Today we announced the partial results of a scientific public opinion poll of Vermonters. The survey interviewed 400 randomly selected Vermont residents to measure their feelings towards state leaders, various issues that policymakers are pursuing, and general sentiments about the direction the state is heading.

“What we have found is shocking. Vermonters have very clear opinions on a number of policy differences between the Administration and the Legislature. And consistently the legislature has missed the mark in setting their priorities.”

-Pat McDonald, CFV President

If you have read my two latest Op-Eds on the Prisoner’s Dilemma Around Climate Change and Not Losing our Heads in the face of the same, then you know that I advocate for a thoughtful and balanced response to climate change. A response that conveys the urgency of the issue while also avoiding pitfalls of inhumanity and single-mindedness. But, what does that mean? What does it look like for Vermonters and for our state?

What is it about climate change that elicits such a panic in us? Perhaps it is the unrelating force of nature? The overwhelming sense of powerlessness we feel when storms, wind, fire, and water encroach upon our lives. In the face of such (un)natural disasters, maybe we clutch to whatever agency we can muster? Or, could it be that the prospect of our grandchildren not experiencing the same planet we did terrifies us. It could be a bit of both, or a whole host of other reasons.

The Paris Climate Accords were ratified in 2015 and have gained 195 signatories since. Most experts agree that a 2-degree (Celsius) increase in global temperatures would avoid the worst impacts of climate change and that a 4-degree increase would be devastating. But how are we tracking towards those goals? Not well, it turns out. Most countries are on track to miss the 2050 net-zero emissions target. The top 7 emitters account for 50% of all global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and none of them meet the most aggressive Paris targets. Three (China, India, and Indonesia) are considered highly insufficient, according to ClimateTracker.org. One (Russia) is listed as critically insufficient. The remaining three (US, European Union, and Brazil) are rated as insufficient.

Excuse me, can I get some child care subsidies for upper middle class folks?
		Sure
Also a massive helping of new electric-powered heating systems?
		Sounds great
Of course we also have to get universal school meals.
Oh, and don't forget a side of universal fee increases!
		...
So what does that come out to?
		Uh, a few hundred million more than you have in your account.
No worries, these other folks are picking up the tab for us...
		???

While the hypothetical conversation above highlights the approach the legislature seemed to take with spending this year, in all seriousness a historically high state budget (growing at nearly twice the rate of inflation) and a number of new landmark initiatives left us wondering how much more Vermonters can expect to pay in taxes and fees in the years to come. This is the question we set out to answer for you and boy did we find some interesting stuff!

S.39 was introduced by Senators Ruth Hardy and Alison Clarkson in January 2023. As introduced, the bill would make legislators eligible for the State employees' health benefit plan at no cost, allow them to participate in any flexible spending account program offered to State employees for health care expenses or dependent care expenses, or both, and provide compensation during adjournment (something not currently offered). The bill also significantly increased compensation levels.

S.100 was introduced by the Senate Economic Development Committee in February. After moderate revisions, the bill was passed by both the House and Senate and delivered to the Governor on May 30th, 2023.

The bill intends to address the state's housing crisis by cracking down on municipal zoning that is seen as exclusionary and by making significant investments in low-income housing stock. Critics question the effectiveness of the bill without significant revisions to the Act 250 land use regulations to make development easier.

The 2023 legislative session came to an end this week. While legislators are expected to return next month for a veto session, they passed a number of bills in the final days. These included the primary housing bill of the session and a major overhaul and investment in early childhood education. In a last-minute effort, legislators also invested in themselves, significantly increasing legislative pay and creating an entirely new benefits package.

The budget that emerged this week contained $8.5B in spending and included a new payroll tax that would be split between employers and employees (to fund the afore mentioned child care bill).

The Senate Economic Development Committee came back on Wednesday to review the House changes to S.100, which they did not yet possess, and the single House floor amendment that persisted with the bill (there were many other attempts to amend it).

The Senate Economic Development Committee finished reviewing changes to S.100 on Friday morning and brought the bill to the Senate floor for a vote. Funding was still pulled out and included in the budget. Currently it appears fairly significant (over $200M according to the Committee of Conference report) but the Governor is expected to veto the budget bill so things could change.

No new arguments were presented on the House floor Tuesday; the bill primarily deals with municipal zoning reform and feigned to address Act 250 issues, shy of a few time-limited exemptions. It focused on large lot sizes, excess parking requirements, excess setbacks, and other local zoning requirements legislators felt inhibited housing growth.

Critics of the bill argued that municipal reform should be paired with rollbacks to Act 250, the state’s major land-use and environmental law. However, since the bill passed third reading in House with a voice vote, incremental progress will have to be settled for. Amendments were introduced to limit energy requirement that could drive up construction costs by tens of thousands of dollars, but it was disagreed to. Other amendments would have moved up some of the implementation dates, add reviews of current processes for inclusivity, and widen the priority housing project exemption in Act 250. They were met with varying levels of success.

After passage, the Senate Committees began reviewing the bill.

The session’s major Housing bill, S.100, arrived on the House Floor Monday. Speaker Krowinski announced they would only receive the committee reports and then adjourn for committees of jurisdiction to consider amendments before returning. No votes would be taken during this floor session.

The House Government Operations Committee reviewed another round of amendments to S.39 that would later be voted on by the House. These included technical corrections to language in the bill and accountable reimbursement of expenses instead of per diems.

A number of amendments were reviewed by the House Government Operations Committee and then reviewed on the House floor later in the day. These included attempts to reduce health care coverage to just during the legislative session, looking at creating an independent commission to oversee legislative compensation, study appropriate salaries instead of new salaries instead of setting them now, and shortening the legislative session to 12 week (typically around 19 now).

Two different House committees reviewed S.39 on Monday, passing the bill quickly to get it back to the floor in time for Friday adjournment. The bill encompasses significant increases in salaries for legislators, an entirely new benefits package, and more generous expense reimbursements. Proponents claim it will make legislative service more accessible to members of the public by moving compensation more in line with median wages across the state.

The House took up S.5 on Thursday to override the Governor’s veto of the bill.

Representative Beck presented the bill on the floor Monday. Major changes from the Senate involved a slightly increased average tax increase and a reduction in the tax newly-created reserve to help buffer property taxes in FY2025. In the Senate version, this fund was reduced from $22M to $13M.

As the 2023 legislative session is winding down, legislators are rushing to give themselves a pay raise and a new benefits package. The effort would bring Vermont legislative pay closer to the $31,775 median for legislators across the country. We reported on this when the bill passed the Senate, at the time it looked like the bill would likely wait until next year, but the House is posturing to move aggressively on it.

The Senate Finance Committee reconvened on Wednesday to review their changes to H.492, which sets the annual property tax rate calculation. The draft changes would decrease the income yield to $17,537 and the property value yield to $15,443. It’s worth noting that decreasing the yield will increase local tax rates. The non-homestead property tax rate would be increased from $1.388 to $1.391.