Pass S.146 this year to protect Vermont’s most pristine lakes
Last year the Vermont Senate passed S.146, a bill relating to the permitting of indirect discharges. What does this mean? It will mean more protection for our lakes and ponds.
Last year the Vermont Senate passed S.146, a bill relating to the permitting of indirect discharges. What does this mean? It will mean more protection for our lakes and ponds.
I’m writing this column as I sit in seat 2 on the House floor — don’t worry, I can write and listen at the same time — as we head into our fourth hour of discussing and voting on H.887, which is an act relating to homestead property tax yields, non-homestead rates and policy changes to education finance and taxation.
I’m not here to tell anyone how to vote. I recognize what a personal choice it is every time someone casts a ballot, and although I have opinions about every question on every ballot,
With crossover behind us, the calendar is stacked on the House floor with all the bills we voted out of our committees last week; now they need to make it out of the House and into the Senate.
It’s town meeting, so the Legislature is off for the week. This is a good time for me to answer emails and phone calls. I try really hard to get back to people right away, but sometimes things fall through the cracks and for that I apologize. I’m going to spend the week making sure I’m all caught up.
First, an important note: We recently lost two pillars of our community, and it’s a heartbreak for their families and a true loss for all of us, not just on a personal level, but as a town.
Laura Derriendinger wants to protect Vermont children from social media, or as she defined it to Senate education committee members Jan. 26, “a toxic rabbit hole.”
Vermont could ban pet stores from selling dogs, cats and wolf hybrids under a bill in the House agriculture committee.
Like many people in town, I felt frustrated and disappointed after watching last week’s informational meeting regarding the town administrator/town manager debate.
At the risk of wading into a swamp that I don’t really need to get into in the first place, I’m going to touch on property taxes quickly.
We’re back in the Statehouse, and unlike last year, which started with a lot of ceremonies and traditions, trainings and figuring out where to get a turkey sandwich, we got right down to business.
In the context of my legislative life, every time property taxes, the education fund, property tax increases, pupil weights or anything relating to that topic comes up, the person speaking or writing makes this caveat:
I take prolific notes during committee meetings. It helps me remember things later on, it keeps me focused, and it prevents me from changing my hairstyle every 20 minutes because my hands are busy with a pen instead of messing with my hair.
First, the past couple weeks have been hideous. War in Israel and Gaza, concern for our Jewish friends, break-ins and car thefts in our normally peaceful town, the looming government shutdown while the U.S. House figures out how to manage itself and another deadly shooting, this time close to home in a way that makes us all pause and wonder not if it’s going to happen here, but when.
I don’t drink vodka straight up. This is because I don’t find the flavor that pleasant on its own. Throw in some olive juice, vermouth and an olive or three, and I’m delighted; a martini tastes good.
We had some visitors to the House Government Operations and Military Affairs committee this past spring.
I have a habit of loudly and dramatically announcing that certain aspects of government function are “the cornerstone of democracy.” (I put the fun in government function!)
I’m not going to get involved in the town-manager-versus-town-administrator debate. I mean, I’m already involved to the extent that, should it get to this point,
I’ve been thinking a lot about the major challenges Vermont is facing these days: incessant rain and flooding, an unhoused population
It’s so fun when field trips come to the State House. This spring, one group was visiting my committee room and I asked, “If you could make a law, what would it be?”