Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Good afternoon, and welcome to the Senate Committee on Government Operations Committee meeting on Thursday, January 29.

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: The final You read it?

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Or final third of the month. We have two items to do today. The first is two S-two 55, an act relating to establishing a pilot law enforcement governance council in Wyndham County. And we are joined by two senators and also the sheriff from Wyndham And at one point, we'll have our legislative council joining us as well too, And so, yes, let's have Senator Wendy Harrison kick things off. Okay. And welcome.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: Thank you.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Thank you for having me. So tell us a little bit how this Okay. Bill came

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: This bill proposes a pilot program to provide reliable and affordable police services by the Wyndham County Sheriff to Wyndham County towns. If successful, the inspector could be easily replicated in other Vermont towns. This bill proposes municipalities in Windham County to be authorized to establish a law enforcement governance council for the purpose of providing regional law enforcement services. At least five municipalities would be necessary to initiate the council. The council would establish standards for operation and review. The council would work with the assistant judges to include the cost in the county budget instead of creating a new process. So it was very thoughtfully designed to use existing mechanisms rather than find other mechanisms. Really to answer your question about why is this necessary, three towns and one village in Windham County have professional police departments. So that means 20 towns are without police And over the decades, those residents had a reasonable level of comfort relying on a combination of state police and optional annual sheriff contracts. In recent years, however, for multiple reasons, the state police are not able to provide the previous level of service, Something that's not new, but it has been a barrier to services over time is that there's only one method for the sheriff to provide services to municipalities, which is by contract. And so those contracts are typically annual contracts and it's not sustainable and you'll hear more from folks who know it's are in that business. But I am excited about this because the lack of law enforcement services really become a problem. You'll hear from Sheriff Anderson that he has spoken with many of our municipalities, maybe all of the municipalities and is getting a really good response. And just one side note, I served on the task force, the school redistricting task force and we talked a lot about geography. And the geography of Central Wyndham County is most like the geography of Northeast Kingdom in terms of being similar to other parts of our state. So I think this is also important because it could provide a good model because a lot of the issues are geographic. It's difficult to get place to place as you all know, because you're Vermonters. So I'll leave it there.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Okay. Does anyone have questions for Senator? Great. Thank you. I know you have your own I do.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: I do. Chair, cross the hall.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Senator White, would you like to be up first or?

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: No, I would like to share. Oh, If that's okay with you. Absolutely.

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: Good afternoon, committee. Mister chair of members of the committee on government operations, for the record, my name is Mark Anderson. I am the chair of Wyndham County. I no longer wear my hat of being president of the Sheriff's Association, so I am here solely in my own regard to representing my office's interest. This bill is the outcome of what I will call a capstone project for me. I probably started working on it unbeknownst to myself about twenty years ago. I didn't know I was talking about these things, but we were talking about these things. And what it really, surprises is a representation of how to govern, and how to fund services on the sheriff's office. Many of you, we have worked together before on things, having to do with sheriffs. All of them always come back to very similar things. So I'm going to talk today at high level. I can dive into the weeds. Formally, we've been working on this project for about three years of including with all the towns in Wyndham County. As senator Harrison said, 23 towns in Windham County, three towns, one village have a police department. So 19 towns in Windham County do not. 17 towns have said, we like this. Two of the towns are populations under 500 people. They're not opposed to the idea. They're like, we just we don't even have enough to talk about the idea. So, it's not that they're opposed to the idea. It's simply to say they're small and there's other issues for them to address. So that is positive. The four towns with police departments, I'm gonna call them towns, but three towns in a village, they are all aware of the project. This would not be serving their needs. It would not be changing their needs. We're not trying to address the towns that have police departments needs. We are trying to address the towns that do not have, the services available. This is not a law enforcement, but it does law enforcement. It's But not a law enforcement bill. It's a governance bill. It is a funding bill. I can be a subject matter expert on law enforcement. It's the thing we're going to do with the governance and the funding. But at the end of the day, what we're really talking about is how to, allocate the resources and the responsibility. Currently, state of Vermont is responsible for policing that's built into title 20, where it says that the state police are responsible for promoting the public safety of the state of Vermont performing search and rescue. For about seventy years, this problem has existed and has been studied by the Vermont legislature, think tanks, by special interest groups to all come to some semblance of what we'll call regional governance. Different names in each time, but it's the same conversation. This work was initially, at least in my research, initially attempted once by former Chief Justice Jeff Amstoy when he was actually the state's attorney in Windsor County. It was attempted again under sheriff Bill Graham, Windham County sheriff then, Bruce Campbell, the Brownboro police chief, and Taco Ahmand, who was the Bells Falls witness chief. The first attempt with chief justice Hamztoy fell apart. I talked with him about it, and he's like, it fell apart because it offended certain interests. The second attempt with sheriff brand chief Campbell, and Chief Ahmad fell apart when Chief Campbell had a heart attack and passed away. And then we've talked and talked and talked and attempted and created all these structures around regionalization over the years, which includes dispatch, fire, EMS, water, the list goes on. So why law enforcement? And know. Talk about other things, and you probably talk intelligently about some of them too. But at the end of the day, while law enforcement, I'm a subject matter expert in that area, and we can talk about that thing, but the governance and funding of the service is important. Under the current model, of sheriffs rendering services, it is strictly a contract model. This is a business relationship between my legal entity and a town or the state's legal entity, which means we will have very business things end up as results. If there is a nonlife threatening emergency in the town of Dummerston and I have a deputy serving a business need in the town of Putney, when a non emergency need comes in in the town of Dummerston, there's no business interest for me to go. I need to satisfy the business need. And contracts are structured very well for business needs, but they're very problematic when we're talking about access to government services. So what this does is rather than develop separate individual business relationships. We're trying to create an entity that manages one relationship with anyone who wants to be a member of this. I mentioned that under chief justice Anastoye's plan, the issue was that it offended certain interests. I get that. We don't want to force anyone into this. And so what we're trying to do is say, towns that wanna be a part of it get to join voluntarily. They're not forced in, but they want it. So part of the last three years has been building the coalition with the town's going to kind of say, we want this. If they told me they don't want it, I would not be before you today to talk about it. So this is me being an emissary to our towns to represent that they want this, and we're prepared to provide a list of stakeholders from towns that will support that. We also know that there's other interests. Vermont City's And Towns, is another entity that has a significant, role in this project, not for any reason other than they are their insurance company for towns. Towns have an interest in public safety. They have an interest in managing their own expenses, their own liabilities. And so these are things that we recognize the League of Cities and Towns needs to be able to speak on behalf of the Towns for. We recognize that there are other public safety interests. And so this while it's not designed to solve the issues of of town such as Bradborough who has its own police department, what it is designed to do is say, we have resources, and if they have an emergency, a crisis, we can help even though we're not talking about relationship there. That becomes much like a mutual aid agreement of any other town or form of or political subdivision to say we're sharing resources for the thing nobody anticipated. Cost is a big factor. So it is a governance bill, it is a funding bill. We've designed this to actually be within the control of the towns to decide what money they are raising, which is what they currently do under the contract So we're not actually raising any new taxes or creating any new fees except for what the towns would willingly say through their governing model they want control of. When I frequently present this issue to people who are hearing it the first time, what I say is, I am the expense side of the spreadsheet. It costs to provide the service. I have to buy cars, I have to pay staff, federal law dictates, State law dictates the things I have to do. The treasurer's office is not happy if I do not pay the retirement. It's just how it is. So at the end of the day, I'm the expense side of the column. The towns are the revenue side of the column. I'm not the expert on how towns function. I work with all of them, though, and I want this to be successful for them. So what we're trying to do in the pilot project is come up with the answer that each of these studies have identified as problems and possible solutions. We boiled it down to be the critical components that must be addressed and what questions need to be answered so that we can answer those questions and potentially come back to the legislature at the end of this pilot project with a we answer these questions. We failed in these ways. We found successes in these ways that we have never practiced in the last seventy years. If we are successful, then I would like to think we will be successful. But if we are successful, I see this as an opportunity for Vermont to actually reduce duplication of services, reduce gaps in services, and finally be able to exercise what the studies have shown us over seventy years and have been consistent in saying the same thing. Where the studies have been different, does the state own it, do the towns own it, do we create a new form of government, do we rely on something like wastewater district, communications union district, school district? Don't forget some of the terms, but there are other subdivisions of government created in statute that could also be used that do have powers. What we will find is that oftentimes they either did not work or they are not used because they do not work well. So there are other ideas and well, they just they don't work. So we're trying to come up with something new that does it in a way. This is not designed to be the end all be all, so we are attaching to things that currently exist in law. I'll say right up front, we know that the county tax is not the most supported structure of taxation in the state of Vermont. There are frustrations by a variety of groups on how that works, why it works the way it does. It's what it is. There will be people saying, do we need county government? I'm not here to say we need county government or we don't, but there is an existing structure called the county tax that exists right now, and I don't have to figure that problem out if we can figure out the governance problem. Because what follows governance is funding, and if governance can be figured out and we can figure out the issues related to that, they will figure out the funding conversation. So we're trying to create an interim plan of funding. The funding again is already currently raised, so we're intentionally cannibalizing the funds raised by Wyndham County towns to support this instead of it going into the public safety contract line item for a town's budget. It will

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: go into the county tax line item for a town.

