2022 Legislative Session
Override Clean Heat Carbon Tax Veto (H.715). Failed 99-51 (100 to override) on May 10, 2022. The Clean Heat Standard (CHS) is a complicated, de facto carbon tax intended to hide the price increases on fossil fuels. If heating fuel sellers do not generate enough “clean heat credits” themselves through weatherization and green appliance installations, they must purchase credits generated by others to stay in business. Those voting YES believe the CHS will help Vermont achieve its GWSA 2025 & 2030 greenhouse gas reduction mandates. House members voting YES trust the PUC to implement the Clean Heat Standard without needing further legislative approval. Those voting NO believe the CHS would lead to extreme hardship for the 200,000+ fossil fuel heating Vermont households and numerous small businesses supplying and relying on fossil fuels. The technology to replace fossil fuel heating systems is not currently scalable to satisfy the GWSA, due to labor and supply restraints.
Mattos - NOImpose Rental Registration with Housing Programs (S.210). Passed 88-54 on April 22, 2022. The flagship provision of S.210 is a statewide registry of rental properties. Landlords can only rent housing if they pay $35 to register it and may not rent units that fail inspection (complaint basis). 7 full-time bureaucrats would administer the program, with salaries initially paid by federal ARPA money. Units rented out for fewer than 90 days are exempt. S.210 also creates two housing programs, designed to expand Vermont’s rental market and increase the homeownership rate. Those voting YES believe S.210 will increase the quantity, affordability and safety of Vermont’s rental housing market. Those voting NO were against the rental registry portion of S.210. They believe increasing housing regulations will reduce Vermont’s housing supply, raise rent on properties, shrink Vermont’s tourism industry, and reduce tax intake from short-term rentals. This could represent the first step toward state control of rental property.
Mattos - NORestrict Aggressive Political Speech and Firearm Rights (S.265). Passed 89-32 on April 12, 2022. The underlying language of S.265 would allow for the legal punishment of citizens who are aggressive toward public officials. Citizens could be given a misdemeanor (a year or less in prison) or even a felony (up to two years in prison). A felony charge could result in temporary or permanent seizure of firearms. S.265 also makes it more difficult for a defendant’s legal defense to claim that the defendant was unable to carry out their threat. Those voting YES believe that conflicts between citizens and school board members and other public official across the country warrants increased protections for elected officials from threats of violence, above those of ordinary citizens. Those voting NO believe S.265 infringes on the Constitutional rights to free speech, to petition government and Second Amendment firearm rights. S.265 could potentially result in citizens being punished for criticism (not threats) of certain groups, which is clearly protected First Amendment speech.
Mattos - NOAdd 27 days for “Default Proceed” Firearm Background Checks (Notte Amendment of S.30). Passed on January 27, 2022 by a vote of 97-49. This would lengthen the time some Vermont firearm applications take from 3 to 30 days. Those voting YES believe this amended bill could “potentially save lives,” by preventing dangerous police retrievals of guns for those who ultimately fail federal background checks. Those voting NO point to the rights to firearms protected in the Vermont and US Constitutions. They note that failed background checks have a shelf life of 30 days, meaning the applicant could be caught in an endless cycle.
Mattos - NOProtect Doctor-Patient Privacy during Firearm Disputes (Donahue Motion of S.30). Failed on January 27, 2022 by a vote of 55-90. S.30 would add various gun restrictions, as voted upon above. The Donahue Motion would send S.30 and the Notte amendment to the House Healthcare Committee for further review. Those voting YES believe that greater deliberation was needed for discovering how S.30 could impact Vermonter’s doctor/patient relationships, if healthcare workers become legally obligated to report patients, limiting their firearm rights. Those voting NO believe that no such analysis was necessary.
Mattos - YESStricter Act 250 Development Process (S.234). Passed 99-43 on May 3, 2022. S.234 reorganizes the Act 250 approval process, which restricts economic development. The new permitting process adds “undue adverse impact on forest blocks (or) connecting habitat” to the list of reasons an Act 250 permit could be rejected. S.234 also offers favorable tax treatment to areas that already have economic development. The permit fees would fund the salaries of a new “Environmental Review Board,” overseeing Act 250 permits. Those voting YES believe updating Act 250 will reduce Vermont’s carbon emissions, preserve natural habitat for wildlife and funnel development into downtown areas. Those voting NO believe S.234 will make getting Act 250 permit approval more difficult, costly and uncertain. Housing and business development will fall further behind.
Mattos - NOMandate Conserving Half of Vermont Land from Development (H.606). Passed 98-42 on March 15, 2022. H.606 mandates conserving 30% of Vermont land by 2030, and 50% by 2050. Vermont would need to conserve another 6-8% of its private and public lands by 2030, and more than double its land conservation by 2050. Conserved land would gain "permanent protection" of a "natural state" of land, or could by subject to "long-term forest management." It is unclear what would happen if Vermont failed to meet these mandates, though conservation groups could conceivably sue Vermont for failing to address climate change quickly enough under the 2020 GWSA. Those voting YES believe greater conservation of land under H.606 will reduce the damage that climate change will have on Vermont ecosystems. Those voting NO believe creating new mandates will only increase the cost of living and intensify Vermont’s housing crisis, if less land is available for residential and commercial development. A land grab against private landowners is possible.
