Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Speaker 0]: So good afternoon and welcome back to the Senate Committee on Government Operations Committee meeting for Friday, 03/13/2026, up for consideration. Today is S275, an accolade to creation of the Cemetery Vandalism Response Fund. And we have taken considerable testimony on this. What appeared to be a fairly straightforward, I won't use the word simple, but straightforward piece of legislation has become a little bit more involved. And I just wanted to present a final opportunity for both the municipal clerks and treasurers association and then the president of VOCA and the president of the Vermont Funeral Directors Association to weigh in, and I'm intending on voting this bill out today. So with that in mind, I think I'd like to start with the, Town Clerks Association, and thank you so much for being able to be with us today and then further being able to be with us earlier than we told you you need to be present. So we do appreciate that and welcome in.

[Speaker 1]: Thank you.

[Speaker 0]: Can you just identify yourself and then give us your thoughts on the bill?

[Speaker 1]: Sure. My name is Bobby Brimblecombe. I'm the Marshfield town clerk. I've been the town clerk for twenty eight years. I just, got asked to testify a few minutes ago, so I don't have anything prepared. But I did read I have read the bill, a few days ago, and my my, fellow town clerks that I've talked to are not in favor of the bill the way it's written.

[Speaker 0]: K.

[Speaker 1]: We it seems it seems that we would be asking families to pay an additional fee for every burial, but then I'm not sure that it would be funds that we would ever be able to access. The the grants that are envisioned in the in the bill would be probably unavailable to us because one of the requirements would be to provide written notice to the next of kin. We have nine cemeteries that are no longer accepting burials. The burials in those cemeteries are 100 years old. There would be no way for me to find next of kin. So that would make it too difficult. And it also says that the grants would only be available if the agency has no available funds. So any any town should have operating funds. I don't know of any towns that don't have cemetery operating funds. So it seems like we would be collecting this money, turning turning it over to another organization, and then I don't know what town would be able to access the funds because we would never be able to meet that condition that we not have any available funds. And one of the other requirements is that we not charge the fee to anybody who is on receiving state or federal assistance. That's not something that we know. I'm not sure how we would find that out.

[Speaker 0]: I think we can I'm sorry, Bobby. Go ahead.

[Speaker 1]: And then it's not in the bill, but I was told that it's, there's the potential to replace the burial transit permit fee with this $5 fee. I don't wanna give up the $5 fee. It's minimal, but I don't wanna give it up if I'm issuing the burial transit permits. Those are fairly time consuming, and there's a sometimes a lot involved, and I don't think we should have to give up our fee, particularly if there are any clerks that are still receiving fees as their compensation. I don't think they should have to give up their fee and instead divert it to an organization that may that they may never be able to receive a grant from.

[Speaker 0]: Okay. So you've listed four concerns. I think we can immediately take care of two of them. My view now is that we will not repeal what is currently in statute, that the town clerks will be able to continue to, receive the $5 for the permit, that they are now. I don't know how many of them are actually doing that. But that aside, in order for the clerk's association to be in support of the bill, I'd be willing to to alter that. So this, in essence, yes, it would be an additional $5 fee. I'll just let that go in the wind for the second. The other part that you mentioned on page two, it does ask for a written notice of the lot owner or next of kin, and then two lines further down, it also references next of kin again. If we were to be able to add the phrase to the greatest extent practicable that might let you off the hook if somebody has been dead for two hundred years and there's no way to trace the lineage, that's no longer practicable. So I would be willing also to put that phrase in, which would alleviate the, the agencies from having to do considerable amount of research. So that's where I am with that. I'm gonna let, if you want, Bobby, both Tom Griffin and Chris Book. Tom is the president of VOCA. I don't whether you guys know each other or not, and Chris is the president of the funeral directors association of Vermont. I think one of the things that's confusing here is we define agencies in the bill as town cemeteries, religious or ecclesiastical society cemeteries cemetery associations or any person from corporation or unincorporated association engaged in the business of cemeteries. So you mentioned about being able to access this. If your cemetery or town cemetery has been impacted by vandalism, you would be able to ask VOCA for funds to fix that to whatever extent they are able to do that in terms of collecting the $5. So I don't know whether that allays and if your concerns or not.

