Four candidates for state House seats, and seven candidates for state Senate seats, met the public in a forum last night at the Hartness House. Among the topics were the T.I.F. (Tax Incremental Financing District) program, which is intended to spur economic development; Act 46, which may force some school districts to merge with each other, and Act 250, which deals with development.
www.eagletimes.com
www.facebook.com
Legislative candidates meet public in Springfield By JEFF EPSTEIN Vtreporter@eagletimes.com 22 min ago 0 Windsor district Senate candidates Candidates for Windsor Senate district (5) Wayne Townsend, Alice Nitka, Randy Gray, Mason Wade, Alison Clarkson, Dick McCormack, and Jack Williams. JEFF EPSTEIN Save SPRINGFIELD, Vt. -- Four candidates for state House seats, and seven candidates for state Senate seats, met the public in a forum here. Among the topics were the T.I.F. (Tax Incremental Financing District) program, which is intended to spur economic development; Act 46, which may force some school districts to merge with each other, and Act 250, which deals with development. The Act 250 program dates back to the 1960s. Democratic incumbent Alice Emmons said she supports Act 250, but thinks it needs to be updated. “There are things we can re-visit,” said Republican challenger Elizabeth Gray. “Bring it up to speed for the new millennium.” Other subjects included gun control legislation, climate change, the opioid crisis, and education. The forum was recorded by Springfield Area Public Access for later viewing. Regarding Act 46, most candidates agreed that it needs tweaking, and some want it simply repeal. “It’s not going to be repealed but it will be tweaked,” Emmons said. Districts struggling with consolidation are likely to come before the education committee in the state legislature. Act 46 does not improve education, Progressive challenger McNaughton said, and “definitely does not save money.” “They blew it,” said McNaughton, speaking of the legislators who passed Act 46. “If they consolidate Weathersfield, we lose,” he said. Bob Forguites, a Democratic incumbent who voted in favor of Act 46, says he did so because Springfield gets a lot of state money, and he “did not want to jeopardize that.” But even with differences, several candidates claimed they were willing and able to work with members of other parties. “We are a body that works with each other,” Emmons said. Each of the candidates discussed their personal backgrounds, especially candidates who are not incumbents. Republican Elizabeth Gray mentioned that she used to work for the national visa center, trying to make immigration procedures smoother, for example. advertisement On the senate half of the evening, all the candidates agreed that economic issues were important, but not all agreed on the specific instruments that were best used for economic development. “Many people are working two or three jobs trying to pay their taxes,” said Mason Wade, the independent candidate. That fact, he said, was crucial for people to remember, even if they are caught up in the details of state programs. The subject of a possible carbon tax came up, and Clarkson said, “Climate change is coming at us fast. We have to do something to turn this ship around.” The Republican candidates, however, were not in favor of a carbon tax. It simply would not help anything, said Wayne Townsend. “It’s going to drive up the cost of everything ... It won’t do one whit of good.” Nitka and Wade also said they were against a carbon tax. Dick McCormack, a Democrat/Progressive candidate, however, was more nuanced. “It’s certainly by its nature regressive,” he said. But if a way could be found to address that, it may be possible to have a carbon tax that is effective. McCormack also noted that Vermont was inherently attractive. “We’re attractive because we are a good place to live.”
I want to thank those that attended. The questions asked were cogent questions that pertained to Springfield. It is important that the voters are exposed to whether the State Representatives actually know and understand what issues affect Springfield and how the legislation they pass actually works, rather than just either taking credit for beneficial legislation they don't understand and trying to give feeble answers for why they voted for legislation that hurts Springfield.
ReplyDelete