Two more problematic bills moved out of committee this week. The first was a bill tightening restrictions on independent schools who receive public tuition dollars under Vermont's historic town tuitioning system. We have been following this bill for quite a while and, although duplicative, the bill was generally acceptable until a new provision was added the day before the Committee was set to vote on it... That provision would disallow any sort of normal application processes to play out before schools make enrollment decisions. Current rules prevent discriminatory behavior, but schools still saw value in bringing students in for site visits before enrollment so they could begin planning how to best meet their needs. The bill would prevent this as well as other criteria such as program alignment. This was particularly concerning for students ability to use their tuition dollars at specialty schools like ski academies, which were not given an opportunity to comment on the bill. We are hopeful that this language will be fixed by a House floor amendment or by the Senate.

Legislative Council provided the Senate Government Operations Committee with an overview of the newest draft of S.32 on Wednesday. They noted that in draft 3.1 if a municipality wanted to get rid of ranked choice voting (RCV) once approved either the voters of the municipality or the legislative body would have to vote to move away from it. However, the legislative body could not vote to get rid of RCV if the voters of a municipality had voted to adopt it originally. Only the voters could repeal RCV in that case.

Tuesday

The House Commerce Committee pivoted on Tuesday and took up draft bill 23-0991, which deals with enhancing workforce and economic development opportunities, a topic they had not previously covered in earnest. The bill appears to be a replacement for H.452.

Tuesday

On Tuesday, Gus Seelig (Executive Director, Vermont Housing and Conservation Board) spoke to the Senate Natural Resources Committee about their version of S.100.

He commented on the state’s failure to pass statewide land use planning back in the “Act 250 days.” Specifically, he pointed to the abundance of opportunities during the permitting process for folks to increase costs and raise objections that lead to a lack of affordable or lower market rate housing generally.

He pointed out that the Vermont Housing Conservation Board (VHCB) is the financing arm of the state’s housing development efforts and recanted some stories about a designated smartgrowth site in Putney adjacent to the food coop. The same person came forward and appealed at two different stages of the process. Both times they won the initial appeal against the objections, but now it is headed to the Vermont Supreme Court. The town of Putney was all on board, however the resulting delays will be 18 months by the time the appeals play out, and it will raise the per unit cost by an estimated 20% (originally expected to be $400,000).

Tuesday

Dan French (Secretary of Education) shared with the House Education Committee on Tuesday that the Agency of Education did not fully support the bill. The main reason is because they just embarked on rulemaking with the State Board of Education (SBE), which he described as “yeoman’s work… to bring forward a much-improved regulatory framework for independent schools.”

He is concerned about changing the rules before they even go into full effect. His preference would be to see the new 2200 series rules go into effect and then make adjustments as necessary.

The week leading up to town meeting was a mixed bag. The full potential impacts of the carbon-pricing legislation (S.5) were averted by an amendment from the Senate Appropriations Committee, which they claim turns the bill into a "study." In actuality it still asks the Public Utilities Commission to build a carbon-pricing system for heating fuels, but then the legislature will need to sign off on it before those rules they develop go into effect. Essentially they are building the bus and then deciding whether or not to drive it, versus designing the bus first and then deciding if they should build it. Perhaps a small distinction, but an important one.

Also, despite a full-throated attack from from public school administrators, the House seems reluctant to move forward on a bill that would end Vermont's historic town tuitioning system. If that holds true, that's a win for rural Vermont!

Action Alert!

Friends, the Senate is voting TODAY on a bill to introduce a carbon pricing scheme for home heating fuels that the Scott Administration says will increase the cost of heating fuels at least $0.70 per gallon. This morning I sent the letter below to all our Senators, but we need you to speak out as well. NOW is the time to make your voice heard. If carbon pricing on heating fuels will hurt your family's financial stability, Senators need to hear from you!

After being passed by the Appropriations Committee earlier in the week, S.5 arrived on the Senate Floor Thursday afternoon.

