Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Good afternoon. Welcome into the Senate Government Committee on Permanent Operation, strong for lesser. Wednesday of February fourth, twenty twenty six. We unfortunately, for those of you that may have seen an earlier version of the agenda, have lost one of our items of discussion today. We originally wanted to talk with the Vermont Youth Council, but they can't come in today. So, unfortunately, we're gonna have a rather long poll this afternoon in our meeting, which affords the, colleagues in the room a longer break because at this point, I mean, we could sit around and talk, but I don't have any other stuff to fill the afternoon in. We will be taking up ACL-one 119 at 03:00, but up first is the House Bill five sixteen, an act relating to approval of amendments to the charter of the town of Essex, and we are joined by our legislative council, Tucker Anderson. We'll now assume the chair.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: Good afternoon. Tucker Anderson, legislative counsel. You have in front of you, age five sixteen, approval of the amendments to the charter of the town of Essex. I will note upfront that much of the text within the h five sixteen is comprised of technical corrections. Oh, wow. So what I will do as we move through is I'll quickly flag where the town is proposing some Texans to clean up within their charter, and then I will zoom in on those provisions, that are substantive. Alright. So, well, let's work through the operative sections. Start with section two, and that is the amendments to chapter one seventeen, the town of Essex Charter. The first couple pages are all technical corrections within section 101, 102, 103, and the beginning of two zero four, so I'm now three pages in, if

[Unidentified Committee Member]: you're with me on section two zero four. Yep. Then

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: section two zero four, subsection C, we have the first instance of a substantive change within the charter. Subsections c and d, we'll get to momentarily deal with vacancies within specific town offices. Subsection c deals with, filling vacancies for select board members. The town is proposing to add as a basis for vacancy change of residence outside of the town. If you move out of the town of Essex, they'll no longer be a select board member. They are further clarifying the timing of appointing a member, if there is a vacancy, that the select board may appoint person eligible to fill that position until the next annual or special meeting. Special meeting can be called at any time. Further on, in subsection C, the town is proposing that if the select board is unable to agree upon an interim replacement, that they, until the next annual or special meeting, a special election shall be held to fill the position. Finally, they're adding a new sentence at the end of the subsection that states that incapacity, which is one of the bases for determining that there's a vacancy, shall include the failure by any member of the Select Board to attend at least 50% of the VAs of the Select Board in any calendar year. So if a member fails to attend that minimum threshold of 50 of the meetings of the board within the calendar year, that is a basis for determining that that seat on the select board is vacant due to incapacity. Senator Wayne.

[Senator Rebecca “Becca” White (Member)]: Thank you, mister chair. And I I see maybe senator Vyhovsky also might have a similar flag. I thought that we weren't like, on my select board, we were told we're not allowed to do that. Like, you can't set like, so I'd like to understand how that's allowed. But then I also wanna understand, is a board meeting just anytime they are meeting as a board, or if you are also on a subcommittee, like the finance committee, and you miss all of those meetings, does that factor into your 50%?

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: The way that this is phrased is meetings of select boards, so that would be meetings of the actual body, right? You asked a question about whether or not this is allowed to happen. The municipality itself and its legislative body are both creatures of statutes. The general assembly has the authority to establish the procedures for vacancy removal appointment, and you have done so with some other charters. The most recent was the Town of Ligneten Charter after the LignetenLigneten bill merger. They have the same provision that, a position is deemed vacant if the member of the select board fails to attend a 50% move forward against board.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: So And I recall we had this with a town, a member John in who was in Gavops, we had this Representative issue with Gannon involved. Yes. With representative Gannon in Southern Vermont.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: Right. That was That was a big issue. So that was amending the general statute related to vacancies and what the general assembly did at that time was state that if a member fails to take their oath of office, and actually never I remember that. Never even becomes a member of the select Right. Board that Their position is deemed vacant and may be appointed by the other members.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: So that attendance record was so bad, that person hadn't even gotten sworn That in is correct.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: They had not attended, kept swearing it.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: And it was hampersed big time. Is that right? We do remember the date.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Senator Morley. Tucker, seems like to me, dealing

