Final Reading: Stakeholders scramble to compromise on fossil fuel divestment

Sen. Ruth Hardy, D-Addison, at the Statehouse in Montpelier in January. File photo by Glenn Russell/VTDigger

Another year has brought another effort to divest Vermont’s pension fund from the fossil fuel industry.

It’s been a running debate for years, but this time, it looks like the bill may pass out of its first committee just in time for the crossover deadline. On Tuesday, it almost did.

Almost.

The current version of the bill, S.42, would require the Vermont Pension Investment Commission to create a plan to divest Vermont’s three statutory pension plans — with a few exemptions — from the fossil fuel industry by 2031.

In previous debates, former State Treasurer Beth Pearce opposed divestment, arguing that the state could best help reform the fossil fuel industry by maintaining its seat at the shareholders’ table.

But Mike Pieciak, the state’s new treasurer, has been working with lawmakers in the Senate Committee on Government Operations on a bill that would gradually move some of the fund’s investments away from fossil fuels. With his support, the bill appears to have some wind in its sails.

Lawmakers took testimony from Pieciak and representatives from the Vermont Pension Investment Commission, along with divestment advocate, environmental organizer and author Bill McKibben, before the Town Meeting Day recess.

“I think today marks the day when Vermont officials finally conceded the point that we need to divest from fossil fuel,” McKibben said on March 3, referring to an amendment to the bill proposed by Pieciak. “If that’s true, then it’s a watershed moment for which we thank the treasurer a great deal.”

McKibben said Vermont has been dragging its feet for years — a point he called a “great sadness,” particularly because the state birthed the divestment movement when 350.org, an organization McKibben led, first made the case in 2011.

“We know that it’s hard to go out and, you know, install 200,000 heat pumps in people’s homes and insulate 200,000 homes,” he said, referring to the clean heat standard, the biggest and most controversial climate change bill of the session. “This is one of the very easy things to do. It has a huge impact on climate change.”

But while stakeholders have agreed to different versions of a divestment plan, they diverge on the details.

Much of the disagreement has focused on whether and how to include investments in index funds and private equities. The bill includes exemptions for funds in which less than 2% of investments are fossil-fuel-focused, though it does require that entities with investments in those funds create a plan to report on the progress of divestment from both. Private investments that contain fossil fuel company stocks are also exempt.

The groups, including McKibben’s latest organization, Third Act, the treasurer, and VPIC met over the weekend to draft language they could all agree on. They presented that plan to lawmakers on Tuesday — but Eric Henry, chief investment officer for VPIC, raised concerns, saying the language wasn’t exactly what the commission had agreed to.

In addition, some members of the government operations committee are concerned the bill doesn’t go far enough in lowering the carbon footprint of the state’s investments. The committee will likely take a final vote on Thursday or Friday, but all the while, the crossover clock is ticking.

“We really need to move this bill this week,” Sen. Ruth Hardy, D-Addison, who chairs the committee, told lawmakers. “We don’t have time for broader conversations.”

— Emma Cotton

IN THE KNOW

The Senate Transportation Committee advanced a bill Tuesday aimed at curbing thefts of catalytic converters — the vehicle exhaust gadgets used to limit harmful emissions.

S.48 would prevent scrap metal processors in Vermont from purchasing more than one “used and detached” catalytic converter per day from any person, unless that person is a motor vehicle recycler or runs a vehicle repair shop.

The bill also would ban anyone who isn’t a recycler or repair worker from transporting two or more catalytic converters at the same time, unless they have documentation proving they own them.

The legislation, introduced by Sen. Thomas Chittenden, D-Chittenden Southeast, would also add more detail to existing state law about the documentation required to prove ownership of a catalytic converter or any other scrap metal items.

Rates of catalytic converter thefts have increased sharply nationwide over the past few years. The devices — which contain valuable metals and are fairly easy to steal — can be sold for hundreds of dollars and cost far more for vehicle owners to replace.

— Shaun Robinson

Vermont lawmakers are considering placing restrictions on restraints and seclusion, controversial practices in which students are physically immobilized or detained in school.

On Tuesday, the House Committee on Education heard testimony on H.409, which would prohibit schools from secluding students and limit the use of physical restraints. As written, the bill also would require officials to report and track any instances of restraint and seclusion in schools.

