Finance

Advocacy Updates: Municipal Capacity, Revenue, and Governance

VLCT has identified capacity, revenue, and governance as a key topic to follow during the 2024 legislative session. Check back for the latest updates on this issue. Or, view our Weekly Legislative Reports page to see everything we're following.

VLCT’s overarching Legislative Priorities are to expand the capacity of and increase revenue for local government. The ever-increasing responsibilities of local government and lack of state funding necessary for effective municipal governance demand legislative action. Several bills being discussed this session have the potential to support our efforts or, as noted in the issues discussion below, further strain local government.

The June 10, 2024 entry below is a portion of our complete 2024 Legislative Wrap-Up.

H.546 – Miscellaneous Tax Bill, Authorization of Local Option Tax

Amends 18 V.S.A. § 5017, 24 V.S.A. § 138, 32 V.S.A. § 3802(22), § 4041a, § 4452, § 5412, § 5824, § 6061, § 6066a, § 6068, § 9741(52), § 9701(12), § 5930, and 33 V.S.A. § 2503(d).
Effective date July 1, 2024.

This year’s miscellaneous tax bill includes a long-held VLCT priority: authorizing municipalities to adopt a local option tax – of one percent (1%) on sales, rooms, and meals – through a vote at an annual or special town meeting.

Municipalities can choose to approve all three, none, or any combination of local option taxes to address municipal revenue needs. With short-term rentals present in nearly every Vermont municipality, a new revenue source now exists to address local needs without lightening residents’ pocketbooks.

The authorization includes a relief valve that allows the tax commissioner to reject or delay implementation of any more than five new municipal local option taxes in a calendar year. This provision is designed to ensure that the Tax Department can onboard municipalities successfully. We believe, from reviewing existing local option tax adoption data, this relief valve should not be a significant barrier. If it is, VLCT will advocate on members’ behalf in the coming years.

The governor signed H.546 on June 3, 2024, and the Local Option Tax authorization becomes effective July 1, 2024.

The bill also includes several other provisions that affect municipalities, including:

In cases of valuation appeal, the Property Valuation and Review (PVR) director may waive the requirement of continuing an appeal or court action until there is no further right of appeal if the director concludes that the value determined by an adjudicated decision is a reasonable representation of the fair market value of the parcel.
The bill removes the $15 penalty from the property tax credit refund for late filing of credit.
PVR may require municipalities to use certain valuations for property used for the transmission and distribution of electricity.
The bill clarifies that real property owned by a county shall be subject to municipal property tax by the municipality in which the land or buildings are situated, with exemptions for public, pious, and charitable uses.

H.629 (Act 106) – Municipal Tax Abatement and Tax Sales

Amends 24 V.S.A. § 1535, § 5144, 32 V.S.A. § 6065, § 5252, § 5253, and § 5260.
Effective date May 13, 2024.

With the governor’s signature, Act 106 became law on May 13^,2024. All provisions were effective upon signature, with the exceptions outlined below:

The amendments to 32 V.S.A. § 5252 made by Sec. 4 of this act (notice of sale) shall not apply to a property that was subject to a notice of sale prior to the effective date of this act.
The amendments to 32 V.S.A. § 5260 made by Sec. 6 of this act (redemption) shall not apply to a property that has been sold at tax sale prior to the effective date of this act, except that, notwithstanding any provision of 1 V.S.A. § 214 to the contrary, the provisions of 32 V.S.A. § 5260(b) and (c) shall apply if, on the effective date of this act, 90 days or more remain until the end of the redemption period.

Tax Abatement Process Clarifications and Changes

Allows any other municipal charges or fees for utilities or services to be eligible for abatement and allows abatement in which there are “clear or obvious” errors or mistakes.
Requires the board of abatement to issue a written abatement decision with sufficient explanation of what was considered and what was decided.

Allows the board of abatement to hear a group of similar abatement requests as a class and allows the taxpayer to decline status as a member of a class.
Requires municipality to provide a new uniform notice of taxpayers’ ability to request tax abatement.
Allows municipalities to abate de minimis amounts of taxes for reconciling municipal accounts.
Requires the Tax Department to provide a simplified notice regarding the homestead property tax credit for inclusion in property tax bill, including directing taxpayers to a resource for translation into the five most common non-English languages in Vermont.

Tax Sale Process Significant Changes

Requires a taxpayer be delinquent for a period longer than one year before extending a warrant.
Requires the municipality to offer a written reasonable repayment plan to delinquent taxpayers.
Requires written notice, by certified mail, 30 days prior to delinquency and, if returned unclaimed, notice shall be provided to the last known address by first class mail or by personal service pursuant to Rule 4 of the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure. The notice shall also be provided by email if the tax collector can acquire the email address of the delinquent taxpayer using reasonable effort and affixed to the front door of the property subject to tax sale if it has a structure.
The mortgagee or lien holder of record must also receive notice 30 days prior to delinquency.
A new standard statement warning of unpaid taxes and notice that a property will be sold at auction must include directions to a resource provided by the Tax Department for translation into the five most common non-English languages in Vermont.
During the redemption period, the tax collector shall provide written notice to the taxpayer and public posting of notice between 90 and 120 days prior to the end of the redemption period using certified mail requiring a return receipt, directed to the last known address of the delinquent taxpayer. If the notice by certified mail is returned unclaimed, notice shall be provided by resending the notice by first-class mail or by personal service pursuant to Rule 4 of the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure.

Working Group on Vermont’s Abatement and Tax Sale Processes

Act 106 also creates a “Working Group on Vermont’s Abatement and Tax Sale Processes” to assess how Vermont may balance fairness for delinquent taxpayers with the needs of municipalities. The Working Group will be composed of a representative appointed by Vermont Legal Aid, a representative appointed by the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, a representative appointed by the Vermont Bankers Association=, a representative appointed by the Vermont Housing Finance Agency, a representative appointed by the Vermont Municipal Clerks’ and Treasurer’s Association, a representative appointed by the Neighborworks Alliance of Vermont, a representative appointed by the Champlain Valley Office of Economic Opportunity Mobile Home Project, a representative appointed by the Vermont Assessors and Listers Association, and a representative with experience practicing real estate law appointed by the Vermont Bar Association.

The Working Group shall offer recommendations relating to:

Whether the State should change the law to allow a delinquent taxpayer whose property is transferred by a tax collector’s deed, or a tax-lien foreclosure sale, to recoup all or part of the equity in the taxpayer’s property in excess of the tax debt, fees, and interest for which the taxpayer’s property is sold;

Whether further changes are needed to standardize the abatement process across Vermont municipalities;

Whether the State should require a minimum amount of tax debt before a tax sale can be initiated;

Whether the State should allow a tax sale to be initiated for blighted or dilapidated real estate that has been abandoned when taxes are delinquent for less than one year;

A reasonable percent rate of monthly interest paid by delinquent taxpayers during the redemption period;

Whether the purchaser of a property at a tax sale should be allowed to secure the property against illegal activity, damage from exposure to the elements, deterioration, and potential fire prior to acquiring title to the property; and

A process for statewide collection of data relating to tax sales, including to whom the data could be reported, the values of properties sold at tax sales, the amounts and types of debts underlying tax sales, and descriptive data for properties subject to tax sales.

Act 106 directs Vermont Legal Aid to call the first meeting of the Working Group on or before August 1, 2024, and submit a written report to the House Committee on Ways and Means, House Committee on Government Operations and Military Affairs, Senate Committee on Finance, and Senate Committee on Government Operations on or before December 15, 2024, with its findings and any recommendations for legislative action, including proposed legislative language.

If you are interested, you can review all of VLCT’s updates throughout the session on H.629 .

S.55 – Open Meeting Law Changes

Amends 1 V.S.A. § 310, § 312, § 314, 17 V.S.A § 2640, and § 2680.
Effective Date: July 1, 2024, except requirements for Communications Union Districts, which shall be January 1, 2025, and training requirement effective January 1, 2025.

Signed by the governor on May 30, 2024, S.55 creates requirements related to hybrid meetings, recording meetings, and new Open Meeting Law training.

With the COVID authority of municipalities to meet fully remotely sunsetting on July 1, 2024, the legislature tried to strike a balance between their desire to require all public bodies to meet in a hybrid fashion and the reality that most municipal bodies don’t have the technology to do so. For state public bodies, that largely means a hybrid meeting requirement. For municipal public bodies, it’s a bit more complicated – and riddled with catch-22s that will inevitably lead to some confusion.

Two Classes of Public Bodies: Advisory and Non-Advisory

The bill creates two classes of public bodies:

Advisory bodies, which do not have supervision, control, or jurisdiction over legislative, quasi-judicial, tax, or budgetary matters; and
Non-advisory bodies, which do have jurisdiction over legislative, quasi-judicial, tax, or budgetary matters.

There will be lots of questions about what qualifies as an advisory body. Right now, we know that things like selectboards, development review boards, and boards of abatement are non-advisory bodies. We also know the intent of the legislation was that things like “garden clubs” be considered advisory bodies. VLCT’s staff attorneys, the Secretary of State, and others will be working on these definitions in the coming months and years.
The big advantage for municipal advisory bodies is the ability to hold fully remote meetings most of the time.

Non-advisory municipal bodies will need to offer a physical location for their meetings and essentially return to pre-COVID Open Meeting Law. VLCT anticipates this will apply to most municipal public bodies.

Hybrid Meeting Requirement, Sort Of

There’s a big caveat to this ability of advisory bodies to meet remotely or of non-advisory bodies to meet only in-person: “any resident of the geographic area in which the public body has jurisdiction, a member of a public body, or a member of the press may request that a public body designate a physical meeting location or provide electronic or telephone access to a regular meeting, but not to a series of regular meeting, special meetings, emergency meetings, or field visits.” The request must be made in writing at least two business days before the meeting.

During debate, it was clear that the legislature did not want this to equate to a “hybrid meeting requirement”, though it feels like one.

The justification that it wasn’t a hybrid meeting requirement? Municipalities can deny the request if the area is under a declared emergency, an all-hazards event, a new thing called a “local incident”, or if granting the request would create an “undue hardship” on the municipality. Undue hardship is if an “action required to achieve compliance would require significant difficulty or expense in light of factors including the overall size of the entity, sufficient personnel and staffing availability, the entity’s budget, and the costs associated with compliance.”

“Local Incident” Exceptions

VLCT advocated for the new “local incident” concept. This allows a municipality impacted by “a weather event, loss of power or telecommunication services, public health emergency, public safety threat ... or other event that impedes a public body to hold a meeting electronically or in a designated physical location” to hold a fully in-person or fully remote meeting when they would otherwise not be allowed to under law. The highest ranking elected or appointed officer needs to declare a local incident before exercising this right. As an example, if a selectboard – a non-advisory body - was impacted by a blizzard, it could declare a local incident and have a fully remote meeting during the blizzard with no physical location, despite the law requiring non-advisory bodies to have a physical meeting location.

Recording Requirement

Perhaps the most distressing element of this bill is a recording requirement for all local non-advisory public bodies. Though there is an exemption if this requirement causes “undue hardship” on a municipality, the law now requires that non-advisory bodies record all meetings in audio or video form and post the recording for at least 30 days following “the approval and posting of the official minutes for a meeting.” Given that no law requires the approval or posting of “official minutes”, VLCT advises that you post your recordings for at least 30 days after your body either posts minutes or approves them. We’ll have to ask the legislature for help clarifying that one next year. We also understand the legislature was told by the Vermont State Archives & Records Administration that such recordings need to be retained by the municipality for at least a year – though we have not been given that advice directly.

Training Requirement

Beginning January 1, 2025, all chairs of legislative bodies, town managers, and mayors will need to take an annual Open Meeting Law training developed by the Secretary of State. VLCT opposed this mandatory training requirement but will be working with the Secretary of State’s office to petition that VLCT’s training satisfies this requirement.

Other Important OML Changes

Included in the bill are:

A new website posting requirement of “an explanation of the procedures for submitting notice of an Open Meeting Law violation to the public body or the Attorney General” and associated text from the new law.
A new video recording and posting requirement for informational meetings held within three days of Town Meeting. The video must be posted within 24 hours of the meeting and stay up until the results of the annual meeting have been certified.
Expanding from 10 days to 30 days the time period a municipality shall hold a hearing before it holds a meeting using the Australian ballot method of voting; and
A new video recording and posting requirement for the hearings held before an Australian ballot system is used.

H.875 – Municipal Ethics

Repeals 24 V.S.A. § 1984. Amends 24 V.S.A. § 2291 and 24 V.S.A. chapter 60, § 1991 – 1997.
Effective date: January 1, 2025, except repeal of existing municipal ethics statutes takes effect upon passage and new training requirement takes effect September 30, 2025.

This bill creates a new uniform municipal code of ethics that most municipal officers will need to follow; requires municipal legislative body members and quasi-judicial body members to take training; requires municipalities to take, investigate, and enforce ethics complaints; and implements new record keeping and reporting requirements.

Since 2019, municipalities have been required to adopt an ordinance or a policy that defines conflicts of interest and outlines how violations will be enforced. VLCT estimates that most municipalities have done exactly that, as the State Ethics Commission recognizes 66 such policies on its website, and we’re aware of many others that have used our own model conflict of interest policy or have charter provisions addressing ethics. Moreover, we receive nearly 100 inquiries from our members a year – which almost always receive the same advice: “take a look at VLCT’s model conflict of interest policy and FAQs.” But following the issuance of a report on municipal ethics, the State Ethics Commission proposed to discard these municipal authorities and instead create a statewide municipal code of ethics. The House largely ignored VLCT’s input on the bill – making small changes related to prohibited conduct definitions. The Senate significantly improved the bill, making changes to whistleblower protection provisions that, if they had passed, would have allowed any citizen to file a lawsuit against any municipal official they believed violated the state’s new code of ethics, even offering punitive damages. VLCT ultimately opposed the bill, in large part because of the deeply flawed nature of the one-size-fits-all approach that demonstrates a distrust of municipal officials, and also because of the new unfunded mandates put on municipalities.

