[A] bill to alter and augment the process to select the state’s adjutant general has passed unanimously out of the House Committee on General, Housing and Military Affairs.
The proposal passed Friday would form a nine-member nominating committee with members of the House, Senate, and governor’s veterans advisory council who would vet candidates for the post in the first year of a biennium, and then shift the election to the second year of the biennium.
Under the bill, the Legislature would retain the right to make the selection. Gov. Phil Scott has advocated making the post a gubernatorial appointment. Vermont is the only state where the Legislature elects the head of the state militia.
Rep. Tom Stevens, chair of the committee, said the change would provide a better vetting process for the leaders, given of a series of articles on abuse and sexual misconduct within the guard last fall.
“That would give us a better way to have an election or reelection that focused on that adjutant general’s work,” said Stevens, D-Waterbury. “That’s something that had been missing, along with the notion that criteria is spelled out for adjutant generals.”
The criteria for candidates under the proposal includes having attained the rank of lieutenant colonel or above, being a current member of the military or eligible to return to active service, and being a graduate of, enrolled in, or eligible to enroll in a senior service college.
Stevens said the nomination process would work in the same vein as the judicial retention process, with in-depth interviews and vetting of each candidate. He said this year’s election went “as well as could be expected,” but that the process is fundamentally flawed.
“I am still uncomfortable with a selection process set up in a way that candidates were being asked to really assume a role of an active candidate seeking votes in a way that is jarring for people,” Stevens said. “I understand many folks in the military don’t particularly care for that process, I don’t care for the elements of it that make it difficult for us as legislators to take it on.”
He commended the candidates that have put their names forward, and said that although Vermont is the only state in the nation where the adjutant general is elected by the Legislature, he noted the process has been in use for more than 100 years.
On the Senate side of things, there’s interest in a bill that would change the process entirely, so that adjutant generals would be appointed by the governor instead of elected by the Legislature.
“It’s still a popularity contest, we’re still electing the person,” said Sen. Jeanette White, chair of Senate Government Operations, commenting on the House committee proposal. “This is a serious position, we’re hiring somebody to lead an organization of 3,500 people, and it’s not political. I don’t believe it should be an elected position. We’re the Legislature, we don’t know anything about electing the National Guard.”
Col. Greg Knight, the recently elected adjutant general, said in a statement that whatever the reform looks like, he’s confident the Legislature will pass a bill to refine the selection process.
“Whether the final determination is to retain the process within the Legislature as currently drafted, or a legislative vetting process to allow for Gubernatorial appointment, the goal is to select the person most qualified for the position and best suited to facilitate a ready force,” Knight said.
“Establishing qualifications for the position is perhaps the first criteria to consider, and should provide enough information for those engaged in the selection process to make a decision on the Adjutant General. In the end, I would welcome a change that makes for a less awkward process for all involved,” Knight said.
One change in the House bill would no longer require candidates for the post to live in Vermont. If elected, the adjutant general would still be required to reside in the state, but candidates could come from elsewhere. Stevens, D-Waterbury, said the change would help to “broaden the talent search” for the role.
Stevens also said changing the vote to the second year of the biennium would give lawmakers more time to get educated on the process and on the candidates, especially for newly elected members.
“[New members] didn’t have context for the election or even full context of the Statehouse yet,” Stevens said. “There was a certain kind of information canyon that happened, and we did a lot of education this year, which was perfectly fine, but our thinking was that if we move it to the second year, all the legislators would be more grounded in their work and have a better understand of the process.”
Stevens said he was “pleasantly surprised” the bill passed out of committee unanimously and said he would focus on building support for the bill from the rest of the House.
