On Vermont this week.

Pushback to the governor's plan to repeal some climate change standards.

Our goals are the same.

It's just the pace and the expense of of how we get there, is important because we can't.

We can't continue to harm, everyday Vermonters and school budgets getting ahead of town meeting day.

Will it be enough for them to get a passing grade from voters?

What's on town meeting day?

The balance of power in the balance in Burlington.

All that and more ahead on Vermont this Week.

From the Vermont Public studio in Winooski.

This is Vermont this Week.

Made possible in part by the LLintilhac Foundation and Milne Travel.

And thanks for joining us on Vermont this week.

I'm Cat Viglienzoni in for Mitch.

We're live.

And it's Friday, February 21st.

Joining us on the panel this week, Mark Johnson, host of 802 news podcast, Lola Duffort, education reporter with Vermont Public.

And Katherine Huntley, the city beat reporter for WCAX.

Thank you all for being here.

We start with potential changes to laws to combat climate change in Vermont.

A bill introduced this week in the House, backed by the governor, would make several changes to the Global Warming Solutions Act and develop a 20 year plan to address climate change.

Mark, what else does this bill do?

Well, I think what this really comes down to is this whole question about affordability.

The governor was able to really tap into that in order to get more allies into the legislature last election.

So I think, you know, there's a genuine concern about what we all spend on energy.

It's about $3.5 billion a year.

Probably ranking only higher is what we spend on health care.

So I think that the governor, you know, was successful in challenging this idea that the Democrats are moving too fast.

So what he wants to do is to sort of basically slow down the pace of these emission reductions, and whether or not he's going to be successful or not is questionable, but I think it will allow him to continue to beat this drum of affordability.

I mean, the the really sort of ironic, funny part about this is that he's talking about coming up with a new plan, after the election in 2026.

Maybe some indication of his political future right there.

I would say so.

Democrats of course, not likely to be on board with this.

So this this basically a nonstarter or does the governor have enough support perhaps in other areas to get traction?

Well, you know, that's a good question because I think that there is a lot of concern among the Democrats.

You know, they saw the numbers, too, and how many they how many of their members they lost.

So, you know, there might be some support within the Democrats to listen to this more than they would have two years ago when they had a supermajority.

You know, I mean, they lost historic numbers in the last election.

And I think they may be anticipating and don't want to see that happen again.

I mean, the Vermont Senate is, you know, 1713 at this point, if they're not careful, there could be a Republican state Senate after the next election.

It's funny that you talk about the Senate because, right.

Senate Majority Leader Karen Hinsdale, I think around the beginning of the session said, I don't know that we should have put a gun to our head, when it went it.

And she was referring to the fact that the Global Warming Solutions Act, which is, you know, this landmark law, includes this provision that if Vermont does not meet its, emissions reduction targets, citizens can sue the state, right?

Or groups can sue the state.

And so there's this built in accountability measure.

And that's one of the main things that the governor wants to do away with, right, is really the teeth of the law.

But at the same time, you are hearing Democrats, saying, no, we need to stick to these commitments.

And we are not seeing a unified party line on this.

And I think in real time, we are watching Democrats figure out sort of what their, climate agenda is going to look like.

I think you're totally right that they don't seem to have a unified voice on this and many other things, too, including the whole school discussion.

If there is sort of kind of this broad agreement that we are likely not to meet our climate targets and then we are likely to face lawsuits over it.

We already faced one, as of yet, and probably likely more.

Is there than you think support for perhaps removing parts of that bill and just kind of cherry picking what might stay and what might go?

I don't know, probably.

But I don't want to speculate, about sort of like which which pieces, you know, which parts of the maybe they might be willing to amputate mixing some metaphors.

But, yeah, I mean, if there's no legal threat, then, you know, to this what's is there any proposal from the Scott administration for or the Democrats, for that matter, on some form of accountability that might not be quite as strong as you can see?

The state for this?

Well, the lawsuits are already out there.

I mean, it the administration claims they're going to make the 2025 goals.

Lot of people question that.

And you know it.

Five years goes pretty quickly.