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: So whose service am I hurting? My own. Why am I doing it? Because it makes more sense, which then means I would work with a board to develop a budget, and that will feel very much like working with a town select board. But now I don't need to work with 15 boards with 15 different interests and 15 different levels of understanding, which I'm using 15 because that's what I currently contract with. There's two towns that want to contract, but they want what I'm selling, not what I currently have. And so they like the idea of the regional model better. So 17 towns in Woodland County have indicated their support. The bill before you is a starting point. I don't know that we even threaded the needle right because I'm not an expert on governance and funding. I'm an expert on law enforcement. Mhmm. So it's a starting point. We got it to a place where we said we can talk about this with people who matter to the conversation, the stakeholders of the group that care to the taxpayers. Like, it's a starting point, and there's things that we can fix. There's one issue and I'm not gonna get too deep into the details on it. There is one issue and that I do just wanna hit. Originally, when it was drafted, it indicates that the town would go on. They're joining at a town meeting.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: Mhmm.

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: That'll be

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: problematic for two reasons. One is time. If it's a five year pilot project, it would take two years for us to get this warrant, voted on, and then a budget passed for. So what we would like to do is just alter a minor piece of language to say, let the slide put aside. It's still gonna be the town meeting that authorizes the font. Logically, it would be the town's voters who are going to authorize the joining of it anyways, but it at least allows the select force to join. So that's really the one critique I can offer of the bill before you in its draft form. But we are excited to do this because it really solves what has been identified as the problems. There's an elephant in the room around the accountability of sheriffs. This is not intended to be a sheriff's accountability bill, but there are two things I'll say to the point of accountability for sheriffs. Thing number one, power of the purse. There's a way to control people when you control the purse. So there's the power of a purse, which it's an inferno, it is a soft power, but no less will call it out. This would also be an opportunity to identify future improvements around accountability to sheriffs. I've worked with this committee and the general assembly for many years around the professionalism and accountability of sheriffs. I do not want to try to submit and defend improper actions of sheriffs. It's never my intent. I do care about the institution of sheriff. I do believe that we are capable of providing things. I think there's an awesome power that the voters have to pick

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: who their law enforcement leader is by vote.

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: I think it's also very powerful and beneficial to have a fight to poll its chief, and that is a separate structure that exists, and towns can choose to select that as well. So I see duality to these systems where there are benefits that are provided, and I'm not going to sit here to try to antagonize either. But what we're trying to solve is, tenants currently feel they don't have the resources to do the things they want. There is a final problem that we are working to resolve in this. Before I stop and say it quite to other witnesses, which is really related to I apologize, I lost my train of thought. You know what? I'll just stop there. Fine. I'll come back

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: with them. You know, it'll just pop.

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: It will come back tonight.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So I'll get to senator Morley's question in a minute. Just for the benefit, I think we have four students from Middlebury College joining us today. For their benefit. We should and I don't know whether senator White and other senator

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: I know.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Get too deeply into this. But in Vermont, we are not organized county by county to a great extent. We have county courthouses and other actually, can't think of too many other things that are organized that way. Law enforcement is not one of them. So for instance, I'm from Rutland City or Rutland Town. The city of Rutland has their own professional law enforcement group. They're unionized, and there are, I think, 28, 32 officers there. So some areas in Rutland County, other towns, by default, fall to the state police for their law enforcement coverage. That is probably going to be talked about in this bill at some point because people that are already getting, in essence, free law enforcement from the state police sometimes don't wanna have the added burden of more taxes in order to get a more permanent law enforcement. And the city of Rutland's already paying for their own law enforcement group. So that figures into it. I just wanted to mention that at the outset. I'm not sure. I know, perhaps governor Douglas teaches that in school. I don't know what exactly the topics are, but we're not a county in in Florida, for instance, it's completely different. Florida is organized by county. The sheriffs there actually wind up with well, I'll I'll say from what I know, much more authority and much more flexibility in terms of law enforcement. The state police there basically patrol the interstates and and those speeding tickets, and that's upon you know, they get involved with investigation. But the sheriffs there are kings, if you will, or acquaintances with all that. Senator Morley. Mark. I've been

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: looking at doing something very similar to this up in the Northeast Kingdom in Orleans County dealing with fire. Mhmm. Same. And Tanya is the same same thing almost. And so I'd like to talk to you at some point off record on something like that. But the other thing I noticed in your bill is you're not looking at charging by grant list, you're looking at charging by population. I've tried both. It's kind of interesting because some towns can be very wealthy with very few people in them, but they're wealthy. So you there there may be a little glitch there because I've looked into that as far as ambulance services as well. And so, and I think I wanted to use the exact same thing in Orleans County, and I've got a lot of pushback too. And so I'd love to, work on this bill and go through it with you folks. I think this is then going to open the door, you may say, into other areas. So I truly believe it is

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: the same problem, and I will be quickly kicked in the shin if I say, let's do it. Because the reality is is one of the the significant issues becomes the politics around how to manage existing infrastructure. And that is one of the issues, especially as, like, we talk about dispatch. Dispatch is the first thing everyone jumps to. Yeah. Second thing is schools. And it's like, I'm not an expert on schools. I am an expert on dispatching, but I'm not gonna go there for a second because we also know that that is an incredibly complex thing. And we don't want to be upsetting anyone's fear around their own safety, whether it's medical safety, buyer safety. I'm here to talk about public safety broadly. So to that end, is it the same problem that you're probably looking at with fire departments? Yes. And there have been groups that have said, how do we regionalize? And it has turned into an absolute knockdown, drag out for the very personal and emotional reasons that are tied to some of the small rural fire departments or EMS or other types of departments. One of the reasons why I come before you, Windham County would have been the same conversation with police departments five years ago. After COVID, if we saw a significant shift and I would not be before you without the support of the police department saying this actually makes sense, and we should finally fund the sheriff the way it should work because it's kinda weird when the car goes off the road and Bradenburg PD is leaving the town of Bradenburg where they're paying taxes to by the town in Bradenburg to support the town of Dominick.

[Josh Hanford (Vermont League of Cities and Towns)]: So and you're absolutely right. So with the fire departments, it's mutual aid system. Right? So you have

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: some very strong fire departments and not so strong fire departments. Well, we can get

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: a call at mutual aid because there's no funds. Well, we can get paid. Right. That's a Okay. Senator.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Can I just ask you to jump out of that chair? I wanna get our legal counsel back in. Technically, that's supposed to be reserved for our lawyer, but I he's out of the hall because there's too many people. Tim?

