Carla Occaso
Montpelier’s fiscal year 2027 city budget has been finalized for the Town Meeting Day ballot. During its second and final public budget hearing Jan. 21, the city council adopted the same municipal budget they approved at the previous meeting. By a 5-to-1 vote of support, (with Councilor Sal Alfano voting ‘no’), they set Montpelier’s municipal budget at around $20 million, with $13,287,636 to be raised by taxes. This represents an increase of 7.9% over last year’s municipal budget (with the ballot items factored in), but is down from the 11% increase in the first FY27 budget presented in December.
These numbers mean that the municipal portion of a tax bill on a house with an average value of $370,000 would be $3,906, an increase of $288 over last year, former city Finance Director Sarah LaCroix said.
Also, councilors agreed to add in an additional amount of approximately $4,000 to the Community Fund following a motion by Councilor Jim Sheridan. The Community Fund is not part of the municipal budget, but is part of the ballot items — such as Kellogg-Hubbard Library — which are voted on separately. Before the increase, the Community Fund had around $134,000. The fund was established in 2012 to provide money to nonprofit organizations that benefit city residents, according to the city’s website, montpelier-vt.org/448/Community-Fund-Board.
Factoring in the School Budget
LaCroix said — based on information she had that night — the school budget is increasing by 3%, but the overall property tax rate increase would be around 5%, because the school budget makes up a larger proportion of the combined municipal and education budget. However, this was before it became widely known that the Montpelier Roxbury Public Schools board added back about $285,000 into its budget on the same night as the city council meeting, causing the aggregated tax rate to go up a little over 6%.
In fact, the most contentious portion of the meeting involved the municipal budget’s relationship to the tax rate, and how the narrative gets out to the public. A significant misunderstanding arose regarding the difference between the municipal budget increase and the overall tax rate increase.
LaCroix clarified the breakdown several times. The council approved a budget (plus ballot items) that represents a 7.9% increase. The school budget (which the council does not control) was set to increase by 3%, she believed. The aggregated tax rate result would have been (because the school budget makes up a larger portion of the total tax bill) approximately 4.95% (again, unless the school board changed its proposed budget, which it did end up doing around the same time as the council meeting).
Councilor Pelin Kohn expressed concern about her “integrity,” stating she voted ‘yes’ on the municipal budget believing she was voting on an overall tax increase of 5%, including the school tax. She suggested changing her vote after discussing the increase of the municipal budget alone. Councilor Sal Alfano said the city council should focus on the municipal budget, since that is the only part it actually controls. Councilor Adrienne Gil suggested that future savings could be found by hiring lower paid staff with high-level IT skills into the existing job openings to reduce technology cost overruns.
Council Finalizes Bond Approval
Following a public hearing, city councilors unanimously approved an $8 million infrastructure bond to address Montpelier’s water and sewer needs. That money will pay for work on Pump Station No. 1, sewer lines on Berlin Street, and sewer lines from Clarendon Street to Bailey Avenue. It will also pay for work on water lines on Barre Street, lower State Street, and North Street.
Jim Sheridan later proposed adding $500,000 to the bond for infrastructure to support a housing development at Sabin’s Pasture. This money would fund water and sewer for that location. Sheridan said Sabin’s Pasture is the best place for residential growth and it has been in the master plan since 1990. Additionally, Sabin’s Pasture is closer and more walkable to Montpelier than the Country Club Road property, he said.
Former Finance Director Sarah LaCroix said the existing $8 million bond could be repurposed for infrastructure if desired.
Planning Director Mike Miller said he met with the Sabin’s Pasture landowners, and such infrastructure could be financed through a state process rather than locally.
Public Comment
The meeting opened with public comment covering a range of concerns. Homelessness Task Force Co-chair Zack Hughes and Acting City Manager Chris Lumbra noted a gap in warming shelter coverage for the weekend, but Lumbra said otherwise the city was actively preparing for cold weather and a serious snow storm.
Resident Phyllis Rubinstein commented on article 12, a non-binding petitioned ballot item regarding Israel. Rubinstein argued the resolution was one-sided. Another resident, whose name was not clear on the meeting’s video recording, advocated for divestment from Israeli bonds.
And resident Steve Whitaker questioned the eligibility of Country Club Road for development due to a lack of Environmental Protection Agency soil reviews, while Dave Bellini expressed frustration that the 138-acre site isn’t yet generating significant revenue.
