Mike Prynheiser outlines multi‑year property‑tax and school‑funding plan in Ways and Means amendment

Representative Mike Prynheiser, chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, told the House Appropriations Committee on April 14 that the committee’s amendment to the education bill H 9 55 is designed as a multi‑year package of changes intended to reshape how Vermont funds K‑12 education and how property taxes are applied.

The amendment pairs deep changes to property‑tax law with updates to the education foundation formula and the roll‑out of regional structures Ways and Means calls CSAs and regional assessment districts (RADs). "Unless we line up the changes in the foundation formula, the implementation of the CSAs, the changes to the property‑tax credit system, and the changes to the homestead/nonhomestead system, all in the same year, we'll see this wild variation year over year," Prynheiser said, urging the committee to avoid what he and staff called "tax whiplash." He said the approach is intended to spread savings equitably so that "all kids can have opportunities" while lowering uneven property‑tax burdens over time.

Kirby, a Ways and Means staff presenter, walked members through key technical pieces. Section 30 would establish Regional Assessment Districts to allow municipalities and school districts to pool mass reappraisals, tie RAD boundaries to school districts, and create RAD appeals boards for mass‑reappraisal disputes. The Department of Taxes and the Property Valuation Review division would provide guidance and technical assistance, while municipalities would handle year‑to‑year valuation adjustments and appeals.

On the cost side, staff explained a continuation of the existing $8.50 per‑parcel payment to municipalities for grand‑list maintenance while reappraisal costs would be funded by the Department of Taxes at the lesser of $66 per parcel or two‑thirds of the estimated reappraisal cost. Staff said reappraisals would be phased so that roughly one‑sixth of municipalities would undergo mass reappraisals in a given year.

The amendment also restructures property classifications. Under the draft, Vermont would keep the current homestead category but split the current non‑homestead class into nonhomestead‑residential (intended to capture second homes and short‑term rentals, likely carrying higher multipliers) and nonhomestead‑nonresidential (commercial and long‑term rental properties). The bill would require owners to file a new dwelling‑use attestation, similar to the homestead declaration, and assign the highest rate by default if the attestation is not filed.

Legislative counsel and staff also described a proposal to make state school construction aid more targeted and predictable. The amendment contains intent language to provide an additional $50 million annually in state bonding capacity as a short‑term goal and proposes a debt‑service subsidy or state bonding support that could cover a substantial share of approved project costs. Staff stressed that the language is designed so districts would know state awards before final local bond votes, changing the sequencing of the current process.

Why it matters: the package reframes how schools are funded and how property taxes are assessed, spreading fiscal effects over multiple years to avoid abrupt local tax spikes. Committee members pressed staff on implementation details, data collection and timeline; staff repeatedly noted many provisions hinge on later rulemaking and contingent effective dates tied to the foundation formula rollout.

What’s next: the committee heard a fiscal‑note briefing from the Joint Fiscal Office and a detailed presentation from the treasurer’s office on bonding capacity before adjourning to caucus and planning a vote later in the afternoon.

Sources: Committee testimony and section‑by‑section presentation by Mike Prynheiser and Ways and Means staff (see timeline).