[Speaker 1]: No. Because paragraph e under the grant application said that we in order to apply, we would need a signed statement that no available fund that we have no available funds. So this would only be available to agencies that don't maintain any operating funds, which seems pretty irresponsible.

[Speaker 0]: Okay. I'm not sure if that's what was intended. If you don't undergo vandalism, then whatever funds you collect right now would be yours to keep. This is only in the event of a vandalism occurrence, and that's when you would apply a VOCA for help to pick up a headstone or to take paint off headstone or whatever else was vandalized. So it doesn't mean that you have to have available funds for this. It just means if you don't have any vandalism, you keep whatever cemetery funds have been allocated by your own municipality. And I think there are towns and and cities in Vermont that don't have a cemetery fund already in place.

[Speaker 2]: Yeah. Lots to

[Speaker 1]: But does but does that mean that every family should have to pay an extra fee for a burial because Yes. Some cemeteries choose not to maintain operating funds? And this doesn't the what the what this says is if we have vandalism and we want to apply for a grant, we can only apply for a grant if we don't have any operating funds.

[Speaker 0]: That's not what it says, I don't think. If it

[Speaker 3]: does I

[Speaker 1]: think that is what it says. It says the grant application shall include the following, a statement signed by the cemetery commissioner that the agency has no available funds that it has authorized to use for the repair.

[Speaker 4]: Okay.

[Speaker 0]: Let yep. Let me ask Tom to weigh in because he may be able to or maybe Chris. One of the media ones that are

[Speaker 5]: So working for the the idea behind that was if if my stone was sitting in the cemetery and I'm still alive, I have most people have that on their homeowners insurance. So my homeowners insurance would cover that stone. That way the state's funds wouldn't be used to fix it. The insurance company would be doing it. Mhmm. These cemeteries don't have any money to fix vandalisms in their cemetery at all. No cemetery does. It's just too much money. They're all operating on very little margins.

[Speaker 1]: But the My I don't I don't disagree, but the way this is written, if my town had vandalism, I would not be eligible for a grant to fix that vandalism because we do have operating funds. We need those funds for future tree work. We build up a fund, our operating funds over several years, and then every so many years, we do a tree project, which is thousands of dollars. So we do have operating funds, but we would we don't have funds to cover vandalism, but because we have operating funds, we would not be eligible for this grant the way it's written.

[Speaker 0]: Can you point that out, Bonnie? Because I'm not seeing the same blank.

[Speaker 1]: Page three, thirteen.

[Speaker 0]: Okay.

[Speaker 3]: Yeah. I guess I would say my interpretation of it, and I really appreciate you bringing this up, Clerk Brimble Collam, but I don't read it the same way or I had not interpreted it the same way. So we should I agree with you. If you have an operating budget, you should not be disqualified from accessing the funds. The way I had interpreted the language was that if you didn't have money already set aside to resolve the vandalism Correct.

[Speaker 4]: That's what

[Speaker 3]: That's okay. That's what I But we could if you reading it didn't catch that, that may mean we need to change it so it's clearer.

[Speaker 2]: So we should clarify. Yeah. So

[Speaker 5]: I do think we got to have something if somebody donates, though, because if there's a major vandalism, there is some people that may donate toward correcting that.

[Speaker 0]: That doesn't mean I'm bad. It's not it's yeah. It is so complicated.

[Speaker 2]: Don't think it's that complicated. I think no. I think you put on line 13 easily add, and John, our legislator, Campbell, has just arrived.

[Speaker 4]: I have to leave now, but I can call right back. I just have something up 01:45.

[Speaker 2]: Oh, okay. Okay.

[Speaker 0]: We'll see you in a bit.

[Speaker 4]: I'll I'll be right back.

