Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Okay. We are live. Alright. Good morning, everyone. Apologies for the delayed start. We had some late arrivals due to weather and a couple of other absences. So we were waiting for a quorum, but now we have such. So we're gonna get things rolling on Thursday, January 22, and we're gonna pick up work with testimony on page six forty five, an act relating to identity identity verification and real property transactions. We did an introduction in our walkthrough last week with counsel and representative Pinsonault. And after that, hearing a story or two about real life situations, we decided to pick up conversations with some industry folks and trade association folks. Rep McGuire is not available this morning, so we are gonna just go straight down the punch list, and we are gonna begin with Peter Tucker on Zoom. Mister Tucker, how are you?

[Peter Tucker]: Good morning. Nice to see, you know, a a part of your committee anyhow.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: So Slightly more than half of us. Yes. 53.7%.

[Peter Tucker]: Great. Well, thanks for the invite. For the record, Peter Tucker, I am the director of advocacy and public policy for the Vermont Association of Realtors. And we appreciate the opportunity to comment on age six forty five. The Vermont Association of Realtors represent some 2,000 members across the state who work on behalf of buyers and sellers every day. We adhere to a code of ethics and promote homeownership and private property rights. H six forty five addresses an important issue in our industry, fraudulent misrepresentation as the owner of a property. This is an issue nationwide and occasionally in Vermont. Across the country are well aware of this strategy, and our National Association of provides guidance and best practices for our members. In Vermont, the Vermont Association of Realtors is actively communicated with our members and the public with fraud alerts and encourage members best practices that include asking for a Zoom, or a FaceTime meeting with a prospective seller. Very often fraudulent sellers do not want their face to be seen. Ask them to show identification on the screen during their initial meeting. Use an app like Forewarn to research potentially fraudulent sellers. You can conduct a reverse lookup of the telephone number if it if it shows anything other than the owner of the property, you know, really gives us a good sense of what's going on. Conduct a reverse name search and call the the the number of the folks who, you know, by by reverse name actually own the property. And in addition, you know, verify information with town clerks as we we do on a regular basis. More importantly, trust your instincts. You know, our for our members, there's a ton of experience out there, and, you know, and and they can tell when something isn't on the up and up, and we report activity to the Vermont Attorney General. So, and I've included this in my in my comments for the for the committee, but for Warren is a member benefit provided by the Vermont Association of Realtors for all of our members, and this is kind of what the, you know, what the bill is getting at, I believe. You know, it provides identity, phone numbers, address history, financial indicators, property records, properties that they own in other places, criminal records, anything that's a public record, and and this is a a tool that we provide to our members so that they can do this kind of, you know, kind of forensic research, right, before a before, you know, entering into a listing agreement with someone to be certain that they are who they say they are. Realtors are doing a good job of this. You know, I I provided copy from a Manchester Journal article that was done actually a a while back now in '23. Jennifer Hoffman, who's the broker owner of Hoffman Real Estate, was contacted by a fraudulent seller to sell a piece of land down in Bennington. The scammer even provided her with a a falsified passport. She tracked down the real owner of the property, determined they didn't wanna sell the property, and reported that attempt to the attorney general's office. In that same article, the Bennington town clerk, Barbeau, said the the more professionals involved, the better chance to catch red flags before it's too late. The public is best served when buyers and sellers are represented by a realtor. Last year, representative Pritchard approached me to discuss a land scam that was thwarted in Paulette. The scammer contacted a local real estate company asking to list a piece of land for sale. The realtor who knew the family contacted an uncle, I believe, who confirmed that the actual owner had no intention to sell the land. But the scammer undeterred undeterred approached another real estate company, once again providing a fraudulent passport as identity. That company recognized the scam, confirmed it with the town clerk, and reported it to the attorney general. You know, in doing research for this, I actually found an article about 12/02/2025 in the Hardwick Gazette of all places that indicates a recent report compiling national data about the growing national epidemic of real estate fraud ranked Vermont fifty first out of 50 states and the District Of Columbia with a falling rate of scams involving involving real estate. Now these are all scams, not just land scams, but, you know, the they are, you know, we are not as not as big a target maybe as as other areas of the country. Realtors work collaboratively with title companies, attorneys, mortgage brokers every day to ensure multiple layers of review prior to closing on a property. We work with the attorney general's office to report suspected fraudulent activity and provide scam alerts to our members and the public. Realtors are already licensed by the secretary of state through the office of professional regulation. We are already subject to complaints of unprofessional conduct. Realtors currently have the tools to protect the public from this kind of fraudulent misrepresentation and land scams. And as a result, you know, our our position on H six forty five is that this registration is is not necessary. Realtors are doing the job and and protecting the public. So thank you for the opportunity to speak. Happy to answer any questions.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Apologies if you cited this earlier in your testimony. I was still kind of getting. But, my question right now is, you said in a couple of instances where fraudulent activity was flagged, reported, and stopped. But do you have any idea, say, maybe in, like, the last calendar year, many instances were flagged and prevented,

