Thursday, January 31, 2013

Springfield adopts $10.3 million budget

Springfield voters will decide the fate of a $10.3 million town budget, which if passed would represent a 3 percent increase in property taxes.
http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20130131/NEWS02/701319917

32 comments :

  1. well let's see a 3% increase in your taxes because of the town budget, an increase in your taxes due to a school budget and an upcoming increase in your water and sewer base amount (which was stated will happen this spring/summer, at the time of the last water rate increase)

    Hey good luck with all that. I can only surmise that the real estate going on the market will increase unfortunately the pricing of that real estate won't since the increase in taxes will drive down any increase in value. Good luck everyone!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The only way to lessen the tax burden on property owners is to bring more businesses to Springfield so what does the the board decide to cut? Economic Development.



      Delete
    2. Aethelred the Unready1/31/13, 11:14 AM

      I suspect that spells the end for the paid director at Springfield on the Move. The cutting the funding might make sense if we had a Town Manager who was actually out there doing something to encourage economic development in the Town, but under the current situation it doesn't make a lot of sense since the only way out of the current death spiral is to grow the Town's Grand List. If they are going to do this, then maybe its time to really start looking at all the overlapping non-profits we have accumulated in this Town because the Town government itself doesn't govern.

      Delete
    3. The Board did not cut Economic Development or SOM, they are separate articles on the ballot. They stand a better chance passing there then in the budget, as all special appropriations seem to pass with no issues. Ohh, by the way, those special appropriations, when passed are in addition the the 3 percent increase.

      Delete
    4. Aethelred the Unready1/31/13, 4:06 PM

      Anonymous 1:52 PM, you want to lay odds on a special appropriation the size of those two passing?

      Delete
    5. Just think the more houses on the market, the more low-rent landlords we can attract that will scoop them up and turn them into more section-8 housing and then let them rot into the ground thereby drawing even more on the resources of the Town...don't believe me....look at the luxurious house the Town now owns on Cottage Ave...

      Delete
  2. chuck gregory1/31/13, 9:56 AM

    It's helpful to remember that for 80% of the nation, wages have not kept up with inflation, especially health care, and their tax load has increased relative to the top 10, 5 and 1 percent. So, those who are making less than $160,000 a year can feel justified about the pain of tax increases.

    The problem is, both Congress and Montpelier push for a "revenue neutral" approach-- if taxes are going to be raised in one area, they have to be reduced in another. This works really well for people like Mitt Romney, whose army of accountants not only got him a 14% tax load in 2011, but who also managed to park (apparently illegally) $1 million in a 401(k) account.

    One example of this revenue neutral approach is the Gov shifting $17 million from Earned Income Credit rebates to low-income working parents and parking it in day care funding. That $17 million represents an average of four and a half weeks of wages for one of those families (who make from nothing to $50,000 a year). To a household in the upper 2.12%, their share of a tax increase to cover that $17 million represents an average of 12 hours of work. So, the people who make this state run right get it in the neck, and the beneficiaries of their work aren't even aware of it.

    If we get away from the "revenue neutral" concept, we can get lower property taxes in Springfield as the state and feds provide the money for the infrastructure that we now pay for.

    However, that would open up the possibility that the Walton (Wal-Mart) heirs might pay as much tax as the bottom 40% of Americans, which is how much income they have.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Deck Chair on the Titanic1/31/13, 10:05 AM

      Chuck,
      should we all just go out and kill ourselves ?

      Delete
    2. Aethelred the Unready1/31/13, 11:15 AM

      So exactly what are you saying Chuck?

      Delete
    3. Deck Chair, as an inanimate object you can't kill yourself. In fact you shouldn't even be typing. You have nothing to worry about.

      Delete
    4. Basically he is saying the deck is stacked against the working middle class.

      Delete
    5. You may find this interesting Chuck: http://ideas.time.com/2013/01/29/viewpoint-why-the-decline-of-unions-is-your-problem-too/

      Delete
    6. chuck gregory1/31/13, 10:42 PM

      Anonymous @ 3:19-- thanks; people ought to read that and think about it. Athelred the Unready: for the last 60 years, the public has been sold a bill of goods about the value of the worker. My father and his co-workers didn't form a union at their workplace because their boss (who lived a block from us) told them if they formed one, they'd get union pay, no more. After working there for 28 years with no benefits, no workman's comp, and no paid holidays, he got too sick to continue and got a job in a unionized shop. He started as a sweeper making more money the first week than he'd been making any week in his last job.

      He, his co-workers and the general public to this day are duped by the myth of unions as being evil. The result of course has been that while the wage of the workers has gone flat or downhill (cost of living and sales tax increases), the value of the work produced by the average worker per year has risen 387% (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkgZpRDFX2M).

      But in the top 20% ($160,000 and up), the higher the income, the lower the productivity increase-- and those at the very top (e.g., just the top 400 households, which averaged $434.3 million in 2010) are way overpaid for their work. They are the ones who should be paying America's school taxes. After all, they are making a little more than the average Springfield property owner.

      And what do they use the money for? Not to keep America's infrastructure in good shape for people who have to drive to work or get educated to work or stay healthy to work, but to die with the most toys.