[Speaker 0]: Yeah? So

[Speaker 1]: we'll find that for

[Speaker 2]: I think what you could say, no available funds for that specific purpose. I mean, for evangelism. Look. It already says that. It does. It says for no Oh, right. Funds that are authorized to use for the purpose of repair. But that's a little different. You could say be very explicit and say, no available funds for vandalism.

[Speaker 3]: Or to say this does not include regular operating costs. You could just vary because I think that

[Speaker 1]: That that would that would be much better.

[Speaker 0]: That would that would

[Speaker 5]: Also exclude their perpetual care fund from that.

[Speaker 3]: Yeah. Oh, that's a good suggestion.

[Speaker 1]: And back to the next of kin, I think if- if you could say next of kin if known.

[Speaker 2]: That's what I think he had- I

[Speaker 3]: think you suggested if practicable because I think if there's

[Speaker 1]: a But small what's practicable? What's practicable? That's not easily

[Speaker 3]: That's legal It's, yeah, the legal term of our It's a legal

[Speaker 2]: term that's used a lot in legislation, and it it encompasses, you know, what what do we know if known or not known, but how much work goes into it and how much and if it's frack it it's a there's definition.

[Speaker 5]: But I know that in New New York where they use this, they lots of times, they'll put a little ad in the newspaper. You know? Anybody related to such and such and such and such and let it run for a week.

[Speaker 1]: And is the cost of that ad recoverable as part of the grant?

[Speaker 0]: Yeah. Well,

[Speaker 5]: I I think if you're getting $2,030,000 for the fund, you could spend a $100 on an ad.

[Speaker 0]: If

[Speaker 1]: all the grants if there's always funding and all the grants are always funded. Yeah.

[Speaker 2]: I I think the answer is no. The ad is probably not covered unless the the vandalism fund is willing to cover that.

[Speaker 0]: We could strike newspaper ads out and just let it go with a copy of any letters or other documented attempts to obtain funding for the repair from the family of the deceased. And I'll check-in with John Gray when he gets back, our lawyer. If you would rather say if known than to the extent practicable.

[Speaker 1]: I think I think you should envision a a vandalism in one of our cemeteries where there are still family members living in town. That would be easy. If there was vandalism in one of our cemeteries where there hasn't been a burial in one hundred years, I'm not sure what's practicable.

[Speaker 3]: Tanya Vyhovsky? So my concern with using the language of just known is I think in some small towns you might know everyone's relative, but I know the town clerk may not know all of my relatives. I live in a larger town, but she could Google it. And so that's where I prefer it practicable rather than known because you just may not know.

[Speaker 0]: I am, like, thought of the time this. Okay. Have we at least come close to being able to get support from the Clerk's Association, Bobby?

[Speaker 1]: I think so. Yes.

[Speaker 3]: Okay. Well, Bobby, as you know, the house has the next bite of this apple.

[Speaker 0]: Well, we'd like to send them a finished product.

[Speaker 2]: Yeah. That's exactly I mean, they are we're gonna get it into the best shape we can. But any further concerns the clerks have can be taken up in the house, obviously.

[Speaker 0]: So number one, we will not repeal the current statute, and town clerks or city clerks can keep the five. Yes, there will be an additional cost to the family. There's no way around it. That's the whole purpose of the fun. Secondly, we will find out whether to the extent or greatest extent practical works. I don't care about newspaper ads if we wanna if that represents, enough of an expense that it's a concern as long as there's some way for someone to say, hey, the town clerk tried their best to find who it was that was next to him. I I'm not married to a newspaper ad. In fact, probably at this point, that's the last place I look. But, anyway, I do look at social media, which you could probably do for nothing. And then the last thing was to, indicate that, again, as senator White and Clarkson and Vyhovsky have all said, we will make that very clear that if you have available funds for general upkeep, those are yours to keep. That has nothing to do with vandalism, and we would make sure that you could take advantage of someone deliberately toppling a tombstone for spray painting it or something like that. You would have available opportunity just like all the cemeteries to do that. And I think

[Speaker 1]: My my last concern was just the requirement that the fee not be charged to anyone receiving state or federal financial assistance. I don't know if we would always be aware of that.