Mattos - NOEnact Contractor Registration & 3 Housing Programs (S.226). Passed 103-42 on May 6, 2022. S.226 would enact a Residential Contractors Registry, requiring contractors to pay $75-250 annually to work legally in state, with an option of becoming certified in specific areas of contracting. S.226 also seeks to increase Vermont’s housing stock and make existing homes more affordable, by spending $20 million in federal ARPA funding on three housing programs. Those voting YES believe S.226 will protect Vermonters from contractor fraud, while the programs will alleviate Vermont’s housing crisis. Those voting NO opposed the contractor registry portion of the bill, believing home improvement fraud is rare enough that government intrusion is unnecessary. When fraud does happen, Vermont government has been reluctant to use the tools available to address it. Contractors are likely to raise their rates to cover the registry charge and added paperwork needed to do their jobs.
Mattos - NOCreate ‘Environmental Rights’ to Defend (S.148). Passed 109-31 on May 3, 2022. S.148 would acknowledge the environmental disparities minorities face in Vermont and to give those minorities more chances to live and work in the safest and least polluted areas of Vermont. A new 17-member Environmental Justice Advisory Council and an 11-member Interagency Environmental Justice Committee would make recommendations to the Legislature and Vermont government agencies for integrating environmental justice principles into State policy. Those voting YES argued that minorities live and work in environmentally undesirable locations relative to white Vermonters. Those voting NO are wary of adding 28 individuals to Vermont’s bureaucracy (insulated from Vermont citizen objections), who will likely make costly recommendations, with no shortage of ‘injustices’ to alleviate.
Mattos - YESExpand Police Reporting, Study Misconduct & Interrogation (S.250). Passed 99-48 on May 11, 2022. First, S.250 expands obligated police collection of demographic data from roadside stops to any police encounter with citizens. Second, it creates a database of pending police infractions against individual officers. Finally, a study of appropriate police interrogation is authorized. Those voting YES believe more substantial data collection on police encounters and oversight of police interrogation techniques are needed. Those voting NO believe that expanding police encounter data will overburden exhausted police with more paperwork, exhibiting a distrust in the police that makes recruitment and retention difficult. The interrogation study begins with a bias against police already, having reached a predetermined conclusion that future legislation is needed to correct police misconduct.
Mattos - NOMake Town Withdrawal from School Districts More Difficult (H.727). Passed 98-39 on March 17, 2022. H.727 encourages multi-town school district foundation and discourages town school withdrawal from school districts. Current Vermont statute allows town citizens to bring school withdrawal from a district to a vote. H.727 would require more paperwork to be completed before the proposed withdrawal goes to vote, and gives the State Board of Education a final say in that withdrawal process. Those voting YES believe school withdrawal requires more serious deliberation than is currently the case, and want to give Vermont veto authority in such decisions. Those voting NO objected to the added paperwork that is especially onerous for smaller towns hoping to separate from their district. H.727 takes away local decision-making power and centralizes it in the State Board of Education.
Mattos - YESEnsure Assisted Suicide is Voluntary (S.74). Failed 41-98 on April 13, 2022. S.74 would expand Vermont’s euthanasia law to allow terminally ill individuals to order the drugs they need to kill themselves exclusively with video telemedicine. The Donahue Amendment of S.74 would safeguard against the possibility of coercion by insisting that one of the patient’s appointments be in-person. Those voting YES believe eliminating the in-person requirement could make it much easier for those with authority over the individual to coerce the patient into ending their life before they would like to. Those voting NO believe many terminally ill Vermonters are not well enough to visit a healthcare provider, making video telemedicine the logical option.
Mattos - YESGuarantee "Personal Reproductive Autonomy" (Proposal 5). Passed on February 8, 2022 by a vote of 107-41. Proposal 5 would amend Vermont’s Constitution, adding “that an individual’s right to personal reproductive autonomy is central to the liberty and dignity to determine one’s own life course and shall not be denied or infringed unless justified by a compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means.” Those voting YES argued that a constitutional amendment is necessary to protect abortion rights in case Roe v. Wade is overturned. Those voting NO may or may not be in favor of greater abortion protections, but argued that the vaguely worded language in Proposal 5 that does not mention ‘abortion’ is so ambiguous that any number of judicial interpretations could be reached.
Mattos - NO
2021 Legislative Session
Pass All-Mail Voting, No Safeguards (S.15). Passed 119-30 on May 11, 2021. S.15 makes permanent the Covid-19 emergency measure of mailing “live” ballots to all active voters on the statewide checklist regardless of request. Vermont would become the only state relying on all-mail voting to do so without security measures. In the event a ballot is cast fraudulently by mail and the legitimate voter shows up at the polls to vote, there is no way to remove the fraudulent vote. Those voting YES believe the convenience of an all-mail voting system is worth the potential risk of fraud, which they believe is insignificant. Those voting NO believe it is irresponsible to have a voting system in which the overwhelming number of ballots counted (76% in 2020) cannot be independently verified by election officials as valid or fraudulent. States that have moved to all-mail voting exhibit large racial voting disparities and flat or declining overall participation in the election.