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: Tim, are you there? You can get another chair over here.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Right. Chair is liberated.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: That's right. Senator Clucks.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: I'm delighted that you're doing this finally. This committee, under Senator White's leadership many years ago when Brian and I served with Jeanette, we have been looking at regionalization for a long time. We did a statewide tour, around this very subject, and we did look at regionalization of EMS, fire Dispatch. Dispatch, and police. That's our ideal. It's efficient. It's smart governance. It's smart use of taxpayer dollars. And more importantly, it's smart deployment of our resources to reminders. Remoders may be having a domestic violence incident in a very remote town. Right now, a state police dispatch from Westminster could take almost an hour to get to it. Fire could take longer. If they're in a town that has no volunteers in their fire department and their fire department is really squeezed, this is an equity issue, a big equity issue for all Vermonters, access to public safety, fire, health, all the things we're talking about. I think starting here makes a lot of sense. I applaud you. I know who you're working with. You have a great team in Wyndham County, and I really am so excited to see you move this forward at least with one piece of what does need long term to be, all needs to be regionalized for the benefit of Vermont, not just those little independent departments.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Senator Vyhovsky?

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I'm curious, you know, given that it would that Senator Karpz is saying it would take BSP maybe an hour or fire an hour, why would it take the sheriffs less time?

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: So I don't wanna speak to other agencies and what their abilities to respond are or are not. We've been through the three years that we've been working on this, we've started working with towns to geographically share resources. And so the example I used is probably in Westminster. The two towns have talked about the same population right next door to each other. Those two towns have been sharing the resources of two deputies. They each pay for one, and it's the geographic proximity to the resource that's available. Where this doesn't work is in the town of Londonderry, which is at the corner of Windham County and the town of Vernon, the exact opposite corner, who would be willing to work together if it weren't for the distance between the two. And so all of this comes down to geographic proximity to each other and that ability to pay for resources. One of the reasons we went with the per capita is actually because town town leaders, I'm sorry, board town administrators or town managers said it is a better system for them. And back to my original statement on the expense side, so if all the money is raised, I sure. If it makes sense for you, it's fine. I originally went with Brandless because that made sense, and it was the town leaders had said, no. We've worked per capita. So I don't understand that system, that's where I depend on other stakeholders. But why would it be different? Because we would resource it and have the conversation with the elected officials to say it. As it occurs right now, when I present a contract to one of the 15 towns I currently work with, they're negotiating their own individual service. So that's a fee for service per hour. Town of Domerson negotiates about twenty hours per month. Town of Putney negotiates forty hours per week. So there's very quickly this resource difference based on what they negotiated for the service and the coverage that they want. I remember the one thought, and thank you, Senator Collamore, for actually kicking this thought loose. One of the services the sheriff provides is to transport prisoners of the state of Vermont. We're not talking about that today. The civil process is not talking about that. And assist parties with final relief from abuse orders retrieving their property. We're not talking about that. None of that list was talking about providing law enforcement to towns. That is a right codified to the state of Vermont and funded to the Vermont state police. Towns are enabled but not required to provide policing. There's no obligation a town has a police department. And so then there becomes this issue of why are there towns that have it and towns that do not have it. Bravo is what we call a town, one of the hubs. While it's not I'm not here to talk about the hub and spoke model from the Department of Health. Similar to the hub and spoke model, the town of Bravo's day or nighttime population is about 12,000 people. The daytime population is about 40,000 people. So 12,000 people are paying for the services rendered to anyone who's coming into the town that's not paying taxes, and this begins another funding conversation. So we have a governance and funding bill. There's a Supreme Court decision from the sixties, it was known as Stoe v. Lemoyle, that talks about the authority that the county has to raise taxes for sheriffs. And the Supreme Court ruled that the county is not empowered to raise taxes except for the things that the legislature has granted the authority for. So if the legislature granted the towns the authority to raise funding for policing, which is what this bill intends to do, then they would be able to do it. Why would they have access to it? Because they could say, we have approximately seven forty square miles and we feel an appropriate number of resources is this number of law enforcement officers per square mile. Or as it currently is represented, we have one law enforcement officer per 42 square miles of window fury. Sandra Vyhovsky?

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: So the Vermont state police are ostensibly overseen by the state of Vermont, and a statistical police force is ostensibly overseen by the municipality, but sheriffs don't really have any foresight. So who would what would be the oversight mechanism?

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: Part of the governance model is to create there are many names that I'm going call this. I'm going to leave all of the names out because two people that have each name means something different, but we would need to navigate the name. What this body would be or what this bill would be doing is creating a governing body that oversees the funding mechanism and basically works as a legislative body for sure. Just like a select

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: port would for town.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Overseeing the funding mechanism is different than overseeing the law enforcement.

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: So again, this is a pilot project to establish some of the, some of the things that are, protected, under the constitution that then become a far different conversation. But those are things we wanna identify through the pilot project to say that this would need to necessarily change. It's hard to explain the idea of what needs to change in the constitution and have support for it if we can't even envision the things if we have not been able to exercise, that have been identified through those studies as things we need to figure out. So what we want to do is through a pilot project explain the thing so that we can then explain the change that would need to necessarily happen, whether it's in statute or in the constitution or both. But we really want to visualize it, make it tangible to people so that then they can embrace and support future changes that will be necessary.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I appreciate that.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Senator Clarkson?

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: We used the word earlier population, and I assumed law enforcement, just like fire, just like you meant, we cover all population, whether it's part time population or full time. So the challenge of going to the two choices, you had grand list, and what was the other one?

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: Grand list and population.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Yeah, just go ahead. So the population challenge is full time or part time, and that we cover part time population. So how do how are you envisioning including our seasonal residents?

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: I don't know, and that's why I think this is a really cool bill for the legislature to help me figure No, I do not try to take that too loosely. I believe originally when I came up with the funding model, it was formula of three things. One was a split of population and grant less ability to pay and the correlation to need. So that would represent about 80%. And then a third smaller percentage, maybe 20%, maybe less around demand. There are some agencies who use a rolling average of call volume in a town to drive what that should be. At one point in dispatch, I'll talk about dispatch only briefly, they were saying, hey, you're gonna pay per call, which then creates an opportunity that you can skew the funding model based on how you record this in the industry. And so that's where we started, and it was the town leaders who said per capita is better. Like, it works. We are doing it on waste management. We're doing it on EMS. We're doing it on fire. We're doing it on this, this, this. And so this is where

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: fine as long as you count your part time population who are full time, many of them, for three or four months. Yeah.

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: And these are all issues that I can acknowledge I'm not the expert to,

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: and that's

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: why I want to bring forward witnesses that would say, this is how we would navigate that issue. And that's where I'm working with the League of Cities and Towns to say, I'm not trying to I'm not trying to represent, be the representative of town. My customers are towns, and so I'm trying to make them happy. So VLCT also represents all of almost all of or all the towns in the state of Vermont. So to make this work for the whole state, we want VLCT as a partner, but I'm working with the Wyndham Hemp.

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: I'm gonna

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: just have one last question. Having just seen Jen Morrison upstairs, I assume you've had some conversations with Jen by other department, and my guess is there are some issues to work out there. How are those conversations going? Issues around? Oh, it's sort of common territory. I mean, it's a it's a it's a con you know, you have territorial issues there.

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: Two of the problems we're trying to solve is duplication and funding. So we're talking about multi taxation. In some cases, it's not just double taxation, triple taxation. So duplications of funding and then gaps. So there are places where I'm funded to provide resources, so the state police are funded to provide resources, and then there's places that have dug. What do we do? So what we're trying to do is say, can we be logical

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Well, no place has none because, technically, the Vermont State Police are supposed to cover everything that is not covered by you, by contract, or by a police department. So I they're supposed to be there isn't shouldn't be any nuns. Yeah. I would But maybe nuns some are, but they not too many.

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: Legally, will be no. No. The problem is and this is some of the reason why I have on parish with Townsend is to say we're not getting enough resources. I have six troopers, full staff, state police. I have six troopers that cover two counties. Mhmm. So That's Westminster. Westminster covers Wyndham and Windsor Counties. And so the problem that we run into is what happens when the six troopers are tied up at full staff. Yeah. And what happens when the state police have been saying for the last several years, we don't have full stop. Rutland is also the Rutland Barracks also is responsible for Windsor and or Yeah. So right now, my department does work in areas that are duplicated by the state police coverage in that technical sense. Putney and Westminster being an example. We provide eighty hours of coverage to the towns of Putney and Westminster jointly. So a hundred and sixty eight hours in a week, we cover eighty. Who covers the rest? The state police. What happens when a call comes in while we're covering? We take it. When they're covering, technically, they take it. What we'd realize, we take a hundred and sixty eight hours worth of call volume except an actual emergency, which then the state police respond because they don't have the ability to respond to, my car was broken into and there's no one around, and there's not a safety issue. They're tied up on a domestic. They're tied up on a dead body. They're tied up on a sexual assault. Like, there's things that they're tied up on. There's a lack of resource. Let me just suggest that rather than try

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: to solve Yeah. I just wanna walk through the bill. Tim, I don't know if you have any time constraints. If you do, then you can go next, and we'll wind it up with Senator White. If not, we'll have Senator White go first.

