[A] daylong dispute between the governor and the clerk of the House of Representatives was settled late Tuesday after the governor’s veto message on two bills was initially rejected.
As expected, Gov. Phil Scott vetoed the state budget and a separate bill that set property tax rates. The veto message was rejected by the clerk of the Vermont House, William MaGill, who said the governor did not follow proper procedure because he referenced both bills in a single veto message.
The governor’s spokesperson, Rebecca Kelley, accused MaGill of engaging in a “hyper-political” move in rejecting the vetoes. MaGill denied any political motive.
By late afternoon, after the administration made some changes and resubmitted the vetoes, they were accepted by the House clerk’s office, according to Jeremy Weiss, the journal clerk.
Earlier, Kelley maintained the governor’s initial vetoes were constitutional.
“We believe we are fully aligned with what’s called for” to issue a veto, Kelley said. The administration’s legal team is drafting a response.
Katherine Levasseur, the chief of staff for House Speaker Mitzi Johnson, said the office had a copy of the original letter the governor’s office sent to the clerk of the House vetoing the two bills together.
Levasseur said the office was still waiting to get a copy of two separate letters, which she said are needed to veto the bill.
“The constitution says one bill, one explanation. Just as they can’t sign two bills with one signature, they can’t veto two bills with one letter,” MaGill said. “You have to have the individual explanations.”
MaGill, a lawyer who worked under the former clerk of the House for 15 years, said he is “nonpartisan.” He has never held a political position or an elected office. “I keep the records and interpret the rules, and none of it’s politically motivated,” he said.
The clerk is elected by the full House and serves as the record-keeper for the Legislature’s lower chamber. The position is not affiliated with a political party. The House picked MaGill in 2015 to succeed Don Milne, the father of onetime Republican gubernatorial candidate Scott Milne.
Kelley countered: “Mr. MaGill’s explanation is incorrect, there is no constitutional or statutory authority for a House clerk to impose restrictions on how, or in what way, a governor communicates his objections in writing. Further, they can point to no legislative rule addressing this claim.”
She added: “It is extremely unfortunate that the clerk would take such a partisan and unconstitutional action.”
Later in the day, Scott’s legal counsel weighed in as she resubmitted the veto message and accompanying material.
The clerk “has no authority to refuse to accept a bill returned by the Governor with written objections, or in any way limit or restrict the Governor’s authority to communicate those objections,” wrote attorney Jaye Pershing Johnson.
Scott vetoed H.518, the state budget, and H.509, the property tax bill.
In his veto message, Scott said he was rejecting the bills because lawmakers failed to pass his proposal to save $26 million on teacher health care. He also cited other problems with both bills.
The governor had until Wednesday to veto the property tax bill and faced a Thursday deadline to veto the state budget.
“At the beginning of the session, I challenged the Legislature to give residents and businesses a break from new or higher taxes and fees in all bills passed this year. I also urged the Legislature to join me in the work of making Vermont more affordable in every way we can,” Scott wrote. The two bills, he said, “fail to achieve these goals and as a result, I cannot support them as written.”
Lawmakers will return for a special session June 21. There do not appear to be enough votes to override the vetoes. Republicans hold 53 seats in the House, enough to sustain a veto in the 150-member chamber.
Scott has promised to sign a state budget before the beginning of the fiscal year on July 1.
He has said the state has a “once-in-a-lifetime’’ opportunity with all current teacher health care plans ending Jan. 1.
Chief of Staff Jason Gibbs told Cabinet members that “the governor is committed to reaching an agreement for the June 21 veto session that ensures Vermonters – and Vermont’s economy – benefit from this unique savings opportunity. When we do these bills will be improved significantly, the state will be more fiscally secure, and Vermonters will be better for it.”
In a statement late Tuesday, Johnson argued that the Legislature has done much to ensure Vermonters’ financial well-being.
“Our budget raises no new taxes and fees,” she said while listing investments in housing, higher education, water quality, economic development, child care and mental health. “It’s disgraceful that Gov. Scott would say no to these critical investments with his budget veto.”
Johnson said teacher health care savings are already accruing as a result of local negotiations and are returned to taxpayers in the property tax bill. “With his second veto, the governor vetoed a property tax decrease that would have gone directly to Vermont taxpayers,” she said, adding that he has called for a bill “that gives second homeowners a tax cut.”
Scott and lawmakers were in negotiations that extended the legislative session by several weeks as the two sides tried to work out a compromise. Scott insisted that contract negotiations over teacher health care needed to be done on a statewide basis to achieve uniformity and maximum savings.
Democratic leaders, including Johnson and Senate President Tim Ashe, decried the last-minute nature of Scott’s proposal. Other lawmakers and the teachers union said the proposal would undermine collective bargaining by moving health care negotiations from the local to the state level.
(This story was updated June 6 at 3:49 and 8:15 p.m.)