The bill:

Places two former municipal officials on the State Ethics Commission – one appointed by the Speaker and one by the Senate Committee on Committees.
Creates a uniform code of municipal ethics, including required recusal procedures and prohibited activities, that municipal officers must follow.
Enables the State Ethics Commission to receive ethics complaints about municipal officials and refer them to municipal ethics liaisons for investigation and enforcement.
Enables the State Ethics Commission to provide advisory opinions and guidance to municipal officials.
Requires all members of legislative bodies and quasi-judicial bodies to take ethics training every three years.
Requires training records to be maintained by the municipality or the municipal officers themselves.
Directs the Ethics Commission to be the creator of ethics training (though they can approve other training vendors).
Requires municipalities to post the code of ethics and enforcement mechanism of the code on their website and provide it to all municipal officers.
Requires municipalities to designate an ethics liaison, within 30 days of the bill becoming law, to communicate with the State Ethics Commission.
Requires municipalities to designate someone to receive complaints.
Requires municipalities to maintain records of complaints and the disposition of those complaints.
Requires municipalities to establish an investigation and enforcement ordinance, policy, or rule.
Requires municipalities to report the number and outcome of any complaints to the Ethics Commission.
Creates a new whistleblower protection for municipal employees that is nearly identical to that which protects state employees.

Of note is that the bill gives no new resources to the State Ethics Commission or municipalities to undertake this work.

In May, VLCT wrote to Governor Phil Scott explaining our concerns about the bill and requested that he veto the legislation. On June 10, Governor Scott allowed H.875 to become law without his signature and sent this letter to the legislature. Read Ted Brady’s remarks in VLCT’s June 11 public statement. We will do our best to help our members comply. We are committed to ensuring that municipal officials hold themselves to the highest ethical standards and are accountable to the people who elected them. The State Ethics Commission is given the authority to provide guidance and advice to municipalities, so we encourage municipal officials to contact the Ethics Commission and ask any ethics questions they may have, as the commission is best suited to interpret the state code at this time.

S.220 – Library Modernization

Amends 22V.S.A. § 67, § 69, § 172, 13 V.S.A § 1702, 22 V.S.A. § 105, § 143, § 606, and 16 V.S.A. §1624.
Effective date July 1, 2024.

S.220, signed into law by the governor on June 3, 2024, primarily addresses library material selection, free speech, accommodations, and discrimination protections. However, sections 5 and 6 pertain to library governance, budgets, and library employee relationship within a municipality. The legal and governance structure of libraries varies greatly throughout Vermont. S.220 clarifies that trustees, managers, or directors of municipally owned libraries must:

Adopt bylaws and policies governing the operation of the library; establish a library budget; hold regular meetings; and ensure compliance with the terms of any funding, grants, or bequests.
Establish a library budget for consideration by the legislative body of the municipality for inclusion in the municipality’s budget.
A library director shall be under the supervision and control of the library board of trustees unless the employee relationship is otherwise specified in the municipality’s charter or by written agreement between the legislative body of the municipality and the trustees.

H.883 – The Big Bill or FY25 Budget

Amends statute in many titles and writes session law.
Effective date July 1, 2024.

Usually controversial and the last bill to pass each session, this year the House, Senate, and Governor Scott reached compromise with time to spare on the state’s $8.6 billion fiscal year 2025 (FY25) budget. The governor signed H.883 on May 23, 2024. However, contingency and surplus funds included in the FY25 budget are used in H.887, the Property Tax “Yield Bill”, to help buy down expected increases in education property taxes. The governor vetoed H.887 on June 6, and it’s unclear at this time how that veto will affect the FY25 budget.

The $8.6 billion FY25 budget includes $2.2 billion of general funds (GF), $3.1 billion of federal funds (FF), $2.3 billion of education funds (EF), $374 million of transportation funds (TF), and $587 million of other funds. Remarkably, General Fund appropriations in this budget are only $10.0 million, or 0.46 percent, higher than the governor’s recommended budget. Budget negotiators were keenly aware that projected revenues for FY24 and FY25 are expected to be a cumulative $111 million below FY23 revenue. Regardless, the FY25 budget was still able to meet all statutorily required reserves, meet all pension obligations, and make essential investments in housing, public safety, workforce, economic development, human services, and the environment.

Of note for municipalities, the budget provides new funding for:

Three Regional Emergency Management Program Coordinators at the Department of Public Safety.
Provides $1.8 million of GF to the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to support S.213 initiatives relating to the regulation of wetlands, river corridor development, and dam safety.
Provides $1 million of GF for local economic damage grants and transfer funding to the Emergency Relief Assistance Fund to support communities affected by the August and December federally declared disasters.
Provides $250,000 of GF to the Department of Public Safety (DPS) for the Urban Search and Rescue Team.
Contingently appropriates (should FY25 revenues exceed FY25 appropriations): $3.5 million of GF to the Community Resilience and Disaster Mitigation Fund for structure elevation grants and $3 million of GF to the Dam Safety Revolving Loan Fund.
Reallocates $36 million of ARPA funds to the Department of Public Safety for Federal Emergency Management Agency match and municipal support for hazard mitigation.
Provides $1.86 million of GF to the Office of the Defender General for caseload relief.
Provides $2.86 million of GF to the Judiciary for new positions to address the criminal justice system backlog and court security in addition to three new Superior Court judges.
Provides $297,000 of GF to court diversion to address increased caseload.
Provides $661,000 of GF to the Department of Corrections for the pretrial supervision and electronic monitoring programs outlined in S.195.

Provides $300,000 for Community Justice Center support.
Transfers $25 million from GF to EF to provide property tax relief to Vermonters.

Housing

We know housing is a top priority for local officials. The House had big plans this year, proposing a 10-year $900 million new taxpayer-funded housing plan. The Senate and Governor Scott strongly opposed this plan, citing hundreds of millions of dollars in existing affordable housing funding still available at the Vermont Housing Conservation Board, the Vermont Housing Finance Agency, and the Department of Housing and Community Development. This year’s consensus was to support more modest increases to programs that have been working well and regulatory relief for builders and developers (see more under Housing, Community Development, Land Use).

New housing funding of note for municipalities in the budget:

Provides $7.5 million of GF for Emergency Housing in addition to a $16.5 million GF one-time appropriation and a $20 million GF contingent appropriation.
Provides $7.2 million of GF to the Department for Children and Families’ (DCF) Office of Economic Opportunity for shelter bed expansion.
Provides an additional $753,000 to support programs for homeless youth.
Provides a $10 million contingent appropriation for shelter beds and permanent supportive housing.
Provides $25.8 million to DCF for the Housing Opportunity Grant Program (HOP).
Provides $900,000 of GF for the State Refugee Office to support transitional housing for refugees.
Directs $1.2 million from the Opioid Abatement Fund for recovery residences, including supporting two new residences.
Provides $16.5 million of GF to DCF for Emergency Housing.
Provides $1 million of GF to extend 10 DCF positions to support Emergency Housing.
Provides $1 million of GF to the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) for the Manufactured Home Improvement and Repair Program.
Reallocates $25 million in ARPA funds to DHCD for a grant to the Vermont Housing Finance Agency (VHFA) for the Middle-Income Homeownership Development Program, the Vermont Rental Revolving Loan Fund, and the First-Generation Homebuyer Program.
Reallocates $30 million in ARPA funds to the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board (VHCB) for the production and preservation of affordable rental and homeownership units.
Contingent appropriations (should FY25 revenues exceed FY25 appropriations):

$20 million of GF to DCF for Emergency Housing.

$6 million of GF to DHCD for the Vermont Housing Improvement Program (VHIP).
$4 million of GF to DEC for the Healthy Homes Initiative.
$10 million of GF to DCF for shelter beds and permanent supportive housing.

See Budget Line Items of Interest Below for a Comparison With Last Year – in Millions of Dollars

Budget Item	FY24	As Passed FY25
(GF) Homeowner Rebate (B137)	$16.5	$19.1
(GF) Renter Rebate (B138)	9.50	9.50
(GF) Tax Dept. Reappraisal and Listing (B139)	3.395	3.4
(GF) Municipal Current Use (B140)	18.6	20.05
(LOT 30%) PILOT State Buildings (B142)	12.281	12.05
(LOT 30%) PILOT Montpelier (B143)	0.184	0.184
(LOT 30%) PILOT Correctional Facilities (B144)	0.04	0.04
(GF) Special Investigative Units (B206)	2.229	2.231
(GF/Interdept. Transfer) Criminal Justice Council (B221)	4.07	4.178
(SF) E-911 Board (B235)	4.795	4.901
(SF) Cannabis Control Board (B240)	5.681	6.062
(GF, EF, FF, Other) Education Finance & Admin. (B500)	36.411	41.342
(GF, SF, FF, Other) Education Services (B501)	492.131	351.718
(EF) Special Education Formula Grants (B502)	229.822	264.650
(EF) State-Placed Students (B503)	19.00	20.00
(GF, EF) Flexible Pathways (B504.1)	10.143	11.362
(EF) Adjusted Education Payment (B505)	1,711.148	1,893.267
(EF) Education Transportation (B506)	23.52	25.306
(EF) Merger Support Grants (B507)	8.30	4.05
(EF) Education - Nutrition (B508)	0	20.4
(SF) Education - Afterschool Grants (B509)	4.0	4.0
(EF) Essential Early Education Grant (B510)	8.35	8.726
(EF) Technical Education (B511)	17.03	17.882
(GF, EF) Teachers’ Retirement (B513, B514, B514.1)	188.07	206.954
(GF EF) Retired Teachers’ Health/Medical (B515)	53.741	62.108
(All Funds) Total General Education	2,815.340	2,936.531
(GF, Inter-Dept. Transfer) ANR Lands PILOT (B701)	2.675	2.689
(Property Transfer Tax) Municipal Planning Grants (D100)	0.87	0.90
(TF) Town Highway Structures (B911)	7.2	8.016
(TF, FF) Better Roads Program (B912)	0.478	0.481
(TF) Town Highway Class 2 Roadway (B913)	8.8	8.86
(TF, TIB, FF) Town Highway Bridges (B914)	37.2	45.334
(TF) Town Highway Aid (B915)	28.6	29.533
(TF) Town Highway Class 1 Supplemental (B916)	0.128	0.129
(TF) Town Highway Non-federal Disaster Aid (B917)	1.15	1.15
(TF, FF) Town Highway Federal Disaster Aid (B918)	0.18	0.18
(TF, FF, Special) Municipal Mitigation Assistance (B919)	10.48	7.143
(SF, FF, ARPA) Vt Housing and Conservation Board (B811)	86.519	82.283

Table Notes:
1. Citations in parentheses refer to the section in the budget bill where those items are found
GF = General Fund
LOT = 30% local option tax share remitted to state
PILOT = Payment in lieu of taxes
SF = Special Funds
EF = Education Fund
FF = Federal Funds
TF = Transportation Fund
TIB = Transportation Infrastructure Bond
ARPA = American Rescue Plan Act

2. Resources used for FY25 Budget analysis:

H.657 – Communication Taxes and Fees

Amends 30 V.S.A. § 7501, § 7511, § 7513, §7521, § 7523, 32 V.S.A. § 3602b added, § 3618, § 3659, § 3803, § 5401, § 606, and 16 V.S.A. § 1624.
Effective date July 1, 2024 (PILOT Fund Appropriation) and July 1, 2025 (communications property tax) and shall apply to grand lists lodged on or after April 1, 2025.

H.657 is an act modernizing Vermont’s communications taxes and fees, with the stated purpose “to be more competitively neutral and to provide a financial structure that equitably and sustainably finances public benefits related to communications networks in the State”.

The bill, signed by the governor on June 3, 2024, will update and change taxes and fees assessed on telecommunications and cable providers and certain digital services.

The bill repeals the 2.4 percent (2.4%) Universal Service Charge (USC) for landline, postpaid wireless, and interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) consumers and replaces it with a $0.72 monthly charge per access line. The 988 Suicide and Crisis Hotline has been added to the list of programs funded by the Vermont Universal Service Fund (VUSF).

Provisions affecting municipalities include:

Adding all communications property to the grand list as real estate.
Communications property owned by a nonmunicipal communications service provider shall be taxed at appraisal value.
On or before May 1 of each year, the Division of Property Valuation and Review of the Department of Taxes shall provide the listers in each municipality with the valuation of all taxable communications property of any communications service provider situated therein as reported by such provider to the Division.
The valuations provided to the listers pursuant to this section shall be used by the listers in determining and fixing the valuations of communications property for the purposes of property taxation.
$150,000 is appropriated from the PILOT Special Fund to the Division of Property Valuation and Review in fiscal year 2025 for the purpose of creating a property valuation model for communications property.
The Secretary of Transportation, in consultation with the Commissioner of Public Service and the Secretary of Digital Services, shall conduct a study concerning access to and use of the public right-of-way (ROW) in Vermont by telephone (wired and wireless) and broadband companies. Two studies were created to assess how to tax and charge communications property placed in the State ROW.

S.159 – County and Regional Government Study

Effective upon passage.

S.159, signed by the governor on May 28, 2024, creates the “County and Regional Governance Study Committee” to “examine how to best strengthen county-level government in Vermont to enhance and optimize public safety, tax collection, and resource allocation”. \

.The six-person Committee must be from geographically diverse regions of the state and have three current Representatives – not all from the same political party – who are the Chair of the House Committee on Government Operations and Military Affairs and two others appointed by the Speaker of the House, and three current Senators – not all from the same political party – who are the Chair of the Senate Committee on Government Operations and two others appointed by the Committee on Committees.

The Committee shall study and make recommendations to the General Assembly on how to improve the structure and organization of county and regional government, including:

enhancement and optimization of public safety;
enhancement of regional collaboration and planning;
efficient, equitable, and transparent allocation of public resources;
promotion of effective regional public services for individuals and municipalities;

clarification of the role and oversight of elected county officials and their departments;
reduction of duplicated public services and promotion of opportunities for intermunicipal collaboration;
balance of availability and cost of services across municipalities in each county;
mechanisms of county and regional government structures in other states; and
impact of climate change and resiliency on the maintenance of public infrastructure, delivery of regional government services, and coordination of regional emergency planning.

The Committee may contract with one or more consultants to assist with research, preparation of the report, and any other assistance with the Committee’s work deemed necessary by the Committee. The Chair of the Senate Committee on Government Operations shall call the first meeting of the Committee to occur on or before September 1, 2024, and the Committee shall report to the House Committee on Government Operations and Military Affairs and the Senate Committee on Government Operations with its findings and any recommendations for legislative action before November 1, 2025.

Regional Governance Technical Advisory Group

VLCT is included along with the Department of State’s Attorneys and Sheriffs, the State Court Administrator, the Vermont Association of County Judges, the Vermont Association of Planning and Development Agencies, the Vermont Municipal Clerks’ and Treasurers’ Association, the Vermont Regional Development Corporations, and the Vermont School Boards Association on a Regional Governance Technical Advisory Group.