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: I just have to be another committee at 03:00.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Okay. Senator White, how long were you prepared to speak?

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: One hour and a half. No.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Do you mind if Jim goes first? We'll just quickly walk through the bill. Okay. Thanks, Brian. Appreciate it. So it's a nine page bill. Provide a little bit of direction. You have questions for our attorney, please make sure they're above what the words are on the paper and not intent or anything else because it'll just take forever

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: to get through it otherwise. Appreciate it. Thank you. Well, you're welcome. Thank you very much for having me, committee member. For the record, my name is Tim Douglas, legislative council. So before you, you have the s two five five as introduced by senators Harrison and Ashish. This is an act or really a bill related to the establishing of a pilot law enforcement governance council in the Windham County. This bill proposes to create pilot program named the Wyndham County Law Enforcement Governance Council to provide orchestrated law enforcement and related services to participate for municipalities within Wyndham County. So all of this is session it's not going into Vermont's statue. It's annotated largely because there's an expiration date to it, and implied during the same pilot. It will just kind of it is set to expire at either a certain time or a certain set of events that we get into later. So this will read, like, establishment of another kind of annual government entity. However, there's no real statutory sections referenced throughout the Swan for life as a Swan. So start off with definitions on page one here. A short follow on, perhaps it is, I guess, to you to sign up what level walkthrough of Texas. Would check them online, or

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: 35,000 feet.

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: Okay, sure. So definitions, we'll just kind of really skim through those. Council is the council itself, member municipalities, or distinguished from non member municipalities, based on public and public safety services is worth mentioning here just because that means law enforcement, dispatch services, animal control, and other related services as determined by the council. It's important to point out that these will be interpreted by the council to assess that by the. So section two, authorization establishment, discuss to the circumstances in which it is created and, I guess, brought into existence. So the council shall be established and to be here when five or more municipalities vote to become another municipalities. And the c, council shall be established and associated operations to the end taxation shall commence on either the life first term crisis or that date of which the five more members really come together, whichever first. But membership is described in section three. So we have how municipal is entered into it, essentially joined in this council, and it has to be done by a majority of the, by the populace of the town, either an annual or a special town meeting or for that purpose, and there's specific language to the question.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Got I Senator White?

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White]: On this point, before you go to third, Tim, we did have a discussion about perhaps the language in section three might need to be changed to reflect the municipal legislative body making the decision rather than the town for speediness. I'm just wondering if you the way this is written now, it would only be something you could do through your town meeting, or is this something that you could even open meeting as well. It could be a special

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: It's a vote about the process. Yeah. Anything could be changed. So Yeah. Direction. Okay. So now moving on to some of the entitlements and duties, and b, we'll get to a more exhaustive thought. Should describe both the rich section that have the powers and duties. But in essence, see, each member of municipality shall have one representative with one vote on the council, and that representative has to be a serving select board member of that municipality. And that municipality can for the 411,112 individuals. Each member group is valid for civil law enforcement related services, sixty five zero, and it's 500 council, just a reminder. And it will pay its proportion share of costs through accounting tax mechanism, which we'll get into in more detail in the. And then there's exit provision here in sub subsection c and which states, member who's filed may withdraw from accounts by majority vote at an annual or special town meeting with such withdrawal becoming effective at the end of the next fiscal year following the vote. So enter by vote of the populist. Okay. So moving up to the governance structure of the council itself and section of board here, we're on page three. The council shall consist of, again, one representative from each nonfuspality, and they shall elect on the membership chair, vice chair, and as an officer, secretary treasurer, been recently quarterly and by the votes in force, we have page four under the powers and duties of counsel. So they can adopt bylaws and operation of counsel. They can determine the annual budget for law enforcement related services. Get into that next section. They can establish the level and scope of services being delivered to nonverbal municipalities. They can develop standards and performance metrics for delivering law enforcement and services. They can monitor service delivery and evaluate appropriate conductance and submit the approved budgets to assist judges accounting budget and is in turn to agreements necessary for the provision of services, both the contracting sorry. The budgeting is the section five that provisional services be a contract in section six.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Senator Vyhovsky?

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: All of the things I'm going through now would be decided by the council and voted on by the public, voted on by the select I'm just trying to

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: Sure. So The Bahamas of Beach Town are really they're the ones who've decided entering an exit. Duties and powers I just enumerated, those will be in session law, and so those provide the guardrails for what, you know, is not permitted. Certain elements within that are up to the discretion of the council to determine in with further levels deeper levels of detail. For example, what those global scope of services are, what the standards and performance metrics are, and and what the budget is, and, let me save a little more information, what the definition of public safety services related to building needs. So the council had a discretion to flush out a lot of zone operational aspects. But here yeah. So I would say local legislative bodies are empowered to affect the operation of the council through, you know, that one designated they have on board member of the president, one for the other public justice, other member of the staff.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: Now if a municipality were to have an individual contract with a sheriff or have their own municipal police, that budget and that information goes to the voters to vote on every town meeting. I I certainly know that our police budget goes to our voters in Essex.

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: As part of the overall term budget?

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: It I mean, it's a line it's a line item that we should get. Yeah. Yeah.

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: Sorry. I'm I'm not quite sure.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: I'm just wondering if that's true across towns that if they're not utilizing the this sort of council sheriff system, if if voters really get to vote on or if it's the municipal body?

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: As far as the putting this proposal aside, regular contract

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White]: Yeah.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: So I'm trying to compare this to what we're currently doing.

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: Contracts with sheriffs are a matter of public record and usually come before a decided legislative body council, select board, etcetera, board of all the people. And that contract is approved in a public setting and so it's assuming they have

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: The Budget line item is in our town budget, whatever they've contracted. Sure. We can both.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: Well, it can do. It also goes to the public. I remember a very I remember a very public debate in Randolph recently about the expansion of policing, specifically. It wasn't just a line item. I'm

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: I think there's a terrorist, like, public safety budget could be the matter of a specific public question. Okay. Would be appropriation to Okay. But I don't think there's anything to preclude that I I would have to work at the back to give you a true

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: because the sheriff's contract is if they contract with the share the share of contract and the line that that cost is in every town budget and we all know about this. Yeah. And they're subject of some it's fierce to make. I have been on meetings where they have been. Those items have been withdrawn. So

