By Kolby LaMarche

The Queen City continues to face persistent financial pressures as city officials prepare the Fiscal Year 2027 budget. Leaders are confronting a structural deficit estimated between $10 million and $12 million, the third year in a row the municipality has dealt with such a sizable shortfall. 

The budget has expanded considerably in recent years, rising from about $75 million in FY 2020 to roughly $107 million projected for FY 2027. 

That represents an increase of approximately 43% over seven years. Much of this growth occurred during a period when one-time revenues—such as federal COVID-19 relief packages and various state grants—provided substantial cushioning. 

Those funds allowed for service expansions and new hires without immediately burdening local property taxpayers. Now that those sources have ended, though, the city must cover recurring expenses like salaries, benefits, equipment maintenance, and utilities through its regular revenue streams, primarily property taxes.

Mayor Emma Mulvaney-Stanak has described the situation as requiring a multifaceted response rather than any single fix. 

Her administration is instructing department heads to develop plans for reducing their budgets by 5% to 10%, with a focus on identifying efficiencies, reevaluating programs, and seeking input from staff on cost-saving ideas. 

While reductions in personnel remain possible, the mayor has stressed that layoffs would only come after exhausting all other alternatives. To that end, the city is introducing a voluntary furlough option for employees as one way to achieve savings without forced cuts, the City says.

Beyond spending reductions, officials are exploring revenue options. 

A key proposal calls for a 5-cent increase in the dedicated public safety tax, which supports police and fire departments. If voters approve this on Town Meeting Day in March, it is expected to generate around $3 million annually. 

Even with the public safety tax adjustment, a significant portion of the deficit—likely $7 million to $9 million—would still need addressing through other cuts or revenues. 

Without the voter-approved increase, the municipal property tax burden would rise due to factors like debt obligations and retirement contributions. With it, the combined impact on city residents’ municipal taxes could reach about 9.4%, though the precise figure will depend on final budget decisions and how statewide education property taxes are set, leaders stress. 

The 9.4% estimate accounts for the proposed public safety tax hike layered on top of baseline adjustments.

Mulvaney-Stanak has repeatedly pointed out the difficulty of sustaining expanded municipal commitments without corresponding, permanent revenue sources. 

The budget process remains in its early stages, with more City Council meetings, public hearings, and community engagement ahead. 

Residents will have opportunities to weigh in as proposals take shape. The city must balance the desire to preserve essential services—public safety, infrastructure, community programs—with the reality of affordability concerns in a community where many households already feel squeezed by rising costs.

In addition to these increases, Burlington Daily News reported earlier this week about the school district’s plan to raise taxes, potentially up to 9% if Gov. Phil Scott doesn’t do a tax “buydown”, expected this legislative session.