Mattos - YESAccept Ballot Security Measures for All-Mail Voting (S.15). Failed 39-99 on May 12, 2021. The S.15 Strong Amendment would delay implementation of vote-by-mail elections until after the Secretary of State’s report on ballot security is complete. Town clerks and the Director of Elections testified that there is no way to police fraud and determine if an absentee ballot was filled out and returned by the appropriate voter. Those voting YES on the Strong Amendment believe it is irresponsible to execute vote-by-mail elections before options for ballot security provisions are even studied. Those voting NO on the Strong Amendment believe absentee ballot security measures are not necessary in Vermont, and the “honor system” is enough to ensure election integrity.
Mattos - YESPass $2 Million Transfer Tax, Expand Urban Tax Credit (S.101). Passed 93-56 on May 18, 2021. S.101 creates an additional 0.5% property transfer tax on all real estate transactions exceeding $1 million, resulting in a tax increase of $2 million. Expands town center manufactured homes’ tax credits from $425,000 to $675,000. Authorizes the Planning Fund to give grants to municipalities for promoting “smart growth” that emphasizes walkable, compact neighborhoods. Those voting YES believe this will help revitalize town centers and encourage “smart growth” in urban areas, while raising tax revenue. Those voting NO question increasing the property tax, which would disproportionately impact small business at a time when businesses are just recovering from the Covid shutdown a recession and dissuade new businesses from setting up shop.
Mattos - NOOverride Governor’s Vetoes of Montpelier, Winooski Noncitizen Voting (H.177, H.227). Passed 103-47 both times on June 23, 2021. To override Governor Scott’s vetoes of H.177 and H.227, which amended the charters of the cities of Montpelier and Winooski to allow non-citizens who are legally in the United States and full-time residents of each city to vote in city elections. Those voting YES assert that non-citizens pay taxes, have children in the schools, and are active participants in the community, therefore they deserve the right to vote on issues that affect them. Those voting NO assert that voting is a right and responsibility tied to citizenship under the Vermont Constitution. Giving this privilege to non-citizens unfairly undermines the votes of actual citizens.
Mattos - NOImpose Rental Housing Registration Requirement (S.79). Passed 93-54 on May 21, 2021. Creates a statewide registry of rental properties monitored by a 5-person, full-time task force who will collect a $35 fee per unit from owners to register with the state. Second, the inception of the “Vermont Rental Housing Investment Program,” providing grants and loans to “households identifying as Black, Indigenous, or Persons of Color.” Those voting YES believe the bill would make rental housing safer, and encourage landlords who own blighted or vacant rental properties to bring them up to code, increasing the overall amount of rental housing available in the state. Those voting NO believe this would cripple Vermont’s short-term rental industry, reduce tourism, harm homeowners who rely on income from a short-term rental to afford their properties, and cause a shortage of rentals on the market.
Mattos - NOAllow 15-17 Year-olds in Brattleboro to Vote/Hold Elective Office (H.361). Passed 102-42 on April 29, 2021 To allow children 15-17 years old to vote in local elections and on local issues, and to hold elective office. H.361 changes to the Brattleboro charter to allow 16-17 years olds (and 15 years olds who turn 16 by election day) to vote in municipal elections and serve on town boards. Those voting YES believe this will help get young people more involved in the political process and establish the habit of voting. Those voting NO believe that children who are not legal adults are not ready to make fully informed decisions relating to voting or mature enough to hold positions of authority and responsibility over critical municipal decisions.
Mattos - NODeclare Racism a “Public Health Emergency.” (JRH.6) Passed 135-8 on May 12, 2021. Declare white-against-black (and other minorities) racism a public health emergency. Legislators dedicate themselves to the “deep work of eradicating systemic racism throughout the State, actively fighting racist practices … grounded in science and data.” They hope to achieve “more just and equitable systems” in Vermont. Many of those voting YES believe white Vermonters are guilty of intentional and unintentional racism toward minorities, resulting in “systemic” racism that severely harms the very bodies of minorities, especially blacks. Massive amounts of money (such as reparations) from Vermont taxpayers will be necessary to eradicate the effects of slavery. Those voting NO believe that prioritizing racial disparities over all other types of social disparities increases the chances that unwieldy proposals for removing racism will hurt Vermonters of all races.
Mattos - YESAllocate $80 million in Covid Funding for Bevy of Programs (H.315). Passed 141-5 on April 6, 2021. The bill allocates federal $80 million (as of yet, not received) in federal American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds to areas somewhat related to Covid’s impact on Vermont. Many of those voting YES believe this is a bill is essential for helping Vermonters during a difficult time, at any financial cost. Others reluctantly voted YES reluctantly and did not want to make their constituents wait to receive essential funding. Some of those voting NO are wary of “premature” allocation of ARPA funding that Vermont has not received yet. They view much of the funding in the bill as hastily allocated and excessive. Beginning in tax year 2021, Vermont would tax, as income, PPP loans that Vermont businesses received from the federal government (which are not taxed as income by the federal government).
Mattos - YES$14 Million Tax on “Cloud-based” Software (S.53, Sections 9-12). Passed 96-44 on April 15, 2021. This would apply the state sales tax (6%) to cloud-based software services, costing Vermonters at least $11 million a year. Those voting YES wanted to raise tax revenue by including cloud services. Those voting NO wanted to remove the cloud tax. This tax would strike Vermont businesses relying on the cloud, while telling prospective Vermont businesses to stay away. A tax increase is not needed, given our $300 million revenue surplus.