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: with other towns and communities, sometimes you're allowed to elect officials from the municipality itself, and sometimes you can elect them from outside of that municipality. Is there kind of a standard, or is everyone all across the board different, and you never know unless you read their charge? So everyone's different. Everyone's different. And what I would point out is that you have different bases depending on whether this is an employee of the municipality that we're talking about, whether it's an appointed officer, which could include non residents, and then if it's an elected officer. And in 2021, the general assembly updated, some provisions in title 17 to allow municipalities to vote to allow nonresidents to be appointed or elected officers except for select Except for select works. Yeah, and there's the When we could pass a letter, you could hire from outside of that Not hire, sorry. Appoint from outside. Yes, or a lightest between Or a lightest the outside.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Okay. All right,

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: then just outside where Alice de Blasphemy. Senator Miedovsky.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Thank you. So based on the fact that we have in larger state statute that one does actually need to be a member to reside in the area that one is serving on the select board for, does this aspect of the charter, is it necessary, the part that says if you don't live here, you're not on the Select Board anymore?

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: It's

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: good question.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: It's binding on the town in a way, again, select board members are not part of the statute that allows towns to shift the residency requirement. This may be more binding than what appears in general law, and I'm hesitant because I don't remember all of the bases for, vacancy under the general statute, so I'll make a note for myself to look up what the enumerated bases are in that section, and I'll send it to the committee so you can compare.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Okay. That is really helpful. Thank you. And I did I appreciate Senator White being able to read my face so well. I did have similar concerns around the sort of 50% of meetings aspect. You said Lindenville is another town that does that. Are there any other municipalities that you're aware of?

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: I am aware of a few others, and what I can do is send that list to you all as well so that I don't have to log into my laptop and

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: possibly Can you send the list as well as the specific language? Because I seem to recall a lengthy debate about something similar to this in regards to the sort of why of missing meetings.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: I remember that as well, and at that time you were representative, Vyhovsky, and that was in reference to S-one 181, which would have amended the general municipal laws to put this provision in place as a basis for a vacancy. Does current law talker also, are you treating village trust, elected trustees the same as select board members? There is a separate body of law for village trustees. I don't remember if the vacancy statute touches upon trustees. My recollection is that it refers to legislative bodies broadly. That's a real Incorporate select boards, village trustees, or boards of other so I was just curious. I will confirm and send that all to you. I seem to remember that it's 24 VSA, section nine zero one. I

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: bet you're right. It's ten

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: zero one. Some of us

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: are hoping we'll have fewer villages. And, Arch. Yeah, no, we've Channel assembly takes Yeah, you all you're have a

[Unidentified Committee Member]: village, with all kinds of services.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Okay.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: Subsection D, we have some provisions related to the town moderator. Subsection d starts by stating that the moderator shall perform the duties that are prescribed by general law and preside at town meetings, but that in the moderator's absence, the town clerk shall call the meeting to order, and the first order of business shall be the election of a moderator pro tem. Prelude. It's led. To preside for the duration of the meeting. The moderator shall conduct every meeting according to this charter or the laws of the state. The moderator shall observe order in the conduct of business, and in all things shall observe the principles of fairness and openness to town government. And here we go into this agency. In the event of the death, resignation, or change of residence to a location outside the town, the select board may appoint a person eligible to fill the moderator position until the next individual for a special town meeting. So you have some backup here so that you don't have to, as first order of business, elect a moderator for a second. If the slide board is unable to agree upon an interim replacement, special election shall be held forth with to fill a position. The one thing that I flagged in the house about this is that there is some discrepancy between subsection C and D and that there's no even capacity requirement basis here, unlike for the select law firms. Senator Vyhovsky.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Thank you. So under state or maybe municipal law, the moderator does need to be a resident of the town is my first question.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: No. Because of that general law provision that I referred to earlier where the town could vote to change residency requirements for that officer.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: But it does seem like based on the language of this charter, they're they're saying that the moderator does move out of the town, they may no longer be the moderator. So under the Essex town charter, that is a requirement.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: That is correct. And it would remain in place no matter what the changes in general law are in the future, except that if you recall, 17 VSA twenty six forty five a was added in s one eighty one to allow municipalities to suspend their charter specific provisions in order to take advantage of general law for a period of years in which they notify the general assembly that they don't want their charter provision anymore, that it should be prevailed or excuse me. That's too excited.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: So that was not so this is was not my second question, but it comes up as you say that. So within that three years that charter provision was suspended, is the expectation that if they want it to be permanent, they would change the charter? Or can they then say, after three years, we're just gonna do it again for another three years without ever taking it to the public?

