A clash between the public’s right to know and protecting a young person from having information about an arrest follow them for life won’t be decided until at least early next year.
This week, lawmakers abandoned an effort to override Gov. Phil Scott’s veto of S.107, which would have barred police from releasing information about the initial arrest of a person under 19 in most cases. Under the legislation, the age would have risen to 20 next year.
The bill would have allowed release of initial arrest information of suspects 19 and younger only if they were charged as adults and with any “Big 12” offenses, such as murder and sexual assault.
However, information about other offenses — including drunken driving with death resulting, or careless and negligent driving with death resulting — would be kept secret under the legislation.
The bill passed both the House and Senate earlier this year, but was later vetoed by the governor, who raised concerns about upping the age for protections provided to juveniles.
Lawmakers decided this week not to try to override the veto.
The Vermont Press Association testified against S.107 and had been lobbying lawmakers, asking them not to override the governor’s veto, according to Michael Donoghue, the organization’s executive director.
“We believe Vermonters are happy that the House and Senate both understood that more committee work and testimony are going to be needed on this major public policy legislation,” Donoghue said Thursday afternoon.
“The press association, along with the Vermont Association of Broadcasters, had reached out to various legislators,” Donoghue added, “and we actually had calls and emails from legislators asking for more information about why our groups didn’t think the law was ready for prime time.”
He said some of the legislators were surprised to learn that certain crimes could be “hidden” from the public, including child abuse, elder abuse, hate crimes, and major felonies such as embezzlement.
Sen. Jeanette White, D-Windham, said Thursday morning on the virtual Senate floor that the Senate Committee on Government Operations would take up the issue again in January, when lawmakers go back into session.
Senate President Pro Tempore Becca Balint, D-Windham, told VTDigger in an interview a day earlier that, in communication with House Speaker Jill Krowinski, D-Burlington, they concluded there were not enough votes in the House to override Scott’s veto of the legislation.
“Sometimes we just need to take a little bit more time,” Balint said, “and I’m OK with that.”
It takes a two-third majority vote to override a governor’s veto, meaning the support of 100 House members and 20 senators.
The bill passed the House 88-36, with several lawmakers absent. A breakdown of the vote in the Senate was not recorded.
Krowinski, speaking Wednesday to VTDigger, said lawmakers will keep working on the legislation, and, “we can always take it back up when we meet again.”
Asked if lawmakers would try in January to override the veto or work to incorporate the bill into a different package, Balint replied, “It’s not clear.”
She said she had exchanged emails with Sen. Dick Sears, D-Bennington, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, about the matter.
“He asked if he could have permission for the Senate Judiciary Committee to meet for several days this summer to prepare for January,” Balint said, “and determine whether it is continuing to look for a veto override on 107 or if there are changes that need to be made, perhaps to another bill, for us to get to the same place.”
The governor, in a message to lawmakers explaining his veto, stated that before taking the steps outlined in the legislation, more work needed to be done to provide young adults with needed services around rehabilitation, housing and other supports.
“I don’t believe we’ve done enough collectively — the executive branch, the judicial branch, the legislative branch — to prepare us for this moment,” Scott said at a press conference shortly after the veto. “We need to take a step back and reassess and make sure that we put the programs in place or we keep the age lower, at least at this point.”
Sears spoke Thursday about the legislation and the governor’s veto of it on the virtual Senate floor.
Sears read from a statement issued after Scott’s veto by the Justice Lab at Columbia University. That statement referred to legislation Scott signed into law in 2018 that gradually raises the age young people can automatically be prosecuted in a juvenile court from 18 to 20.
“It is no surprise that the Covid-19 pandemic has presented obstacles to Vermont’s ability to provide services to youth involved in the justice system,” the statement read. “But research shows that raising the age at which young people are automatically prosecuted as adults is effective and developmentally appropriate. Facing roadblocks during its implementation does not mean that Vermont legislators and Gov. Scott should retreat from this legislation.”
Sears said the Senate Judiciary Committee is willing to work this fall with the governor’s administration on the raise-the-age bill to ensure “we get this right.”
“We want to improve outcomes for emerging adults, increase public safety, and reduce costs,” Sears said. “I’m disappointed in the governor’s veto message, but it is an opportunity to renew our commitment to raise the age.”
The bill followed a fatal motor-vehicle crash last year in which police said a teenage driver crossed into oncoming traffic on Route 7 in Charlotte, crashing into a vehicle headed the other way and killing the Ferrisburgh couple inside it.
Conflicts and uncertainty over the law raised in that case prompted state police to stop publicly releasing the names of juveniles arrested — including those facing motor vehicle charges.
In addition, in a fatal one-car crash in Putney earlier this year, Vermont State Police did not release the identity of the juvenile driver charged with drunken driving with death resulting, nor the name of the teenage passenger killed in the crash.
The names of teenagers involved in accidents, including fatal crashes, had been disclosed by police for decades.
Adam Silverman, a spokesperson for Vermont State Police, stated in an email Thursday afternoon that the veto will “result in no changes to the current interim policy.” He added that the state Department of Public Safety and the governor’s office are “currently discussing next steps regarding the general evolution of policy in this area.”
Sears, speaking Thursday afternoon after the veto session, said lawmakers need to do something to resolve the situation.
“It’s an issue that has to be addressed,” he said. “We can’t leave confusion out there about what is a public record and what isn’t a public record. We’re kind of in a position where it’s undetermined.”
Xander Landen and Kit Norton contributed to this article.