Mattos - NOSeize Firearms After Alleged Domestic Abuse (H.133). Passed 102-44 on March 12, 2021. Seeks to offer alleged victim of abuse greater protection, “upon a finding that there is an immediate danger of further abuse.” Section E would require the accused “to immediately relinquish, until the expiration of the order, all firearms that are in the defendant’s possession, ownership, or control, and to refrain from acquiring or possessing any firearms while the order is in effect.” Those voting YES believe this is a reasonable protection for victims of domestic abuse. Those voting NO believe this is a due process violation of the Second Amendment and Article 16 of the Vermont Constitution. The defendant has no opportunity to offer evidence disproving abuse.
Mattos - NOMandatory Registration for Construction Contractors (H.157). Passed 97-52 on April 6, 2021. Contractors with residential construction jobs exceeding $3500 in labor and materials must pay $75-$250 annually to register with Vermont. A written contract and liability insurance are also required. An “unauthorized practice” penalty could result in a $5,000 fine and/or 1-year imprisonment. Those voting YES believe this bill will prevent fraud and provide consumer protection when fraud occurs. It also creates a mechanism to enforce future environmental building regulations. Those voting NO note that small claims court already exists for addressing fraud. This is a $620,000 a year problem, with a $740,000 estimated cost in annual registration fees, before contract drafting costs.
Mattos - NOAllow Montpelier’s Noncitizens to Vote (H.177). Passed 103-39 on March 10, 2021. Allows non-citizens who are legally in the US and full-time residents of Montpelier to vote in Montpelier elections, amending Montpelier’s charter. Those voting YES assert that non-citizens pay taxes, have children in the schools, and are active participants in the community, therefore they deserve the right to vote on issues that affect them. Those voting NO assert that voting is a right and responsibility tied to citizenship under the Vermont Constitution. Giving this privilege to non-citizens unfairly undermines the votes of actual citizens.
Mattos - NOShift Union Bargaining Costs to Taxpayers (H.81). Passed 102-46 on February 16, 2021. The purpose of this bill is to create a separate bargaining process for lower income school workers. Those voting YES want to give paraeducators, cafeteria workers, school custodians and other lower-paid school staff a bigger seat at the bargaining table. Those voting NO believe H.81 will have “significant (negative) financial implications for Vermont taxpayers.” Bargaining will take more time, and thus more money for publicly financed negotiations. If lower income employees pay just 1% less on their premiums after negotiations, taxpayers would have to pay another $1.43 million. Taxpayers in some school districts may pay more than others, worsening “inequity issues for our students and our taxpayers.”
Mattos - NOExpand 5¢ Deposit Fee to Most Containers (H.175). Passed 99-46 on April 15, 2021. To raise revenue by expanding the 5¢ beverage container deposit/redemption requirement to water bottles, wine bottles and other containers, with new labeling requirements, except for milk. Vermont is projected to get $1 million more annually from unredeemed deposits. The expansion requires an IT upgrade and hiring a bureaucrat paid $125,000 annually. Those voting YES believe the bottle bill has a successful environmental track record and deserves to be expanded. Those voting NO believe that “single stream” recycling programs are more environmentally effective than separate systems. H.175 places financial and storage burdens (for returned containers) on small businesses. Out-of-state beverage distributors may stop selling in Vermont to avoid the re-labeling requirement.
Mattos - NORemove Property Transfer 0.5% Tax (H.437, Scheuermann Amendment). Failed 53-94 on March 25, 2021. This would remove an additional 0.5% property transfer tax on real estate transactions of $1 million or more. Those voting YES wanted to remove the tax increase from the bill. The majority of real estate transactions over $1 million are farms, retail, restaurants, and manufacturing businesses. Not private mansions. This tax would be another disincentive for businesses to come to Vermont. Those voting NO favored keeping the increased tax in the bill. They believe spending new tax revenue to increase the supply and quality of low-income housing is worth any negative economic impact.
Mattos - YESCreate Pension Task Force (H.449). Passed 125-22 on April 22, 2021. The Pension Benefits, Design, and Funding Task Force will analyze the state employees, teachers, and municipal employees pension funds while reviewing the retirement benefit plans for current and retired teachers and employees. Second, the Treasurer’s oversight of the Vermont Pension Investment Commission will end, giving the Commission more investment independence. Those voting YES believe creating the Task Force is critical to fixing the unfunded liability crisis. Most of those voting NO opposed the makeup of the body for not having enough representation by labor interests. Others voting NO believe more decisive action is needed now. Vermont’s three state funded pension systems have a combined unfunded liability of $5.8 billion and rising. Recognizing the problem is a small step in the right direction but is well short of decisive action.
Mattos - YESAllow Income Tax Exemption for $30,000 in Military Pensions (S.53, Sibilia Amendment). Failed 55-79 on April 15, 2021. The Sibilia Amendment attempts to increase the military pension exemption amount from $10,000 (tax benefit ~$100) to $30,000 (tax benefit ~$400). Only 3 states currently tax fully military pensions, and Vermont is one of them. Those voting YES supported the higher exemption for military pensions to show respect for those who have served, while bringing Vermont tax policy more in line with other states. Those voting NO wanted to maintain a revenue source and opposed the higher exemption.
