct services to Vermonters on behalf of the state.
It would appear that the Republican Party is confusing Vermont with our crazy neighbors in New Hampshire.
Permalink |
Great Point The VT GOP needs to stop acting like the TEA PARTY!!! The TEA PARTY has no place in VT!!!!!! The only things this state should do is raise taxes! and Keep the pressure on washington’s chaos! Our safety net is already stretched to the limit with reduced funding over the past 3-4 years! We cant afford any more regression!!!
TEA PARTY belongs in ALASKA NOT VERMONT! Thank YOU!
Permalink |
@Doug Hoffer, I think you missed Pat and Rep. Olsen’s point that if there were unspent funds in the VHCB budget (i.e housing money) that an appropriate use of these funds would be housing recovery efforts for those who lost their homes! I think this would be a decent and appropriate use of those state dollars (earmarked for housing anyway) to assist those who have experienced the worst of this disaster…the FEMA money is not enough to replace what these people, and their communities, have lost.
Permalink |
“It would appear that the Republican Party is confusing Vermont with our crazy neighbors in New Hampshire.”
LOL Doug:) I think that you are right. What are they working on over there now? Guns in the statehouse?
Permalink |
“If we wanted to “realign priorities” in the manner suggested, why did Vermonters elect Peter Shumlin and retain a Democratically controlled legislature?”
Um . . . because the ekection occured before Irene did?
What’s so hard to understand about that? Are you saying priorities can never change after an election? Even in the wake of the biggest natural disaster to the state in 80 years?