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: This is the exact discussion that came up in the context of s one eighty one. So, they don't have to amend their chart. The municipal corporation could do what 2645 a requires, which is contact house incentive government operations with a statement of their intent about whether they wanna keep the charter specific provision at all, in which case the general assembly based on their feedback could go in and repeal the charter provision without having a subsequent local vote. The municipality could vote to amend their charter. Or final option, twenty six forty five a does not have a cap of three years. It just limits the duration of a vote to suspend to a three year period. Uh-huh. There could be a subsequent vote to have another three year suspension rights, but the house also asked about this when I said is the legislative body, the municipality, or the voters have to remember that every three years they have to vote to suspend. Otherwise, if they forget the Charter provision comes back into play.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Well, I mean, my bigger concern is that theoretically, a legislative body could continue to suspend any charter aspect without ever taking it to the the public. But that was not my second question was actually a logistical question, and that is, is it municipalities generally follow Robert's rules of order. Correct? And is that by statute, or is that just kind of generally what they do?

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: It is not by statute. It is generally what they do. They adopt the rules of order governing their town meetings, and that's what the moderator applies. And I am not aware immediately of a municipality in the state that uses something besides Robert rules of order. The sole exceptions might be a few municipalities that have their rules of procedure set out in their charter, and one of the ones that I might want to take a look at is the town of Springfield because for some reason I recall that they do have some specific procedures built into their charter. I know that they have their own, or at least they used to have their own open meeting law and public records specific provisions in their charter as well.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Thanks. Tanya said my favorite bill.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Okay.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Now would so with the open meeting law aspect in their charter, I'm assuming, and correct if I'm wrong, that it it sort of is like a state constitution and a federal constitution in which the town rules can be more transparent but not less transparent than the state rules?

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: That would be a fruitful discussion after I look up what the actual Springfield Charter provisions are, especially since the charter was significantly amended recently, and they should have updated some of the open meeting provisions. But it would not work so much like federal state, because under the US constitution, the states have reserved power under, the tenth amendment. What you're dealing with is total prescription of the exercise of municipal authority absent authority from the General Assembly, and that is because municipal corporations have zero inherent power under the Vermont constitution. It is a strict and pure Dillon's rule state, so they would only have specific authority articulated in their charter, which would be construed by courts against the municipality and their exercise of authority unless it is expressly granted, and because of that, all of the provisions of the Open Meeting Law would be binding, except for provisions of a charter which are more specific or later enacted. And it's good that this is coming up, because there is a provision, I think in a page or two, dealing with minutes. And I had to answer questions about the overlap with the open meeting log. So I was primed for this.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: You're welcome. Okay.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: So moving through section two zero five, technical directions, changing board to select board. In section two zero six, there is, in subsection b, substantive amendment to the charter. And here, the minutes of each meeting of the select board shall be approved by the board as soon as is reasonably possible. This is a shift away from the current requirement in their charter that it be approved at the next meeting. One of the things that I raised in the House, and it was not an issue, because there was no mismatch of intent and language, is that the open meeting law would still apply here, and that minutes have to be posted within five business days of the meeting. This is just about a select board's