Mattos - YESResolve Against Police Restructuring (H.R.7). Passed 108-40 on February 5, 2021. To reject Governor Scott’s executive order to restructure Vermont’s police and emergency forces. This order would bring Vermont’s law enforcement, fire division, and emergency management government branches closer together. It would create an Agency of Public Safety, composed of the Department of Fire Safety & Emergency Management and the Department of Law Enforcement. Those voting YES voted to reject the order, mentioning the Governor’s lack of ‘due process.’ They were open to the governor’s proposals, but believed legislative deliberation is needed. Those voting NO were decidedly neutral toward the governor’s order but expressed alarm about the House’s general lack of transparency in getting the resolution to the floor.
Mattos - NOAdd Income Tax Surcharge on "The Rich" (H.436, Cina Amendment). Failed 21-125 on March 26, 2021. To add a marginal tax increase of 3% to income over $500,000, giving Vermont the second highest marginal income tax rate in the nation at 11.75%, behind only California. The revenue from which would be used to repair Vermont’s neglected state pension obligations. Those voting YES believe that “the rich” need to be “asked” to pay “their fair share” regardless of any other economic implications. Some voting NO believe saddling Vermont with the second-highest marginal income tax rate in the country is bad economic policy. Others voting NO sounded open to taxing the rich but didn’t want to use the tax increase to fund the pension obligations.
Mattos - NO
2020 Legislative Session (August - September)
Allocate $586,000 for GWSA (H.969). Passed 100-42 on September 11, 2020. After passing the GWSA, the House voted to fund the 22-person Climate Council and 3 support staff with $586,000 for 1 year. The Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA) mandates that Vermont meet strict carbon emission reduction targets, beginning with 26% below 2005 levels by 2025. The Climate Council is composed of 22 state government officials and citizen experts who will adopt a “Vermont Climate Action Plan.” This plan would offer guidance to the Agency of Natural Resources, which would be empowered to create and implement new rules for achieving the emission targets. If any citizen (or special interest group) believes the Agency is not adopting rules quickly enough to meet the mandates, they may take the state to court, with the taxpayers potentially responsible for the plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees. No cost analysis was made of what the impact of meeting these new mandates might be, nor any disclosure of what rules might be in the “action plan.” Watch the floor debate on YouTube.
Mattos - NOOverride Gov Veto of GWSA (H.688). Passed 103-47 on September 17, 2020. Rather than spending $586,000 for funding 1 year, this bill allocates $900,000 for maintaining the Climate Council and supplying 3 support staff for 2 fiscal years. Watch the floor debate on YouTube.
Mattos - NONew Deadly Force Standards for Police (S.119). Passed 106-37 on September 22, 2020. Narrows the current justifiable homicide statute so that an officer would only be “guiltless” for homicide if they are “promot(ing) and protect(ing) the health, safety, and welfare of the public.” Officers must consider language barriers, medical conditions and other factors before deciding to use force. For officers not under an “imminent threat,” choke holds would no longer be permissible for subduing a suspect. The overall criteria for force will be based on “a reasonable officer in the same situation.” Watch the floor debate on YouTube.
Mattos - NO
2020 Legislative Session (January - June)
Pay Increase for Legislators (H.961, Donahue Division of Hooper Amendment). Passed 82-61 on June 25, 2020. Those voting YES supported tying legislators’ future cost of living increases to the rate of increase allocated to constitutional officers beginning in July 2021. The net result of this would be a modest, annual, automatic pay increase for legislators. Those voting NO argued that it was inappropriate for legislators to support a pay increase for themselves when a public health and economic crisis has left many of their constituents with lost income, and state revenue downgrades will likely require future cuts in government services. Watch the floor debate on YouTube.
Mattos - NO
Prohibit “Ballot Harvesting” in the 2020 Election (S.348, Myers Amendment). Failed 50-95 on June 10, 2020. Ballot harvesting” is a controversial practice in which campaign operatives and/or activists collect ballots from voters that has resulted in improper influence over voters, fraudulent filling out of ballots, and destruction of ballots. The key language in the Myers amendment to prohibit ballot harvesting reads, “An early voter absentee ballot may be returned only by the voter; the justices of the peace who delivered the ballot, if applicable; or an authorized family member or caregiver acting in the voter’s behalf,” as well as defining criminal penalties if violated and mandates a civil investigation if there is reason to suspect this kind of fraud is occurring.” Watch the floor debate on YouTube.
Mattos - YES
Legalize a Taxed and Regulated Marijuana Marketplace (S.54). Passed 90-54 on February 26, 2020. S.54 would create a regulatory framework for the sale and taxation of recreational marijuana, implement a 20% tax on sale of marijuana (a 14% excise tax plus the existing 6% sales tax), and establish a Cannabis Control Board responsible for regulation and licensing and establishes a license for current medical dispensaries to start selling marijuana in 2022. The bill directs the board to prioritize Vermont businesses owned by women and minorities as it considers license applications.