[Speaker 2]: The funeral directors are. The funeral directors are.

[Speaker 1]: Okay.

[Speaker 2]: And I would say that you have to excuse me.

[Speaker 0]: Bless you.

[Speaker 2]: I have to use the publication of records for the town to advertise, something like that. So that's a it's a legal

[Speaker 0]: Yeah. That's right. So It's a pretty.

[Speaker 2]: Those are mostly newspapers, but I I would also think that there could be some discussion with the fund.

[Speaker 0]: John, we haven't heard from you yet.

[Speaker 1]: Would the I'm sorry. I had a question.

[Speaker 4]: Oh, yeah.

[Speaker 1]: Would the fee apply to home burials?

[Speaker 0]: How many home burials are there in the state?

[Speaker 1]: In Marshfield, there are quite a few. It seems to be a growing trend.

[Speaker 3]: Have testimony from the woman about the green burials.

[Speaker 1]: We have to do the same thing.

[Speaker 2]: No. Green

[Speaker 1]: burials are different. Green burials can happen in a cemetery.

[Speaker 2]: Home burials tend to be often people with lots of land who may have a family graveyard. Ah. But they also I mean, unless you have a family graveyard, actually, if you're just buried on your property, let's say you have a 100 acres, and you have a family burial spot, you you swamy buried in your woods, that's I think what Bobby's referring to.

[Speaker 1]: Yes.

[Speaker 0]: If you wish you a thing, do you get the $5 if you wish you a permit for a home burial?

[Speaker 1]: A burial transit permit? Yes.

[Speaker 0]: Then we would charge the same. We would charge them

[Speaker 2]: on this too. Yes. They would not tend to have any anything that would be vandalized in terms of. Yeah. So it has to be very private and not very long.

[Speaker 0]: Something to so we have an exception for home variance.

[Speaker 3]: I'm fine with that.

[Speaker 0]: Okay. That's pretty bad. My bad.

[Speaker 3]: To Alison's point, like, it's your property and there's not a monument to vandalize Mhmm. But did we also ex did we also have an exemption in there like you don't have a monument at all? I don't know if we did.

[Speaker 0]: I thought that we did. We were going to charge the five. Yeah. Because it's a burial. Right.

[Speaker 3]: It's kinda the yeah.

[Speaker 0]: That's what I remember hearing about. Okay.

[Speaker 2]: I would charge them on all burials because but

[Speaker 1]: It would be I don't know how I would I don't know how we would collect that. We could tell people they owe $5 for burying grandma

[Speaker 2]: Yeah. If they're not going

[Speaker 1]: to backyard, but I don't know how we collect it.

[Speaker 2]: Bobby, are they going with with a funeral director? I mean, are they going through a funeral home in those cases or not?

[Speaker 1]: No. No. Not always.

[Speaker 2]: It Christopher?

[Speaker 0]: Chris. Yes.

[Speaker 2]: Chris, how many of those are you aware of? I'm I'm just curious that don't use your services in any way because most of those home burials that I know about tend to be cremations and tend to be actually have used a funeral director.

[Speaker 5]: Typically, with the home burials, we still fill out the death certificate form and issue a permit because the way the state got their EDRS, it's pretty hard for the family to do them on their own.

[Speaker 1]: We've we've had one last month. The family did not use a funeral home. They

[Speaker 5]: they How did they get their death certificate?

[Speaker 3]: How did

[Speaker 2]: they take it in the grab? They

[Speaker 1]: went through hospice, and you don't have to go through a funeral home to get a death certificate.

[Speaker 5]: You you gotta apply to the you gotta apply to the state to get the death certificate, and you gotta fill out all the information to get it.

[Speaker 2]: Mhmm. And because they still could pay

[Speaker 5]: the $5.

[Speaker 2]: I think hospice doctor could do that. Well, we should Well,

[Speaker 0]: we're not gonna have time to find out.

[Speaker 2]: I think that's a house.