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: approval. I guess I'm confused then. If you post minutes that are not yet approved,

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: what good are they? They are draft minutes, and that is what most practitioners in this space do. Okay. They post the minutes as draft minutes, and then when they're approved, the approval official minutes are posted. Okay, thank you. Section two zero seven contains technical corrections. In section two zero eight, within subsection A, the town is proposing to allow the select board to appoint the members of the Cemetery Commission in Subdivision A6. Subsection B of that section. Are also technical corrections in section two zero nine, Section two ten, Section three zero five, and Section four zero one. Brings us to the next set of substantive amendments, is in Section four zero two, which relates to the officials that are appointed by the town manager. The town is proposing that the town manager will no longer appoint the grand juror or fire wardens, fence viewers, inspectors of lumber, shingles, or cemeteries. Recall that that is now a silt of order. They are adding the fire chief as an appointed officer. And they are adding language that clarifies that the town manager has authority to appoint any other officer, that is existing authority, in the town charter, if the select board has not filled the office within forty five days after the day the position becomes vacant. So for these appointed positions within the town, the select board has forty five days to make an appointment. If they fail to do so, the town manager may appoint a replacement. Senator Vyhovsky?

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: The you said the fire chief is now going to be appointed by the select board or the town manager?

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: No. Town manager. With

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: the approval of a select.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Yes. With the approval of the select board?

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: Yes. With the approval of the select board.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Okay. That's interesting. If the select board has to approve it, why wouldn't the select board just appoint it?

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Right. Well,

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: that's not what they decided. Senator Claxey?

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: We we can clarify that. What happened to the fire department selecting its own fire chief? Yeah. That's I think that's just really outrageous that that I mean, maybe this is standard, I just haven't appreciated it, but I thought that the fire department appointed you know, voted on their own chief.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: I will have to look into some of the general provisions in title 20, like some of No doubt.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Is it top down? This is, like, way

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: too top down. My understanding is most of those head of department positions are appointed by officials within the municipality, either the town or city manager or We'd to

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: professional fire department for, We I could do as far

[Unidentified Committee Member]: as, but we still have

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: to volunteer. Yeah, that would, anyway, how interesting. Senator Morley.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So it is kinda interesting. So like, in the village of Orleans, the firefighter gets together, makes a recommendation at basically village meeting, and then they're elected.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Oh, even better by the general population. By the general population. Oh, how interesting.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: So that's just the way we do it, just by the specific policy. They're actually elected officials.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Oh.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: It's good be able to achieve and the

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: first and second engineers. Got pluses and minuses. So this is interesting to me that

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Yeah. How, there must be a whole hybrid and I had not appreciated that, I had not appreciated that. Well, there we are.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: Municipal Public Safety. Section five zero one contains technical corrections. We'll move into Subchapter six, specifically Section six zero two, where there are some substantive amendments. The Town in the new Subsection a is proposing that the town select board shall employ by contract a public accountant to examine the financial statements of funds to the town. They are then requiring that the annual auditor's report shall be made available to the voters of the town not later than thirty days prior to the annual meeting. Notification of the availability of that report shall be distributed by mail to all Essex households if it's thirty days prior to the meeting. So that's just notification that the report is available. There was some discussion about the costs of mailing town reports.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Well, everybody does it differently now. Particularly, it's on their website or Yeah, on the website at the pharmacy, it's at the, well, you know, it's at stores.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: Subsection B, the annual report shall be made available to the residents at least ten days prior to the town meeting. All right. In section six zero four, specific requirements for the time of holding the annual meeting of the town are replaced with a reference to 17 BSA section twenty six eighty. That is the section related to elections by Australian ballot. Subsection B of that section six zero four, the election of officers and the voting on all questions to be decided, including the budget, shall be conducted according to that same statute governing Australian ballot. Section seven zero two, eight zero two, nine zero one, 1,001, 1,002 all contain technical corrections. There are no substantive proposals with those sections. In section 1,003, the town is proposing to add, related to the appraisal of property by the Department of Assessment, the following sentence at the end of that section. The department shall review or cause to be reviewed the appraisals of all property in the town that is subject to taxation in accordance with the standards for appraising established by state law.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: All right. Section