The Senate Appropriations Committee dove back into S.5 on Tuesday. Chairwoman Kitchel notified the Committee that it was her intention to add a study and a check-back provision to the bill.

Kitchel highlighted the importance of a “potential study.” It informs everything else, including the economic and technical feasibility of the plan. Based on Julie Moore’s testimony (Secretary, Agency of Natural Resources), this study needs to be the first step in this process, and must be added to the bill.

The House Government Operations Committee took up potential changes to their elections bill, H.429, on Thursday. Chairman McCarthy had an amendment to offer on the bill which would cap contributions from statewide candidates to political parties at $60K.

Legislative Counsel shared with the Senate Government Operations Committee a new strike-all amendment for S.32 that it pushed adoption of Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) for presidential primaries in 2028. He went on to note that the new draft allows communities to adopt RCV for local elections. There is also a provision for a study committee.

On Tuesday, the Joint Fiscal Office (JFO) and the Agency of Education (AOE) provided their customary update to the House Ways & Means Committee. Chairwoman Kornheiser shared that she had asked JFO to include a new line item for cloud taxes, which would amount to $16.9M in revenue if added. This addition would result in a 5% increase in average property tax bills if coupled with the additional spending items the Committee is considering.

The House Education Committee took up their draft bill again on Friday, which would primarily look at strengthening anti-discrimination protections for independent schools. Chairman Conlon led off by saying that he wants to support Vermont’s anti-discrimination policies, like the public Accommodations Act. Notably, the new draft would also pause approval of further independent schools. He also reiterated that the purpose of the public tuitioning program, which is to fulfill our obligation to Vermont students where a public school does not exist or it is unpractical to operate one.

The House Education Committee returned Wednesday morning to the bill that does away with Vermont’s public tuitioning system. Chairman Conlon opened the meeting, indicating that this would not likely be taken up again before the town meeting break. However, on Friday they will take another look at their committee bill on this topic.

On Wednesday, the Senate Education Committee took up the latest draft of their miscellaneous education bill. One of the major components of the bill is study on the compensation and staffing levels for the State Board of Education (SBE).

Administrators of Vermont public schools came out swinging this week trying to drive through a bill that would eliminate public tuitioning to independent schools. They mostly repeated talking points that teachers unions argue nationally where vouchering or charter programs are introduced - i.e. not specific to Vermont or the program we offer to kids who live in towns that don't operate a school. The language they use is concerning and indicates a nationally-coordinated effort.

On Thursday the Senate Natural Resources Committee brought up the topic of possible amendments to S.5. It was a short discussion and no major changes where proposed, however they did discuss some minor concerns from Xusana Davis’ testimony the previous week.

After sitting nearly a week, S.5 was brought up in the Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday afternoon. June Tierney (Commissioner, Department of Public Service) testified that the $400K allocated in S.5 is not enough funding to achieve the goals for her department set out in the bill.

Tierney generally supports the idea of “potential study” to see what the impact will be and to discover if climate goals are practical and can be fulfilled. She pointed to questions like what is out there, what can be done, and at what cost?

On Wednesday the House Government Operations Committee heard significant testimony on their draft bill that would, among other things, ban fusion candidates. John Rodgers (Former State Senator) testified first.

Rodgers stated that he believes in “One Person, One Vote, One Candidate, One Party” and mentioned he and Senator Alice White had meant to address these issues in the past. He believes this is a serious issue for primaries and he sees low turnout (27% in the 2022 primary) as being exacerbated by “hybrid candidates.”

The Senate Government Operations Committee took testimony on S.32 Thursday, which introduces ranked choice voting for federal elections. Chairwoman Hardy announced that she will be changing how the Committee approaches this bill. The Secretary of State’s office has stated that it would be difficult to get Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) running by the 2024 presidential primary. Therefore, the bill will now push that timeline back to the 2026 federal primary. S.32 would also allow municipalities to use RCV, if they chose to do so, for local races.