[Peter Tucker]: You know? Your organizations? I I really don't. Yeah. Good question. You know, perhaps I can can, you know, determine some of that information.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: If you could try and mine some of that, that'd be interesting to see because, one of the things I we are trying to assess right now is how persistent this is. And if we're seeing a notable spike in it, you know, it's like kind of like one of one of the frauds du jour. You know, they always hook onto something if it's working, and then they move on to something else once it gets stopgap.

[Peter Tucker]: Yeah. That's that's a great point, Cher. You know, so I will say that the the article in the hardware Gazette was was 12/02/2025. So that's very current information showing that that scams are actually being reduced in Vermont. And and these are all scams, and this is one thing. You know, when I was thinking about testimony on this particular land scam issue, you know, the the big money is in spoofing a an email with a different bank account on it. And the, you know, the bigger ones they hit are when, you know, from our perspective, from from the realtor's perspective, you know, a buyer is sending a deposit to us. But there are instances when, you know, the they're very close to closing and buyers are sending essentially the all of the all of the proceeds to purchase a a house, you know, usually at that point to the attorney or to the to a bank, and, you know, that's a big chunk of money. So, you know, when you look at at kind of scams overall, you know, there are just a variety, as you say. And the minute we kind of nip one, you know, that's gonna morph into something else. We do see these folks approaching multiple real estate companies, and that's why we've been so, you know, so concerned. And I will say that that, you know, there was a successful scam, you know, a year ago, year and a half ago, that really triggered a lot of this work by the Vermont Association of Realtors. You know, we got, you know, when when it was successful, it's obviously very shocking, You know? And and we just wanted to make sure that our members were a aware of it and really, you know, give them some some best practices to work with to to ferret it out.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Reporter Evans has a hand up.

[Rep. Sandra "Sandy" Pinsonault (Member)]: Good

[Rep. VL Coffin IV (Member)]: morning. You mentioned that you actively communicate with realtors, the members of your association. I'm wondering if, there's any training or continuing education effort or seminar or anything like that that you offer that might, just out of curiosity.

[Unidentified committee member]: I was wondering what if they I'm not sure what actively communicate you.

[Peter Tucker]: Yeah. So and and one thing I'd like to to comment on is, you know, I I would encourage the committee to to hear from the title insurance industry and also attorneys because this bill, you know, addresses, you know, the attorney work. You know, we do actually, in the in the summer, we have an event, and it's been loosely titled the battle of the barristers. Mhmm. But it it basically takes on, you know, hot topics. And we spent a ton of time on this last summer at our at our our summer event discussing exactly this thing. And and, you know, having attorneys give us their impression because we know. I mean, we're the we're the frontline on this on this particular issue. You know, the attorneys are certainly in in line with us, you know, in in terms of, you know, going to a closing. You know? But the reality is, and and this was pointed out by the the town clerk in Paulette. You know, if it hits my desk, it's too late. You know, once the money's been transmitted, the the the fraudster is is off to the races on his next one. So, you know, it is really important, you know, that that we're the, you know, we're the ones that can and and are identifying this.

[Rep. Sandra "Sandy" Pinsonault (Member)]: Thank you.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Anything else from Mr. Tucker? Peter, if you could maybe sniff around you know, instances over the last year, that would be helpful information with us as we start start assessing the tools and the frequency that people have at their disposal.