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: 1,005 relates to powers and duties of that Department of Assessment. The Department of Assessment shall have the same power, discharge the same duties, proceed and be discharged with those duties in the same manner, with the same liabilities as listers pursuant to state of law. Section eleven oh one contains technical corrections. That brings us to the end of section two. Section three contains one repeal. They are repealing section six zero three of the charter, which contained town meeting, warning, and budget procedures, which will now fall to general law governing that subject. That is all within the four corners of H516. If you have the as passed by house version, you'll know that there was one change made by the House Government Operations Committee. That was to make the appointments between the select board and the town manager consistent because there was an error in how the language was put together and that cemetery commissioners were appointed by both. So house gov ops asked the town to weigh in. This was also an issue identified by the town themselves that they brought to the committee, and the solution was just to strike cemetery commissioners and the town manager appointed the place. Senator Vyhovsky?

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Yeah, thank you. There's a bunch of places in this charter change that explicitly reference that they'll just follow state law. My understanding is that is completely unnecessary because if it is not in the charter, it automatically reverts to just following state law.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: Yes. Although some of what you're looking at is they, propose to clean up references to just statute and replace it with, reference to the Vermont statutes annotated. So

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: would it

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: become a problem, though, if we were to change something and renumber things, and then it is referencing the wrongs? Like, do

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Yeah.

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: I see what you're getting at here. Some of the references to, like, the title 17 statutes that are specifically cross referenced. Yes. It would require cleanup if 17 VSA section twenty six eighty is changed or moved or redesignated. It's something that legislative council tries to keep track of when there are major changes to kind of election law being an example where there's cross references all through statute. We'll do a comprehensive search of our Lexis database and try to include all of that, or at minimum, include in a bill that is moving that has big changes to general law a provision directing legislative counsel to correct those references during statutory revision. You are correct that there is no need to reference general law authority in a charter. As a matter of fact, in order to stop the practice of referencing general law in charters, the general assembly added a section to title 17 stating expressly that chartered municipalities have all of the same authority as other municipalities under general law, and that was an attempt to stymie some of the proposals from municipalities to codify charters just saying we're gonna have the same authority as everyone else under general law.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Yeah. I I thought I remembered that, and I wonder if it's cleaner and easier and produces less work for legislative council if we look at the places within this charter where they don't need to reference that they have the authority of general law and just remove those so that down the road, if things change, you don't have to go through and look for those spaces because they already have the authority of the general law. Certainly

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: could be one of the challenges that that impose is making sure that in doing that, the specific authorizations that the town has given doesn't restrict access to the general law. So that might require more of a comprehensive cleanup.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Okay. Just just something I wanna flag as, you know, thinking forward, wanna make sure that we're not creating unnecessary work for legislative council. I

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: appreciate that. So this is of particular interest to me, to some degree. Rutland City currently is going through The mayor has announced that he will step down as of February 27. He has. Yes. So he will not fill his full term. And I'm not trying to compare the charter of Rutland City because I haven't read it. I have no idea. But what it amounts to is there's four days in between his last day in office, effectively, and town meeting. By charter, from what I'm able to understand, that will now fall to the president of the board of aldermen to take over the responsibilities of the mayoral office. And there's some discussion from different people that have weighed in legally whether it means there should be a write in vote because the the deadline for for putting your name in has passed. Right. And so the charter, I think, says at the next annual or special election. And there were a group of people that felt strongly that there should be a special election, would allow candidates to sort of come out of the woodwork, but it seems to fly in the face of the charter. So the last legal opinion I saw was that, in fact, it'll

