House Democratic leaders accused Republican Gov. Phil Scott of “shirking his responsibilities” Wednesday by not working with the House Appropriations Committee to find budget cuts.
Two days after returning from a weeklong Town Meeting break, House Speaker Mitzi Johnson (D-South Hero) called a press conference to say the budget the Appropriations Committee is building would be better with more cooperation from the governor.
“It’s time for the governor to be a leader,” Johnson said.
“He’s shirking his responsibilities as governor,” said House Majority Leader Jill Krowinski (D-Burlington).
The House Appropriations Committee expects to complete work on its version of the 2018 state budget by Friday, said committee chair Kitty Toll (D-Danville).
Toll said she returned from the break expecting Scott’s staff to bring new proposals, but found none. She wasn’t alone in that expectation.
The week before Town Meeting, committee vice chair Peter Fagan (R-Rutland) said the governor’s staff told him they would present new budget ideas after the break. “They said they will have some options,” Fagan said at the time. “They want to see the results of next week’s Town Meeting votes.”
Toll sent a memo Tuesday to Administration Secretary Susanne Young asking for a meeting, but she said none has materialized.
Instead, Finance Commissioner Andy Pallito told state employees in a Wednesday memo not to negotiate directly with the House Appropriations Committee on budget issues. “If you are contacted, please remind them that the governor put forth a balanced budget, and we should continue to support that budget,” Pallito wrote.
Meanwhile, the Appropriations Committee is $16.4 million shy of balancing its version of the budget, Toll said. Members are scouring for savings, looking at the impact of across-the-board cuts while also targeting certain departments, she said.
“I will solve this problem but I would be much happier solving it as a team,” she said.
Johnson contended that Scott isn’t helping to find cuts “because it’s hard.”
The legislature already rejected Scott’s proposal to require local school districts to freeze their budgets and negotiate a 20 percent contribution from teachers for their health coverage. He proposed spending the savings to boost Vermont State Colleges funding and childcare subsidies.
Toll said her committee is still considering funding those programs, but would have to find further cuts elsewhere to do that.
House Ways and Means Committee chair Janet Ancel (D-Calais) said her committee is working on a plan to produce $5 million in new revenue through increased enforcement of state tax laws. She argued that would not count as a new tax, something the governor has said he wouldn’t support.
Wednesday evening, Scott’s office released a statement in response that expressed a willingness to work with legislators, and noted the House has had seven weeks to work on its proposal. It read, in part:
The Governor presented a balanced budget without raising taxes and fees – including property taxes, despite the misleading rhetoric – without cutting programs that protect our most vulnerable and while making investments in areas that will help grow our economy.
… House majority leadership has made it clear they do not support the Governor’s priorities, or want to work within those parameters to balance the budget. This is a difference in priorities and approach from previous administrations, not a lack of communication.
Earlier Wednesday, Scott reiterated in an interview that the House committee has embraced some of his budget proposals, and that he believes a balanced budget could still rely on education savings. “I don’t have to have a Plan B,” he said.
A new teachers’ health care plan promises to provide savings, Scott said.
Johnson was clear, however, that the legislature has no interest in using savings from education programs, which are funded through property taxes, to pay for general fund expenses, which are paid through income taxes, federal revenue and fees.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Epic failure! It appears the House leadership team is starting to panic. They prematurely rejected the Govorner’s budget plan and now are unable to produce an alternative that won’t be brutal. Govorner Scott, stick to your plan you have the support!
Since early in the session I have been trying to have a substantive conversation with Speaker Johnson in regards to the stunning abandonment by Governor Peter Shumlin of state procurement policy as his administration executed no bid contracts en masse and no one has ever been held accountable, reprimanded, nor has a full accounting been done to determine just how much beyond the $68M State Auditor Hoffer unearthed in his report of December 2015 actually exist in no bid contracts for the entire fiscal year. I had a brief encounter with Speaker Johnson on a visit to the State House and was surprised to hear that as part of her apparent lack of the ned to make it a priority was her belief fraud had not ever occurred in state government. In the Retreat matter, the hospital billed DMH on an “interim” basis when majority of patients were Medicare prime. In short, these invoices evidenced fraud on their face and were approved by DMH staff for payment despite the clarity of Medicare Secondary Payer Guidelines. Speaker Johnson did not appear eager to review the no bid contract problem despite a whopping $68M in no bid contracts found in just a sampling of 5 state agencies reviewed. Had the review encompassed the entire fiscal year, the figure would have been higher than $68M. Unfortunately, Speaker Johnson did not allow for the budget to be considered and debated before snap votes were taken to sabotage the budget before any serious discussion and debate had occurred. In its simplest form, Governor Scott delivered a balanced budget which his opponents dismissed prematurely and now the burden is on the democrats to figure out their own shortfall.
