On Tuesday, the council added another penny to the manager’s proposed property tax rate increase
The people of Burlington appeared to offer up a collective shrug on Tuesday as the city’s elected leaders signed off on a new budget that ramps up the city’s property tax rate by 8 cents, or roughly 16.5 percent.
The city’s new budget, which received a unanimous nod from Burlington’s city council that evening, calls for a grand total of $95.9 million in outlays from the city’s general fund. The budget’s passage followed a state-mandated public hearing that drew nary a peep from the city’s residents.
Included in the eight-figure sum that the council has approved is the money to raise the wages of police officers and firefighters, a 3 percent “cost of living adjustment” for most other city staff members, and an additional $3.4 million to pay the debt on various bond-subsidized projects that the city’s voters approved in 2024. In order to cover the cost of these added financial commitments, the new budget increases the city’s property tax rate from 48.36 to 56.36 cents for every $100 of property value – which equates to an extra 16.5 percent on this particular levy.
In addition to its provisions for the general fund, the city’s new budget calls for a 5 percent hike in the fees that sustain the city’s self-contained water and sewer fund and an extra $1 month for curbside waste removal, which has also been spun off into an account that’s separate from the general fund. In the meantime, the budget lowers the city’s stormwater fees from $7 to $6 a month as part of a multi-year transition to a graduated fee structure for the commercial and industrial property owners that are responsible for most of the runoff these fees are meant to address.
In its broad strokes, the budget that was enacted on Tuesday is quite similar to the proposed spending plan that city manager Bob Patterson presented to the council in May. The most conspicuous difference between the two plans is that the council’s version adds an extra penny to the 7-cent property tax increase which Patterson had originally suggested.
When he first unfurled his spending plan a month ago, Patterson had told the council that the first 4 cents of his proposed tax hike were intended to cover the debt payments on the aforementioned bonds, while the remainder was more or less what he had set aside to fund increases in public safety expenditures.
On Tuesday, Patterson recalled that the council had subsequently demanded a systematic approach to increase the wages of Burlington’s police officers and fire fighters after an annual report from the city’s police chief revealed that the city has been losing ground in its once-envied public safety salaries.
“We did that,” the city manager went on to recall, “and it necessitated an additional penny to make that 8 cents.”
In spite of the sheer magnitude of this increase, it failed to elicit any response from the city’s residents during Tuesday’s public hearing. This silence was all the more mystifying given that the council heard from about a half dozen people earlier that evening during another hearing on the city’s federally-subsidized programs to address blight and provide housing for people of limited means.
Although the city’s residents had little to say about the new budget, the members of Burlington’s city council seemed to grasp the gravity of the proposal before them on Tuesday.
Councilman Ian Baltutis was especially loquacious about the implications of the proposed property tax increase.
“I’ve heard from a lot of community members that families are struggling and budgets are tight. So, I think it’s really important to understand how we got to the point where we have an 8-cent property tax increase in one year.
“[TheN-mayor Jim] Butler stated in his retirement ceremony that he wanted to go out without another tax increase. So, the ball was passed to this council to approve. That’s why were sitting here looking at an 8-cent tax increase.”
– Burlington city councilman Ian Baltutis
“I’ve heard from a lot of community members that families are struggling and budgets are tight,” he said before Tuesday’s vote. “So, I think it’s really important to understand how we got to the point where we have an 8-cent property tax increase in one year.”
Baltutis, who had once presided over the council as mayor, went on to share a rather tendentious account of the council’s decisions after his departure from office in 2021 when he lost the mayor’s seat to then councilman Jim Butler.
He went on to criticize what he termed “the sloppy and rushed” follow-through on the bond projects that the voters approved in 2024 as well as the council’s decision to forgo a tax increase in 2025, shortly before Baltutis’ return to the dais as a rank-and-file council member in that fall’s election.
Baltutis was particularly quick to tear in to his mayoral successor, who chose to retire from public life rather than seek reelection in 2025.
“Mayor Butler stated in his retirement ceremony that he wanted to go out without another tax increase,”
Baltutis recalled. “So, the ball was passed to this council to approve. That’s why were sitting here looking at an 8-cent tax increase.”