[Speaker 1]: Just from a practical standpoint, the town can easily assess a $5 fee when we are already charging them for a burial. We can add $5 to it. We can add it to cremation burials when people are cremated in another state and they bring the ashes here. They still have to pay a fee for them to be buried in a town cemetery. But I don't have a way to assess a fee to someone who's burying a relative in their backyard. I don't have

[Speaker 0]: I don't think we're asking the town clerk to do that. VOCA is going to be the group that assesses through the funeral directors association the extra $5.

[Speaker 1]: So it won't apply to people who don't use a funeral director?

[Speaker 0]: In essence.

[Speaker 1]: Okay. As long as it's clear that I'm not gonna have to chase people down.

[Speaker 0]: No. No. Preston $5. Bobby, the last thing we wanna do is put more work on the town clerks. Right. So, again, I'm trying to get your support for this. Secretary of state's already said that they fully support this, and it's an attempt to be able to provide some monetary assistance. I mean, on an average, we get about 6,500 burials in Vermont a year. So if you multiply that times five, assuming the great majority do use a funeral director, we're not talking about a million dollars. We're talking about 35, maybe $40,000, which would be administered by VOCA, sent up to the historic preservation division, and then sent back to VOCA for distribution based on a number of factors that we have listed in the bill. I think the longer we talk about this, and maybe it's a fair thing to do, the more intricate it seems like some of the details are. I really would like to just put this on the floor next week. I'll report it. If there are questions, I'll do my best to answer them. And if it's not to your satisfaction, if it does move, you'll have, as senator Clarkson points out, a chance when it gets to the house to to modify it to some degree.

[Speaker 1]: So the copy that I have of the bill says that the town will collect the fee and once a year give it to VOCA. It has that been changed?

[Speaker 2]: Oh, yeah. Yes. It's now the historic the division of historic preservation will collect the fee, and distribute it once a year to VOCA.

[Speaker 1]: So they'll correct they'll collect it directly. It won't pass through the towns. The way it's written here, the town will collect the $5, and we will send it to historic

[Speaker 3]: okay.

[Speaker 2]: What draft do you this is draft 2.1.

[Speaker 1]: Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I don't have that.

[Speaker 0]: 1.2. I

[Speaker 3]: just have 2.5.

[Speaker 1]: I have one

[Speaker 0]: point So either way, it's not. You

[Speaker 3]: should have Yeah. Certainly, it's not my intent that you go knocking on people's doors to collect the $5, which is why I was supportive of just exempting the whole burials. Yeah. Okay. We can consider that in the house.

[Speaker 0]: It's a

[Speaker 2]: lot of damage. Yeah. I

[Speaker 3]: actually had no idea that you could bury a loved one in your backyard.

[Speaker 0]: Yeah.

[Speaker 1]: It it's I it's something I wish the legislature would take a look at because it's there's not a lot of regulation about it right now, and it's Oh. Becoming a little problematic for

[Speaker 2]: small The house may the house may dive into that depending on the other things they have to consider.

[Speaker 3]: Are you sure you didn't mean they might dig into it?

[Speaker 2]: Yeah. No. I accept that.

[Speaker 3]: It's a little bit like

[Speaker 1]: the Wild West right now. All you have to do is say you're so many feet away from water and keep that in mind when you're buying a house. There could be a body buried.

[Speaker 5]: I will say that most of them that I bury on property, I dig them up and move them within ten years.

[Speaker 2]: Yes. Because people want them to stay with them. Then they it's really you're right. The reason to look it up is that people move. Yeah.

[Speaker 1]: Yeah.

[Speaker 0]: Tom, do you wanna weigh in?