The Technical Advisory Group shall analyze the subject matter being considered by the County and Regional Governance Study Committee and advise, assist, and provide recommendations to the Study Committee, specifically on the structure and organization of county and regional government. The Vermont Bond Bank will convene the Technical Advisory Group before September 1, 2024, and shall participate in order to support improvements to local capacity.

Federal Funding Opportunities

S.159 also requires the Secretary of Administration to report to the County and Regional Governance Study Committee on federal funding opportunities resulting from the disaster declaration for the major flooding events of 2023 in the State, including the received federal funds, the status of pending applications for funding, and potential avenues for additional funds. The Secretary shall analyze the impact of Vermont’s lack of robust county or regional governance on the receipt of federal emergency funding.

VLCT’s Position

VLCT supports the evaluation of how best to ensure that government responds to its citizens' needs and largely supports this bill. However, during legislative deliberations, we asked that the study focus more on encouraging and authorizing intermunicipal cooperation instead of studying county government. VLCT feels the study may help further our legislative priorities regarding municipal capacity.

H.887 – Property Tax Yield Bill

Amends 32 V.S.A § 5401, § 5402, § 4016, § 4026, § 4028, §9701, 32 V.S.A chapter 225, subchapter 4 added, § 5414 added, 16 V.S.A. § 4025, § 563.
Effective July 1, 2024, except property tax rates and yields upon passage.

The “Yield Bill” sets the homestead property tax yields and non-homestead rates and makes other policy changes to education finance and taxation. The governor, as expected, vetoed the Yield Bill due to an average property tax increase of 13.8 percent (13.8%) and a lack of cost containment measures included in the bill. Governor Scott will attempt to negotiate a new plan with legislative leadership before the veto session on June 17, 2024.

Provisions of the bill will:

Create the Commission on the Future of Education with final recommendations and proposed legislation due December 1, 2025.
Create the Education Fund Advisory Committee reporting December 15 annually on funding and financing Vermont’s education system.

Creates a new six percent (6%) cloud tax on software.
Creates a new statewide three percent (3%) Short-Term Rental Surcharge.
Sets the excess spending cap at 118 percent (118%).
Uses $25 million of General Fund surplus to help buy down the property tax rate.

S.305 – Miscellaneous Changes to the Public Utility Commission

Amends 3 V.S.A § 165(b), 30 V.S.A. § 8(d), § 10(c), § 102(a), § 201, § 209, § 231(a), § 248(u), § 231, § 7004(c), § 8009, § 8124, § 8125, § 8126, 32 V.S.A § 3102.
Effective upon passage.

This bill, signed by the governor on May 30, 2024, makes several changes to statutes related to the Public Utility Commission, including notice requirements and energy storage facilities.

Of most interest to municipalities, it authorizes municipalities to create and operate thermal energy networks.

Specific provisions impacting municipalities include:

A municipality shall have the authority to construct, operate, set rates for, finance, and use eminent domain for a thermal energy exchange network utility without a certificate of public good or approval by the Commission.
The Public Utility Commission shall issue a report to the House Committee on Environment and Energy and the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Energy about how to support the development of thermal energy exchange networks and the permitting of thermal energy exchange network providers. The report shall address all aspects of the permitting, construction, operation, and rates of thermal energy exchange networks and recommend necessary statutory changes.

S.209 – Prohibition of Unserialized Firearms

Amends 13 V.S.A chapter 85, § 4019a, adds § 4027, 4 V.S.A. § 1102, 17 V.S.A adds § 2510.
Effective upon passage.

This bill, also known as the Ghost Guns bill, prohibits firearms at polling places and creates a study on regulating firearms in municipal buildings. This bill also bans ghost guns or any unserialized firearms including frames and receivers.

Governor Scott allowed this bill to become law without his signature, citing concerns about the practicality and impact of regulating unserialized firearms but also agreeing that firearms should be serialized.

Provisions of S.209 most relevant for municipalities are:

The possession of firearms at polling places on election day is prohibited.
Firearms prohibition shall apply to the town clerk’s office during any period when a board of civil authority has voted to permit early voting.

Provides an exemption for a firearm carried by a person while preforming the person’s official duties as an employee of the United States; a department or agency of the United States; a state; or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a state.
Provides an exemption for firearms stored in a motor vehicle.
Requires a notice of this section's provisions be posted conspicuously at each public entrance to each polling place.

As the House debated the bill, supporters of H.525, a bill that would allow municipalities to ban firearms in town buildings, attempted to include broader authority in the bill. Instead, the House included language commissioning a report that evaluates:

Whether the preferable approach is for the General Assembly to pass a statute prohibiting firearms in municipal buildings statewide or for municipalities to be provided with the authority to decide whether to pass an ordinance prohibiting firearms in municipal buildings;
Whether a statewide prohibition should include a definition of the term “municipal building,” and if so, what that definition should be; and
Which municipal buildings should be covered, and which should not be covered by a prohibition on possessing firearms in municipal buildings.

H.704 – Pay Disclosure in Jobs Listings

Adds 21 V.S.A. § 495o.
Effective July 1, 2025.

The governor signed H.704 on June 4, 2024. The bill requires employers to include wage or salary information in employment advertisements. Vermont employers (including municipalities) with five or more employees will be required to include an hourly wage or annual salary, or a range, in any job advertisement. Employers are allowed to hire someone with a different wage than advertised in limited circumstances – such as labor market conditions and for candidates with special qualifications. The Attorney General is directed to issue additional guidance by January 1, 2025.

In a related but unsuccessful legislative effort this year, a majority of the Senate had cosponsored a bill – S.237 – that would have required municipalities to also post every job opening and include a salary range. VLCT testified against the bill, and it did not leave the Senate. VLCT hopes this larger initiative satisfies those who were supporting S.237.

S.102 – Expanding Employment Protections and Collective Bargaining Rights

Amends 3 V.S.A. § 941, 16 V.S.A. § 1992, 21 V.S.A. § 1502, § 1581, § 1584, § 1724, Adds 21 V.S.A. § 495o.
Effective July 1, 2024.

This bill, also known as the Captive Audience bill, prevents employers from taking a corrective action against employees who decline to attend or participate in “employer sponsored” or “required” meetings or communications in which the employer opines on “religious or political matters.” “Political matters” means political affiliation, elections, political parties, but also includes an employer’s decision to “join or support any … civic, community … or labor organization.” The governor allowed this bill to become law without his signature, citing concerns that it would negatively impact the employer-employee relationship.

We believe the impetus for this new legislation was to prevent an employer from engaging in certain labor-avoidance campaign tactics. However, the broad language could have unintended consequences that allow employees to opt out of or refuse to attend routine workplace business, such as an employer’s expression of support during a required/recurring staff meeting for a local non-profit or community organization. In addition, workplace discussion or all-staff emails about diversity, equity, and inclusion training, ESG investment discussions (investing into funds that take environmental, social, and governance factors into consideration), Earth Day events, discussions about public health or vaccination could fall within the new law because employees may find them political in nature. This means that an employer could still raise these subjects, but should evaluate with legal counsel whether to discipline an employee who skipped a work meeting because one of these topics was a subject.

In addition, the legislation makes it significantly easier for employees to unionize, without giving all potential unit members a say through an election. Under this new legislation, the Vermont Labor Relations Board (VLRB) can automatically certify a union as the exclusive representative of certain employees when the union presents the VLRB with over 50 percent (50%) of signed employee cards. An employer’s ability to insist on a secret ballot election is a longstanding option when it is presented with signed cards. Employers have also long had the option to voluntarily recognize unions when presented with signed cards, but typically employers want an opportunity to share its perspective on the topic with employees and, more importantly, to make sure that every potential union member has a say in whether or not they want to form a union.

The bill is modeled after a bill Connecticut passed in 2022, which is currently subject to legal challenge in a federal court located in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals (the jurisdiction that includes Vermont). A challenge to this legislation in Vermont would be costly and time-consuming.

Please see the relevant bills listed in this May 10, 2024 summary.

H.629, Changing Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales Procedures, Passes Both Chambers

The House concurred with the Senate-amended H.629, found on page 764 of the Senate Journal, which included changes requested by VLCT. H.629 needs one more procedural vote and then will be referred to the governor for signature. As a refresher, the changes included returning the interest rate for properties purchased at tax sale back to 1% and removing the expensive and time-consuming Personal Service Requirement for municipalities conducting tax sales. Please see the most recent Testimony to Senate Government Operations Committee on H.629 (Tax Sales) for an overview of these concerns.

H.546: Conference Committee will Consider Statewide Authorization for Municipal Local Option Tax

VLCT testified this week in favor of statewide authorization of Local Option Tax, included in the Senate amended version of H.546, as recorded starting on page 2141 of the 4/16 Senate Calendar. Unfortunately, the House Ways and Means Committee did not concur with the Senate-amended H.546 which included Section 20 stating “Local option taxes are authorized under this section for the purpose of affording municipalities an alternative method of raising municipal revenues, if the legislative body of a municipality by a majority vote recommends, the voters of a municipality may, at an annual or special meeting warned for that purpose, by a majority vote of those present and voting, assess any or all of the following: a one percent sales tax; a one percent meals and alcoholic beverages tax; a one percent rooms tax.”

A Committee of Conference has been established to reach agreement on the House and Senate differences over H.546. Please let the Conference Committee members, listed below, know your support for the statewide authorization of Local Option Tax. This provision in an important step to providing equity to all of Vermont’s municipalities. Please review VLCT’s latest testimony for additional reference on the benefits and justification for Local Option Tax authorization at this time.

Rep. Emilie Kornheiser
Rep. Carl Demrow
Rep. Julia Andrews
Sen. Ann Cummings
Sen. Mark MacDonald
Sen. Thomas Chittenden

Final Days for S.55, a Must-Pass Bill Making Changes to Open Meeting Law

VLCT testified this week on the latest draft 4.1 of S.55. In an effort to help municipalities better operationalize and implement new provisions in the bill, VLCT continues to provide feedback to the House Government Operations Committee, which has final possession of the bill. This is considered a must-pass bill, due to the remote or electronic meeting authorization expiring June 30, 2024. A number of state, regional, and local public bodies have influenced this bill, and it is considered a consensus bill. For some background, see this webpage’s updates from January 19, February 23, and March 1.

House Likely to Concur with Senate-Passed H.629, Changing Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales Procedures

The full House is scheduled to vote on concurring with the Senate-amended H.629, recorded on page 764 of the 4/18 Senate Journal, with changes requested by VLCT. The changes included returning the interest rate for properties purchased at tax sale back to 1% and removing the expensive and time-consuming personal service requirement for municipalities conducting tax sales. Please see Ted Brady’s Testimony to Senate Government Operations Committee on H.629 (Tax Sales) for VLCT’s most recent overview of these concerns.

Senate Likely to Approve Miscellaneous Tax Bill with Statewide Authorization for Local Option Tax, but Passage is Less Likely in House

New since our 4/19 update on this bill, the full Senate is scheduled to vote on the amended H.546 which includes Sec. 20 on page 2148 of the Senate Calendar: “Local option taxes are authorized under this section for the purpose of affording municipalities an alternative method of raising municipal revenues, if the legislative body of a municipality by a majority vote recommends, the voters of a municipality may, at an annual or special meeting warned for that purpose, by a majority vote of those present and voting, assess any or all of the following: a one percent sales tax; a one percent meals and alcoholic beverages tax; a one percent rooms tax.” Unfortunately, the provision creating a Local Government Revenue Working Group, which VLCT testified in support of, was removed due to the belief that this amendment satisfied the need.

The Local Option Tax authorization in H.546 incorporates S.60 from the 2023 session, which also passed the Senate but died in the House. VLCT has long supported Local Option Tax authorization for all municipalities, if they so choose, giving them the ability to raise tax revenue and support the needs of residents. The House, and in particular the House Ways and Means Committee, has been a roadblock to approval. Please let your representatives on the House Ways and Means Committee know your support for this authorization.

Rep. Emilie Kornheiser, Chair
Rep. William Canfield, Vice Chair
Rep. Carl Demrow, Ranking Member
Rep. Julia Andrews, Clerk
Rep. Peter Anthony
Rep. Scott Beck
Rep. Carolyn Branagan
Rep. James Masland
Rep. Christopher Mattos
Rep. Carol Ode
Rep. Katherine Sims
Rep. Curt Taylor

Senate Passes Amended H.629, RE: Municipal Tax Abatement and Tax Sales Procedures

The full Senate passed an amended H.629 found on page 764 of the Senate Journal, which included changes requested by VLCT. The changes requested included returning the interest rate for properties purchased at tax sale back to 1% and removing the expensive and time-consuming Personal Service Requirement for municipalities conducting tax sales. Please see the most recent Testimony to Senate Government Operations Committee on H.629 (Tax Sales) for an overview of these concerns. If the House does not concur with changes made in the Senate, a conference committee will be formed to work out their differences.

Senate Finance Adds Statewide Authorization for Municipal Local Option Tax in the Miscellaneous Tax Bill

The Senate Finance Committee amended H.546, adding Sec. 20 on page 2148 of the Senate Calendar, which reads:

Local option taxes are authorized under this section for the purpose of affording municipalities an alternative method of raising municipal revenues, if the legislative body of a municipality by a majority vote recommends, the voters of a municipality may, at an annual or special meeting warned for that purpose, by a majority vote of those present and voting, assess any or all of the following:
(1) a one percent sales tax;
(2) a one percent meals and alcoholic beverages tax;
(3) a one percent rooms tax.

This amendment essentially incorporates S.60 from last session, which passed the Senate but died in the House. VLCT has long supported local option tax authorization for all municipalities. Please let your representatives know your support for this authorization, as we suspect the House Ways and Means Committee will, again, be hesitant to approve this authorization.

Senate Government Operations Committee Makes Changes We Sought to H.629, a Bill Changing Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales Procedures

The Senate Government Operations Committee passed Draft 1.4 of H.629 on a 6 to 0 vote out of committee on April 11. Our advocacy efforts, with your help, convinced this committee to address the remaining concerns in H.629. Our primary concern was reduction in the interest rate from 1% to .5% for investors that purchase properties at tax sale and the requirement for Personal Service of Tax Sale Notice. We believed, from talking with many Delinquent Tax Collectors, this will result in fewer investors interested bidding at tax sales and instead force municipalities to pay more delinquent property taxes to the state. This places a further burden on taxpayers who do pay their property taxes on time and takes away tools that help municipalities collect delinquent taxes.

