Does the bill now address how many pages the mortgages will be?
I do not mind charging a set fee, as long as I am not losing revenue. I don
t want to be recording 18 page mortgages for $50.
How will this address the issue of raising the restoration/computerization
fund from $1 to $2 per page?
Huntington Town Clerk/Treasurer
From: Vermont Municipal Government Discussion Network
Date: Thursday, February 20, 2003 9:49:29 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Fwd: House Bill 31
John Cushing et al.
Here is a note I sent to the league for their consideration. Comments???
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 12:58:52 -0500
From: Barry Isaacs <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: House Bill 31
Steve, I discussed this with Harry Chen and then the Mendon Selectboard
kicked it around again last night.
Everybody is for the bill, the question is the revenue hit on the towns.
Why is it necessary to have single, state-wide, fixed rate for mortgage
recording? We propose that this fee be set at the town level.
Think about this,
(a) The current draft of the bill is not "revenue neutral" to the towns.
This will exert more upward pressure on the local property tax impacting a
group of tax payers that is already on the verge of mutiny due to
(b) In Mendon's case $85 dollars makes us "revenue neutral". In some other
towns the number may be $50. In others it may be $150. A state wide fee
will not and cannot satisfy all the towns.
(c) In many cases (fortunately Mendon is not one of them) these fees serve
as part of the Town Clerk's compensation package. Do you really want to
mess with that can of worms?
I'd like the league to consider this. It would be a shame to lose what is
conceptually a very good bill because we can't agree where to set the local
Barry M. Isaacs
Town of Mendon, Vt.