[Peter Tucker]: Right. And, you know, what I'd really like to do is come back to you and say, here are the ones that that, you know, we've caught. You know? Yeah. Because I think that is the you know, I have not heard of any experiences in the last last year or so. I I think that, you know, there was one that happened, and I it really triggered a response from the Vermont Association of Realtors. And and we work, you know, we work with Liz Smith, especially at at Caddock. You know, she's super experienced at at this kind of stuff. You know, they're putting out scam alerts all the time. We actually they they now send us their alerts so we can push it out to our members.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Gotcha. Yeah. So definitely the, like, number of catches that you've made Mhmm.

[Peter Tucker]: I'll I'll see what I can do.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: It'd be useful. Great.

[Rep. VL Coffin IV (Member)]: Rap Coffin. Just a question because I know to be a realtor, you have to be a member of Vermont Real Estate's the VAR. Correct?

[Peter Tucker]: Well, so to be yeah. So there are to be a realtor, you need to be a member of our association. To be a licensed real estate agent or broker does not require membership in the realtor association. You know, I think if we're 2,000 members, there's probably 2,500 licensees somewhere in that range statewide. So, you know, what we find typically are are those folks that are not realtor members are retirees who are just kind of maintaining a license and a lot of commercial brokers have a tendency to not do that either.

[Rep. VL Coffin IV (Member)]: Okay. So this so they wouldn't have access would they would those people still have access to the, same app you have that I'm trying to get the look at the name of it right here.

[Peter Tucker]: Right. Yeah. Forewarned. Yeah.

[Rep. VL Coffin IV (Member)]: The Forewarned, would they still have access to that?

[Peter Tucker]: No. They would not. Yeah. We're that that is a member benefit. That's why you belong to the realtor association.

[Rep. VL Coffin IV (Member)]: Okay.

[Peter Tucker]: Yep. I've gotta say, I mean, the people that are licensed that are not members of the realtor association because that also provides form programs and access to multiple listing service are typically not very active folks or commercial. Yeah.

[Rep. VL Coffin IV (Member)]: Okay. But they could be targeted specifically by not being a member.

[Peter Tucker]: Correct? That yes. I agree. Yeah.

[Rep. VL Coffin IV (Member)]: Okay.

[Peter Tucker]: They should join our organization.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Well, trade association plug. Yeah.

[Peter Tucker]: Yeah. Exactly. Only when I get the chance.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Yeah. You know, when it's there, swing away. Anything else from the table for, Peter? No. Alright. Thank you, sir. And enjoy your enjoy your conference.

[Rep. VL Coffin IV (Member)]: Right.

[Peter Tucker]: Yeah. You know, I'm gonna I'm gonna learn how to be a better advocate, so I will come home fully prepared.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Alright.

[Peter Tucker]: Thanks. I'm gonna hang on and watch. Yep. Oh, please do. Please

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: do. Yep. Hang out. How are you, sir? Mister chairman, how are you? Doing fine. Doing fine for us. Whatever today is. Thursday.

[Chris D’Elia]: Not sure I like the screen behind me.

[Unidentified committee member]: It's really hard. I was on a meeting last night, and I was on the screen, and people were complaining. They couldn't see me.

[Rep. Sandra "Sandy" Pinsonault (Member)]: It

[Unidentified committee member]: was discombobulating them. Yeah. Was at them.

[Chris D’Elia]: Yeah. Just with my Italian background, I never let anybody sit behind me.