The version that was passed out of committee raises the interest rate for properties purchased at tax sale back to 1% and removes the expensive and time consuming Personal Service Requirement for municipalities conducting tax sales. Please see our most recent Testimony to Senate Government Operations Committee on H.629 (Tax Sales) for an overview of these concerns, and please thank members of the Senate Government Operations Committee for making these changes.

Municipal Ethics and Conflicts of Interest Bill Now Being Considered in the Senate Government Operations Committee

VLTC continues stress its strong support for Municipal Ethics, but does not support the approach in H.875 as passed the House. The Senate Government Operations Committee started to take testimony on H.875, including from Ted Brady, on April 11. The Committee members seemed open to some of the changes requested by VLCT and stressed that they will make time for testimony from VLCT members and communities of all sizes as they consider this bill. The Secretary of State (SOS) also expressed concerns about the new training requirements and coordination with existing training. The Committee asked VLCT, SOS, and the State Ethics Commission to work on revisions to the training required in Section 22 §1995 and Section 23. VLCT’s concerns are also summarized in Ted’s Testimony from March 12. VLCT’s bottom line: remove Section 22 § 1995-1997 and remove Section 23!

Senate Appropriations Moves Quickly to Finalize Changes to H.883 (FY25 Budget)

The Senate Appropriations Committee is racing through its work on H.883, “the BIG BILL” or the FY25 budget bill. The committee is reviewing their priorities and the spending priorities of each Senate committee compared to the House passed budget. In the March 29 Advocacy Update, we provided a comparison of Governor Scott’s proposed budget and the House-passed $8.58B budget, highlighting the increase to the Town Highway Program. Unfortunately, this small but meaningful increase of $1.9M to the $100.6M in town highway aid was reduced in the Senate Transportation Committee when they reallocated $1M of it to Green Mountain Transit.

The Senate Appropriations Committee will continue to work through each section of the budget highlighting differences such as the Transportation Budget and making their own funding recommendations, including priorities from Senate Bills not included in the house version. The acceleration of work in the Appropriations Committee seemed to catch some Senate committee chairs off guard and unprepared to submit their funding priorities by the new April 12 deadline, asking why so soon? Legislative leadership’s reported adjournment goal of May 10 leaves the Senate only a few weeks to work through the many remaining funding decisions and allow time for the Conference Committee to work out the differences in the House and Senate budgets.

Concerns in H.546, The Miscellaneous Tax Bill and H.657, Communication Taxes and Fees Bill

The House-passed H.546, the Miscellaneous Tax bill, has several provisions we are following. VLCT Testimony to Senate Finance Committee this week highlighted our concerns with Sections 6 and 7 that would repeal the $15 penalty for late property tax credits and Section 8 that would require municipalities to accept the Department of Tax’s valuation for utility transmission lines and infrastructure. VLCT continued to express our support for the Local Government Revenue Working Group in Section 13.

The Senate Finance Committee is also considering H.675, an act relating to modernization of Vermont’s communications taxes and fees. Section 10 places all communications property in the grand list as real estate, requiring the Division of Property Valuation and Review (PVR) to provide listers in each municipality with the valuation of all taxable communications property of any communications service provider. Communication providers have expressed opposition to this new taxing scheme and the requirement that they provide sworn inventory of all taxable communication property. The Vermont Assessors and Listers Association and PVR are scrambling to understand the implications and consequences of this significant change in taxing process for communication property. Early assessments are that it may increase municipal and state property tax revenue, as it puts these communications properties on the Grand List and no longer just paying corporate tax. However, there are real concerns about a lack of cost benefit analysis and the capacity to conduct this new valuation and assessment work. Aside from those concerns, VLCT opposes Section 13, which raids the PILOT Special Fund to fund the initial property valuation model for communications property.

Library Modernization Bill

As reported in our March 29 update on this topic, the Senate passed an amended Library Modernization and Protection Bill (S.220). VLCT has been working with the Vermont Commissioner of Libraries and the Vermont Library Association to make a small but meaning change to the governance and budgeting language in the bill which, as is, could add more confusion to the relationship between library trustees and selectboards. Section 5 of the bill may cause confusion with the additional language that municipal library trustees “shall have the power to establish a library budget.” Library trustees may propose their library budget to the selectboard, but the selectboard ultimately has control over the town meeting warning and proposed budget for the town, including what the library budget should be. While the trustees can make strong recommendations, they can’t force the selectboard to use the library trustees’ proposed budget. Some may interpret this to mean that the library trustees’ recommended budget to the selectboard must be accepted ‘as is’ by the selectboard for placement on the town meeting warning to be voted on by the town. We disagree with this interpretation, as the selectboard still controls the town meeting warning and the articles thereon. To avoid confusion, we have proposed this provision be changed to “municipal library trustees shall have the power to establish a library budget for consideration by the legislative body of the municipality for inclusion in the municipality's annual budget." The Department of Libraries, Commissioner of Libraries, and the Vermont Library Association are all in support of our language proposal and plan to suggest the change during their next testimony. In addition, we all agreed to continue our governance conversation because much confusion exists with current statute around library trustees and selectboards.

H.55, Relating to Miscellaneous Unemployment Insurance

Joe Damiata and Ted Brady provided testimony to the Senate Committee on Economic Development, Housing and General Affairs related to provisions of H.55 affecting firefighters. The comprehensive testimony highlighted the challenges of providing workers’ compensation to firefighters, covering cancer presumption claims, and the desire for cancer screening coverage. Joe stressed that any increased costs must be passed on to PACIF members and then collected back from them to offset any increase in expenses. VLCT stressed that containing costs, defining appropriate screening criteria, and caring for our firefighters should be a cost shared at the state level and not by just by our already cash-strapped municipalities.

Senate Government Operations Committee Continues to Discuss the Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales Bill, H.629

The Senate Committee on Government Operations took additional testimony on H.629 as passed by the House. As we have reported each week on this webpage, many of VLCT’s original concerns with the bill as first introduced have been addressed. The remaining concerns are best summarized in Executive Director Ted Brady's April 3 testimony and include reducing the interest rate from 1% to .5% for investors that purchase properties at tax sale. We believe, from talking with many Delinquent Tax Collectors, this would result in fewer investors interested in bidding at tax sales and instead would force municipalities to pay more delinquent property taxes to the state. This places a further burden on taxpayers who do pay their property taxes on time and takes a way tools that help municipalities collect delinquent taxes.

The committee also heard from tax sale attorneys, who expressed the same concerns as VLCT, and from Vermont Legal Aid, which sponsored the bill and supports dramatic changes to Vermont’s tax sale process. The committee seems open to addressing some of VLCT’s concerns, so it’s important that they hear from you. Please let the Senators on both the Senate Government Operations and Senate Finance Committee know your concerns with this bill.

Municipal Ethics Bill, H.875, Passes the House

The House passed H.875, a lengthy bill that also impacts statewide office holders, creates new ethics requirements for municipalities. The amendments put forth by Rep. Jim Harrison (Chittenden), Rep. Pat Brennan (Colchester), and Rep. Kelly Pajala (Londonderry) that would remove the training, reporting, investigatory, and new legal right to civil action against a municipality failed by a 41 to 83 vote found on pages 1083 to 1087 of the April 2 House Journal.

As we have reported here throughout the session, VLCT testified on January 24, February 26, and March 12, and also provided recommended alternative language on February 21. Our testimony was crystal clear: we support the fundamental goal of establishing ethical standards, educating people about those standards, and holding people accountable to those standards. But we didn’t support their approach, which was top-down and prescribed by the State Ethics Commission without regard for the impact the new obligations would have on volunteer officials. H.875 as passed by the House now heads to the Senate Government Operations Committee for consideration. VLCT encourages municipal officials to reach out to members of the Senate Government Operations Committee and share your concerns about these new requirements. Now, while every legislator is acknowledging the capacity constraints of municipalities, is not the time to layer additional bureaucracy and unfunded mandates on you.

The full House is considering H.875, a bill that would create new ethics requirements for municipalities, and VLCT hopes you will contact your representative to ask them to support a change on the House floor early next week that would remove the training, reporting, investigatory, and new legal right to civil action against a municipality. It would retain the proposed uniform municipal code of ethics. Rep. Jim Harrison (Chittenden), Rep. Pat Brennan (Colchester), and Rep. Kelly Pajala (Londonderry) plan to offer an amendment striking provisions objected to by VLCT in our write up of the bill on March 21st (see entry directly below). Now’s the time to reach out to your representative and encourage them to support the Harrison, Brennan, Pajala amendment.

Cannabis Bill, As Amended Allows Setback Restrictions on Cultivation

The full House approved the Cannabis Bill (H..612) as amended by a voice vote. This bill would change a number of provision to Vermont’s laws on medical and recreational cannabis, including a. change to how highly potent, hemp-derived products are regulated by the Cannabis Control Board and a change that would allow adult recreation cannabis retailers to apply for a special license to sell medical-grade cannabis.

Of importance to municipalities are new provisions that would give the cannabis board and towns greater authority to regulate the siting of outdoor cannabis cultivation. Municipalities would be given the ability to enforce minimum setback distances of cannabis cultivation operations. Existing law regulates cannabis cultivation in the same manner as “farming” and not as “development” on the tract of land where cultivation occurs for the purposes of permitting. Conflicts have developed in several communities with cannabis grow operations interfering with residential neighbors and other incompatible uses, especially in more densely developed areas. The changes referenced below attempt to address some of these issues by:

if the cultivation occurs in a cannabis cultivation district adopted by a municipality pursuant to 24 V.S.A. § 4414a, the setback shall be not larger than 25 feet as established by the municipality;

if the cultivation occurs outside of cannabis cultivation district adopted by a municipality pursuant to 24 V.S.A. § 4414a or no cannabis cultivation district has been adopted by the municipality, the setback shall be not larger than 100 feet as established by the municipality;

if a municipality does not have zoning, the setback shall be 10 feet;

Library Modernization and Protection Bill Passes the Full Senate

The Senate passed an amended Library Modernization and Protection Bill (S.220) on a vote of 23 to 6. Largely an uncontroversial bill, S.220 seeks to modernize library procedures, provide better privacy for library records and prevent political interference such as book bans. However, the governance relationship between library trustees and selectboards has been marked by confusion in the past and this bill does little to address these concerns.

In the case of Hartford Board of Library Trustees v. Town of Hartford, 174 Vt. 598 (2002) the Vermont Supreme Court was presented with the question of determining the relative authority of the town and board of trustees with respect to a town librarian's salary and benefits. In resolving this issue, the Court focused on the Vermont Legislature's use of the phrase “full power to manage” in describing the trustee's breadth of authority governing library matters as granted in 22 V.S.A. § 143(a). “The Legislature could have simply said ‘to manage’ in § 143(a), but instead chose the phrase ‘full power to manage.’” Though the Court did highlight the “spirit of cooperation” that is necessary for the efficient operations of the affairs of the town given the ambiguity of the controlling statutes at play [“In this way, library trustees and town managers across the State of Vermont can agree to a wide variety of power-sharing schemes that best suit the needs of each particular town…”] when that “spirit” is not present or lost the Selectboard “cannot, in the name of administrative efficiency, infringe upon the Board's ‘full power to manage’ the library.” In short, this case supports the rule that libraries already have the authority to manage their own affairs, property, staff, and funds (once appropriated/gifted).

In VLCT’s opinion, this bill does little to change the existing municipal library/trustee authority. However, one could argue this bill creates an additional area of confusion.

Currently, we think that while library trustees may propose their library budget to the selectboard, the selectboard ultimately has control over the town meeting warning and proposed budget for the town, including what the library budget should be. While the trustees can make strong recommendations, they can’t force the selectboard to use the library trustee’s proposed budget. Section 5 of the bill may cause confusion with the additional language added that municipal library trustees “shall have the power to establish a library budget.” Some may interpret this to mean that the library trustees recommended budget to the selectboard must be accepted ‘as is’ by the selectboard for placement on the town meeting warning to be voted on by the town. We would disagree with this interpretation, as the selectboard still controls the town meeting warning and the articles thereon. To avoid confusion, this provision could be changed to; municipal library trustees “shall have the power to: “establish a library budget for consideration by the legislative body.”

Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales Bill Receives Testimony in the Senate

VLCT Executive Director, Ted Brady provided testimony on the Municipal Tax Abatement and Tax Sales Bill, (H.629) as passed by the House, to the Senate Committee on Government Operations. As reported each week, many of VLCT’s original concerns with the bill as first introduced have been addressed. The remaining concerns are best summarized in, VLCT’s latest testimony and include reducing the interest rate from 1% to .5% for investors that purchase properties at tax sale. We believe, from talking with many delinquent tax collectors, this will result in fewer investors interested bidding at tax sales and instead force municipalities to pay more delinquent property taxes to the state. This places a further burden on taxpayers who do pay their property taxes on time and takes away tools that help municipalities collect delinquent taxes.

On March 28, Carol Dawes- Barre City Clerk and Treasurer, Jeff Mobus- Springfield Town Manager and Marco Tallini- Town of Dover Treasurer provided testimony to the Senate Committee on Government Operations also supporting many of the concerns raised by VLCT. Please let your Senators on both the Senate Government Operations and Senate Finance Committee know your concerns with this bill.

County Governance Study Bill Easily Passes the Full Senate

The County Governance Study Bill (S.159) as amended, creates the County and Regional Governance Study Committee to address local government capacity challenges, enhance and optimize public safety, regional collaboration and planning, efficient, equitable, and transparent public resource allocation, and effective regional public services for individuals and municipalities.

The study committee, consisting of three members of the House of Representatives and three members of the Senate, shall study and make recommendations to the General Assembly on how to improve the structure and organization of county and regional government, including:

enhancement and optimization of public safety;

enhancement of regional collaboration and planning;

efficient, equitable, and transparent allocation of public resources;

promotion of effective regional public services for individuals and municipalities;

clarification of the role and oversight of elected county officials and their departments;

reduction of duplicated public services and promotion of opportunities for intermunicipal collaboration;

balance of availability and cost of services across municipalities in each county;

mechanisms of county and regional government structures in other states; and

impact of climate change and resiliency on the maintenance of public infrastructure, delivery of regional government services, and coordination of regional emergency planning.

The committee is granted administrative, technical, and legal assistance of the Office of Legislative Operations, the Office of Legislative Counsel, and the Joint Fiscal Office and appropriated $50,000. On or before November 1, 2025, the Committee shall report to the House Committee on Government Operations and Military Affairs and the Senate Committee on Government Operations with its findings and any recommendations for legislative action.