Mattos - NO
Allow Time for Public Input on Act 250 Reform (H.926, Bock Motion). Failed 45-96 on February 28, 2020. Reforming Vermont’s 50 year old comprehensive land use law is immensely complicated and impacts many facets of business, recreational, and daily life. The Bock Motion came in response to an flurry of constituent questions and comments, and called for a one-business-day delay on the vote so that legislators have an opportunity to speak with and hear from constituents regarding proposed changes over the Town Meeting Day break.
Mattos - YES
Override Veto of Minimum Wage Increase (S.23, Veto Override). Passed 100-49 (2/3 required to override) on February 25, 2020. S.23 would raise the state minimum hourly wage from the current mark $10.96 to $12.55 by 2022, with increases tied to inflation afterward. The Governor vetoed this bill because, “Fiscal analysis projects job losses, decreases to employee hours, and increased costs of goods and services, which will offset the intended positive benefits for workers; These harmful impacts will be felt more significantly in rural parts of the state, worsening economic inequity between counties; and there will be an overall negative impact on economic growth.”
Mattos - NO
Global Warming Solutions Act (H.688). Passed 105-37 on February 26, 2020. The Global Warming Solutions Act (GWSA) mandates that Vermont meet strict carbon emission reduction targets, beginning with 26% below 2005 levels by 2025. The bill would create a Climate Council, for paying $900,000 to 22 state government officials and citizen experts who will adopt a “Vermont Climate Action Plan.” This plan would offer guidance to the Agency of Natural Resources, which would be empowered to create and implement new rules for achieving the emission targets. If any citizen (or special interest group) believes the Agency is not adopting rules quickly enough to meet the mandates, they may take the state to court, with the taxpayers potentially responsible for the plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees. No cost analysis was made of what the impact of meeting these new mandates might be, nor any disclosure of what rules might be in the “action plan.” The legislature is not required to vote on the plan or the rules before they are put into effect.
Mattos - NO
Require Legislative Approval of GWSA Plans/Rules (H.688, Donahue Amendment). Failed 44-99 on February 20, 2020. The Donahue Amendment to the Global Warming Solutions Act would ensure legislative review and approval of any plans/rules proposed by the newly formed Climate Council and the Agency of Natural Resources before such plans/rules could be put into effect because it is the Legislature’s responsibility to serve as the final judge for any plan that will so materially affect the people of Vermont.
Mattos - YES
Override Gubernatorial Veto of Paid Family Leave (H.107). Failed 99-51 (2/3 required to override) on February 5, 2020. The Paid Family Leave Bill would establish a new payroll tax on employees of 0.2% on income up to $137,000 (total $30 million annually) in order to fund a government-mandated insurance program allowing employees to take up to 12 weeks of paid leave for the birth of a child, or 8 weeks for family care. If the volume of people claiming the benefit exceeds the revenue raised at this tax rate, the tax rate will automatically increase to meet demand. Employees can elect to pay an additional 0.38% of their wages to obtain medical leave of 6 weeks maximum. While all Vermont employees would have their wages taxed, only employees who work at least 675 hours annually (13 hours a week) for a single employer would be eligible to receive the paid leave or to opt-in to the medical leave. The Governor vetoed H.107 stating, “My administration’s approach is voluntary for employers and employees. It can be accomplished more efficiently, affordably and quickly, without a $29 million payroll tax that Vermont workers simply should not be burdened with, and without putting the risk of underfunding on taxpayers.”
Mattos - NO
2019 Legislative Session
Mandatory Paid Family Leave/Payroll Tax (H.107). Passed 92-52 on April 5, 2019. This would put in place a government-mandated Paid Family Leave program paid for with a new payroll tax on income up to $132,900. The program would allow an employee to take up to 12 weeks of paid leave for the birth of a child, or 8 weeks for family or personal medical care. Employees would receive 90% of their weekly wages up to the “liveable wage” (currently calculated at $13.34/hr). Wages above that level would covered at 50% of the weekly wage. Wages above $132,900 would not be covered. A maximum cap on the benefit would be set at $1,334 per week. The payroll tax would be initially set at 0.55%, and the estimated total cost would $76 million annually to start.
Mattos - NO
Double the Tax on Home Heating Fuels (H.439, Ways & Means Committee Amendment). Passed 81-60 on March 26, 2019. This would double the tax on the retail sale of heating oil, propane, kerosene, and other dyed diesel fuel delivered to a residence or business from $0.02 to $0.04 per gallon, and to impose a gross receipts tax of 1% on the retail sale of natural gas and 1.5% on the retail sale of coal. The estimated $4.6 million tax will be used to increase funding for the state’s low-income weatherization program.
Mattos - NO
Increase State Minimum Wage Annually by 2.25x Inflation (S.23). Passed 90-53 on May 15, 2019. This would increase the state mandated minimum wage each year by 2.25x the rate of inflation. If inflation remains steady at 2%, the next hike would raise the minimum wage from $10.78 to $11.26 in 2020. Again, assuming steady inflation, the state minimum wage would reach $15/hour in 2027.
Mattos - NO
Increase Capital Gains Tax/Reduces Estate Tax (H.541). In order to address the issue of wealthy taxpayers fleeing Vermont, this bill would increase the estate tax exclusion (raising the point where the tax kicks in) from $2.75 million to $4.25 million in January 2020, and to $5 million in January 2021, resulting in a substantial estate tax cut. However, in order to backfill the lost revenue anticipated from the estate tax cut, the bill would also decrease the exemption for capital gains from 40% to 30% and cap the exemption at $450,000. The former change positively impacts mostly wealthy citizens passing on assets to younger generations, the latter change negatively impacts mostly middle/working Vermonters who rely on a one-time, large dollar sale of a home or business to fund their retirement.
