Ways & Means reviews H.955 amendments on property-tax classifications and pre-K funding

The Ways & Means committee continued work on H.955 on April 7, reviewing technical edits to property-tax classification language and a set of amendments that touch education funding and data collection.

Committee members focused first on changes to how the bill defines residential property. A presenter described replacing the term "dwelling" with "dwelling unit" in the classification chapter to avoid confusion with the homestead statute. "We start with the grand list, and we start with using the word dwelling units," the presenter explained, and said the rewrite intends for chapter-specific definitions to govern within those chapters.

The committee also discussed removing language that would require a property's tax classification to appear on the public grand list and instead routing classifications largely through a dwelling-use attestation filed with the Department of Taxes. The presenter said that change would make classifications "more like that kind of data now by not having it on the grand list and public like that," shifting some information from open public record to a tax-administration process.

Lawmakers probed practical consequences. Several members said making nonfilers default to a higher nonhomestead-residential classification could be an efficient compliance tool, while others warned it risks misclassifying businesses or mixed-use properties that might not file the new attestation. One committee member summarized the policy choice as "what we want the default no-paperwork has-been-filed status to be." Kirby Heaton, Credit Counsel, explained the department's perspective that a default could reduce the department's workload chasing nonfilers but acknowledged it is a policy choice for the legislature.

The committee spent substantial time on appeals and hardship procedures. Presenters said appeals would depend on who made the decision: appeals of assessing officials would follow standard property valuation appeal routes, while appeals of commissioner-level decisions would follow income-tax appeal procedures; misfiled appeals would be forwarded and treated as timely. Members supported extending the Department of Taxes’ homestead hardship process (for events such as military service, serious illness, or disaster) to dwelling-use attestation filers so affected taxpayers could request a statutory correction in hardship cases.

Members expressed concern about moving some discretion away from locally informed bodies such as Boards of Civil Authority: several lawmakers said small-town actors have local knowledge that can prevent forced sales or other harsh outcomes and asked how the department would replicate that local advocacy. Presenters answered the change is intended to supplement—not replace—local remedies and to allow the tax department to correct filings in some hardship circumstances.

Committee counsel, Beth St. James of the Office of Legislative Council, next reviewed multiple committee amendments that would reformat appropriations and update effective-date contingencies. In one amendment, language was drafted so some grant funding (for example, $30,000 for the Seesaw startup grant program) becomes an allowable use of monies appropriated in Act 73 rather than a new, standalone appropriation. Another replacement in the draft would direct $442,000 from Act 73 to the Vermont Learning Collaborative to hire facilitators, with an allowance of up to $32,000 for administrative costs.

The amendments also change effective-date contingencies: the committee draft would delay the foundation-formula implementation from 07/01/2028 to 07/01/2030 and adjusts contingency language tied to study opportunities and votes on unified union school districts.

On early-childhood policy, the panel considered new reporting and pre-K funding language. One amendment would require school districts to report the number of pre-K hours each child receives and would add Building Bright Futures to the set of entities involved in monitoring and evaluating pre-K programs. Committee members expressed concerns about data collection complexity, the sufficiency of current data systems, and whether the proposed 10-hour subsidy model aligns with varied district practices.

No final votes were recorded during the session. Members agreed to continue refining language, hold additional conversations with agencies (AOE, Department of Taxes, JFO and Building Bright Futures) and return to the full amended bill at the next meeting.

Next steps: staff will distribute updated drafts and the committee will reconvene to consider the consolidated amendment package.