VLCT and other partner organizations are named members of the County and Regional Governance “Technical Advice Participants” to support the legislative study committee. VLCT has remained supportive, but cautious of the breadth and scope of this effort. We support a “fresh look”; however, we have concerns that S. 159 too narrowly charges the committee to evaluate “county government” and Vermonters may be better served by making recommendations to encourage and stimulate regional collaboration. Narrowing the scope of the legislation to address specific government services may prove to be a more reasonable task.

The House Government Operations and Military Affairs Committee voted to send an ethics bill including the municipal code of ethics, new municipal training and reporting requirements related to ethics, and a new right of civil action against municipalities related to whistleblower protections to the full House for consideration by a vote of 10-2. These provisions were tacked on to a state ethics bill, H. 875.

VLCT testified on January 24, February 26, March 12, and provided recommended alternative language on February 21. Our testimony was crystal clear: we support the fundamental goal of establishing ethical standards, educating people about those standards, and holding people accountable to those standards. But we didn’t support their approach, which was top-down and prescribed by the State Ethics Commission without regard for the impact the new obligations will have on volunteer officials.

Aside from VLCT’s philosophical concerns with the state dictating how municipalities should approach ethics policies, we have several practical concerns that members should be aware of:

The bill discards existing conflict of interest policies municipalities have been required to adopt since 2019, and which VLCT has created model policies and training on. (Section 20)
The bill creates the first and only training requirement for municipal officials – an unspecified ethics, open meeting law, and public records act training to be approved by the State Ethics Commission in consultation with the Secretary of State. (Section 22, § 1995)
Every municipality will be required to appoint a “State Ethics Commission liaison”. (Section 22, § 1995)
Municipalities will need to maintain a record of every municipal officer who received ethics training. (Section 22, § 1996)
Municipalities will need to designate a municipal officer or body to receive complaints. (Section 22, § 1996)
Municipalities will need to investigate ethics complaints. (Section 22, § 1996)
Municipalities will need to maintain records of complaints and the disposition of those complaints on every municipal officer for the entirety of their term plus five years. (Section 22, § 1996)
Municipalities must provide the State Ethics Commission with a summary of every complaint, plus the outcome of the complaint. (Section 22, § 1996)
Municipal officers, employees “or any other individual” are given a new right of civil action against municipalities related to whistleblower protections. (Section 22, § 1997)

Several municipalities had asked the committee to exempt communities that have similar or more robust ethics policies already in place. The committee chose not to do so but added language that attempted to ensure any ethics training those communities did would be honored by the State Ethics Commission.

VLCT encourages municipal officials to reach out to the representatives and share your concerns about these new requirements. At a time when every legislator is acknowledging the capacity constraints of municipalities, now is not the time to layer additional bureaucracy and unfunded mandates on you.

Amended H.629, a Bill Changing Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales Procedures, Advances

The full House of Representatives amended and passed H.629 on Thursday, February 29. The “leap year surprise” passed primary on party lines with Independents and several Democrats (the members joining the minority in opposition were former town clerks and treasurers familiar with the existing process). See pages 328 to 348 of the House Journal to view the amended version and a record of who voted Yea and Nay.

As reported last week, many of VLCT’s concerns have been addressed and are summarized in VLCT latest Testimony from February 27. The most distressing change remaining in H.629, cuts the interest rate from 1% to .5% for investors that purchase properties at tax sale. We believe, from talking with many Delinquent Tax Collectors, this will result in fewer investors interested bidding at tax sales and instead force municipalities to pay more delinquent property taxes to the state. This places a further burden on taxpayers who do pay their property taxes on time and takes away tools that help municipalities collect delinquent taxes.

The recent amendments made to H.629 – allowing similar types of abatements to proceed as a group or class and allowing selectboards to forgive de minimis amounts of taxes for the purpose of reconciling municipal accounts – are supported by VLCT and have been requested by many members for years. This makes our support for, or opposition to, the amended version of H.629 challenging. We hope the Senate Finance Committee, where H.629 is expected to go next, will support VLCT’s requested changes.

Hybrid Meeting Flexibility Remains for Municipalities

The latest version of S.55, Draft 5.4 was voted out of the Senate Committee on Government Operations by a vote of 6 to 0. If you have been following S.55, the original three-page bill proposed to amend the Open Meeting Law to continue the COVID procedures allowing public bodies to meet remotely. However, the Senate Government Operations Committee added several new sections and a hybrid meeting requirement, which would not work for many municipalities. Your advocacy against that unfunded and unrealistic mandate convinced a majority of the committee members to remove the mandatory hybrid requirement instead studying the future implementation for municipalities. The bill creates a working group charged with making recommendations to increase participation and accessibility of municipal public meetings and elections. The Vermont Secretary of State is charged with leading the working group and is allocated $50,000 to support the study. S.55’s next stop is likely the Senate Committee on Appropriations.

Committee Hears Your Backlash on Plans for State Ethics Commission to Control Municipal Ethics and Conflicts of Interest

The House Committee on Government Operations and Military Affairs heard powerful testimony on February 29 from the Town of Colchester (starting at 10 minutes in the recording) and the Town of Lunenburg (starting at 58 minutes) against the their plans to hand over control and oversight of municipal ethics and conflicts of interest to the unelected State Ethics Commission. The testimony provides two very different perspectives on the latest version of the Committee Municipal Ethics Bill and how it would affect their community and the elected officials & volunteers who work hard to ensure that local government works for everyone.

It is distressing that the committee crafting this bill – which would directly affect every municipal employee, every elected and appointed official, and thousands of volunteers, over 9,000 in all – has heard the concerns of only two municipalities. We know many of you have reached out to your legislators and asked them to slow down and work with us to support municipal ethics reform that is focused on and centered at the local level. Please continue to reach out to your legislators and tell them about your concerns with this bill as drafted and how seriously you take conflicts of interest in your municipality.

As you know, VLCT makes model conflict of interest policies available to you and provides training on the subject. VLCT Executive Director Ted Brady provided comprehensive written testimony to the committee a few weeks ago. We hope the committee members slow down, get this right, and work with municipalities for the outcome we all want: “Good government for the people and by the people.”

For history and background on this update, see the January 19 entry below.

House Ways and Means Moves Improved Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales Bill

The House Committee on Ways and Means moved out of committee the latest version of H.629 on a vote of 9 to 3. Many of VLCT’s most pressing concerns have been addressed and are summarized in VLCT Testimony from Feb. 16. The most distressing change remaining in H.629 would cut the interest rate from 1% to 0.5% for investors that purchase properties at tax sale. After talking with many collectors of delinquent taxes, we believe this would result in fewer investors interested in bidding at tax sales, which would in turn force municipalities to pay a higher share of delinquent property taxes to the state. This would place a further burden on taxpayers who do pay their property taxes on time and would take away tools that help municipalities collect delinquent taxes.

Although VLCT succeeded, thanks to your input and advocacy, in making significant positive changes to this bill, we cannot support it at this time and will continue advocating to restore tools that help municipalities collect and pay delinquent property taxes.

Hybrid Meeting Mandate Removed

If you have been following S.55, the original three page bill proposed to amend the Open Meeting Law to authorize public bodies to meet through electronic means without designating a physical meeting location — and VLCT strongly supported that effort. However, the Senate Government Operations Committee added several new sections and a very problematic Hybrid Meeting requirement.

Because of your advocacy against that unfunded and unrealistic mandate, we are pleased to share that the committee removed the mandatory hybrid meeting requirement for municipal meetings. Thank you for taking time to write to your legislator, testify, and have conversations! Without your advocacy, the bill would have almost certainly left that committee with the new requirement. The only senator who remained steadfast on retaining the hybrid meeting requirement was Senator Tanya Vyhovsky, who represents Essex Junction, Colchester, Winooski, and Burlington. You may wish to send your thanks to Senators Hardy, White, Clarkson, Norris, and Watson for their willingness to change their minds.

While the bill isn’t perfect –it removed the $250,000 grant program for communities), has a few technical issues that should be corrected, and creates a time-consuming study committee to evaluate how to host more inclusive municipal meetings – it is far better than where it was, and we’re thankful the committee worked with municipalities to make the most important change of eliminating the hybrid meeting requirement for municipalities. Please see the latest version of S.55 Draft 4.2. Thanks again for your advocacy!

Power Grab in Montpelier: State Control of Municipal Ethics and Conflicts

The House Committee on Government Operations and Military Affairs has been working on a Municipal Ethics Bill (still in Draft form so no bill number has been assigned) since the beginning of the session. This bill largely follows the recommendations of Christina Sivret, Executive Director of the Vermont State Ethics Commission, and dismisses the efforts of municipal officials across the state who care deeply about ethics and work hard to earn the public trust of residents.

As you know, VLCT provides model policies and regular training on the subject of conflicts of interest. VLCT Executive Director Ted Brady provided comprehensive written testimony to the committee a few weeks ago. It’s distressing to see the committee move ahead without incorporating feedback from our members and addressing the concerns we have raised. VLCT has provided a compromise framework and draft legislation that would result in a uniform municipal conflict of interest and unethical conduct policy for adoption by every municipality. Both the House Committee on Government Operations and Military Affairs and the State Ethics Commission appear to be more interested in taking away local control and accountability and holding municipal officials accountable in Montpelier by an unelected board.

The current draft bill would repeal the existing laws governing municipal ethics and conflicts of interest and:

Create a new 10-page Municipal Code of Ethics
Require a new mandatory training (the number of hours determined by the State Ethics Commission) within 120 days for every municipal officer (elected or appointed)
Have the State Ethics Commission determine continuing education and training requirements for all municipal officials every three years
Require each municipality to designate a “senior-level” employee as a liaison to the State Ethics Commission and would be required to attend “educational seminars” determined by the State Ethics Commission on a regular basis
Require all municipalities to post the new Municipal Code of Ethics and ensure it is made available to all members of the public
Maintain records of who has received required ethics training
Designate a municipal officer responsible for receiving complaints alleging violations of the new Municipal Code of Ethics, investigate complaints and maintain records of each compliant and disposition of each compliant for the duration of the municipal officer service plus a minimum of five years and, upon request by the State Ethics Commission, promptly provide a summary and outcome of each complaint.

See our Legislative Alert about this issue – and please consider sharing your concerns with a member of this House committee or your town's representative!

Concerning Changes to Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales

H.629 proposes to make significant changes to the municipal tax abatement and tax sale process. Testimony from VLCT Executive Director Ted Brady expressed our members’ concerns with the bill as proposed. VLCT has committed to work with this bill’s sponsors and other interested partners to find common sense solutions that don’t further strain municipal budgets and that do recognize the challenges some lower income property owners face under the existing process. Please let us know if you have questions, concerns, or suggestions about this issue. You can also visit our MAC resources on property tax abatement and tax sale.

Making Remote Open Meetings Permanent

S.55 proposes to amend the Open Meeting Law to authorize public bodies to meet through electronic means without designating a physical meeting location. VLCT strongly supports this bill as proposed; however, a new draft of the bill is in the works which seeks to compromise on the concerns expressed by the Secretary of State, who does not support remote-only meetings. Ted Brady’s testimony shared our members’ support for remote meetings and noted the resources VLCT provides to help members manage both remote and hybrid meetings.

Requiring a State-Run Municipal Ethics Framework

The House Committee on Government Operations and Military Affairs heard testimony from Christina Sivret, Executive Director of the Vermont State Ethics Commission, on a proposed Municipal Ethics Framework. We know Vermont municipal officials care deeply about ethics and VLCT provides model conflict of interest policies and regular training on the subject. Please read Ted Brady’s December 8, 2023 Feedback to the Vermont Ethics Commission expressing our concerns about the current approach and unintended consequences.

Please stay tuned for updates on these issues and more legislation affecting municipal capacity, revenue, and governance.

Read the Preview

Read the Fall Update

ARPA: Single Audit? Or Alternative Compliance Examination Engagement (ACEE)?

The U.S. Department of Treasury (Treasury) recognizes that due to the receipt of a State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF)/ARPA award, many recipients may expend $750,000 or more in federal awards during their fiscal year and newly be required to complete a Single Audit or a Program-Specific Audit. Section IV of the SLFRF/ARPA Compliance Supplement describes an alternative approach for SLFRF/ARPA recipients that are required to undergo an audit pursuant to 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F solely for the expenditures of SLFRF funds directly awarded by Treasury. An SLFRF/ARPA recipient may still elect to undergo a Single Audit or a Program-Specific Audit under 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F.

Eligibility Criteria

SLFRF/ARPA recipients that expend $750,000 or more in federal awards during the recipient’s fiscal year and that meet both criteria listed below have the option to follow the Alternative Compliance Examination Engagement (ACEE) Report:

The recipient’s total SLFRF/ARPA award received directly from Treasury or received (through states) as a non-entitlement unit (NEU) of local government is at or below $10 million; and
Other federal award funds the recipient expended (not including their SLFRF/ARPA award funds) are less than $750,000 during the recipient’s fiscal year.

Further details are included in:

21 SLFRF Compliance Supplement – Technical Update (see content beginning on page 9)
2022 SLFRF Compliance Supplement (see content beginning on page 10)
2023 SLFRF Compliance Supplement ( see content beginning on page 11)

Examination Guidance

The alternative approach to a Single Audit or Program-Specific Audit under 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F permits eligible recipients to engage a practitioner (professional auditor) to perform a compliance examination engagement in accordance with the Government Accountability Office (GAO) Government Auditing Standards. These standards direct practitioners to conduct these engagements in accordance with the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Statements on Standards for Attestation Engagements. The AICPA attestation standards are codified in the AT-C section of the AICPA’s Professional Standards and AT-C Section 315, Compliance Attestation, which is the standard to be followed.

Some Additional Details to Remember about Local SLFRF/ARPA Awards

Notice the name of the SLFRF/ARPA funding: STATE and LOCAL Fiscal Recovery Funds. The State of Vermont received state ARPA (~$1 billion) and municipalities received local ARPA (~$200 million).
The amount of your total local SLFRF/ARPA award is HERE.
All recipients of local SLFRF/ARPA funds are direct recipients (not beneficiaries or subrecipients).
All recipients of local SLFRF/ARPA funds have a grant agreement (HERE and HERE) directly with the U.S. Department of Treasury.
If a municipality receives state SLFRF/ARPA from the State of Vermont, then the municipality is most likely considered a subrecipient of these funds. If you are unsure, look at the first section of the first page of your grant agreement. It should look like THIS.
Expenditures of local SLFRF/ARPA funds should be included on a municipality's Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA).

