Hi John,
I absolutely agree with you - The loss of revenue this
would cause is quite significant.  I will contact my
reps and let them know.
Deb Beckett
Williston
--- John Cushing <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> IMPORTANT NOTICE TO BE ACTED ON
> IMMEDIATELY**********
>
> House Bill 31 – is now in the Government Operations
> Committee and
> testimony was heard this week. For those of you who
> do not know – H31 is
> the ‘short form mortgage’.
>
> This bill is being looked at as a reduction in vault
> space and I cannot
> deny that it will reduce the number of volumes being
> recorded.
> HOWEVER------the issue that I continue to try to
> understand is the loss
> of revenue to the municipality.
>
> In Milton’s case alone – this is a tremendous loss
> of revenue and
> proportionately to smaller municipalities I suspect
> that it would be
> equally an issue as well. I determined this
> information by performing
> the following task – something that you need to do
> in your own
> municipality. I took a land record volume at random
> from the 23 volumes
> created in calendar year 2002. I determined that
> there were 39
> mortgages. I counted the pages of the mortgages and
> reduced them to one
> page which would have reduced the number of pages in
> the volume by 537
> and a loss of revenue in the amount of $3,759.00
> from this volume alone
> using the $7.00 per page method - $4,296.00 using
> the $8.00 (proposed
> legislation) per page.
>
> If this were an average volume, the $3,759 x 23
> (volumes recorded in
> 2002) I would have reduced my revenue by $86,457.00.
>
>
> Word now has it from Montpelier that the proposal
> may be a document fee
> of $50.00 for the short term which would reduced my
> loss of revenue to
> $46,207.00 – this is about one-third of the total
> revenue generated in
> the year 2002. I am not on fees, but this represents
> almost one cent on
> our tax rate. I can admit that it will reduce the
> vault space BUT I
> believe that this will place a financial burden on
> each and every town
> in the State of Vermont. Each and every one of you
> need to do this
> exercise and begin to be heard.
>
> There are over 250 clerks in this State. I have
> heard from very few of
> you so I am still not sure what direction you would
> like to see the
> Legislative Committee proceed. Not only do I need to
> hear from you, but
> you need to contact your legislators, select boards,
> town managers,
> administrative assistants – this affects the
> municipality as a whole.
> The ironic part of this issue is that the dollar
> increase per page – if
> granted by the new legislation – will still end with
> a net reduction in
> revenue using the 2002 recording statistics.
>
> I BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO PROPOSE THAT THE SHORT
> FORM BE USED BUT THE
> DOCUMENT FEE WILL BE EQUAL TO THE $7.00 OR $8.00 PER
> PAGE TIMES THE
> NUMBER OF PAGES THAT THE SHORT FORM DEED REFERS TO.
> THIS ACCOMPALISHES
> TWO FOLD --- REDUCES THE VOLUME OF PAPER BEING
> RECORDED AND GENERATES
> THE REVENUE NEEDED TO IMPROVE VAULT SPACE AND
> MAINTAIN THE RECORDS. IT
> IS BEING PAID FOR BY THE PERSON(S) FILING THE
> DOCUMENT. THE RECORDING
> FEES ARE A VERY SMALL PORTION OF THE CLOSING COSTS.
> SOMEONE BORROWING
> $100,000.00, I BELIEVE, WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY THE
> $105 - $120 FOR A
> 15-PAGE MORTGAGE IF THEY KNEW THAT THEIR RECORDS
> WERE GOING TO BE
> PROPERLY MAINTAINED. THE TOWN’S FINANCES ARE JUST AS
> CRITICAL AS THE
> STATE’S.                   John
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com