Gov. Phil Scott REALLY wants to fund infrastructure.
Flanked by cabinet members and allies at a press conference Thursday, Scott implored the Legislature to set aside $150 million in state surplus dollars in order to take advantage of future federal match dollars available for various infrastructure projects.
As a general rule of thumb, Scott said, for every $1 Vermont invests, it will reap roughly $4 from the feds. Not ponying up the state dollars would leave money on the table, he said, and would delay needed improvements to the state’s water, roads, bridges and broadband infrastructure.
And with a sunny state surplus in the bank now, and economically uncertain time ahead, Gov. Dad said the time is right to set aside state funds for a rainy day. He harkened back to January’s E-Board meeting, where state economists looked into their crystal balls and predicted a revenue slow-down on the horizon.
“That means we might not have the match money we need, putting important projects at risk, also putting us in a tough position of either cutting programs or raising taxes, and neither are good options,” Scott said. “This is really about fiscal responsibility and good government, thinking ahead and being prepared.”
But wait, are the Legislature’s budgeters fighting this? Scott didn’t name names, but he said he’s received a “mixed response.” Some under the golden dome are “fully supportive,” while others “had other priorities for (the) surplus dollars.”
“We want to make sure the message is loud and clear: This is very important to me,” Scott said.
— Sarah Mearhoff
IN THE KNOW
Considering Vermont has approved regulations designed to transition thousands of car owners to electric vehicles in the next decade, how will the state replace revenue from the gas tax?
That was the question of the morning in the Senate Transportation Committee, where lawmakers heard a proposal from the state’s Agency of Transportation to impose a mileage-based fee on electric cars.
“Within a few years, we can begin to see millions of dollars that are lost due to electrification,” said Patrick Murphy, who works on sustainability projects for the agency, referring to a chart with different projections of revenue loss according to the pace at which Vermonters switch to EVs.
Lawmakers had questions.
Who would collect the fee? Who would track mileage, and how? How much would a car owner be charged?
One possible option, Murphy said: The state could incorporate the fee into a car’s annual inspection process. The recommended rate for all-electric vehicles would be $0.013 cents per mile — equivalent, roughly, to $150 per year, and car owners could pay upfront or over time.
According to Murphy, Vermont was home to more than 4,000 all-electric vehicles and nearly 5,000 plug-in hybrids in 2023 out of about 430,000 passenger vehicles in the state. By 2030, Vermont would need to have 126,000 electric cars on the road to meet the state’s climate goals.
— Emma Cotton
ON THE MOVE
There was only one sympathetic ear for the Vermont Agency of Transportation representative sent to testify against S.9, a bill that would explicitly give the state auditor the ability to directly audit state contractors. The rest of the Senate Committee on Government Operations was ready to vote.
Jeremy Reed, a construction engineer, said that the agency already follows the strict audit requirements set by federal agencies and maintains records on all its many contractors. The state auditor could get whatever was needed from them, he said.
“We have a very small bidding pool for our projects,” said Reed. “Anything that would be deemed as an annoyance or hindrance or work for a contractor could have a chilling effect on that bidding pool.”
Chair Ruth Hardy, D-Addison, stuck with the aquatic theme when explaining that the bill was necessary to respond to a Vermont Supreme Court decision last summer. The court ruled that statute only gave the auditor the right to audit state agencies and departments, not state contractors. “That just seems a little fishy since the auditor is an elected official in the state,” she said.
After multiple days of testimony, and changes that limited the scope of the auditor’s review to records that “are relevant to the performance of the contract with the state,” Sen. Alison Clarkson, D-Windsor, had had enough.
“Previous to the court’s decision, I think everyone assumed the auditor had that ability, so I don’t really understand what the issue is here,” Clarkson said. “I’m unclear why the administration is landing so hard on this. What are they so afraid of, and why are they fear-mongering on this?”
The bill passed out of committee, 5-1, with Sen. Robert Norris, R-Franklin, opposing it.
— Kristen Fountain
Also at Thursday’s press conference, Scott offered his strongest support yet for H.89, a proposed shield law aimed to protect Vermont doctors who offer reproductive care to out-of-state patients, and, to some extent, the patients themselves.
Scott has maintained since the bill’s early days that he supported it in spirit, but stopped short of affirming he would sign it, saying his legal team needed to review the details. After taking a “broad look” at the version of the bill passed by the House, Scott told reporters Thursday, “If it were to pass in its present form, I see no reason why I wouldn’t sign it.”
The House passed the bill by a 130-13 vote on Feb. 10, and the Senate Judiciary Committee is now considering it before it heads to the full floor for a vote. Should it pass, it’s off to Scott’s desk for his signature.
— Sarah Mearhoff
ON THE HILL
A spokesperson for U.S. Rep. Becca Balint, D-Vt., confirmed Thursday that Vermont’s newest member of Congress is “fully cooperating” with federal authorities in the prosecution of disgraced cryptocurrency executive Sam Bankman-Fried.
In a superseding indictment filed Thursday in federal court, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York outlined new details about an alleged Bankman-Fried scheme to illegally funnel investor funds to political campaigns through associates to mask their source.
One donation in particular cited in the indictment appears to mirror the circumstances that led to a million-dollar influx of pro-Balint spending in Vermont’s 2022 congressional primary. Balint is not named in the indictment and has not been accused of wrongdoing.
— Sara Mearhoff
WHAT WE’RE READING
Court backlog to blame for more Vermonters held in prison pre-trial, experts say (Vermont Public)
Dogged by on-duty and off-duty complaints, Northfield police chief to retire (VTDigger)
Lawmakers consider big plans for prisons, but can the state afford it? (WCAX)
A drinker’s guide to sugaring season in Vermont (Wine Enthusiast)