Flood Recovery Check-In Recordings and Resources

Several Vermont municipalities were impacted by the July 2024 flooding and many more are still recovering from the two major flood events in the summer of 2023. This work and funding can take so long to complete, and the process can be so challenging, that we are holding recurring meetings to support the municipal officials who are dealing with it. Each month, VLCT hosts staff from Vermont Emergency Management (VEM), FEMA, and Vermont’s Flood Recovery Office and other partners to share information, discuss timely topics, and conduct a Q&A to help smooth the path to flood response, recovery, mitigation, and resilience.

Each check-in features:

Updates about FEMA’s Public Assistance Program.
Information directly from FEMA and state officials.
Details about other programs and opportunities that could benefit your town relative to flood recovery, mitigation, and resilience.
Tips, best practices, and resources that can help you navigate projects involving FEMA funding.

If you want to attend and have yet to register, register here.

If you have already registered and cannot find the event link, log in to your MAP account and click on the Events icon.

Presentation Slides: FEMA's Requirement to Obtain and Maintain Insurance

Presentation Slides: Staci Pomeroy, River Morphology 101

Recorded Video

Presentation Slides: VEM Hazard Mitigation Program for VLCT

Recorded Video

Presentation Slides: FEMA PA Subgrant Info from the Vt Department of Public Safety (DPS)

Recorded Video

Presentation Slides: State of Vermont Municipal Technical Assistance Program (MTAP)

Recorded Video

Presentation Slides: Flood Recovery Check-In with Ben Rose of the State Emergency Operations Center (SEOC)

Recurring Speakers

Eric Forand, Director, VEM
Ben Rose, Alternate State Coordinating Officer, DR-4720-VT, Recovery and Mitigation Section Chief, VEM
William (Will) F. Roy, Federal Coordinating Officer, Field Leadership Cadre, FEMA Region 1
Douglas R. Farnham, Chief Recovery Officer, State of Vermont
Pat Moulton, Recovery Officer, Central Vermont

Publication Date

06/18/2024

2024 Events & Training Schedule

VLCT offers a variety of trainings throughout the year. This listing is an overview that is subject to change. For details of currently available trainings and to register, please visit vlct.org/events. Most events are posted on the events calendar four weeks before they take place.

January

Topic	Event Date	Time	Format/Location
Advocacy Chat	1/8/2024	11:00 - 11:45	Zoom Meeting
Town Meeting Warning and Model Articles	1/10/2024	10:00 - 11:00	Zoom Webinar
Flood Recovery Check-In	1/16/2024	1:00 - 2:00	Zoom Webinar
Town Meeting: Australian Ballot Voting Legal Requirements Overview	1/17/2024	10:00 - 11:00	Zoom Webinar
Introduction to Family Medical Leave Insurance	1/18/2024	10:00-11:00	Zoom Webinar
Legal Lunch Hour – January	1/24/2024	12:00 - 1:00	Zoom Meeting
Eclipse Planning Check-In	1/25/2024	10:00-11:00	Zoom Meeting
Advocacy Chat	1/29/2024	11:00 - 11:45	Zoom Meeting

February

Topic	Event Date	Time	Format/Location
Town Meeting Tune-Up	2/7/2024	9:00 - 12:00	Hybrid, central Vermont
Eclipse Planning Check-In	2/8/2024	10:00-11:00	Zoom Meeting
Advocacy Chat	2/12/2024	11:00 - 11:45	Zoom Meeting
Franklin and Grand Isle Counties Selectboard Convening	2/13/2024	5:00 - 7:30	In Person, St. Albans
Flood Recovery Check-In	2/20/2024	1:00 - 2:00	Zoom Webinar
Eclipse Planning Check-In	2/22/2024	10:00-11:00	Zoom Meeting
Advocacy Chat	2/26/2024	11:00 - 11:45	Zoom Meeting
Legal Lunch – February	2/28/2024	12:00 - 1:00	Zoom Meeting

March

Topic	Event Date	Time	Format/Location
Eclipse Planning Check-In	3/7/2024	10:00-11:00	Zoom Meeting
Advocacy Chat	3/11/2024	11:00 - 11:45	Zoom Meeting
Flood Recovery Check-In	3/19/2024	1:00 - 2:00	Zoom Webinar
Eclipse Planning Check-In	3/21/2024	10:00-11:00	Zoom Meeting
Selectboard Essentials	3/23/2024	9:00 - 2:30	In Person
Advocacy Chat	3/25/2024	11:00 - 11:45	Zoom Meeting
Legal Lunch – March	3/27/2024	12:00 - 1:00	Zoom Meeting

April

Topic	Event Date	Time	Format/Location
Eclipse Planning Check-In	4/4/2024	10:00-11:00	Zoom Meeting
Advocacy Chat	4/8/2024	11:00 - 11:45	Zoom Meeting
Grant Basics: Before the Grant	4/9/2024	10:00 - 12:00	Zoom Webinar
Liability and Risk Management for Selectboards	4/11/2024	10:00 - 12:00	Zoom Webinar
~~Flood Recovery Check-In~~ CANCELLED	4/16/2024	1:00 - 2:00	Zoom Webinar
Open Meeting Law for Boards and Committees	4/17/2024	10:00 - 11:30	Zoom Webinar
Advocacy Chat	4/22/2024	11:00 - 11:45	Zoom Meeting
Legal Lunch – April	4/24/2024	12:00 - 1:00	Zoom Meeting
Unemployment Insurance and Act 76 - What Employers Need to Know	4/25/2024	11:00 - 12:00	Zoom Webinar

May

Topic	Event Date	Time	Format/Location
Advocacy Chat	5/6/2024	11:00 - 11:45 AM	Zoom Meeting
Selectboard Essentials: Northwest & Chittenden County Region	5/14/2024	5:30 - 9:00 PM	Hybrid, Milton
Legal Lunch – May	5/22/2024	12:00 - 1:00 PM	Zoom Meeting
Grant Basics: Project Development - Developing and Funding the Project	5/28/2024	10:00 AM - 12:00 PM	Zoom Webinar
Spring Zoning and Development Review Forum	5/30/2024	9:00 AM - 12:00 PM	Zoom Webinar

June

Topic	Event Date	Time	Format/Location
FLSA Basics and Updates	6/4/2024	12:00 - 1:00 PM	Zoom Webinar
Intro to CaseBuilder and Your Equifax Team	6/6/2024	2:00 - 3:00 PM	Zoom Webinar
DER Training: DISA360 Portal	6/7/2024	1:00 - 3:30 PM	Zoom Webinar
Flood Recovery Check-In	6/18/2024	1:00 - 2:00 PM	Zoom Webinar
Local Officials Golf Outing	6/21/2024	9:00 AM - 3:00 PM	Green Mountain National Golf Course
Advocacy Chat - Wrap-up 2024	6/24/24	11:00 AM - 12:00 PM	Zoom Meeting
Legal Lunch	6/27/24	11:45 AM - 12:45 PM	Zoom Meeting
DER Training: DISA360 Portal	6/27/24	1:00 - 3:30 PM	Zoom Webinar

July

Topic	Event Date	Time	Format/Location
Flood Recovery Check-In	7/16/2024	1:00 - 2:00 PM	Zoom Meeting
Legal Lunch – July	7/17/2024	12:00 - 1:00 PM	Zoom Meeting

August

Topic	Event Date	Time	Format/Location
Managing Your Highway Team	8/7/2024	8:30 - 9:45 AM	Zoom Webinar
Flood Recovery Check-In - CANCELED	8/20/2024	1:00 - 2:00 PM	Zoom Meeting
Mine Safety and Hazard Compliance Training	8/21/2024	9:00 AM - 12:00 PM	Lyndonville
Mine Safety and Hazard Compliance Training	8/22/2024	9:00 AM - 12:00 PM	Manchester
Ordinance Adoption and Enforcement	8/29/2024	9:30 AM - 12:00 PM	Zoom Meeting

September

Topic	Event Date	Time	Format/Location
RMS for Highway Supervisors	9/11/2024	8:30 - 9:45 AM	Zoom Webinar
Workplace Matters: Performance Management	9/12/2024	12:00 - 1:00 PM	Zoom Meeting
Flood Recovery Check-In - PAUSED	9/17/2024	1:00 - 2:00	Zoom Webinar
Municipal Budgeting	9/18/2024	10:00 - 12:00	Zoom Webinar
Grant Basics: Management	9/24/2024	10:00 - 12:00	Zoom Webinar
Legal Lunch Hour – September	9/25/2024	12:00 - 1:00	Zoom Meeting

October

Topic	Event Date	Time	Format/Location
Annual Meeting	10/1/2024	3:00 PM	Killington
Town Fair	10/2/2024	8:00 AM - 5:00 PM	Killington
Flood Recovery Check-In - PAUSED	10/15/2024	1:00 - 2:00	Zoom Webinar
Fall Planning and Zoning	10/17/2024	9:30 AM - 2:00 PM	Hybrid - Lake Morey
ADA 101	10/22/2024	10:00 - 12:00	Zoom Webinar
Legal Lunch Hour – Oct	10/23/2024	12:00 - 1:00	Zoom Meeting

November

Topic	Event Date	Time	Format/Location
Elected Auditors	11/13/2024	10:00 - 11:30	Zoom Webinar
Workplace Matters: Employee Engagement	11/14/2024	12:00 - 1:00 PM	Zoom Meeting
Flood Recovery Check-In - PAUSED	11/19/2024	1:00 - 2:00	Zoom Webinar
Legal Lunch Hour – Nov	11/20/2024	12:00 - 1:00	Zoom Meeting

December

Topic	Event Date	Time	Format/Location
Flood Recovery Check-In - PAUSED	12/17/2024	1:00 - 2:00	Zoom Webinar

Publication Date

12/12/2023

VLCT is Part of State's $15M Flood Loan Interest Relief for Members

Member for

1 year 8 months

Submitted by iminot@vlct.org on Thu, 11/30/2023 - 09:01

photo of Ted Brady at Vt Governor Scott's press conference announcing MCRF on 11/29/2023

On November 28, Governor Scott and Vermont State Treasurer Mike Pieciak announced the creation of the Municipal Climate Recovery Fund (MCRF). This $15 million loan program will support flood-impacted municipalities by significantly reducing the interest they must pay on short-term loans they take out to pay for recovering from the 2023 summer floods before FEMA payments arrive (which can take several months, perhaps more than a year). Operated by the Vermont Bond Bank with funding from the state, MCRF will offer financing that allows municipalities to refinance or finance flood expenses at a reduced interest rate as low as 1.3% for up to seven years. The program will save taxpayers in flood-impacted communities up to an estimated $3.5 million.

The Vermont Bond Bank is also partnering with the Vermont League of Cities and Towns (VLCT) on the implementation of the MCRF to further reduce interest rates on these loans for the members of VLCT’s Property and Casualty Intermunicipal Fund (VLCT PACIF) whose flood losses exceeded their insurance coverage. VLCT will subsidize applicants' interest rates to near 0% for as long as seven years, up to a total of $1 million for the group.

"This is going to reduce the cost of debt so [recipients] can put more of that money into other aspects of running a town – they don't have to raise taxes or cut services [to regain the interest costs]," Brady explains.

Learn more about the program at the Bond Bank's MCRF webpage.
View VLCT Executive Director Ted Brady speaking in the November 28 press conference (presenting at 15:44 and answering a question at 28:29).

The municipalities that are eligible for the additional assistance from VLCT PACIF are Barre City, Barre Town, Bolton Town, Brandon Town, Brighton Town, Cabot Town, Central Vermont SWMD, Chelsea Town, Chester Town, Glover Town, Hardwick Electric, Hardwick Town, Irasburg Town, Jeffersonville Village, Johnson Town, Johnson Village, Ludlow Town, Ludlow Village, Marshfield Town, Montpelier City, Richmond Town, Rockingham Town, Rutland Town Fire District 1, Springfield Town, Wallingford Town, Washington Town, West Haven Town, Weston Town, Wheelock Town, Williamstown Town, Winooski Valley Park District, Wolcott Town, Woodbury Town, Woodstock Town, and Wrightsville Beach Recreation District.

Municipal Budgeting

Event Date: 10/25/23

This annual training explains basic budgeting principles, financial management challenges, how to comply with legal requirements, and best practices for preparing the budget for town meeting. This year it also includes updates on ARPA and more. Attend this timely webinar and live Q&A to kick off budget development season.

Updated Davis-Bacon Wages Rules Apply 10/23/23

Member for

1 year 8 months

Submitted by bwaninger@vlct.org on Mon, 10/23/2023 - 17:20

Woodcut block letters reading "New Rules" on teal background

Is your municipality working on a federally funded public building or infrastructure project, or planning to in the future? If so, the Davis-Bacon Act applies to your project. Updated Davis-Bacon regulations became effective on October 23, 2023.

What Is the Davis-Bacon Act?

The Davis-Bacon Act requires contractors and subcontractors working on federally funded projects that cost more than $2,000 to pay certain workers the “prevailing” wage. Davis-Bacon requirements may be extended to federal financial assistance programs by the terms of other statutes (collectively referred to as Davis-Bacon and Related Acts). For instance, the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act is a Related Act that requires overtime pay to employees on most Davis-Bacon Act covered contracts.

The DBA applies to work:

on public buildings or public works (for example, a town office or town garage building with USDA Rural Development grants or loans, or water, wastewater, or transportation project with federal funding).
involving construction, prosecution, completion, or repair.
performed at the site of the work.

Davis-Bacon Act requirements apply to:

laborers and mechanics.
people who guard property (ex. watchperson or guards) (under certain conditions).
working foreperson (under certain conditions).

The US Environmental Protection Agency's Davis Bacon Act Overview summarizes the requirements. This overview was published prior to the updated regulation.

What Has Changed?

The DOL worked to streamline and standardize Davis-Bacon compliance, but contractors and contracting agencies, such as municipalities, will carry more risk. The DOL summarized the changes in a comparison chart. Below are the main changes.

Prevailing Wages

The methods for how the DOL determines prevailing wages and whether payment of fringe benefits prevails over not paying benefits have both changed. This may have changed the wage or benefit rate for your project.
The updates allow DOL to define a wage rate for multi-county projects (“areas”) and geographic subdivisions, such as state highway districts, not just for counties. Mixing rural and metropolitan county data is no longer banned.

