Some city councilors in Burlington want candidates for local office to disclose their finances to voters. But an effort to create such a rule stalled on Monday night and was sent to committee for debate.
Introduced by Councilor Carter Neubieser (P-Ward 1), the measure would require city council, school board and mayoral hopefuls to file disclosures similar to those completed by candidates for state Senate and House seats. The forms include information about the candidates’ income, business interests and lobbying activities.
Neubieser had hoped to pass the measure on the floor Monday night but instead moved to send it to the council’s Ordinance Committee for further discussion.
Some Democratic councilors wanted to kill the measure outright, saying the body already adheres to a robust ethics policy. The measure ultimately passed on an 8-4 vote, with councilors Mark Barlow (D-North District), Becca Brown McKnight (D-Ward 6), Evan Litwin (D-Ward 7) and Buddy Singh (D-South District) voting no.
Neubieser has been discussing a financial disclosure rule for months, but Monday was the first time he introduced a formal proposal. He said the forms would help the public and media scrutinize candidates, in part because they could reveal potential conflicts of interest.
“Democracy is fragile. Building and maintaining a culture of transparency in government is something we should be doing all the time,” he said. “I don’t find this to be a particularly radical idea.”
Burlington School Board members disagree. In a letter sent to councilors on behalf of all board members, chair Clare Wool wrote that the proposal is “ill-suited, burdensome, and potentially harmful to the health of local democracy.” School board candidates should be exempt from the rules, Wool wrote, because unlike councilors and the mayor, they don’t run with political labels.
After calling a recess to firm up their positions, Democrats outlined their concerns with the proposal. Councilor Barlow said candidates already file campaign finance reports, which list contributions over $100, and typically publish information about their employment on their campaign websites. He suggested a disclosure form is overkill for a position that earns a meager stipend every year.
But the Dems’ chief concern was that the disclosures would discourage potential candidates from running because the information could be weaponized against them.
“I fear that adding another form without truly understanding the problem we’re trying to solve risks fueling personal attacks,” Councilor Allie Schachter (D-East District) said. “I don’t think we’ve done the due diligence to know if this form is necessary.”
Progressive councilors, meantime, argued that those questions could be discussed in committee. Councilor Gene Bergman (P-Ward 2), who chairs the Ordinance Committee, said he would invite debate about the proposal’s merits, including what the form should or shouldn’t include. He also voiced his support for the concept.
“It is important for the people to know who is running for office and what interests they have and perhaps represent,” Bergman said. “This gives an added opportunity for people to do that, and I hope that we will not kill that opportunity in the crib by killing it tonight.”
Councilors don’t have a deadline to report back on the proposal, though Bergman suggested the topic could be on the committee’s agenda later this month.
Also on Monday, councilors heard the initial findings from a working group charged with studying how to make the city’s tax system fairer, particularly for lower-income residents.
Property taxes in Vermont are based on home values, a system that many see as flawed. A 2023 study of Burlington properties found that higher-value homes were typically under-assessed while lower-value ones were overassessed, meaning people of more modest means end up paying disproportionately more. Many homeowners can receive credits on their education taxes, but far fewer are eligible for municipal tax rebates.
Formed by the mayor in January, the 12-person working group consisted of city councilors, city staff and residents. Their report analyzed five different taxing options, two of which were highlighted on Monday night.
The first involves Burlington’s “splinter tax” rates, 18 separate tax levies that fund various city functions, from parks to public safety. But there are different rules for how the funds raised by those taxes can be used. The report proposes creating just five tax rates, which would adjust with inflation. The change wouldn’t lower residents’ taxes but would make the system easier to understand, officials said.
The second would lessen the tax burden on some homeowners by reducing their home’s value for the purpose of calculating taxes. In turn, owners of some higher-valued homes would pay more taxes, as would owners of second homes and commercial properties, which are already taxed at 120 percent of their assessed value.
Data provided by the city show that deducting $30,000 in value from a home valued at $200,000 could save that homeowner $200 on their tax bill. An owner of a home valued at $1 million or more, however, would end up paying $127 more in taxes under that system.
Both options would require changing the city’s charter. Mayor Emma Mulvaney-Stanak plans to bring a formal proposal to the council later this month with the goal of putting a charter change on the Town Meeting Day ballot.