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: now we move on to the section five, halfway through page four here, about budgeting, 5p. And if lunch is being worth going through, it's verbatim. So, Tanya, your counsel shall prepare and approve a budget with law enforcement and related services for the following year. Budget self specific specified total amount needed for those services. And the budget shall the approved budget shall be submitted to the Wyndham Academy of Assistant Judges on or before December 1 of each year. Sub second b, the assistant judges shall include the council's approved budget as a separate item in the county budget. The county treasurer shall levy and collect a special assessment for the grand list member because. Well, we just wanna stop it. I'll assess it there because it was conversation about doctor Bergerich and portion with to each municipality. Sorry. Please. Let me read that again. The county treasurer shall levy and collect a special assessment on the grand list of member who's found this only in proportion to each municipality's violation. Nonmember municipality shall not be assessed or charged for council services, and funds collected shall be segregated and used solely for the purpose of the council. Seems the cost of each member is fine. Okay. And I should just note that in subsection d, there's an annual audit there to be performed by the defense and the CPA. Moving on to section c, we have the service delivery. And so if Wyndham County Sheriff's Department shall provide law enforcement and related services to member municipalities specified by the council, and pursuant to 24 VSA two ninety one, the chief counsel and sheriff shall enter into an annual certificate contract in those service agreements. And now we have some additional specifications, including the types and levels of services to be provided, standards and performance metrics needed, reporting requirements, and allocation of resources. And let's see. Then c is kind of a preservation clause. Law enforcement services shall be coordinating with law state law enforcement agencies, existing member and nonmember municipal law enforcement agencies, and emergency services to ensure efficiency resource utilization. Next, we move on to reporting and evaluation. Let's say that we do an annual report and then a final comprehensive evaluation of the program, course termination. Section eight, gets the limitations and protections and speaks to, what will not affect nonmember municipalities. So the nonmember municipalities shall not be assessed in cause relief to council operations. They shall continue to receive state police services as currently provided and retain all rights established to establish their own local gun enforcement agencies and contract law enforcement services. Doesn't necessarily need to be stated, but it's a well suspension project. So and then nothing herein shall affect the constitutional or statutory duties of Woodland County Sheriff or alter state police responsibilities coverage impact existence, law enforcement agencies, or law of fines as a potential. Then we have the determination of sunset provisions here, which we wanna teach. So there's a hard backstop date of council ceasing to exist on 06/30/2034. There's also in the event, there's a contingency essentially that in the event a member of member municipalities is reduced to one, The council shall be deemed terminated. Five to establish. This goes from two to one. This is the time. It's stronger than that one. Then let's see. Whichever occurs first, really, the council shall cease operations, and any remaining shall be returned proportionally by population to current and prior members. It is valid. It valid. The is valid. And then should be terminated on terms. And then let's see. Then such incentives conforming amendments to the necessary codes. Possible with constant early provisions in '24. '24, again, is where we have this one carried along by the Christian Holt. Then we have to take the. Thank

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: you, Jim. You're welcome. Senator White, would you like to join us? Sure.

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: Yeah. We're kinda playing musical chairs.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Oh, hi.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: Hi. Thanks. Nice to be on this end of day.

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: Yeah. Gonna say,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: table. View's a little better.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: It view's a little better.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: I don't know about that.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: Okay, so thank you. I prepared some stuff. Mark went over a lot of it. So some of it will be repetitive because we didn't coordinate what we were going to say. Mark said, I'll say what I'm gonna say. And I said, I'll say what I'm saying. I said,

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: if Can you do this for the record?

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Oh, I'm sorry. For the record, Jeanette White, it's a Windup County resident. And I'm saying, sir.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Always a senator.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Always a senator. Always a senator.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: A governor. Thank you, Tim.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: So, I am gonna answer some of the questions that came up, but I wanna go through my chart, was gonna say. Serving on this committee for twenty years gave me some insight into our law enforcement system. While the players, for the most part, are good, the system itself defies logic and explanation. Studies going back to 1972, probably even farther, have made recommendations, but there have only been nibbling at the edges of those recommendations. Most have never even been seriously considered. As an aside, I can say, and Alan and Senator Clarkson mentioned it, that I don't know how long ago, we had a tour of the state and we went to at least eight.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: It was 17 or 18.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Yeah, I can remember going. You were both on the committee and Senator Pearson was on there and he went kicking and screaming on the tour because he didn't want to have anything to do with listening to law enforcement. When we got done, he was very happy to have heard what he heard. We went to eight different places and heard from between four hundred and five hundred people. So, they talked to us about what they needed and often what they didn't get from the system. I feel like a little kid as a supplicant because it's a lot work. I've got

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: a lot of chairs.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Yeah, okay. So, their input, the reports and the input from those people is what led me to stay on this path. I am surprised that I'm here, but here I am. One common theme from those reports and hearings was the need for regional policing. With the exception of a few places in Chittenden County where there are abutting towns with existing police departments, this has not been seriously addressed elsewhere. Wyndham County has four towns with police departments, well, three towns and one village. They are spread out. They are not abiding. I could be wrong, but my guess is that the reason this works in Chittenden County, its towns, is that they each have their own PD and they can have cooperative agreements. A problem for communities in Windham County because they're spread out. They do not have a budding police department. On the tour that I mentioned, we heard from two towns that had actually tried this. Manchester had a police department. Arlington did not. Arlington contracted with Manchester Police Department and the town of Manchester to provide police services for them, but soon became very disenfranchised with it and unhappy with the arrangement because they felt they had no say in the policies or the enforcement and what was happening with the police department. They were just contracting. And it was the Manchester Select Board that actually made the rules. And Manchester Police Department agreed with their assessment, so they canceled the contract. In William County, we've been working on this idea for a really long time. As you've heard from Mark, from Sheriff Anderson, twenty five years ago, the sheriff and two police chiefs worked on this. They had a brilliant proposal. It was it would have worked. It was great. And then one of the police chiefs died. The other one moved on to take a job with the state, and the sheriff retired. And the vet. Most recently, Sheriff Anderson has been working on this for three years. He has met with town managers, select boards, assistant judges, interested public legislators. In fact, he meets with anybody who will listen to him, and with some people who won't listen to him, and he still meets with them. The town and the county are ready for this. So sheriff Anderson has explained why this is needed from a law enforcement perspective. That's his area of expertise, although he probably won't admit it, but he has many more areas of expertise than just law enforcement. But I'm going to talk just a little bit about funding and governance. So the proposal creates a governance structure that has oversight, is made up of those it serves, and has authority. The proposed council will be made up of a select board member from each of the participating towns. We originally thought that it could just be any person from a town appointed by the select board. But the VLCT felt very strongly, and I do agree with them, that a select board member has the responsibility for preparing the town budget. And so they have a vested interest in making sure that this budget is well prepared. So I think it does make sense to have it be a member of the select board that is on the council. So each participating town will have a representative. They will oversee the budget working with the sheriff and then they will either accept the budget or change it and then it will be given to the assistant judges. There also will be many governance questions for them to answer and some of those questions have been raised, like how will we do performance? Some of them are in the bill. There will be others that are raised that aren't in there. And they will answer those questions in the same manner in the same democratic way that other councils committees select boards commissioners do they talk it out and they figure it out just like the five of you do you figure it out you vote on it and that's the way it happens. They'll do it in the same way. Two more people sitting around the table, but that's okay. The question of timing and allowing the select board or the legislative body, I think it's all select boards in our case, to vote on this instead of having a special town meeting. There are pros and cons in both ways, but I believe that it would put this off for at least two years, probably three, if it had to go to a town meeting. There is no town in Windham County, I can practically guarantee, that would have a special town meeting just for this. Special town meetings are expensive to run, they are hard to get people to attend, and they're not going to do it. So, if it were left up to the legislative body to decide that they were going to join into this and send somebody to the governance council, then it would speed it up. And also would allow then the governance council to begin to work. There wouldn't be any funding for this for at least another year and a half because they still have to figure out a budget and give it to the assistant judges. So that would happen for a while. But it would allow them to start addressing some of the questions of governance. And they need to be able to do that sooner than two years down the road. You'll hear from some that this is a new tax and that our governor has said no on new taxes. This is not a new tax, and it has nothing to do with the state or the governor's budget. This is purely a town issue. Right now, towns determine their budget, and it's paid for by their property tax. So this will this won't be any different. This will be something that the town votes on or if they vote on the budget. They're gonna have to vote on this budget. So it is not a new tax. And currently, the towns that do contract with the sheriff are paying through their property tax. So that won't change at all. It will still be paid through the property tax. Some towns may see higher county assessment and sometimes towns may see a lower county assessment. We did have a suggestion at one point to base the assessment on a combination of population, Sheriff Anderson said, use, but also of the geographic, how much coverage was there? Did you have to cover three square miles or 47 square miles? Because that could determine how much coverage you needed. The towns said population. And I can answer Senator Clarkson's question about part time people. The way right now, you probably know that we have a regional rescue EMS system, and that is done by population. And it's done by using the census. Pretty clear. If the census puts people in there that are part time, that's what we use. And the towns are very happy with that, I believe, most of them. So that is the way it would be done by the census. And I know we had an issue with one town, for example, that during COVID, probably a bazillion people came up to this little town and decided they were going to live there. And then census was done during that time. So their census went way up, and then the people decided that it was too remote and too cold, and so they moved back. And so their census went down. And so they asked us to adjust their fee, if that's what you want to call it, based on their lesser census. We said, I happen to be on that board also. We said, no. We're basing this on the census, and if we had to change it every time somebody moves in or out of a town, it wouldn't work. So, that answers your question about population, I hope And it it is the towns that wanted it by population instead of the pay. Yeah. We yeah. I already talked about the post reform. And then the budget will be voted on at the meeting, and then it'll go to the or it'll be voted on at the governance council. It will then go to the assistant judges. They'll make the assessment and they'll assess the towns. Whether it somebody at appropriations just asked me if there would be a separate line on your tax bill that came about that would be up to the county assistant judges, I would assume, to see how they wanted to do. Right now, there is a county tax that's listed separately from it's a county assessment, and so we know what we're paying to the county. But how they keep this separate, if it's just an internal thing so they know what they're tracking and what gets spent, or what actually goes on. That's up to the assistant judges.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Senator Morley, I thought I had it Senator White and then

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: I might have lost it for a second. So the select board is going to appoint one of

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: their members to the council. Yes.