Mattos - ABSENT
Allow All School Districts to Delay Forced Mergers by One Year (H.39, Scheuermann Amendment). Failed 69-74 on February 6, 2019. February 6, 2019. This would provide all school districts facing forced mergers ordered by the State Board of Education the opportunity to extend the July 1, 2019 merger deadline currently in law to July 1, 2020.
Mattos - YES
Mandate that Vermonters Purchase Health Insurance (H.524). Passed 92-44 on March 29, 2019. This would mandate that all Vermonters purchase health insurance, restoring at a state level the Obamacare federal mandate repealed by the Trump Administration. However, this state “mandate” comes with no penalty. Instead, the bill would create a database of state income tax filers who do not have health insurance, and commission bureaucrats to encourage these Vermonters to purchase insurance.
Mattos - ABSENT
Ban Plastic Bags, Styrofoam Food Containers, Straws, Etc. (S.113). Passed 120-24 on May 9, 2019. This would make it illegal for businesses to provide “single use” plastic bags to customers at the point of sale, or to provide polystyrene food or beverage containers, or to provide plastic straws except upon request, and to require businesses to charge at least 10¢ per paper bag (if not given away for free). It would create a “Single-Use Products Working Group” to study the effectiveness of these policies and make recommendations for future regulation.
Mattos - NO
Raise Tobacco Use/Purchase Age from 18 to 21 (S.86). Passed 124-14 on April 23, 2019. This would raise the legal age to purchase and use tobacco and tobacco related products from 18 to 21 years of age.
Allow Non-Citizen Voting in Montpelier (H.207). Passed 95-46 on April 18, 2019. This would change the charter of the City of Montpelier to allow non-citizens who are legally in the United States and full time residents of the city to vote in city elections, setting a precedent for other towns/cities around the state.
Mattos - NO
Abolish Columbus Day/Create Indigenous Peoples’ Day (S.68). Passed 113-24 on April 16, 2019. This would abolish Columbus Day as a state holiday and replace it with “Indigenous People’s Day.”
Mattos - NO
Propose Constitutional Amendment Guaranteeing Abortion from Conception to Birth (Proposition 5). Passed 106-38 on May 7, 2019. This would amend the Vermont Constitution to say that “an individual’s right to personal reproductive autonomy is central to the liberty and dignity to determine one’s own life course and shall not be denied or infringed unless justified by a compelling state interest achieved by the least restrictive means.” It would bar any legal restrictions on abortion from conception to the moment of birth.
Mattos - NO
2018 Legislative Session
$5.9 Billion FY19 Budget (H.924). Passed 117-14 on May 12, 2018. The “Big Bill” budget for FY19 totaled $5,861,048,67, an increase of a little over 1% from the FY18 budget. General Fund spending shows a decline of 17.2%, from $1.6 billion to just under $1.3 billion, but this is only because the legislature eliminated the General Fund transfer to the education fund, replacing that money from other sources. The “apples to apples” growth in spending is 2.5%.
Mattos - YES
House Passes $59 million Income Tax Increase/Property Tax Cut (H.911) Passed 85-54 on March 21, 2018. This was a two-part bill. The first part shifts some responsibility for funding Vermont’s pre-k-12 education system from the property tax to the income tax. The second part negates an unintended $30 million tax increase resulting from changes in the federal tax code. Part 1 includes a $59 million income tax increase, called a “surcharge,” eliminates the current General Fund transfer to the Education Fund, and dedicates 100% of the sales and use tax to the Education Fund. This allows for a cut in homestead property tax rates of 15 cents/$100 of assessed value. Part 2 lowers each of Vermont’s marginal tax rates for personal income taxes by at least 0.2%, expands the earned-income tax credit, and eliminates the tax on Social Security benefits for Vermonters with less than $55,000 in income. Those voting YES are in favor of reducing the reliance on the property tax for the purpose of funding pre-k-12 education spending, and shifting that burden to the income tax, which they believe better reflects ability to pay. Those voting NO note that H.911 does not address education spending, it merely shifts the costs without reducing or curbing the total tax burden. The income tax surcharge will give Vermont the third highest marginal income tax rate in the nation. The income tax is historically a volatile revenues source, and ill-suited for education funding. The shift to income taxes is unfair to renters who end up paying higher income taxes but get no property tax relief. This new funding scheme is unfair to 30,000 non-residents who chose to work in Vermont and will now be paying this new education tax with not compensating property tax decrease. H.911 leaves all the complexity of the current system in place (CLA, per pupil spending, income sensitivity etc.), and adds even more complexity by introducing new income tax surcharge. And, finally, object to the tactic of tying two unrelated ideas together in one bill, holding tax relief hostage to a shift to the income tax to pay for education.