Wage Determinations

Wage determinations for substantial activities must be incorporated into the Request for Bids and the awarded contract.
Wage determinations must be updated after a contract is awarded if the contract’s construction scope of work or its period of performance changes, or if a new subcontract is signed. Contracts not tied to completion of a specific project (retainer contracts, pre-qualified consultant contracts, etc.) must have wage determinations updated annually.

Definitions

The updated regulations clarify existing definitions and define terms that previously did not have definitions.

Agency was clarified to include state and local agencies or other entities that provide assistance for Davis-Bacon projects.
Building and work were modernized to include energy generation, broadband, and electric vehicle charger installations.
Construction, completion, or repair includes demolition work and future construction on a demolition site if that construction will be subject to Davis-Bacon.
There are new definitions for contractor, subcontractor, and prime contractor.
Site of work has a revised definition that expands its scope.
Flaggers are covered under Davis-Bacon if they are associated with the construction project. They do not have to be physically on the construction site.
Material suppliers are not considered contractors for Davis-Bacon purposes. Contractor workers who move materials within a site or off site may be covered.
Davis-Bacon applies to truck drivers employed by contractors and subcontractors when they are engaged in certain activities.
Surveyors are considered laborers or mechanics in certain circumstances, and therefore are covered by Davis-Bacon.

Compliance

Record Keeping – Contractors and subcontractors are required to keep certain documentation to prove they tried to comply with Davis-Bacon; to maintain a list of workers with telephone numbers and email addresses; and to retain all documents for at least three years after the work on the prime contract is completed. They also must certify payroll (by signature) and submit it on a weekly basis to the contracting agency. The contracting agency (you!) must retain these records too, and you are responsible for ensuring that the signature on the certified payroll is valid.

Contracting – Contractors and upper-tier contractors now may be liable for lower-tier subcontractor violations. This means they are required to pay back wages on behalf of their lower-tier subcontractors and may be subject to debarment for subcontractor violations. Intent doesn’t matter. Prime contractors must follow up and ensure compliance. Upper-tier subcontractors must have some degree of intent to incur liability.

Contract clauses must be inserted in full. Anti-retaliation provisions are included in the contract clauses and include remedies.

Fringe Benefits – Fringe benefit contributions must be annualized, and an hourly equivalent rate must be calculated if a contractor’s worker performs work on both Davis-Bacon and non-Davis-Bacon projects. There are some exceptions to annualization calculations, and they have nuances!

Apprenticeships – Specific requirements must be met for a contractor to claim a fringe benefit credit for the costs of an apprenticeship program.

Enforcement –

Interest will be due on back wages, calculated per an IRS standard, and compounded daily. Back wages and interest can be withheld from the prime contractor’s other federal contracts.
Certain Davis-Bacon requirements have been aligned with requirements of related acts (e.g., one standard for debarment, its mandatory period, etc.).
If wage determinations and contract clauses are missing from executed (signed) contracts, they must be incorporated retroactively. This may require an increase in the contract amount for cover wages even if the contract has closed.

What Should Municipalities Do Now?

Review your Davis-Bacon compliance program.

Are the required contract clauses in all contracts subject to Davis-Bacon?
Do you have a mechanism or procedure to ensure contractors and subcontractors are following Davis-Bacon requirements?
Are you collecting records (including the newly required records) and certified payrolls from your contractors? How do you ensure that the certification signature is valid?
Do you have a system to verify Davis-Bacon compliance with your contractors and subcontractors?
Do you have any project wage determinations that are nearing expiration?

Conduct a risk assessment of your Davis-Bacon compliance program. Even if your “program” is informal, take the time to identify gaps and create controls to close them.

Revisit training. Do you have clear guidance for contractors and subcontractors to comply with Davis-Bacon? Is your staff receiving regular training on Davis-Bacon compliance?

Need Resources?

To learn more about the updated Davis-Bacon and related acts regulations, visit https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/government-contracts/construction/. The webpage includes a Small Entity Compliance Guide that is useful for understanding the updates.

Need current Davis-Bacon Wages? Our Project Management Tip of the Week includes our Guide to Obtaining Davis-Bacon Wage Determinations.

Got Debris? You're in the right place!

Member for

1 year 8 months

Submitted by bwaninger@vlct.org on Tue, 10/17/2023 - 15:15

debris from flooded home piled on front lawn

Email flood recovery or FEMA PA program questions to: ADM.2023floods@Vermont.gov

For help with debris removal, call Vermont Emergency Management at 1-800-347-0488.

We've consolidated previously released debris information here, so you have current information. New information added as of October 12, 2023 appears in red below.

During the response and recovery from a flood event, municipalities are responsible for debris management.

As the July 2023 flood event has evolved, the State now can assist municipalities with debris removal on both public and private property. For help with debris removal on public or private property, call Vermont Emergency Management at 1-800-347-0488.

You can click on one of these topics to jump to that information: Debris and FEMA PA | Debris Blocking Municipal Infrastructure | Debris in and along Rivers and Streams | Residential and Business Flood Debris | Temporary Debris Collection Sites

Debris and FEMA Public Assistance

FEMA Public Assistance (PA) covers debris clearance, removal, and disposal operations by State and local governments, Indian tribes, and certain CRITICAL private nonprofit organizations.

At least one of the following must apply:

Removal eliminates immediate threats to human lives, public health and safety;
Removal eliminates immediate threats of significant damage to improved public property; and/or
Removal ensures economic recovery of the affected areas to the benefit of the community-at-large.

Debris located on public property and rights-of-way is eligible. Debris on private property usually is not eligible under the FEMA Public Assistance (PA) program, although debris from private property can be moved out to the right of way on a determined date by the municipality for removal by the municipality. Vermont used this strategy early in the flood response. When debris on private property is so widespread that it threatens public health and safety or economic recovery of a community, FEMA may provide PA funding for debris removal from private property. This was the case for the July 20223 floods, and the Governor requested and was approved for FEMA assistance. The State now can assist with debris removal on both public and private property.

Debris type should be separated. Public Assistance debris can include downed trees, sand, building wreckage, and damaged property.
Before picking up debris, note the GPS location of debris pick up and disposal (required!) and take a photograph if you can.
If you hire a contractor to pick up your debris, it must be cost reasonable and procured. You must have a debris monitor to ensure the contractor is picking up what they are charging you for. A monitor can be a current town employee.
Obtain appropriate Federal, State and local permits.
Dispose of debris at proper landfills/locations.

Frequently Asked Questions and information about debris contract requirements, separation of debris types, and debris removal monitoring is available in a VEM email sent on July 14, 2023, Debris Guidance and FEMA Eligibility.

Vermont Emergency Management's Debris Management webpage provides details to help you maintain eligibility for FEMA Public Assistance for debris-related costs. The webpage also describes how to utilize the State's debris management contractors. You do not need to do this! Contact Vermont Emergency Management at 1-800-347-0488. The State is assisting municipalities with debris removal, and it can remove debris on both public and private lands. The State will use its contractors or staff, and the State will take responsibility for monitoring!

Debris Blocking Municipal Infrastructure

The State currently is assessing the flood related impact on local bridges, large culverts, drainage intakes, and stormwater systems. This will help them better understand where challenges exist and where State resources can best be utilized. Please consider answering a few quick questions using this short online form. Please respond to the survey whether or not you need assistance. Ruling out where assistance isn't needed is as important as knowing where assistance is needed!

Debris in and along Rivers and Streams

After a Flood - River and Stream Debris Management is an easy-to-read, two-page guide to managing debris in and along rivers and streams. It was updated by the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources on 9/1/2023.

A brief summary:

Report all debris information to Vermont Emergency Management at 1-800-347-0488. The State may help with removal and disposal.
Human-made debris, such as appliances, furniture, tires, or construction materials, may be removed without restrictions. It must be disposed of or recycled at a solid waste management facility.
Natural debris left in the river after a flood, such as trees, large rocks, excess gravel, or excess sediment, cannot be removed without review by the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation. This includes areas around culverts and bridges. Use the online form to contact the Rivers Management Program or call 802-828-1115.
Natural debris left on land after a flood may be removed by property owners without restrictions. This material is a low priority for removal by the State.
Avoid comingling natural and human-made debris. They need to be separated and managed separately. Vegetative debris can be composted and placed outside the river or stream.

If you still have debris in and alongside rivers and streams as of 10/12/2023, including vegetative debris (e.g., trees and branches caught up against bridge abutments), as well as gravel and sediment which are choking the stream channel and creating potential for further flooding of infrastructure during a future storm, and you want to remove it:

Consult with your Agency of Natural Resources River Engineer. Use this online form to contact your Rivers Management Program or call 802-828-1115. If the River Engineer concurs with your proposed course of action for managing the debris in question, they can assist you in finding a quick application for Municipally Authorized Emergency Protective Measures.
Notify your FEMA Program Delivery Manager of your intention to undertake additional debris management. Note that the debris management activity must be listed on your Damage Inventory, due to FEMA within 60 days after the date of your Recovery Scoping Meeting. Most DR4720 applicants have Damage Inventory deadlines coming up in late October, with the earliest ones due 10/21/23.
FEMA debris eligibility is based on policy guidance in the FEMA Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide.

Find current information from VEM about FEMA eligibility for management of river debris.

The period of performance for FEMA-eligible debris management is 6 months from the start of the incident period (in this case, January 7, 2024), but it can easily be extended for an additional six months by submitting an Extension Request to Vermont Public Assistance Officer Kim Canarecci (kim.canarecci@vermont.gov) with copy to ADM.2023floods@vermont.gov. By requesting an extension, you can maintain the ability to conduct FEMA-eligible debris management operations into spring 2024.

Alternative to FEMA PA: If a debris project is not eligible for FEMA Public Assistance, the NRCS Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) Program covers 75% of the cost to remove debris and/or stabilize streambanks that pose an imminent threat. These projects require government sponsorship. The Vermont Agency of Natural Resouces will sponsor or co-sponsor all EWP projects. It may request that the municipality or other governmental organization play a role in the project. Contact John Schmeltzer, DEC Deputy Director, at 802-249-5620 to discuss potential projects. Remember, municipalities can use agreements to pass match and other responsibilities on to the private property owner!

Residential and Business Flood Debris

As of 10/12/2023, all municipal collections of debris from flooded buildings should be completed.

If your residents have flood debris in your municipality's right of way (ROW) and you need help removing it, the State of Vermont (SOV) can help; the expense for this effort will be covered by the State of Vermont. To have this debris collected, call Vermont Emergency Management at 1-800-347-0488. The State can assist with debris management on both public and private lands.

Temporary Debris Collection Sites

Due to the July 2023 flood, municipalities are allowed to set up temporary collection sites for flood debris materials. Municipalities must separate materials to protect solid waste workers and human health and the environment.

Municipalities are required to notify the Vermont Solid Waste Program (Dennis Fekert, dennis.fekert@vermont.gov) of the location of a temporary flood debris collection site and to specify what and how materials will be collected. Municipalities also must communicate with Dennis again on what date the materials were transferred to a proper management facility. To receive FEMA reimbursement, municipalities must record and save the addresses of locations where the material originated from and provide records for collection and processing costs.

The Agency of Natural Resources published Guidance for Municipalities that want to establish a temporary debris collection site.

Funding Opportunities: Municipally Owned Historic Buildings

Is your municipality ready to renovate or rehabilitate a municipally owned historic building, such as a town hall, library, or historical museum? Below are funding opportunities we've identified to support your efforts.

Consult program-specific guidance for additional information. Links to other sites offered in this document are provided to assist municipalities. The inclusion of a link does not imply endorsement or approval of the linked site or product.

Funding Opportunities | Resources

Funding Opportunities

ACCD Certified Local Government Program - Supports architectural, historical, archeological surveys, and oral histories that help identify properties, conditions, or develop preservation plans; preparation of nominations to the National Register of Historic Places or local landmarks ordinances; work on preservation plans; preparation of zoning studies; development of public information and education activities, including research; training for commission members and staff; development of architectural drawings and specifications; and other preservation plans. Award range is $500 to $25,000. Match is 50%. Municipality must be a Certified Local Government.

ACCD Community Development Block Grants – Supports identifying and addressing local needs for housing, economic development, public facilities, public services, and handicapped accessibility modifications. Funds planning ($3,000 to $60,000), implementation ($50,000 to $1 million), and accessibility modifications ($5,000 to $100,000). Funds planning ($3,000-$60,000), implementation ($50,000-$1 million), and accessibility modifications ($5,000-$100,000). Match for economic development loans, accessibility modifications, and slums and blight is 10%. For municipally owned facilities, no match amount is prescribed, but municipalities must contribute. The amount has a bearing on an application’s competitiveness. Both the Selectboard and Planning Commission must sign a resolution for the application

Funds must primarily benefit persons of low and moderate income. Accessibility projects automatically qualify under this criterion.

ACCD Historic Preservation Grant – Supports restoration and repair of roofs, structural elements, windows, foundations, and other historic building elements. Properties must be list or eligible to be listed in the State Register of Historic Places. Ineligible uses are new construction, additions, electrical, plumbing, heating and code improvements. Awards are up to $20,000. Match is 50% cash, which must be in-hand at the time of application.

ACCD Municipal Planning Grant – This annual State program supports planning and revitalization for municipalities. The program usually is announced in July with applications due in November/December. Single municipalities can apply for an amount between $2,500 and $30,000. A consortium of municipalities may apply for a grant of any amount between $2,500 and $45,000. A cash match of 10% of total project cost is required for both. Project priorities vary each year.

AARP Community Challenge Flagship Grant - Funds a range of projects from public places (i.e. parks), transportation and mobility options, housing options, diversity/equity/inclusion, digital connections, community resilience, civic engagement, and community health and economic empowerment. Grant range is $500 to $50,000 with an average grant of $11,900. Projects should be consistent with AARP’s mission to serve the needs of people age 50+. Applications are due in May annually.

Efficiency Vermont Rebates & Services – Efficiency Vermont has business rebates for heat pumps, HVAC controls, appliances, lighting & light fixtures, and sensors. These rebates could be used with MERP or other funding sources to lower project costs. It also offers services that can support the Town’s efforts.

Utility Rebates & Programs – Green Mountain Power, Washington Electric Coop, Vermont Electric Coop, municipal utilities, and Efficiency Vermont have energy-related incentive programs, like heat pumps. These rebates could be used to lower project costs.

