If Gov. Phil Scott wants to reorganize the state’s law enforcement bureaucracy, he’ll have to work with the Legislature to get it done.
On Friday, the Vermont House voted 108-40 to reject Scott’s executive order to create a single agency incorporating all state-level public safety and law enforcement divisions.
Instead, the Democratic chamber encouraged Scott, the Republican governor, to work with the Legislature on a plan for potential reorganization of the state government agencies.
The resolution to reject Scott’s plan was introduced by Rep. Sarah Copeland Hanzas, D-Bradford, who chairs the House Committee on Government Operations. She told legislators that, while the change could make state government more efficient, it has the potential to create unintended consequences.
Copeland Hanzas and Rep. John Gannon, D-Wilmington, both expressed worry that the executive order could crimp the independence of the Criminal Justice Training Council, which operates the Vermont Police Academy, oversees the training and certification of state law enforcement officials, and acts as an oversight body for police misconduct.
“The chief concern your Government Operations Committee had is whether an executive order is the appropriate mechanism to do this magnitude of restructuring of state government,” Copeland Hanzas told her colleagues on the virtual House floor.
Scott’s order would have created an Agency of Public Safety with two subdivisions: a Department of Fire Safety and Emergency Management, and a Department of Law Enforcement.
Now, state police, emergency management and the fire division all fall under the Department of Public Safety, with other law enforcement agencies spread across state government.
Scott’s plan for a new Department of Law Enforcement would have begun with the state police and the Motor Vehicle Division, which is now part of the Department of Motor Vehicles.
Then, a study would be conducted on whether the Fish & Wildlife Warden Service, the Department of Liquor & Lottery Enforcement, and other state law enforcement groups should be added to the new department and agency.
Jason Maulucci, a spokesperson for Scott, issued a statement Friday saying the governor appreciated the House’s interest in pursuing his goals and hoped the Legislature would approve a similar reorganization in the coming months.
Maulucci also reiterated the Scott administration’s opinion that it takes both the House and Senate to reject an executive order.
Current law says either the House or Senate can kill an executive order, but Scott contends it takes both. The executive order includes a clause saying it would take effect automatically unless both House and Senate rejected it within 90 days of the date it was issued, Jan. 14.
“There are still several paths they could pursue before the 90 days are up, such as legislation which accomplishes similar objectives, or a vote to disapprove taken up by the Senate, as we have suggested is required,” Maulucci said.
On Wednesday, the House Committee on Government Operations voted 10-1 to recommend the House reject the executive order. On the House floor Friday, Republican lawmakers objected to the resolution, alleging that Copeland Hanzas had violated the committee process when bringing the measure to a vote.
Rep. Patricia McCoy, R-Poultney, the House minority leader, accused the committee of failing to hear testimony from a suitable number of stakeholders or to give the public a chance to weigh in.
“When we receive an executive order from our governor,” McCoy said, “my expectation is to fully vet the order.”
“When we attempt to vote a bill or resolution out of committee without first warning it on the agenda, then we have not done our jobs,” she added. “We must do better.”
McCoy was referring to Copeland Hanzas’ initial plan to vote on the resolution Tuesday. During committee discussion that day, Reps. Rob LaClair, R-Barre Town, and Mark Higley, R-Lowell, asked if the vote could be pushed to Wednesday.
Copeland Hanzas agreed to the request, and the plan for a vote was posted on the committee’s agenda.
Rep. Anne Donahue, R-Northfield, joined her Republican colleagues Friday in arguing that it is essential to give the public notice on important committee votes.
“I think that’s a really fundamental aspect of our process,” Donahue said. “The fact that that didn’t happen for this resolution makes it impossible for me to support it.”
Copeland Hanzas replied that the committee decided to move the resolution to the House floor when it became clear there was broad support to consider legislation as a way to accomplish what the governor had proposed, rather than through an executive order.
“There seemed to be universal comfort in the committee that the executive order process was not the appropriate way to accomplish these changes,” Copeland Hanzas said. “It would be more expeditious to get started on the consideration of legislation that would create an Agency of Public Safety.”
The Progressive caucus leader, Rep. Selene Colburn, P-Burlington, defended the decision to quickly reject the governor’s executive order.
“I actually want to thank the committee for taking somewhat swift action on this because I think that, by doing so, you leave us some time to go through the legislative process to examine this issue to work more collaboratively with the administration,” Colburn said.