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: Then the council comes up with a budget. Yes, yes. And then it goes, once it gets approved by the council, it then goes to the assistant judges, and then they they create a tax rate and But bill the

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: the

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: town the the town isn't approving the budget.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: The town is going to pay for it in their no, they're not approving the budget. Correct. The town is not.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: That's what I'm saying. So, currently,

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: it's gonna be up to the council

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: Yes. To approve that. Okay.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Didn't we

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: got it.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Yeah, and that is one of the reasons why BLCT felt strongly, and I agree with them, that it should be a SLAP board member on that council so that they have some knowledge of what's happening with the rest of their town. I mean, you don't want me to be on that council deciding what the budget should be because I'm not currently on the select board.

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: So then the county tax then goes to the towns.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Yes, assessed

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: and

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: goes

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: to And then it goes into the selectman's budget typically. Yeah. And it's paid for by everyone. Right. Okay.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I got it.

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: Thank you. Okay.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: That makes sense.

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: Yeah. I got it.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Alright. Great.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Senator Clark.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: And also, Janet, as you know, when we have extraordinary county expenses like the renovation of the courthouse or something, we they tend to do it as as a special item, like courthouse renovations. For a pilot like this, I would think they might have it as for five years running the budget for its law enforcement pile over here.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Would leave that to the county judges because they know what they're doing, the assistant judge. We do have assistant judges. I know that Senator Collamore talked to you about our county and we do have county assistant judges. And the reason we have county assistant judges, my understanding is because it used to be the Yorkers that came in, and has he talked to you about this, Governor Douglas? A little bit. Yeah, We didn't trust the Yorkers apparently, so couldn't avoid our judges, and so we had to have our own side judges to sit there and oversee the Yorker judges. Okay? Yeah, right.

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: Pretty close, isn't it?

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Are you gonna know that?

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: I didn't know that.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Oh, maybe I made it up, but I don't think so. So, a couple other items, and then I'm gonna answer a couple more questions. So you might hear that the assistant judges do not have the time or the capacity to do this. But remember, this is not affecting any assistant judges except those two in Windham County. And those two in Windham County have assured us that they are in favor of this, that they have the capacity and they've been dealing. So that's a kind of a good argument. You'll also hear it's not needed because the Vermont State Police provides coverage. I think that our towns are the better people to tell you why that isn't true. With the Vermont State Police are understaffed. They are covering way, way too much. They it it will take a long time for somebody to get from the Westminster Barracks to Halifax. And it will take less time for the sheriff's office because the council will determine the coverage and how they're going to put people. And maybe they'll have outposts. Maybe the sheriff will have an office in, well the sheriff does have an office in Pugby, in our fire station. They may have an office in London there in the town office or something. There will be better coverage, and it'll be faster. But our our towns will talk to you about why the Vermont State Police and I'm not dissing them because I think they do a good job of what they do, but they're understaffed, and they shouldn't be providing primary police coverage for all those towns. You may also hear that regional policing is a great idea, but it should not be done by the sheriffs. In the fifty years that we've been looking at these studies, and this has been considered, no one else has come up with a proposal. It's complete silence, and no one else has come up with this. Now we finally have a well thought out proposal. It seems the sheriffs are the exact entity to do it. They're already a county entity. They just aren't paid to do it by the county. Ask your constituents in your rural communities, not your metropolitan communities or those that have police departments, but in your rural communities, ask them who they think provides coverage if they call, if they have a break in or something. And most likely, most of them will say the sheriff, Because that's what we think of, is the sheriff is a county entity and provides the coverage. But they're not paid to do it, and so they should be doing it, but they're not paid to do it. But I would ask you to ask your constituents who they think does it. And when they find out that the sheriff isn't paid to do that, they're pretty surprised most of it. And you already have a, well, oh did you have a? Don't sheriff's offices contract to do that office and thus get paid to do the work they're doing? Yeah, if they contract with the town, yeah. Okay, so they are getting paid then if they're providing assistance. If they're, so here's an example. We have a town in our county. It's a relatively wealthy town. They contract $12,000 a year,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: I believe, is what it is.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: It's primarily for speed control on two roads that are notorious. When somebody wants to, or when somebody has a break in, they call the sheriff and say, Can you come and do this? And the sheriff says, No, I can't do it. So, they're surprised because they think that the sheriff is providing primary coverage, not specific animal control or speeding control. So, the town wants to contract with the sheriff for complete coverage twenty four seven, then they'd they'd be paying for it. Yeah. So they are they are paying. They are but unless the town is contracting, they're not paying it. But they're also not getting the services if they're not contracting. Right, right. So the sheriff is not doing work for free. Well, it's No, I didn't say the sheriff was doing work for free. I said ask your constituents who they think would be providing them with primary coverage. And my guess is they will think that it is the sheriff if they don't have a police department. But they're wrong because the sheriff isn't providing it because he or she is a feeding pig. So

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Senator. Sergeant Clarkson. So this is one of our favorite subjects as we discuss this regionalization. And I remember very clearly Brian and I having real disagreements about expectations. Residents expect that when something goes wrong, there'll be a state police there immediately, or there'll be a sheriff there, whatever. Their expectation is that this service is provided and then it will be there within ten minutes. And they are stunned to lurk, as I have discovered, representing many towns, that those services don't exist, that their services are listed, or that service does exist, but is ineffective because it takes too long to get there. So, is stunning, I think that we were most surprised to really get educated about what people's expectations are, and particularly our seasonal population. They have very different expectations than our our full time residents who may be clear on who is in and out of their town budgets and in and out of their contracts with their sheriffs.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: And I do think it's it's reasonable that if you build a house like I did up on the top of a hill and then down in a hollow that can't be accessed by anything other than a power wagon, that you need to expect that if you have an emergency, whether it's a fire or a break in or a medical emergency, it's going to take them longer to get to you than if you live in the village of Pumany. So, there has to be that expectation, but there still is an expectation that there is going to be coverage, even if it takes a little longer in some areas.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: And also people's expectations with the internet and with our bill, and instant answers to everything. Everybody's expectations really are perhaps unrealistic.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Oh, they are. So you already have commissioned a study of county government. Right. You've already done that. I have no idea where you are. I would love to We're in a law. A part of that as I talked to senator Collamore about that. But so you're already looking at this. This is a pile that could give you some information around that when you finally get around to doing it. So it seems that you're already thinking about about this, then this might be helpful to you. And, Senator, Sheriff Anderson addressed the elephant in the room, and I'm going to say just a word about that. I think the distrust of our sheriffs seems to become a rallying cry lately, and I am very sorry for that. There are rogue sheriffs, just as there are bad players in every profession. If we looked at any profession, you could probably find them. Massage therapists, legislators, who knows? Mean, no, know, did, did I say legislators? Oh.

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: I did. It's

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White]: what you're saying. Did not mean that.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: We did hear. There were there were huge issues with No. Gosh.