[Speaker 6]: Oh, absolutely. There's over 2,000 cemeteries in Vermont, and I thank that I thank the town clerk at Marshfield for her comments. Through my experience that the town clerk I have talked to who have experienced vandalism are thrilled to tears over an opportunity to have money available to help them because they don't have any funds. I mean and again, the cemeteries, I mean, they go back to the seventeen hundreds and there is nobody left to help care for them. And I would hope that the town clerk would see this as a, money's available to help them as opposed to getting into the weeds as it were and doing it. It's a win win for everybody. I mean, when I had to go to a cemetery and there's two fifty stones knocked over and vandalized, it'd be nice to say, well, we can pay for somebody coming in with a tractor to help. So nothing but a positive, and I don't wanna put any more issues with the town clerks. The intent of the bill was not to have them involved hardly at all, and I hope that would continue. The funeral directors are on board. I do know that, as I think, Senator Clarkson mentioned, that, there so many have zero money to do anything other than mowing if they're lucky. So this bill would be able to help them when they And unfortunately, vandalism seems to happen every year somewhere and we've been uninvolved. And I don't think there's been a cemetery that I've been into in the last thirty five years that's not some place where you can see that where people push stones over at Noctomore. I mean, it would be a For these towns to have nothing, it would be a godsend to have a opportunity to say, hey, there is money available that we can have a monument company or somebody come in to help and or VOCA, whoever to to to do the work. And, it's, again, with over 2,000 cemeteries with all the towns that don't have the the funds. I mean, the 10 is that if there's vandalism, there'll be a fund available and they can they can go to it to repair their cemeteries. It's a very clean-cut and what and the intent is is pure and there's no nobody has nobody has an agenda shall we say other than than helping out the communities in the in the in Vermont.

[Speaker 0]: Okay. We've just had, John Gray join us. So I have five potential revisions to this. K. First well, there's no provision right now to repeal the existing statute. So we don't have to deal with that because we're not gonna repeal anything. So

[Speaker 4]: Okay. I had actually drafted something with that, so I will take it out.

[Speaker 0]: Okay. A legal question for you, attorney Gray, is to the greatest extent practicable a term of art, Does it mean the same thing as if known, and which has more of a legal

[Speaker 2]: footing? We're talking about trying to find

[Speaker 0]: relatives of people. Trying to find next of kin to the greatest extent practicable or just if known. I

[Speaker 4]: do think there's a difference between those two. I would say the standard under practicable is a higher standard, right? You have to actually determine whether or not it's impracticable for you to not reach out. Just if no one asks a question about your current state of knowledge, it doesn't require you to agree. So I would say there is a meaningful difference between the two, and if you use practicable language, you are more likely to reach the kin. If you restrict it to as known, that's simpler for the cemeteries or whoever may be needing to reach out. Okay. That's the

[Speaker 0]: I would favor the practical.

[Speaker 4]: Just because I've been running around. Can you guys point me to where

[Speaker 0]: you are in the test? Oh, sure. I'm gonna use 2.1. Is that the latest one we have? That's great. So, again, the first one, I'm sorry, Alison. Thank you for this. We don't have to well, take the repeal. Exactly. Yep. Number two is the the line on page two line 15. Mhmm. And then there's another reference to it two lines below in 17 to say next of kin if I don't know if you say to the greatest extent or just to the to any extent practicable or however you think that that is best wording. Okay. Number three is we would like to exempt home burials from the $5 fee. Okay.

[Speaker 2]: And, mean, unless they use a funeral director.

[Speaker 0]: Well Yeah. If they do And if there's a funeral director have the right to charge the $5. Yeah.

[Speaker 2]: Yeah. If they

[Speaker 4]: So so in that instance, are they being charged the $5

[Speaker 2]: Christopher does some home burials, don't you Chris?

[Speaker 4]: Yes. Sorry, are we talking about the same $5 I'm thinking of the $5 potential fee under this bill

[Speaker 0]: It's in addition to the $5 fee for the home burial permit or certificate. Right.

[Speaker 4]: And I was thinking that if you're doing a home burial and not going through a cemetery, then you are contributing.

[Speaker 2]: But some do.

[Speaker 3]: That's why I think we should just accept them.

[Speaker 2]: That's fine. But some home burials use funeral directors because some are cremated. Okay. Cremation is generally done. Very few cremations are done on their own because it's a very expensive shot at it. Well, it's a it's a it's Christos. I mean, it's a it's not an easy thing to do.

[Speaker 4]: Oh, wait.