[Unidentified committee member]: Good

[Chris D’Elia]: morning, mister chairman, committee members for the record. Chris Delia, president of the Vermont Bankers Association. Before I get into the detail of my testimony, just a couple of responses to your questions. One, your observation, mister chairman, is absolutely correct as far as fraud is concerned. As soon as the parties in the marketplace figure out how to prevent a particular scheme from happening, the criminals are on to the next iteration. And we find that happening in all different areas, certainly in our world when it impacts our customers. So you're absolutely correct there. I will share with you that it's it's not just the transactional fraud in the sense of the the real estate transaction or land transaction, but I'll give you a situation of an impact on, my son in law's family who was selling a lot, and there was a piece of malware that got into one of the lawyer's computers. And the malware just kind of sits there, and it's tracking and observing what's going on. And the one of the parties in the transaction got an email from the lawyer. It was not the lawyer. It was criminal activity. And it intercepted or gave information to intercept the $55,000 wire transfer that took place in order to close on the deal, and that money was gone. And that's because of the malware and criminal activity using that approach, excuse me, in a real estate transaction. Representative, you asked about training. Training is ongoing and just to share with you in our world. So we have a standing mortgage committee. We have a standing training committee. We have two large mortgage conferences a year, and then we have two service providers that will deliver training to your desktop. So anytime there's a new issue that comes up, a new regulation, a new scheme, there's training that's developed and it's constantly ongoing, for our world. So just to answer your question regarding training. When, when we looked at this issue, it was made aware of it late last fall, had conversations with some of the practitioners in the marketplace, had a conversation with the representative over Zoom to understand, what she had seen in her area. And I will say that, while there has been some activity in the marketplace, and I think some of that activity has been thwarted, it's not been, the entities have not succeeded in their efforts, it's not necessarily a bad idea to try and get ahead of the curve if we can because we often see problems that are happening in other parts of the country that kinda slowly make their way to Vermont. So not a bad idea to try and get ahead of the curve. But when, when I look at this bill, and I'll start with section one of the bill, I'll hone in on on something that some of you said, and I think Peter said. The approach that's contemplated in section one with the registry is very much after the fact. It's at the time you're going to be filing paperwork with the clerk's office. You wanna stop this early on in the process, and that's the time that you've got that fraudulent individual who's coming to the realtor to say, hey. I've got this land, I wanna sell it. Trying to stop it at the time you're recording the documents is too late because the money's probably gone at that point. And Peter just did a great job of providing some information and education about what they do to understand who their customers are. So the the notion of creating a new registry in secretary of state's office who was here, and I know we'll speak on this, is from our standpoint is not something that we would support. As Peter alluded to, we, as, mortgage lenders, are registered with a national mortgage, licensing system, realtors licensed by OPR, lawyers that are licensed by the courts. There are already plenty of locations where you've got registries and information that's governing how these different actors participate in the marketplace. Having another registry just doesn't make sense. A registry that I think it's I read the bill correctly would also include owners of property and buyers of property. I don't see how you're ever gonna be successful in getting a grantor to register with the secretary of state's office. What I'm also concerned with in section one is you're you're creating a new approach to land records in Vermont and the recording of land records in Vermont. If there's one thing that I've learned from, my meetings either with the secretary of state's office or two individuals that are on the screen behind me, from the clerk's world, is that not all clerks are created equal. Not all clerks operate equally. And to create a new body of regulations or process that they would have to follow, in some communities will work well, and in many other communities, will not work well. And that's not a criticism of the clerks. They just do not have, at times, the capacity or the support to do what is expected of them, and there is a lot in statute that we expect of them. The other thing that concerns me, is this notion that if you fail to provide information about being in the registry, there's this pause that occurs for fifteen days in the recording of the documents that the clerk will receive. I can tell you that in my world, that will absolutely be unsatisfactory. That will not work. The reason it won't work is the way we perfect our lien on a piece of property when it involves a loan is the time that it gets to the clerk's office. And, ideally, that clerk records it in the day book, and then at some point records it in the land records and indexes it. If you have a fifteen day period that that loan can be sitting out there, I can assure you that will have the chilling effect for a number of lenders in the marketplace who are already concerned about the differences in practices that occur around the state with the recording of documentation. We know that, again, in some communities, as soon as the clerks get the documents, they're in the daybook, and at some point, shortly after that, they're recorded. We also know some instances where documents have been sitting on a desk for a period of time, where documents are in a box for a period of time, and that's troubling for us because that's our hook, if you will, into the collateral that's been used for the loan. If it's not recorded properly, then somebody potentially could sneak in front of that mortgage, and it won't take many of those to really have a negative impact on the lending market. So what's contemplated in section one, while I think it's it's an interesting approach, is not one that we can support. The other sections of the bill two, three, four are are interesting, but I think they warrant more discussion. And what I find interesting about them is be is in our community, a lot of our work is is, focused on knowing our customer. Because of nine eleven and the Bank Secrecy Act that came out after nine eleven, there are procedures that every bank must follow to vet every person who comes in our door then wants to do business with our institution. We have a whole body of regulations that requires us to collect information, to vet that information, to ensure that you, in fact, are who you say you are, and we work with third parties to help us do that. That's an interesting concept. And in my opinion, again, understanding what realtors and lawyers are already doing today of knowing who your customer is. Because if that realtor has to go through the process that Peter talked about, then I could see where a number of these bad actors are getting caught early on. If a lawyer is doing something similar so the sooner you're going through that in the process, in my mind, it it starts to eliminate some of the concerns that are out there. So while I can sit here and agree with those provisions that are in the bill, I think it would be very important to understand what they're doing already and to identify if there are truly any gaps that should be filled in order to prevent this from continuing. So having the secretary of state's office today is wonderful. They can share with you what what their work is. Having a realtor come in and lawyer come in, the title community come in, I think, can start to help build that broader picture of the work that's going on already in the marketplace. Education is key. Absolutely agree with that. And the more we can educate the practitioners in the marketplace, the sooner we have the tools to identify the fraudulent activity that's going on and stopping it. But I just don't think six forty five is the approach to take at this point.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Hey. I don't think I have any direct questions for you, Chris. Anyone at the table have anything for the Association right now?