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White]: There are No. There are

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Yes. Oh, we And we're seeking to give them oversight. And Yes. Yes. We're working on that. So there are five. And they are hard to deal with our Rome shares. I understand that. But there are plenty of really, really good ones. Windham County, Chittenden County, Orleans County, Lemoyle, they're good people. And I don't paint the sheriffs as a profession with the same brush that you paint the other people. These are hardworking, really good sheriffs, and they should not be suffering for the misdeeds of others. I really believe that.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Senator Vyhovsky?

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: My concern is the lack of oversight, and the lack of any ability to do anything. Five sheriffs in the last few years have been charged as some type of It's not one like and there's nothing we can do. Yes. Two days ago, a sheriff was Yep. Arrested on 12 very serious counts and has flatly said, won't resign. There's nothing we can do. My issue is not painting all sheriffs as terrible as terrible. I don't think they are. My issue is there's nothing we can do if they are. And I have a real challenge saying, sure. Have more power. Have more that you're doing when right now the sheriff may be wonderful, but who knows who comes next? Yes, so if I can just respond to that. I think you're right. It is in the constitution, so there would have to be some constitutional changes, I believe. But let me just read my last paragraph here and then I hopefully might answer some of that. So there are many questions to be asked and answered about this proposal. But remember, this is a very limited, very limited, and it's a pilot. It's limited to Windham County. It's limited to law enforcement, and it's time limited. The questions are best answered by those that are impacted, the towns. They should be answering the questions through the council. The council working with the sheriff, the towns, towns with the PDs, the assistant judges, VLCT, professionals, and others are in the best position to answer all the questions that have and will be raised. They will be addressing them in real time and in real situations, not a hypothetical situation with no context. This is the exact purpose and definition of a pilot. So in between this pilot and your study on county government, perhaps some of those answers will come. But they're not going to come, I hate to say this, but they're not going to come by a group of legislators sitting around, not in a situation where they're on the ground looking at this. It's hypothetical and you're looking at, you're not talking to the people who are really impacted. And I believe that a pilot like this can answer some of those questions. I really do. Those, am I? No, sir.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Oh, okay. So

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: I think that that is an issue. I think it's an issue, and I don't know how to solve it, but I think that there are minds out there that can grapple with it and maybe they'll come up with a way of doing it. Maybe this council morphs into something that really is foversight. I don't know. Those are the kinds of questions that should be answered in a pilot. They should not be answered well no luck. Yes.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Let's see. Senator White?

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Sorry. Senator White. Oh, no, you Senator White. Yes. Yes. I don't have to cut off your remarks. No, I think that I, I think I've answered all of them. The town meeting doesn't bother on the details. Already got them. Oh,

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White]: you, Senator Vyhovsky. So my main Thank you, Senator Vyhovsky. My main question Well, first of all, I'm very in favor of this. I think it's a great idea. I think I it's like, where has this been? Oh, dreamed of this for a while. And I and I told but I hear what the senator to my left is saying, seeing that Windsor County has been all over the news Yeah. The last few days. Yeah. It's extremely disturbing. Mhmm. But I kinda see them as, like, separate like, I see I see this as almost like a separate conversation from that one in a way. But I wanted to ask, do you yeah. So that's that's kinda how my brain's working on this. So I wanted to voice that. And then just as a question, will this actually like, so these towns want to go into these agreements. So essentially, you're gonna have 17 towns. That's gonna be a much bigger amount of staff and requirements, and it just seems like it's gonna really explode the requirements of the workload. And that's my only concern is I don't want it to be set up in a situation where I mean, if you if we did this in Windsor County, we'd have every town for the most part that's not serviced in some way going, yeah. Let me sign up for this. We need public safety. Right. And it concerns me that there would be I mean, are you are you thinking through how you would stagger adding folks so you're not coming into an agreement where suddenly there's just not the resources to provide the service.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: I I guess that's my fear. So first of all, if the if the select boards can enter into this agreement, then they can set up the council, which can start working on some of those questions. Okay. Working with the sheriff and the council, they would determine what level of coverage do you want. And that level of coverage is going to cost a certain amount of money. So they would then decide, oh, well, we really don't want that level of coverage. Maybe we want a slightly higher one because we're willing to pay a little more or want less of a cover. And remember that even So, they need to be able to start answering those questions. And then it's gonna take a while to get the funding mechanism in place. And even then, it's going to take, if they need additional coverage from what they currently are getting

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White]: Yeah, that's kind of the

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: It takes a while for the sheriff to hire people, send them to the academy and all of that. But what it could do is just disperse the coverage in a slightly different way. We talked about the agreement with Putney and Westminster. So at one point they were each having their own contract and they weren't cooperating. So, Putney, if a sheriff was in Putney and there was a call from Westminster, he wouldn't go to Westminster because that was Didn't have that. So, even the existing coverage can be re deployed in other areas. So, there will be more coverage in Halifax and Londonderry, and maybe we send somebody else there. I don't know. I don't know. But that is something, that's for the council and the sheriff office to figure out how to provide that coverage.

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White]: Okay. Sure. Yeah. That's really helpful. And probably also a

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: question we can have the sheriff answer to

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White]: the But thank you. I really appreciate this, and I'm grateful that you brought forward this topic, and I hope that if, I hope that we do work on this and seriously take it up as a day.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yeah, and I know we have another question. Okay. I'll just say again, if we had, for numbers' sake, 10 communities sign up for it, and you could raise, I don't know, $400,000.500, whatever it is. Yeah. Whatever that number is, to me, if the towns are contiguous, that's a way to begin to say, okay, you and you will share two deputies. The next town that's a little bit farther away will have to find another town that's close.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Yeah.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: But there's ways around that.

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White]: Yeah. You can reach on.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: And and I think those are all within the province of of this council. Like, I think they're gonna work it out to the best of their ability. Yeah.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: That's kinda

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: And to answer your question, we are gonna

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: take this off. This isn't gonna go away today.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: I I will say, to answer your question, where has this been? It has been in the air for fifty years. '21 was the first report that we found. And in fact, Senator Letty brought to to implement something that was in that study and one of the recommendations. Then the legislature said, nah, I guess I won't do that. Nobody wants to make law enforcement mad at them. So nobody wants to kind of take sides on any of this. So it's been in the air for at least fifty years, but now we finally have a well thought out and a reasonable proposal. It isn't pie in the sky. It can work. It's got the support of the towns that are impacted by it. It's got the support of the sheriff. It's got the support of the assistant judges. And there have been a number of public meetings.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Oh, great. And okay. And we have this committee that just needs to be revitalized.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So, I'm sorry.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Oh. I have pretty significant concerns with this, and perhaps I'd feel differently if the constitutional change last biennium had been moved forward to allow for oversight to be hashed out. But my question is why couldn't towns just vote by charter change to join? Because they don't have charters. Are only a few, there are only something like 30 or 40 towns in Vermont that have charters, and some, or maybe more, Josh, not many.

[Josh Hanford (Vermont League of Cities and Towns)]: There's more than that, but not all towns

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Yeah. Have

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: and many of the, and many of the towns have their charters. We saw an influx of towns writing charters when they thought that they couldn't hire, they couldn't have, I think it was town clerks or some town position if they weren't a resident of the town. So towns wrote, there must have been 30 towns that presented town charters then, just so that they could hire, I don't know if it was a lister, maybe from another town, because the legislature would not give them the authority to do that on its own. So as long as the legislature controls what the towns can do, towns are going to come up with one line charters, that, But I can put this to the vote, they could create a one line charter, they could put this out to vote to the municipality, and do it by charter. And then we'd be five years down the road. It's, the, Creating a charter takes a Josh? So I have

[Josh Hanford (Vermont League of Cities and Towns)]: a point of clarification. Josh Member, monthly exceeding counts. I think the charters aside, I think it's the governance authority that this creates. Thank you. It's got nothing to do with the Charter. There's only two forms of sort of regionalization municipal union districts or the cooperative agreements, which fall apart with your tribe. This is a different model with a different structure and a different governance. That's why the LCT is interested in this pilot, because this governance model, whether it's policing or any other thing, seems to be what's missing in the two governance authorities granted to municipalities in a nutshell.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Perfect. Yes, thank you. Other questions?