[Speaker 2]: Unless you're the Ganges and you're on And we're not going there. Those are not our home barriers. So I would say exempt them unless they use a funeral director, they use a funeral director. That is they naturally are now accepting this fee.

[Speaker 4]: I I think I'm struggling with my own lack of knowledge. If they aren't using a funeral director, why are they being charged a $5?

[Speaker 3]: They should not be, that's my point.

[Speaker 4]: No, I'm saying under the language, how are they being charged a $5? They're

[Speaker 2]: They are currently charged by the town clerks for

[Speaker 0]: Burial certificate.

[Speaker 2]: For a burial certificate, which they have to have. And somehow they've gotten a death certificate. We're not we declare on how burials do that, but they do. So we're examining them on burials unless they use a funeral director

[Speaker 4]: to From the burial certificate, not from this $5 fee, which they would not be charged because they aren't using an agency.

[Speaker 0]: I think they still need the burial certificate from somebody or they can't bury the body.

[Speaker 4]: I'm trying to make sure I'm understanding which thing we're exempting them from. The $5

[Speaker 2]: The additional $5 The vandalism fee.

[Speaker 4]: Okay. So what I would propose is on page five Yep. Lines eleven and twelve, what if we said every seashell contributing $5 to the cemetery vandalism response fund for each burial or cremation it performs that is not at a home. I'm just thinking live here about easy way to accept them for this. Another way to do it is to add to the final lines 14 through 16, an agency shall not charge a fee to cover the cost of contribution to any person receiving financial assistance or any person conducting a home burial that is not using a funeral driver. Right. Maybe that's our symptoms. That's good.

[Speaker 3]: That sounds like

[Speaker 1]: can I ask a question?

[Speaker 0]: Sure.

[Speaker 1]: Do you think it's appropriate to charge the fee to people that are not being buried in a cemetery?

[Speaker 0]: I don't.

[Speaker 1]: Couldn't you just exempt home burials?

[Speaker 4]: Who who conducts the again, I'm sorry that I just don't

[Speaker 1]: It whoever whoever conducts it, the the private burial space is never gonna be able to access this fund

[Speaker 4]: Right.

[Speaker 1]: Because they wouldn't be defined as an agency. So why would they have to contribute towards

[Speaker 4]: So so that is that is why Well, that's not correct.

[Speaker 5]: That's not correct. If the private cemetery ish became an association, they could access that. So I could have one burial on my property and have book a cemetery association, and I could access this fund.

[Speaker 1]: I don't think people who are having one burial in their backyard are incorporating as a cemetery association.

[Speaker 4]: So so that was gonna be my question about, do we think that these folks conducting home burials are captured in agency? The term agency in this draft, and if they are not, they are not already under current language subjected to the $5 payment. That's that's what I've been trying to say, but maybe not stated clear. That's because the way that it works on line 11, every agency shall contribute $5 to the cemetery vandalism response fund for burial or cremation it performs. It's not an agency. There is Oh. I'm sorry. I don't that's why I was so confused. I'm sorry.

[Speaker 3]: Oh, I don't think we need to change anything. I think they're already exempt.

[Speaker 2]: Well Okay.

[Speaker 0]: Yeah. Okay. Here's what how we define agencies. Pound Cemetery, religious ecclesiastical society cemeteries, cemetery associations. Any person, firm, corporation, or unincorporated association engaged in the business of a cemetery.

[Speaker 4]: Yeah. So the the business of a cemetery is kind of a key line for me. Is a person who conducts a home burial engaged into the business of a cemetery, or do they just conduct a burial? The other way to think about it is if this is a debatable point, who would go after a home burial for some kind of $5. So I think you're safe is my simple read. I don't wanna push I don't wanna push you guys in.

[Speaker 0]: I love being safe. No. So we're good. So we don't have the exempts from here. Okay. So, again, Rutildo, next of kin, we're gonna use practicable. Yep. Sounds good. So we we were talking for a little bit about the newspaper ads. I guess we've gotta leave those in. Senator Clarkson made a point that legally, if you don't post it in a in a newspaper of record for that municipality, it's not a legal notice. Right. So we almost, by default, have to leave it in. And then the last one is to strike on page three, subdivision e. We wanna make sure that it's clear that if a cemetery has available funds for cutting the lawn, pruning trees, whatever that activity is, they can still access this fund if it has to do with vandalism.