[Chris D’Elia]: Who is available if she's

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Yeah, no, thank you. That was a lot of very useful detail, to understand what exists within the system of your association. So Great. No. Thanks for the time, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. We're gonna shift over or I should say up to our friends on Zoom.

[Chris D’Elia]: Carol, first time in this session.

[Carol Dawes]: Good morning, Lovely to see you again. For the record, Carol Dawes. I'm former clerk treasurer for sixteen years. I'm now the treasurer of the city of Barrie, and I'm chair of the legislative committee for the Vermont Municipal Clerk and Treasurer's Association. So you may be seeing more of me over the over the rest of the session. Alright. Thank you so much for for inviting us to to come share our thoughts on on this bill. I do want to, because I know you're squeezing a bunch of people into a short period of time, essentially, I wanna say ditto to what both Peter and Chris said. I was particularly struck by Peter's remark that once it hits the clerk's desk, it's too late. And both Peter and Chris talked about the tools that they have, that the realtors have, the attorneys have, the the title in insurance people have. The clerks don't have that tool. And and once the documents are received by us, we we don't have, the the the deal is done. My biggest concern or our biggest concern, at that point in time is the liability being placed on the clerks to, perform some kind of verification. All the other people that we've talked about, the the realtors, the lawyers, the bankers, that they all have liability insurance. They have various protections, for the work that they do. Clerks don't, and it would be a a real concern about clerks having to bear that liability. The other thing that that was talked about is the the the timing. Chris talked about the pause, the fifteen day pause. One of the things that that clerks are taught from the day they're elected or appointed is the timeliness of recording documents. I I agree with Chris's comment that that there are outliers, but the vast majority of clerks understand, by statute, our responsibilities to record a document within a certain number of days. We understand the minute a document is re received by us, it is date and time stamped, and that that date and time stamp become the the date and time associated with when that document goes live, if you will. Chris talked about somebody sneaking in a lien in advance of recording a document. And if we can't live and die by that date and time stamp, if we have to create these fifteen day gaps, not only does it create a a hole for that particular document, we can't record anything received after that document until we can clear that particular document from our queue. Everything lives and dies by its date and time stamp. So we do have real concerns about what is currently in this draft bill. We also understand that that we if we if there's a part we can play, in helping prevent, this kind of fraud, we'd love to be able to be part of the solution. It's just this particular bill doesn't seem to put us in the right place. So happy to answer any questions.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Thank you, that was clear and concise. I appreciate that. Anything from the table for Carol? Okay. Thank you, Carol, if you don't mind hanging out in case something pops up. Thank you. Thank you. Alright. Shuffling along then. Continuing on Zoom.

[Rep. Sandra "Sandy" Pinsonault (Member)]: Bobby

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Brimulcum? Brimulcum? Am I pronouncing that correctly?