      Individual workers by and large do not serve themselves well when they stand alone. One of the biggest weapons an employer has is the employee's reticence about what he/she earns. When union members have a contract, they know what they're getting and they know when they can negotiate for more.

      There is no reason why workers should be paid one-four-hundredth of what the CEO makes. Eighty percent of America's workers are in the same position my dad was in. And, oh yeah-- his former boss died a millionaire several times over. Which means he won!

      Delete
    7. CG and his sewer rats are green with envy over others' success. CG, no one forced your old man to work or live where he did; he chose to. He could have gone anywhere in America to achieve his fame and fortune, but he chose his fate. The fact that he was paid beyond his real worth as a sweeper is the purest example of the economic destruction that the unions have wraught, to include finally nailing the coffin shut on Springfield's machine tool shops. Quit whining about your family's pathetic plight and objecting to the good fortune of others and go out and make something of yourself. And by the way, the fact that America's infrastructure is not kept in good shape is not because the ecomically successful among us don't use OUR MONEY for doing so. It's because the government that you help elect can't put the money that they confiscate in taxes from those who are successful to effective use. You are such a small minded liberal tool...or fool...

      Delete
    8. chuck gregory2/1/13, 6:44 AM

      That's your opinion, Anonymous 12:35. Where's the data to back it up?

      Delete
    9. "The data" is staring you in the face everyday in the miserable surroundings that are the derelict and destitute town of Springfield, you nitwit! Get over your denial and envy and make something of yourself!

      Delete
    10. 12:35 you are so far off base you must see the newly found quasar. If the unions were the problem then why is the gap of the 2 percent of the 2 percent getting bigger as we speak. The unions are all but gone. So when we get to the point that we were at, at the turn of the century (1900’s). The people will rise again. We will see were your kind stand then :))

      Delete
  3. Hmmm...for years we heard that the Water and Sewer superintendant couldn't add anything to his or his crew's work load, and that the highway superintendant couldn't add any responsibilities to his or his crew's workload. But now we are fine with that being one and the same position? Either the two departments will learn to work together, OR less and less upkeep of town will happen....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. considering the departments employ less people than they did 5 yrs ago, i guess the work load is more

      Delete
  4. Aethelred the Unready1/31/13, 12:59 PM

    Don't see why they shouldn't be under a single public works department.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Aethelred the Unready1/31/13, 1:01 PM

    I suspect that both the Town and School budgets are dead on arrival this year. They might as well be planning what the revised budget will look like on the revote. New Supt. will get baptism with fire.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 2 million in potential tax revenue if the Biomass facility is built, talk about adding to the grand list. But noooo, can't have that. So we will all continue to complain about tax increases to the residential property owner, because all the nymby's don't want businesses to offset the tax burden on the homeowner.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you should be forced to think harder

      Delete
  7. Can anyone tell me what has gone down in cost the past year? The cost of providing town services doesn't go down just because you wish it. Electricity is up, fuel both heating and diesel is up, maintenance of vehicles up. Instead of complaining, I guess you should have been at the budget hearings and stated exactly which services you no longer want. Because that is the only place left to cut. Services

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. could start with the bare road policy

      Delete
    2. There is no bare road policy...are you high?

      Delete
    3. Aethelred the Unready1/31/13, 4:09 PM

      My guess would be that Yesman really intended for the two economic development items to result in a cut, otherwise why would he have blindsided them at the meeting.

      Delete
    4. The price of labor has not gone up.

      Delete
  8. x ray glasses1/31/13, 8:20 PM

    $10.3 Million POOF!

    ReplyDelete
  9. What's everybody so upset about. SRDC has announced the renaming of Precision Park and a new sign to go along with it. Can you say ECONOMIC BOOM TOWN? Now shut up, pay your taxes like the good serfs you are, and let our illustrious leaders continue to claim success for their miserable failures.

    The fish rots from the head. Out with Forguites. Out with Perotti. Out with the current boards. Hire some bright, fresh, highly motivated new blood and set them loose to kick some tail and clean house.

    The endless cycle of misery in Springfield will never cease without gutting the system of the INEPTOCRATS that have run the town into the ditch and left it there for years.

    ReplyDelete


Please keep your comments polite and on-topic. No profanity

R E C E N T . . . C O M M E N T S

Springfield Vermont News is an ongoing zero-income volunteer hyperlocal news gathering project. No paid advertising is accepted on this site but any Springfield business willing to place a link to this news blog on their site will be considered for a free ad here. Businesses, organizations and individuals may submit write-ups and photos about any positive happenings here in Springfield that they are associated with and would be deemed newsworthy. Email the Editor at ed44vt@gmail.com.

Privacy statement: This blog does not share personal information with third parties nor do we store any information about your visit to this blog other than to analyze and optimize your content and reading experience through the use of cookies. You can turn off the use of cookies at anytime by changing your specific browser settings. We are not responsible for republished content from this blog on other blogs or websites without our permission. This privacy policy is subject to change without notice and was last updated on January 1, 2017. If you have any questions feel free to contact Springfield Vermont News directly here: ed44vt@gmail.com

Pageviews past week

---

Sign by Danasoft - For Backgrounds and Layouts