[Unidentified Committee Member]: have to

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: be a write in ballot on town meeting day, which I think is March 3 this year. And so the only way for people to sort of announce that they are interested is social media. Pretty much. I guess they could put a radio ad or a TV ad together too. But most of it is Facebook kinda, hey. Guess what? I'm gonna run. And so it it sort of become a little messy. And I don't know who's gonna win and who isn't. But if he had waited and I don't I don't mean to cast dispersions because I

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: I did.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: It gets complicated. Because I interviewed him for my radio show after the announcement. Uh-huh. And the timing of the announcement was something that there were quite a few people in the city weren't happy with. Oh. And I asked him, why did you announce this? And then and he said, because I I got a new job, and I didn't want to announce it until I was sure I had the job. And it was at that moment, that day, that I announced that I would be stepping down when I was assured that I had future employment and even asked whether they could wait a year, and they said, no. It's today. You either accept the new job or you're you're not gonna have it. So he did. And so there's this it's just interesting that there's a vacancy created from resignation in this case, Rutland. But it was unclear about the way that the city would go about filling that vacancy, but it looks like they're gonna have a write in campaign on March 3, which should be kinda interesting. Anyway, I'm not asking you for a legal opinion. If if you if it tickles your fancy and you wanted to read the Rutland City Charter, that would be great. But, I mean, it's already sort of in the works. So if I'm not sure

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: anything That messy that Mike did it that way. It's not. Yeah.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: And and, again, I'm not Where's he going? Taking sides. Where's he He's going to work for Cisco, which is not the food people, but the energy. So he's gonna remain living in Mountain City, but flying to Ohio quite

[Unidentified Committee Member]: a bit, and then the rest

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: of it is virtual for pay.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I don't know if O'Leary is a little bit. He would be taking over for And the four

[Unidentified Committee Member]: if he chose, he could run.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: His arch archrivals meet again, except this time one day.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yeah. It's just and you're right. It is sorta interesting because they ran against each other. Twice. Yeah. At least twice. Yeah. So oh, I'm sorry. Senator Vyhovsky.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I'm just wondering, and I am asking for a legal opinion, if in this particular instance, the head of the board of older people would in fact be taking over until whenever in charter the mayor takes office, because that is usually not on election day.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Vyhovsky. Well, I'm not a lawyer, so I can't provide you with any legal

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Well, that's why I was asking Tucker.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: I know. I

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: know. Yeah. So it would be typically, the phrase it's used is until the position is filled, and the position would be filled at the time the election results are certified.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Which will probably be that same day. And

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: it's an interesting issue because it's effectively more of an issue around withdrawal of candidacy, which is a ballot problem that you face at all levels of government whenever a candidate withdraws from election. Yes. But there are some charter procedures that have been put in place and general law procedures to ensure that anytime there's a resignation in advance of an election, that a special election is held unless you're within a certain number of days of the annual Yeah. Well,

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: forgive me for bringing it up, if anybody's watching that I didn't encapsulate the situation accurately, I apologize, but that's what I've learned. So next next month will be interesting to to see what happened with the town meeting there.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Rutland. Okay. We're keeping it on our toes.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Does anyone have questions for Tucker? Okay, then we will release you to further duties some other place, and we're joined by Representative Bob Thank you, very Hopefully, if you choose to, take the chair and tell us about the Burlington Charter. Did have a walk through the bill already, and I think it amounts to basically ward boundaries changing. It was amusing for some of us to read the East District at the intersection of the center line of Arnold Street, etcetera, etcetera. Yeah.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: It was pretty powerful.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I don't know how long ago those were put together, and now you basically are allowing the city to change that. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Sorry, committee, that I was not able