[Speaker 4]: This is the piece where I walked in in a HOKA, and so I and I get that the committee had a feeling that the current language is sufficient but could be more clear. And so one suggestion for this would be we're talking about really line 13 that the agency has no available funds that it is authorized to use for the purpose of repair. You could add something like a call out effort, repair specific to vandalism, or you could say, has no available funds that are specifically authorized to repair the vandals. Specifically authorized to repair the Alright.

[Speaker 0]: Let's let's go ahead. Who is that? Harrison. Oh my goodness. That's important.

[Speaker 2]: Is this is great. This is not. Hey. This is not getting cannabis out of standard economic realm. I agree. Much more much less.

[Speaker 0]: Bobby, I'll start with you. Is there anything else we should modify here?

[Speaker 1]: No. And I'm just wanna say how I'm pressed I am with this whole process. Thank thank you for listening to us.

[Speaker 0]: Well, if we get it to the floor, well, when we get it to the floor, I will say that the Vermont Municipal Clerk's Associate Clerk's and Treasurer Association support the bill.

[Speaker 1]: Okay.

[Speaker 0]: Okay.

[Speaker 2]: That's okay. Tom or How about they do not Opposed. Oppose the bill. I was gonna say that they're They are enthusiastically I don't think they need

[Speaker 0]: to be identified enthusiastically either.

[Speaker 3]: Yeah. Let me just She

[Speaker 5]: will.

[Speaker 0]: Tom or Chris, do you have anything else to add?

[Speaker 6]: No. It sounds great. Again, having been all over the state and seeing what's and seeing the damage that's been done and having to be able to tell a town clerk or the association that, hey, there is money available to help you. I mean, you have one stone that costs $300 to fix and they have an ability to do that. Imagine any associate town clerk saying, oh, we don't want the money.

[Speaker 1]: That's right. We love the idea. We just wanted a few clarifications.

[Speaker 0]: Chris, you okay?

[Speaker 5]: I'm okay. Thank you so much.

[Speaker 0]: Okay. Senator Clarkson.

[Speaker 2]: Bobby, I've been involved in many bills that you've been involved with. And and I'm glad you appreciate the process because we appreciate your availability and your help with the process of paying.

[Speaker 0]: You've made the bill better.

[Speaker 1]: Thank you.

[Speaker 2]: Okay. See you soon on another bill.

[Speaker 0]: My next question is for attorney Gray. How quickly today Okay. Affect the necessary changes? Because we got a vote of it today.

[Speaker 4]: For sure. So I don't have to run anywhere after this. Oh, well, was going to

[Speaker 2]: the floor, So no money here.

[Speaker 4]: And I thought finance was gonna be going, but they voted out the thing that I was working on without me there. That's nice. Got it.

[Speaker 0]: So we could adjourn and come back in

[Speaker 4]: how long? I so the the question I have for you is, would you like these shapes to be edited before you vote, or if you think of them as sufficiently minor, do you wanna just have them go through editing after the vote?

[Speaker 2]: I would propose they're sufficiently minor for us to do without editing.

[Speaker 0]: Yeah. Yesterday, Sophie said that he was able to not only move quickly, but get it So I can

[Speaker 4]: be back within twenty minutes. Okay. Perfect. And I can ask them for an ASAP job or I can just bring you what I have at that time and if they happen to have me an edited by

[Speaker 0]: the If they're backed up, then just I'm gonna send you a guide. If they're not, we'll take the evidence. Okay. Let's do it.

[Speaker 4]: I'll see you guys shortly.

[Speaker 2]: Thank you, Reynolds.

[Speaker 0]: You can be back for the vote if you choose or not. We can always let you know. And we But let's take a twenty five minute break. So we will be back here at twenty minutes of three for a vote on this.