Wait . . . The Legislature summarily rejected the Governor’s budget plan the day he submitted it, called it “dead on arrival,” and said no, no, no. But now they’re complaining that he’s not helping them find cuts? Sorry. You should have said yes to his plan and tried to find a way to make it work. He was elected with a mandate. You find the cuts. We have the same size government as NH and Maine, which both have more than twice our population.
Tens of thousands of Vermonters voted in a way that did not reflect Scott’s education funding priorities. Time for the Governor to buck up and work with these Vermonter’s legislature.
Has “petulance” become the new watchword for the Scott administration?
Good for Governor Scott! He presented his case, it was rejected. Its now time for Johnson and her crew to come up with a budget, make some hard choices and then own the consequences. What Johnson and the leadership is so incensed about is that they finally have to take responsibility for something. I am a lifelong Democrat but this current crew in the legislature has me wondering how long that will last. Here’s an idea – stop creating unfunded programs, cut some programs or figure out how to make them run more efficiently, stop getting on the bandwagon for every feel good program thats proposed and accept the fact that our tax base can only do so much. In other words, its time for Dems in the legislature to get their heads out of their rear ends and wake up to reality and to be practical for a change. We do not live in a world of rainbows and unicorns.
re: Rama Schneider
There is a new Sheriff in Town who doesn’t subscribe to the unsustainable spending priorities of the “tax & spend” legislature. Indeed, Governor Phil Scott won a mandate because an even larger number of “petulant” Vermonters supported the Governor’s spending priorities which included a mandate to change the way we do business in Vermont.. Now its up to the opposition to put theatrics aside and start doing the job their constituents elected them to do which will be made easier once they recognize the election is over and now its time to govern and do the work of the people while recognizing a vast majority of Vermonters DO NOT support continuing the same spending habits of the former Governor Peter Shumlin who left us with more problems than he inherited six years ago.
I’ll bet John Walters is amped up with how he might spin this one.
This legislature isn’t used hearing No.
Good for governor Scott. Let ’em stew. Without Shumlin to pat their backs and say “everything’s OK” the dems and progs are lost. Hang in there Governor, make them make a few decisions.
Excuse me to all the commentators here, but what part about local taxes don’t you understand? What Scott is trying to do is to take local control away from towns on education issues, abrogate contracts duly entered into by towns and their employees, and run roughshod over the principle of local school boards as if he’s Trump trying to take over the world. To me the House has done a damn good job trying to find cuts to the budget that don’t trample on local policies and obligations, and all they get for that is a bunch of Scott supporters saying he should get what he wants.
A whole bunch of us didn’t vote for him, and the Democrats/Progs came out even further ahead in this election than the Republicans. People may like Phil Scott, but this isn’t about liking him or not. It’s about proposing to do away with an historic right by towns to run their own schools. The state got its fingers into the process when the Supremes said school funding was screwed up. He can do what he likes about equalizing funding, but he wasn’t given carte blanche to wrestle town budgets away from them or town contracts.
For years the DEMS/Progs in the Legislature have been spending as if there is no bottom to the amount taxpayers can afford. The budget deficit was the result of this continual spending frenzy and now Scott is saying to the legislature, you figure it out. He presented a budget that was immediately rejected with no attempt to discuss or compromise so it was dropped back in the legislature’s lap. Now they are the responsible ones and cannot hide behind saying “The governor made the cuts”, now we will see if they can be fiscally responsible or not.
Barbara Alsop, as you tacitly acknowledge toward bottom of your comment, Democrats unfortunately initiated taking away local control of our schools (via the Madeline Kunin/Democrat-appointed Justice Dooley and his well-intentioned but disastrous Brigham decision). Democrat controlled legislature then passed Act 60, signed into law by Democrat Howard Dean. Democrats had unified control of all 3 branches in Vermont.
Vermont has been suffering the consequences ever since. Phil Scott is reacting to a disastrous school financing mechanism created lock, stock and barrel by the Democrats. A mechanism that put Montpelier in charge of redistributing property taxes all over the place with zero transparency for the property taxpayer. No one has any idea how much of their property taxes actually go to pay for their own school versus going elsewhere because the Legislature refuses to require this disclosure.
I would prefer Phil Scott and the Legislature acknowledge the obvious, i.e., the failure of Brigham and Act 60 and the need to repeal both and join the rest of the 49 other states who not only allow local school boards to make their own contracts but respect the jurisdiction of localities to spend their property taxes in their own locale! Democrats do not seem interested in that so Scott is working with the system they created and at least trying to slow the tax and spend freight train.
BTW, I voted Democrat for better part of 20 years. As taxpayer and property owner, it was naive and short-sighted on my part. Last straw was Democrats total embrace of F-35 fighter jet and its destruction of neighborhoods. Republicans, at least you get what you see. Thrilled Phil Scott won the election.