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: to That's okay. We have time today, so let's get on.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: This is an excellent example of why you don't want certain things in a chart. As population changes in Burlington, representation needs change, needs to probably change more quickly. Can you just for the record, Bob Humber, Chittenden, needs to change more quickly than the time that it takes to do a time leading change. Can then come to us. Know, could turn this into a two year process that one district is representative better than another. So what this essentially does is say that the district will stay the way they are now until there is a action by the city council, which does a reapportionment, which a maximum of every five years they're allowed to do. Hopefully, will do it until every 10. Okay. And they will then draw the lines appropriately based on changes in population. As, the New North End and the bridge between that, the Old North End changes with the advent of all the construction at the old orphanage. There will be significant changes in that end of town Yeah. Of of it'll take place a lot less than a ten year cycle. So this basically eliminates all 10 pages of BLF and PDF, it us one complete.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: And I know the vote was, last town meeting, do you remember or have a record of

[Representative Bob Hooper]: what the vote was? It was, like, 83% to 16, but I did not write it down. I don't We we it was significant. Yeah. We can trace that down. Okay.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yeah. I don't I mean, I understand just from the official x ing out or z ing out of the old way doing it. Redlining. Yeah. And so this, the census, of course, is every ten years, as defined by census, but in between those, every five year, the city council could affect a change in the ward distribution? Yes. Okay.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: To a maximum of once every five years. Okay.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: And I guess, yep, Senator Vyhovsky.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Thank you, Chair Collamore, and thank you, Representative Hooper. I appreciate that this sort of sets no more than, but my concern is that it doesn't set the upper, the other end. And so, and I don't know if this was discussed, but theoretically, the town of, the City Council could go thirty years without reapportioning, and then it relies on the citizens complaining that it's not proportional. And so I wonder if there was any conversation, and this may be a better question for the City Council, if you're unsure about the other end of the spectrum and a requirement that the city council do it at least every ten years.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: Senator Ganovsky, it sticks in my mind that conversation was had that with the regular federal census, if it would automatically pick something that would cause the city to review, but I would not state that as in concrete. As a matter of fact, Your points may very well be valid.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Okay, thank you.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: From a safety measure standpoint. So that I wouldn't

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Just at curiosity's sake, representative, how do

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: you track the population in Resolutions?

[Representative Bob Hooper]: Yeah. The situation where there's not a census

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yeah. Oh, yeah. Like, if

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: you wanna do it five years from the last one

[Representative Bob Hooper]: I think it would take the same form as the federal census that city would be paying for people Okay, to do so it would

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: be a whole new Okay.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: I didn't

[Tucker Anderson (Legislative Counsel)]: know if you were tracking it through sort of a system of some kind.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: There's no real way to No, I'm sure that it was either. Say that the new apartment building that went up is theoretically going to contain as many people they saw Exactly. The beds I'm just curious. Got it.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Thank you. Absent US census, which is every ten years, the city at its own cost could affect some sort of research.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: Are there five how many more do there, probably? Five? Eight. Oh, eight. Okay. One of which is UBM generated. You would have

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: to take into account all eight in order to proportionately distribute the voters, I would think. I don't know how much that would cost.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Well, sure,

[Representative Bob Hooper]: it's like a balloon. You put one part, it pops out on another. So if you change the boundary for Ward 4, it's going to encroach on 7, and there will be dominoes falling. Okay. And I can't speak actually to what the city council may employ. We don't, in this legislation, restrict, which could be another point Senator Vyhovsky's point. But, you know, I would assume that so many lawyers being presented in Burlington that we could find somebody would complain if it wasn't done when and how it should be.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yeah, I mean, last section of the bill, it says they'll remain in effect until changed by the city council, which is authorized to make changes from time to time, whatever that means, to the boundaries of the elected areas in order to provide an equal division of population among them in accordance with data produced by the US Census Bureau. But there's no clear indication of the manner in which they would come to that conclusion.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: I don't know. I'm just it it puzzled. But, anyway,

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: obviously, 83% of the people in Burlington thought it was a good idea. So

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: 83% of the people in Burlington who voted on town meeting?