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Will say there are details in the bill that the towns and some of us would be very happy to come back to address the difference between the select board and the town meeting, whether towns can just pop out if they want to, if they can contract with the sheriff if they're not a member, things like that, are in, but that's getting into the weeds of the field itself. Our towns are willing to, in fact, we had one town lined up for today who is all hot to go here. And as Sheriff Anderson said, 15 of the towns already contract, and they would love to do it this way because it removes the having to do this contract every every year. And two towns one of the towns that doesn't contract with the sheriff right now wants to testify in favor of this.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: So you'll be kind enough to get us all that. Oh, we will. Oh gosh. I have no doubt.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So my intent is to take this up again next week. Okay. Continue to take testimony, because it is a work in progress, I'll just put it that way. We'll need to know a little bit more about each particular provision and maybe make some changes therein and maybe not. But my plan is to, again, work on this as much as a week, every week kind of thing. To Senator Vyhovsky's point earlier, there are other ways for oversight despite the constitutional I mean, you can hold back pay if you wanna discipline somebody that shows that

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: you're

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: No.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: We can't. No. I don't We heard during the constitutional hearings that we had that both of you were opposed to that, no. We cannot. We do a tiny little percentage. I wasn't opposed to No. Not you. I was. I was. Not Oh. You. I I I was supposed to it, and I could we'll just say that I was supposed to the constitutional change did not impose oversight. It imposed criteria for running. It allowed oversight. Didn't impose anything. It allowed oversight, and it allowed for there to be basic requirements to serve a sheriff, yes. Right. He didn't say what they were. It didn't. Right. I agree. I'm not gonna get into that because I did oppose it. And I think that they are related, but they are two separate issues. The oversight is a huge issue, but this If we don't do something like this now, we're just going to In ten years, we're going to be coming

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Somebody

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: will We'll be coming back do another study. If we had all the money that we paid for those studies, they're all there. They're all here in this room. Yeah, they're all somewhere. Unless you took them off. Oh no.

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: Broke out electronic versions.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: That's

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: As long as we have a little more time, because I've I've taken this next item off the agenda, we'll just have to reschedule. I I see Hazelton here and some other folks. Frank is here. I don't know if anybody else wants to comment. I've got you don't have to. Okay, so you're here just to listen, kinda sayin', Chash? No. He already did

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: it. Was here to give St. Paul. I

[Drew Hazelton (Rescue Inc., Windham County EMS)]: will always comment when given the opportunity, So, thank for the record, Drew Hamilton, I do run Rutland District, the Regional Angular Service in Wyndham County. I'm here in support of the proposal. We have found huge success in Wyndham County with regionalized EMS, and we've been able to provide the type of coverage the sheriff's talking about with one of the lowest cost and highest reliability anywhere in Vermont. We do have a report that we put together about EMS across the state, but as far as looking at the data, with our regional model, which again covers almost the same geographic area that Sheriff was talking about, we've been successful at creating really high reliability at some of the lowest cost. Good for you. Great.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Read the report. It's

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I've skimmed it. I will admit. Yep. It's good.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: It's a good read. It's in our study on our website.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Senator Vyhovsky.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Thank you, Jordan. I appreciate that, and I appreciate the work that you're doing, and I don't think it is the same thing, emergency services like you do and having the ability to take away people's freedoms or perhaps their lives. I don't think those are analogous services. I'm not sure. Well, at their beds, but I'm not gonna say it. Anybody else? Josh, I

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: can see you.

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: Oh, I'm

[Josh Hanford (Vermont League of Cities and Towns)]: sorry. Josh Hanford, Director of Government Relations, Vermont Legal Cities and Challenge. I think you heard me say earlier, we are in support of this pilot for a variety of reasons. We have talked with the sheriff and others in Wendell County. They have addressed some of our initial concerns since this would be a cost that towns would be obligated to pay once they voted in this council. That's why we felt strongly that it needed to be a select board member who is responsible to the voters for what they are raising in taxes, and we're happy to see that accommodated. I think the promise here is that this is a pilot. It has a sunset if it doesn't work. It has provisions if towns don't sign up, if they leave, if this fails, that will test the possibilities of what regionalization could be successful in Vermont, which we struggle with. And the league obviously is representing individual municipalities. We have both great opportunity here and also some fear of doing that in the wrong way that just adds an additional layer of government and additional costs with no increased services, no increased benefits, and that's what we don't wanna see. We think this pilot presents a chance to get the form, which is better service for our communities and potentially lower those costs. And think it's worth exploring this as an option that maybe doesn't stop at regional policing if it works and we get it right. And I'm sure we're happy to talk much more about any specifics you have, but that's where we are at this point.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Could I add one more question that Senator Clarkson asked I, about the relationship with the Vermont State Police. I had a conversation with Commissioner Morrison this morning, and she has some questions, and she just needs more detail. They are supportive of regional policing. They just need to look at details and how that would affect the Gruvon State Police and the relationship and everything. And they do have some concerns about the lack of oversight of the sheriffs, but

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: to I think when we take this up to go to Tanya's concern, I think those are real concerns. Think it was

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Mhmm.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Sadly, the news from Windsor County doesn't help us at all on this. And so I actually, I support this work. I've been invested in this work since 2017 when I joined this committee. But I think we can get your sight. Right. I mean, I think we can be constitutionally, that may be a piece of what we recommend as a result of this is going back to looking at that. But I think this is worth moving forward. And I think we also have opportunities in conjunction with this work, getting our committee that we've already put together to look at regional and county issues, getting that back on track and maybe extending that work simultaneously because really that needs to continue as well.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Right, I would just emphasize that this is a really limited pilot. It's limited to Wyndham County, it's limited to law enforcement, it isn't talking about waste management districts or fire districts or anything else. All that is needed, but this is a very, very limited pilot. As Josh said, it's a pilot that should be able to answer some questions. And if it doesn't work, it ends. I mean, that's why it's in session law and that's why it's a pilot. Because that is the definition of a pilot is to, other than an airplane pilot. So, had one

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: of those yesterday. Buzz, the state desk. Oh, really? It's crazy.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Anything else you wanted? Well,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: yes, but maybe not for today.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Senator. Thank you.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yeah. And you're welcome to join us virtually when we take this up. I realize it's all up from buttoning, so Well,

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: I rode up with the sheriff today.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Were the lights on?

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: Are you still working for the sheriff? I remember that correctly you on our payroll. No. That is there was a lot of conjecture about that and a lot of misleading information. I worked on a very specific project with Sheriff Clark for three months. That was it. I appreciate you clearing that up. Yeah. I've never been on the sheriff's I mean, was a special project. Yeah. Worked

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: I that Got you there? Another issue that I care a lot about because she works with the Brattleboro Hasic Clerk.

[Former Sen. Jeanette White]: I do. Yes. No, I do not work for the Well, I'm glad that you cleared that up. Yeah. Because that's certainly information I have been given, so I'm glad that you're Yes. There was, believe me, when I was opposing the constitutional amendment, there was a lot of misinformation about my relationship with the sheriff, and it was all misinformation. And I just chose to just be quiet about it. Well, I'm glad that you corrected the record. On the record. The record.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Okay, thank you everybody for your time and attention today, including our four students from

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White]: our yeah.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Now thank you for sticking with us.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: And I I have thought halfway through, six something. See four people leaving, but they're they're sticking up. So that's great.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: We're we're off the record.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: We're not no.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: We're still on the record.

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White]: We so we aren't doing the second thing on the agenda? Well wrapped up.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I'll I'll look to Linda's direction. Did were we able to reschedule?

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: I had not heard back.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Oh, okay. I didn't see anybody poke their

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: head in. Didn't. They did

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: not. No. One to ten on the stop.

[Sheriff Mark Anderson (Windham County Sheriff)]: At this at our forty minute

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White]: And then we'll

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: we'll get back

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: in touch.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yep. Is that okay, senator Warren?

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: Oh, yeah. No. No. I'm not no. You've had

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I didn't know whether you had a personal interest in taking that up today.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison]: Oh, not today.

[Josh Hanford (Vermont League of Cities and Towns)]: Just before

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: you go. Yeah. We will.

[Tim Douglas (Legislative Counsel)]: For sure.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: On the rest of the meeting.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Okay, we will conclude for today. We'll see you all