Advocates argue that the practices can be dangerous and traumatic and disproportionately affect students with disabilities.

“That kind of trauma does stick with students and their families,” Rep. Theresa Wood, D-Waterbury, the bill’s sponsor, told lawmakers Tuesday. “It’s not something that staff and teachers also want to do.”

Read more here.

— Peter D’Auria

With the crossover deadline looming, the sheriff reform bill appears headed for a fourth rewrite.

Among the biggest remaining sticking points is whether to change a state law that allows sheriffs to supplement their salaries with 5% of their departments’ contract revenue. The original version of S.17 eliminated sheriffs’ ability to pocket that money.

But after hearing from a long line of witnesses — including sheriffs and their representatives opposed to the change — the Senate Government Operations Committee redrafted the bill to keep the 5% provision in place. The current version, however, says the money can’t be used to compensate the sheriffs or their staff; it can only be used for department expenses not covered by the state or county government.

Sen. Ruth Hardy, D-Addison, who chairs the committee and is a leading sponsor of the bill, said sheriffs already earn more than most Vermonters expect. “It’s a lot more than most nonprofit executives make. It is a lot more than educational leaders make and a lot of other people who have equal amounts of duty,” Hardy said during a committee hearing Tuesday.

Under state law, sheriffs with a Level 3 law enforcement certification are paid at least $94,000.

Jeanette White, a former state senator, pushed back at this when she testified before the committee, which she previously led.

“I know you have heard that there are about 170 positions in the Department of Public Safety that have higher salaries than the sheriffs,” she said Tuesday. “They are personally responsible for the actions of their deputies. That’s pretty heavy, and they should be adequately compensated.”

She suggested maintaining the status quo — with a sunset provision — until a task force (proposed under the same bill) comes back with recommendations on the appropriate compensation for sheriffs and their staff.

— Tiffany Tan

ON THE MOVE

The annual Budget Adjustment Act, or H.145, landed on Gov. Phil Scott’s desk for his signature — or lack thereof — on Tuesday. At a press conference that day, Scott continued to wring his hands over the House and Senate’s compromise package, telling reporters, “My concerns are still there. It’s $50 million over what we (the Governor’s Office) had asked for in the budget adjustment.”

It’s not where the additional dollars are going — housing, for the most part — that he has a problem with, but where they will come from, he said.

“We presented a budget that we think was balanced and made appropriate investments,” Scott continued. “But it’s got to come out of somewhere. And then all the other initiatives they’re talking about now… I mean, it’s a lot of money at stake.”

He stopped short of saying he’d veto the mid-year budget adjustment, emphasizing that he has five days to act on the legislation.

“At that point, I’ll determine whether to sign or not sign, or whether to veto, as we do with every bill,” he said.

— Sarah Mearhoff

As the Senate is poised to vote on S.18, which would ban the sale of flavored tobacco products and liquids, Scott told reporters at a press conference Tuesday that he’s on board with the bill’s concept.

With the caveat that his office hasn’t yet officially reviewed the legislation, Scott said that he has no problem with what the bill proposes. In fact, “I’m a proponent of as much prevention as possible,” he said.

“I believe that many of our youth, that’s when they get hooked, and so we need to continue to focus as best we can on prevention,” the governor continued. “I haven’t looked at that bill in particular, but anything we can do to prevent someone from getting addicted to smoking, I think would be beneficial for themselves and their families and society, in general.”

— Sarah Mearhoff

Full-day pre-K is out of the Vermont Senate’s child care bill. But paid leave — or at least parental leave — may be in, setting up a potential showdown with the lower chamber.

Sen. Jane Kitchel, D-Caledonia, appeared before the Senate Health and Welfare Committee Tuesday morning to present the outlines of a parental leave amendment to tack onto S.56, the child care legislation that the panel plans to vote out this week, ahead of the Legislature’s mid-session “crossover” deadline.

“This is really the nexus to caring for a child,” said Kitchel, who chairs the chamber’s powerful budget-writing Committee on Appropriations.

Legislative language is not yet publicly available, and is expected to be presented to the health and welfare panel on Wednesday. But Kitchel said her amendment would offer 12 weeks of paid leave for new parents, apply to all genders and be available in the case of both births and adoptions. In an interview, she said she is still “working out” what the wage replacement should be.

Read more here.

— Lola Duffort