[Bobbi Brimblecombe]: Birongom. Bobby from Bobby Birongom. I'm the town clerk of Marshfield, have been for twenty eight years, and the prior three speakers have made all the points that I was hoping to make. I don't have anything new to add. Just to reiterate, by the time it gets to the clerk's desk, the money's changed hands, it's too late. The horses left the barn and the fraud has already happened. I also had the concerns about holding the documents for fifteen days because that, as Carol has explained, that throws off all of our recording process and there we have questions about would that document take precedence over a document that came the next day that was confirmed.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: I

[Bobbi Brimblecombe]: don't think it's a good idea to have a clerk's office holding documents in limbo, unsure of where they fit in the recording process and legitimate transactions where the verification hadn't been done, even legitimate transactions would get held up, could get muddied up by that. So, I don't think holding the recording is the answer. I don't have anything else to add, but I'm happy to answer questions.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Well, thank you. Thank you. I mean, if you are just echoing the sentiments of the previous speakers, I guess I don't have any further questions for you at the moment, but that's just me. Anybody at the table? Seeing no hands. Thank you, Bobby. Alright. We are gonna shift over to back in the room to Tanya Marshall. Lauren, would you like to go up us together as a duet? That'd be wonderful. I love a good Secretary of State's office duet. Singing involved. Me too. I know. Right? It's becoming a pattern.

[Lauren Hibbert]: Just efficiency.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: It really is.

[Rep. VL Coffin IV (Member)]: Good

[Lauren Hibbert]: morning, for the record, Lauren Hibbert, Deputy Secretary of State, and I have

[Tanya Marshall]: with me, I'm Tanya Marshall, I'm the Director of the Vermont State Archives and Records Administration,

[Lauren Hibbert]: and also Chief Records Officer and State. Thank you so much for having us on this bill. I'm just going to speak first about the professional regulation aspects that overlay all of these transactions. I think you've heard quite a bit about it, but obviously we regulate the real estate brokers and salespeople, also the real estate firms. We do have the real estate commission, which is a commission that is appointed by the governor. They meet monthly or pretty much monthly. I think they meet about 10 times a year. We also receive complaints of professional misconduct in this profession. We have not received complaints related to fraud, to my knowledge. I will have to review that again, but I don't believe we have. And we don't have a very active discipline history against real estate brokers at this time. And we also regulate notaries. And notaries play a big piece in real estate transactions, particularly because they verify the true identity of the people signing the documents. Of course, fraudulent documents can be presented to them. It's not completely infallible. But there are quite strict guidelines around the acts of notaries, whether it's being done in person or remotely. To my knowledge, we do not have any complaints about notary public who accepted fraudulent documents. So I think those are two layers of professional regulation that overlay this. And then I just want to speak on behalf of the Secretary of State's office registry. We do not support a creation of a registry within our office. If the legislature were to move forward on that, we would really need to engage with the legislature on the cost of implementation. There's no cost here. Stand up costs, we would absolutely be asking for stand up costs. Because while it may seem simple to create a registry, it's not that simple. It requires a whole new type of application. It would be in our business services platform. It would need to be searchable. There would need to be a lot of fields that were displayed. That is not as inexpensive as creating a Excel spreadsheet. It requires coding, development time, etcetera. And also in line with that, if we were to have a registry, we would need the fee to be higher than $20 That fees generally need to support the structure and maintenance of the program. I would assert that $20 at this time really doesn't cover the work of implementing, maintaining, and sustaining a registry. Because in order for

[Rep. Sandra "Sandy" Pinsonault (Member)]: it to be functional, would

[Lauren Hibbert]: have to be really easy to see, really easy to access, and have all the correct information within it. And with that, I'd like to turn it over Tanya Marshall so that she can talk about the real property modernization project that she's spearheading.