[Representative Bob Hooper]: Point taken. Yep. And to think something's a good idea, that doesn't necessarily mean it's good. And

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: my other question, this passed the House, so what was the committee vote in the House of Governors? What was the floor vote? Do you remember? Again, if you don't, we'll get it later. Not gonna

[Representative Bob Hooper]: pass this today. The floor vote was by Boyd Smith, and the committee voted it out in Zebra one, I believe. Oh, okay.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Did anybody in the house have these same questions?

[Representative Bob Hooper]: Not really. Oh, okay. If they had, I would have been prepared. That's why I asked.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: You're on the committee. Right? No. You're on the committee. I mean, it just seems to me that there should be a clear manner prescribed to determine where the population has gone.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: Yeah. I mean, as I said, I think senator Vyhovsky raises a valid point to, know, you an upper limit and maybe as prescribed by law, I'm sure there's something somewhere that Tucker took off. Yeah. But I'm not sure if you're asking me ask him yesterday. Did he draft this?

[Senator Rebecca “Becca” White (Member)]: Believe that,

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: and we did talk about this yesterday, I don't believe, admittedly, my brain is a little fuzzy because I am ill. But I don't believe he indicated that there is a state law provision pertaining to municipalities that would capture that upper end limit. And I actually seem to recall there have been issues in some municipalities with wards when they did not reapportion

[Representative Bob Hooper]: Mhmm. That's valid.

[Senator Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: For many, many decades.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: Right. Feel free to send us something back. Okay. If you don't

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: any other questions for representative? Yes. Senator White.

[Senator Rebecca “Becca” White (Member)]: Thank you, chair. So this is a different charter than the s one thirty one, which we're seeing on the house side that we passed last session. So this is like if I I just wanna understand conceptually, this is splitting we've split the Burlington Charter changes into two, essentially.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Maybe even more than that.

[Senator Rebecca “Becca” White (Member)]: Or more than that. Yeah.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So

[Representative Bob Hooper]: Yeah. Well, we still have five or six charter changes unlike biennial. Related proposals, they never go away.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Yeah.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: You know, there are still a bunch on, yeah, on the theoretical wall, as they're not necessarily on the law. But this has been split from the housing based change that incorporated initially in this bill.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Oh, okay. Thank you.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I know where you were going, Senator Wyatt, but this

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: I'll pull back up.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yeah. This had to do with landlords and termination, etcetera. That's what was struck in 05/2008. I'm sure that the other bill was still just causing the issue.

[Senator Rebecca “Becca” White (Member)]: Yeah. And I'm

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: afraid so. Okay. However, many of the landlord tenant issues are being addressed currently in the House General. Okay. Where we worked on it, you will see, the body will see that hopefully a very balanced landlord and the bill just coming up.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: There's definitely a conversation about whether, with a lot of things, particularly some of the charters, whether it should be a statewide change for all Vermonters or if you fall into a trap as

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: you walk over the city block. Now being discussed is four cause, not just cause. It's shifted its name.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Okay. Well, we'll definitely take this up again. I think there probably will

[Representative Bob Hooper]: be some adjustments made on this side of gee, I'll warn people that are valid points.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Well, we just finished our conference committee earlier today.

[Senator Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Oh, you did. Good work.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: Yeah. Well done.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So they may not welcome that

[Representative Bob Hooper]: news, but and maybe we won't. Alright. Bob, thank

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: you so much. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you all. Thanks, Bob.

[Representative Bob Hooper]: Have a

[Senator Brian Collamore (Chair)]: good day. Let me give you all a ten minute break, and we will come back with our next item, which is Act 119 report. And we're gonna hear from the Human Services, a couple of folks there coming. So