Energy Efficient Buildings Tax Deduction (IRC § 179D) - The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 extended and expanded the energy efficient commercial buildings. Municipalities are eligible for the credit, which must be transferred to a qualified energy efficiency project designer. A building’s energy efficiency must be increased by at least 25 percent with bonuses for higher efficiency improvements. Energy efficiency improvements such as improvements to interior lighting; heating, cooling, ventilation, and hot water; and building envelope are eligible. VLCT is working to determine whether using this tax incentive is realistic for municipalities.

Northern Borders Regional Commission Catalyst – Supports projects that address transportation, telecommunications, energy, and basic public infrastructure; business and workforce development; health care, nutrition and food security, and other public services; resource conservation; tourism; recreation; and open space preservation consistent with economic development. New in 2023, this grant will fund basic public infrastructure, including public meeting spaces. Incorporating the project’s relationship to economic activity will increase application competitiveness.

Applications are accepted in the spring and fall. NBRC prioritizes construction-ready projects and prefers job-creation projects that help reduce poverty, unemployment, and outmigration. Focusing on project benefits in these areas helps an application be more competitive. Letters from businesses with expansion potential provide excellent supporting documentation. Other elements that can increase a project’s competitiveness include a project’s listing as a Regional Project Priority as and incorporating the project’s relationship to job retention in the Designated Village Center.

Preservation Trust of Vermont (PTV) Robert Sincerbeaux Fund Grants – Helps off-set the cost of hiring a preservation consultant or architect to evaluate the condition of an historic building and make recommendations for its care. The resulting report is important for accessing other PTV grants to implement improvements and to other prospective funders. Sincerbeaux grants also can be used for other assistance that helps a project progress. PTV can direct you to additional funding sources that match with the Wiley Building.

Preservation Trust of Vermont (PVT) Paul Bruhn Historic Revitalization Grants – Supports preserving and restoring buildings and community gathering spaces of economic and social significance. Project examples are roof replacement or repair, structural repairs, facade, window and door restoration or repair, and code improvements. This grant is particularly interested in projects that enhance economic and community activity in village centers. Awards are up to $100,000.

USDA Rural Development Community Facilities Direct Loan and Grant Program – Provides affordable funding to develop essential community facilities in rural areas, which is defined as a community of 20,000 or less in population. Examples of essential community facilities include health care facilities; public facilities; community support services; public safety services; educational services such as museums, libraries; private schools; utility services such as telemedicine or distance learning equipment; and local food systems. We recommend discussing the project with USDA staff prior to initiating an application.

If a community’s grant eligibility is 15% or less, it can be beneficial for the community to pursue a traditional loan. Changes to federal requirements in 2021 may raise project costs sufficiently to offset the benefits of the grant funds. It is beneficial to discuss a project with USDA staff prior to initiating an application. USDA updated income information to reflect 2020 Census information in October 2023. This modified grant eligibility for some municipalities.

VCF Walter Cerf Community Fund – Priority interests are the arts, education, historic preservation, and social services. Within these issue areas, there is a strong desire to support work that addresses the needs of underserved populations. Prefers proposals that encourage cooperation, collaboration, and community building. 70% of funds are awarded to Addison County and the Brandon area. Input of the Preservation Trust of Vermont is strongly encouraged before applying. Award range is Small $500 to $5,000 and Large up to $25,000. Organizations must be serving Addison County or Brandon to be eligible for the large grant.

Vermont Arts Council Cultural Facilities Grants – Works to enhance, create, or expand the capacity of an existing building to provide cultural activities for the public. Examples of eligible projects include improvements such as wiring, heating, accessibility features, lighting, and stage improvements; building improvements, permanent display panels or exhibit cases, permanent infrastructure or fixed equipment; and hazard mitigation efforts such as flood gates, rain gutters, and sprinkler systems.

Vermont Bond Bank Pooled Loan Program – This program provides low-cost loans to Vermont governmental units for long-term capital projects. Loans are primarily funded through the issuance of highly rated tax-exempt bonds by the Bond Bank. Common uses of loans issued through the program include facilities renovation and construction projects, road and highway improvements, energy efficiency upgrades, equipment purchases, and general infrastructure. Voter approval is required. The Bond Bank assists municipalities with determining their debt capacity. Contact Ken Linge at ken@vtbondagency.org for assistance.

Vermont Buildings and General Services Municipal Energy Resilience Program (MERP) – Provides funding for community capacity building, building assessments, project implementation, and staff support for application writing and for other assistance. The Addison County Regional Planning Commission’s MERP webpage provides a digestible summary of the MERP program. Contact your Regional Planning Commission for assistance with this program. Regional Commissions received funding to assist municipalities with the program. The grant can be used for improvements to multiple buildings.

Vermont Buildings and General Services Municipal Energy Loan Programs – The Legislature authorized a Municipal Energy Loan Program and a Municipal Energy Revolving Fund as part of Act 172 in 2022. The funds are being capitalized with funding the State will receive through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Eligible activities for the loan program are equipment replacement, studies, weatherization, construction of improvements affecting the use of energy resources, the implementation of energy efficiency and conservation measures and the use of renewable resources. The programs will be developed following the launch of the other MERP components that have a spending deadline.

VHCB Historic Preservation – Supports acquisition and/or restoration of historic buildings with public use. The building must be on or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Historic preservation easements are required on buildings funded through VHCB, and restoration projects must meet the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Historic Preservation. VHCB’s Project Feasibility Fund may cover predevelopment project costs. Evaluation of feasibility fund requests is completed by VHCB staff.

VHCB Rural Economic Development Initiative - REDI provides consultant-based services to rural communities and working lands businesses interested in applying for federal funds and other funding sources when applicable. REDI can hire a grant writer, complete a necessary step to make a grant application more competitive (such as a business plan or engineering), and in some cases to help make a fundraising plan for a project.

VNRC Small Grants for Smart Growth – Supports advocacy for better land use, advancing transportation choice, supporting housing choice and affordability, promoting downtown or village center revitalization, conservation and natural resources, public outreach and engagement. Awards can be useful for project planning, as well as outreach and education activities around community revitalization efforts. Awards cannot be used for capital improvements. Awards range from $500 to $1,500.

Local Government ARPA Allocation - The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 established the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund (CSLFRF, aka ARPA). It provided $350 billion to state and local governments for response to and recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. Over $200 million was allocated to Vermont municipalities. These funds can address municipal needs and/or serve as a local match to State and Federal funding. Legislative bodies (Selectboards, City Councils, Village Trustees) have discretion and flexibility over how to spend their local ARPA funds. These funds can assist municipal projects and/or serve as a local match to State and Federal funding.

Congressional Directed Spending Requests (Earmarks) - Congressionally Directed Spending Requests (CDS), formerly known as Earmarks, are projects selected by Members of Congress for funding through the appropriations bill. The Senate and House have different rules for these requests. Projects benefit from advanced discussion with Congressional staff. If selected, funds pass through a federal agency with that agency’s associated grant terms and conditions. Funds may not be available for 1-4 years based on agency capacity. Information is available on websites of Senator Sanders, Senator Welch, and Representative Balint. The House and Senate have different rules for their members’ requests. Projects are usually submitted in late February through mid-March annually.

Additional funding opportunities may be available if any of the following applies:

if the project contains components, such as brownfields, hazard mitigation, generator, alternative transportation, records storage/vault, renewable energy generation, or cybersecurity.
if the building supports outdoor recreation, such as restroom facilities, warming hut; and/or
if the building houses multiple users, such as a childcare, library, events space, arts performances or exhibits, electric vehicle charging infrastructure, stormwater improvements.

Resources

Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties – When using grants for historic properties, the grants usually require that all work confirms to the Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. The Standards are basic principles for addressing four treatments: preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and reconstruction. They are intended as general guidance to help preserve the distinctive character of historic buildings and their sites, while allowing for reasonable changes to meet new needs.

Grant and Project Management Capacity – Grant writing and management can tax municipal capacity. VLCT’s Increasing Municipal Grant Research and Writing Capacity offers ideas for assistance with grants. Many of the sources mentioned will provide project management services. Hiring experienced project management assistance can increase the speed of project development and help avoid cost, permitting, and other development surprises.

Capital Planning – Municipal budgets often include capital costs – constructing a new fire station or garage, repairing or replacing the town office, purchasing a new vehicle, water or wastewater system replacement, etc. A capital plan looks at annual costs for capital projects for the next five to ten years and then proposes a means of paying for them. Municipalities use capital planning to avoid large jumps in unexpected costs and to help stabilize their tax rates. VLCT recommends that municipalities adopt a capital plan or, at minimum, establish a capital planning schedule.

The Two Rivers-Ottauquechee Regional Commission has a presentation and resources on its website that are useful for capital budgeting. Municipal Planning Grants (see above) can be used to develop a capital plan. The Vermont Bond Bank has a capital planning resource page with videos and sample templates, policies, and plans. The Bond Bank assists municipalities with determining their debt capacity. Contact Ken Linge at ken@vtbondagency.org for assistance.

Publication Date

10/11/2023

State of Vermont - Subrecipient Annual Report

Member for

1 year 8 months

Submitted by kbuckley@vlct.org on Thu, 08/10/2023 - 11:35

The Subrecipient Annual Report (SAR) is required to be submitted to the Vermont Department of Finance and Management annually within 45 days after the end of your fiscal year by all subrecipients of federally funded grants. Since your local ARPA award is federal funding, you must include it in this report.

When you are completing the Subrecipient Annual Report, you must include only the ARPA* funds that were expended during your fiscal year for which you are reporting. Here is what you should include for your local ARPA funds:

In Section III - Subrecipient Schedule of Federal Expenditure:

CFDA Number (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance) CFDA numbers have been replaced with ALN (Assistance Listing Number). The ALN for ARPA is 21.027.
Granting Agency/Department - U.S. Dept. of the Treasury
Grant Number - Use your assigned "Town ID" number which can be found HERE.
Expenditures - enter your total ARPA expenditures for the fiscal year on which you are reporting. (DO NOT enter the total amount of your award or the total amount of cash you've received - you report ARPA expenditures only.)

* If you expended any ARPA funds as a "subrecipient" of a grant from an entity other than the U.S. Department of the Treasury (ex. a grant from an Agency or Department of the State of Vermont), then you must also report these funds in the Subrecipient Annual Report and do so separately from your local ARPA funds. They will have the same CFDA/ALN Number but the Granting Agency and Grant Number will be different.

If you received any ARPA funds as a "beneficiary," then you do not need to include these funds in this report.

If you are unsure whether you are "subrecipient" or a "beneficiary," please read this FAQ: What is the difference between a "beneficiary" and a "subrecipient"? and if you are still unsure, then reach out to the Agency, Department or entity that awarded the funds to your town/city/village.

Common Subrecipient Annual Report (SAR) Questions can be found HERE.

Subscribe to Finance

Finance

H.546 – Miscellaneous Tax Bill, Authorization of Local Option Tax

H.629 (Act 106) – Municipal Tax Abatement and Tax Sales

Tax Abatement Process Clarifications and Changes

Tax Sale Process Significant Changes

Working Group on Vermont’s Abatement and Tax Sale Processes

S.55 – Open Meeting Law Changes

Two Classes of Public Bodies: Advisory and Non-Advisory

Hybrid Meeting Requirement, Sort Of

“Local Incident” Exceptions

Recording Requirement

Training Requirement

Other Important OML Changes

H.875 – Municipal Ethics

S.220 – Library Modernization

H.883 – The Big Bill or FY25 Budget

Housing

See Budget Line Items of Interest Below for a Comparison With Last Year – in Millions of Dollars

H.657 – Communication Taxes and Fees

S.159 – County and Regional Government Study

Regional Governance Technical Advisory Group

Federal Funding Opportunities

VLCT’s Position

H.887 – Property Tax Yield Bill

S.305 – Miscellaneous Changes to the Public Utility Commission

S.209 – Prohibition of Unserialized Firearms

H.704 – Pay Disclosure in Jobs Listings

S.102 – Expanding Employment Protections and Collective Bargaining Rights

H.629, Changing Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales Procedures, Passes Both Chambers

H.546: Conference Committee will Consider Statewide Authorization for Municipal Local Option Tax

Final Days for S.55, a Must-Pass Bill Making Changes to Open Meeting Law

House Likely to Concur with Senate-Passed H.629, Changing Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales Procedures

Senate Likely to Approve Miscellaneous Tax Bill with Statewide Authorization for Local Option Tax, but Passage is Less Likely in House

Senate Passes Amended H.629, RE: Municipal Tax Abatement and Tax Sales Procedures

Senate Finance Adds Statewide Authorization for Municipal Local Option Tax in the Miscellaneous Tax Bill

Senate Government Operations Committee Makes Changes We Sought to H.629, a Bill Changing Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales Procedures

Municipal Ethics and Conflicts of Interest Bill Now Being Considered in the Senate Government Operations Committee

Senate Appropriations Moves Quickly to Finalize Changes to H.883 (FY25 Budget)

Concerns in H.546, The Miscellaneous Tax Bill and H.657, Communication Taxes and Fees Bill

Library Modernization Bill

H.55, Relating to Miscellaneous Unemployment Insurance

Senate Government Operations Committee Continues to Discuss the Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales Bill, H.629

Municipal Ethics Bill, H.875, Passes the House

Cannabis Bill, As Amended Allows Setback Restrictions on Cultivation

Library Modernization and Protection Bill Passes the Full Senate

Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales Bill Receives Testimony in the Senate

County Governance Study Bill Easily Passes the Full Senate

Amended H.629, a Bill Changing Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales Procedures, Advances

Hybrid Meeting Flexibility Remains for Municipalities

Committee Hears Your Backlash on Plans for State Ethics Commission to Control Municipal Ethics and Conflicts of Interest

House Ways and Means Moves Improved Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales Bill

Hybrid Meeting Mandate Removed

Power Grab in Montpelier: State Control of Municipal Ethics and Conflicts

Concerning Changes to Municipal Tax Abatement and Municipal Tax Sales

Making Remote Open Meetings Permanent

Requiring a State-Run Municipal Ethics Framework

Eligibility Criteria

Examination Guidance

Some Additional Details to Remember about Local SLFRF/ARPA Awards

Other Supporting Documents

Recurring Speakers

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December

What Is the Davis-Bacon Act?

What Has Changed?

What Should Municipalities Do Now?

Need Resources?

Email flood recovery or FEMA PA program questions to: ADM.2023floods@Vermont.gov

For help with debris removal, call Vermont Emergency Management at 1-800-347-0488.

During the response and recovery from a flood event, municipalities are responsible for debris management.