[Tanya Marshall]: Thank you for the opportunity. I haven't been here yet this session, but I'm not often in house job ops. I put inside the testimony. First, for everyone who talked before, agree. We've working with them. We're all in the same boat together on real property records and data. I'm not sure how much the committees were in the modernization project. So it was an initiative of the legislature in 2022. We are the last state in the country to actually do electronic real property records and reporting, electronic reporting, digital reporting. We're the last state to pass that to an overlay law that was passed in 2022 to allow the modernization effort to occur. So we've been working with the municipal parks. We've been working with all the different entities related to real property. We've also been working with the Department of Tax, and it overlays with the frills and assessors, and we look at real estate. We are still in a paper based land record reporting system. They're the last entity in the country. Many of the things that are in the bill are actually part of a submission portal that would be for electronic reporting. We identify who the submitters are. It can be a total transaction directly from the parties who are in the banks, the others that are not the outliers to fraud. It's already built into those types of modernizations and the score of fraud alerts for property owners. Parties allow property owners to understand what's happening with their property and notify out against that. This is an active and ongoing project. There's a proof of concept pilot system right now for a statewide option for municipal clerks to opt into. And it's a proof of concept so that we're not tied to all the different laws that are still paper based, but really optimizing what can be and could be even better than other electronic reporting and land records management systems across the entire country. A lot of these are cobbled together over time. So what we added in some testimony here, which you've heard, is that there's a lot of things on preventative. Now, are some things that the legislature could consider about corrective, which is after the fraud had occurred. We don't have a lot of that within this law and our current laws right now, but we also have a lot of antiquated real property related laws. So we are planning on a larger legislation for the 2027, 2028, which feels so far away. But yeah, we're here in 2026 because there are so many little pathways. This is one of the oldest functions of government. It actually predates statehood for the municipal clerk. And the first act that was passed was for preventing fraudulent deeds. And here we are

[Rep. Sandra "Sandy" Pinsonault (Member)]: Thank you for that. A

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: heartfelt nugget.

[Tanya Marshall]: A legislative history background to anything. The whole point of it was for, and back then, think about it, people coming in and walking into the office, I'm here with Lauren, I have decided to give her my property. We are doing that in front of a clerk who's writing it into a book, right? And then notaries came along, so you didn't have to physically be there to do the identity. But we are still paper based land records. Book page, we have an opportunity to do something that other states don't. And we do have this. We're a cohort. We're a So my recommendation is allow the modernization. There may be things, and we've been spending a lot within fraud. It's not just deed fraud or impersonation or fire transfer. There's all aspects of this. And states are reacting in different ways. But the key part is really a combination of people, the training, the processes, what's preventative. It's a combination of what can be done in process to give property owners the ability to have fraud alerts, things that they can see and access. Women are important, what is on their property. That's a really key part. Secondary is that once debt fraud happens and it's known, it may be years. My first entry into this was 2012 with a homeowner out of Milton Colony who went to sell their property and had found a fraudulent sale. It had already been sold. I don't know the circumstances now, but that was years after. And there are different ways that corrective what do you do after that happens? But I think it would be better as part of that larger modernization bill than piecemeal here. But if we do hear about fraud and working with the different associations, we should really trace down every single aspect of where happened, because it's all different things that you've already heard today. So the Vermont State Archives and Records Administration leading that. It started with just standards and uniformity for clerks, but then when municipalities, listening to listeners and assessors not having all the same information, listening to the zoning and planning not having it, now Department of Taxes, now it's the bigger picture for fraud. It's really an opportunity to just step back and do it well, rather than to rush into something that would create another barrier or a cumbersome process.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: All right. Well, I'm glad you involved rolling on that project. It's an essential warehouse for that. Last state, It's

[Tanya Marshall]: also the opportunity, if your last state, you're not cobbling stuff together like other states have, right?

[Chris D’Elia]: No, for sure. For sure.

[Tanya Marshall]: Reporting started in 1999 based on all their so they were automating paper processes in Washington. And then it became So all the other counties And also think about the county government system, which is what, except for Vermont, Rhode Island, and Connecticut have, they do their own Everything's within that county. And it doesn't have a lot of state overlap for permitting or zoning or land use like we do. So it gives us an opportunity to really be a true state. We're one state, a lot of different needs around real property, a lot of different interest, housing, everything, getting that together so that we can really do better for the Monsters offering.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: That was very useful. So,