Mattos - NO
$16 Million Payroll Tax for Paid Family Leave (H.196) Passed 90-53 on May 11, 2018. H.196 would levy a 0.136% ($16.3 million) payroll tax on employees to pay for a state-mandated, government-run family leave insurance program. However, if the demand for the benefit exceeds the amount raised at this rate, the legislature will have to adjust the rate upward to raise enough revenue to cover the cost. Those voting YES supported the program, believing it will make Vermont more “family friendly” and appealing to young workers. Those voting NO see this as another burdensome “mandate from Montpelier” on businesses, that the tax rate has been set artificially low and will have to be raised, and that this bill levies a $16.3 million tax on all working Vermonters, even though only a fraction of them will have occasion or the ability to benefit from the program.
Mattos - NO
$15 Minimum Wage (S.40). Passed 77-60 on May 18, 2018. S.40 would raise Vermont’s minimum wage from the current $10.50/hr. to $15/hr. by the year 2024.Those voting YES believe this will benefit low income workers and help to close the “income inequality” gap. Those voting NO believe that such a large and rapid increase in the cost of labor will harm Vermont businesses, the overall economy, as well as the workers the bill was meant to help due to cutbacks in hours, lost benefits, and/or lost jobs as employers struggle to maintain budgets. Additionally, a majority of Vermonters living in low income households, especially poor senior citizens, do not report wage income. While their incomes would be unaffected by the minimum wage increase, their cost of living would rise due to higher prices for goods and services due to the artificial wage increase being passed along to consumers.
Mattos - NO
$6.4 Million Tax Package to Fund Lake Clean Up (S.260). Passed 92-48 on May 4, 2018. S.260 would raise $6.4 million in new revenue, primarily from a $4.55 million increase in the state rooms and meals tax (from 9% to 9.25%). The rest, $1.94 million, would come via the confiscation of revenue from unclaimed bottle/can deposits, which is currently the property of the beverage distributors and used by them to defray the costs of managing recycling programs. These taxes would not take effect until 2020, and only then if the legislature does not find another source of funding. Those voting YES believe higher taxes are necessary to fund water quality improvements. Those voting NO believe that water quality improvements should be funded with existing resources, not tax increases, that they should especially not be funded in a way that discourages tourism, such as increasing the rooms and meals tax, or in a way that punishes industries (tourism and beverage distribution) that do not contribute measurably to water pollution problem and, in the case of the unclaimed deposit money, actually help maintain a clean environment through recycling programs.
Mattos - NO
Mandate That Vermonters Buy Health Insurance (H.696). Passed 118-16 on May 12, 2018. The primary objective of H.696 is to require individual Vermonters to purchase and maintain “minimum essential [health insurance] coverage” for themselves and any dependent or pay a penalty to the state beginning in the 2020 plan year. However, legislators do not know how this would work or how it would be enforced, so the bill also creates the “Individual Mandate Working Group” to figure it out. Those voting YES support forcing Vermonters to purchase health insurance as doing so will help keep overall insurance premiums lower. Those voting NO do not support a state mandate to purchase health insurance, assert that forcing citizens to purchase a product from a private company is government overreach, and note that the mandate will make Vermont less affordable for young people, who we are supposedly trying to attract.
Mattos - YES
Legalization of Recreational Marijuana (H.511). Passed 81-63 on January 4, 2018. H.511 legalizes possession of up to an ounce of marijuana for use by people 21 and older and allows possession of four immature and two mature marijuana plants. Those voting YES support the legalization of marijuana for recreational use. Those voting NO do not support the legalization of marijuana for recreational use.
Mattos - NO
Increase Fee on Telecommunication Bills (H.582). Passed 109-27 on February 16, 2018. S.582 increases the surcharge that appears on Vermonters’ telecommunications bills from 2 to 2.5 percent, which amounts an estimated $6.3 million fee increase. The raise would sunset in four years (2022). The money collected from this increase will be transferred to the Connectivity Fund, which distributes grants to internet service providers that expand networks in underserved areas. Those voting YES believe these additional funds are necessary to connect all Vermonters to the internet. Those voting NO believe that Vermonters cannot afford any more taxes/fees, note that the Connectivity Fund has a history of being raided for other purposes, and that there is no clear plan for how the money would be spent to achieve the stated objective.
Mattos - ABSENT
Give Taxpayer Funded Legal Counsel to Those Challenging Immigration Status (S.237). Passed on April 10, 2018, by a vote of 97-40. S.237 allows state-paid public defenders, including the Defender General, to provide legal help to immigrants on immigration issues in the federal court system. Those voting YES believe that immigrants and farm workers residing in Vermont should have access to taxpayer funded representation in federal court “in or with respect to a matter arising out of or relating to immigration status.” Those voting NO believe that giving Vermont’s Defender General more responsibilities without increased funding would put a strain on that government office. There is already a backlog of cases, and the Defender General would have to reallocate resources away from other vital government functions in order to provide this service. The federal court system already offers court-appointed legal counsel, and there is no reason for the state to duplicate this service.
Mattos - NO
Ban More Appliances Via Efficiency Standards (H.410). Passed 137-4 on January 31, 2018. H.410 applies efficiency standards established in 2014 to over a dozen new products, including showerheads, computers and telephones. Those voting YES believe that some consumer goods are too energy-intensive, and that Vermonters should not be allowed to purchase them. Those voting NO believe that Vermonters should be allowed to decide for themselves the costs and benefits of the appliances they purchase.