[Rep. Sandra "Sandy" Pinsonault (Member)]: as the presenter of the bill, I knew that there were a lot of things as a former town clerk that I didn't agree with in the bill, but that I didn't like the bill. And recording it at the time is not that feasible, understand that at all, the sale's already taken place. However, I do think that there should be some process, and we're charging $20 is not, we don't charge anything, but to have an authenticated piece of paper, notarized at the realtor or at the time of the loan, someplace prior to selling, the person who wants to put that piece of property on sale, that it's verified that they are the current owner, and not a fraudulent representation of being the buyer or the seller. So that was the intent. And then it's formed into a lot of things as a template that I don't fully agree with, but I had to go along with it. And I don't see that, I think what we're doing with your, with the act of getting that all done is great, but it's still two years out. And we're seeing a lot of people, and fortunately, our town clerks know our people. So we've stopped a lot. Town clerks have stopped a lot of those sales because they know the owners. They'll contact and say, gee, we're selling your property and then we think it's preventing them from happening. The intent was to get some sort of document recorded prior, maybe at the time of listing, that was reported in the town clerk's office that says, yes, I am the true owner of this property and I'm selling it. So that's what the original intent was,

[Lauren Hibbert]: So if I could just respond to what I hear the intent was from your perspective, and I appreciate. I think what you would be seeking would be an additional requirement for realtors at the point of sale, at the point of engagement with a landowner. And I don't want to speak for the association, and Peter absolutely can do that. But if you wanted to do that, you would want to put it in Title 26, which is the chapter related to professional regulation. That's where real estate salespeople and brokers are as a requirement for a real estate transaction. And we would just need to think about that on a couple of levels. There are a lot of requirements for real estate transactions. Peter knows them far better than I do. And real estate folks are good about doing a lot of public education, about lead, about all sorts of things. And so that would be a place where the concept that you were talking about could be introduced. My concern, just hearing it and responding on the fly is, how does someone verify the identity? And how would that be done? And that's the tricky part that I think the Office of Professional Regulation would really need to dive into. And also, we would want to work with the association on that. But maybe Peter could have an opportunity to respond to that as well. I don't know, but that's off the cuff. It would go into Title 26. And then we have to look at the structure of that requirement, and the feasibility of that requirement.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Peter, did you catch that? Did you wanna chime in?

[Peter Tucker]: Hi, sure. Once again, Peter Tucker for the Vermont Association of Realtors. We do have a lot of regulation and we work with secretary and the office of professional regulation. You know, we're actually entering into rulemaking right now, and, you know, it is kind of a an ideal opportunity to to consider things like this. You know, I I will say my testimony is we're doing it. It it's not mandatory, but I've gotta be honest with you. You know, if there is I I I cannot imagine any real estate licensee in the state of Vermont who wants to enter into a fraudulent land deal. You know, we are you know, we're giving them plenty of of knowledge about, you know, how to detect that. And and really, you know, I mean, it's we are subject to, you know, regulations. So, you know, if if by, you know, hate to say it, but if something does happen, you know, that that realtor is, you know, subject to to unprofessional conduct complaint. And, you know, I think that the threat of that, you know, weighs heavily on us every day. So so, you know, actually having something specific, you know, is it could be up in that rulemaking discussion, but the reality is we're doing everything we can to to avoid this. And, you know, as as as Christina alluded to, you know, as soon as we kind of get this one squashed down, there'll be a new scam coming down the pike, and, you know, we just have to be super aware of how we how we deal with that.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Yeah. No. I did we're hitting the same button again with that. It's the ever evolving practice. Right? It's just whackable, for a lack of a better way of putting it. Yes.

[Tanya Marshall]: And I was going to add, in terms of industry standards, I'm trying to address broad, it is to not have spontaneous changes to how we do reporting or how we do real estate, but rather do the preventative actions, use all the tools already there. They are there and just use them better rather than changing legislation or adding something that makes it a more cumbersome process in addition. So that is kind of a key. There's a great thing with all the national associations to be representing this, not wanting to do something because the next fraudulent thing will happen.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Any other questions for, I guess, Peter and or Secretary of State's office? Yeah, this is all very useful. We really appreciate everybody's time. That was a lot of information and perspective to digest. So thank you. And we I'd like to pause for five minutes before we shift into our next subject matter. So, Nick, could you take us off for a