And to try to get to the 2030 goals which are very ambitious is seems really unlikely at this point.

I mean, the cuts that would have to be made would be substantial.

You know, this reminds me a little bit going back to the discussion about, pollution in Lake Champlain.

And you have the Conservation Law Foundation, which is really holding the administration's feet to the fire the same way they did with these pollution standards.

So they are ready to go.

And I think that, you know, that's one of the concerns I think the Democrats also share with the Scott administration that do we really want to get involved with a lawsuit about this?

You know, what this really comes down to is it's it seems like it's a do you pay now for these upfront costs to get to the climate emission reductions, or do you push it back later and, you know, with this affordability right here, when you're a politician, you kind of worry more about now rather than later.

So I think that might be the real appeal, I suppose, to avoid in the lawsuit.

And of course, talking about affordability now versus later.

Another big issue this session has been education reform sparked by the spiking property taxes last year that led to many school budgets failing on town meeting day.

Lola, it sounds like this town meeting today.

Some of those budgets might be a little more trim than last time.

Yeah, schools are a lot of schools are kind of aggressively cutting, because there are cost pressures that they can't do anything about.

Right.

Like health insurance probably being number one.

But they've also heard loud and clear from the governor, but also from, you know, state level education officials, their representatives in Montpelier that like, look, you need to hold the line on spending this year, or else Montpelier is going to do it for you.

And so we are seeing school districts really heed that warning and off.

And, you know, in a lot of cases, downsize aggressively.

You know, I, I'm seeing two scenarios.

I'm seeing either schools that are cutting personnel, pretty seriously or that are just sort of holding the line.

I'm not I haven't heard of any school districts.

And, you know, they could exist.

I'm not saying they don't, but there's quite a few of them in Vermont.

Yeah.

Exactly.

That are, that are adding anything substantial this year.

And so a lot of, a lot of voters might actually be hearing when they go to town meeting to vote that, you know, their school district is anticipating, you know, modest tax decrease, or, you know, roughly status quo.

But, but, you know, we're looking at some pretty stiff cuts.

I think in general, people expect it to be a quieter town meeting.

I think if budgets go down this year, it could be because of the reverse of last year where people are kind of reacting to some of the steeper cuts that we are seeing in certain communities.

Our districts somewhat limited, though, in what they can do to reduce costs when there are these statewide factors in play.

Yes.

Well, I mean, the only thing that they can really do is, downsize when it comes to staff or school buildings.

Right?

That's that is their only pressure relief valve.

And so that's what you're seeing a lot of school districts do well.

But one of the problems, too, and I think this is a challenge for voters, is if you cut your own community, that doesn't necessarily translate directly to what your taxes will be.

I mean, we're really doing schools on a statewide basis, so you could make big cuts in Burlington, but if the rest of the state doesn't, then you're really not going to see the full impact of that.

The school construction thing, I think, is fair.

And I was listening to a hearing this week where people were talking about, you know, how are we going to do these retrofits?

All these schools that were built in the 1970s are all coming into under need for repair now, kind of all at the same time.

And if we've got this whole discussion that's that hasn't been settled about, are we going to start closing schools, communities are looking at saying, what should we fix up this school that's crumbling now?

Or should we wait and see if the schools actually going to be there?

And then should we fix it?

Or is it cheaper to tear it down and build a new school that will serve a number of communities?

So a lot of things in play.

I mean, I was going to say, like the this thing that you're talking about is hanging over reform talks, right?

Because a lot of education officials and a lot of lawmakers, mostly Democrats, are saying like, look, yeah, we need to consolidate.

But in a lot of cases, consolidation is going to require, you know, either adding on to buildings or building new buildings.

And then there's also the fact that in general, like Vermont school buildings are in states of terrible disrepair because they're very old and no one the governor and also Democratic lawmakers, no one has an answer for how we fund this, right?

I mean, the bill is, estimated to be upwards of $6 billion like that.

That is the hole we're in when it comes to deferred maintenance on school buildings in Vermont.

That's a conservative estimate.

Yeah, and more than just school budgets could be decided in Burlington on town meeting day, the balance of power on the city council up for grabs.

Catherine, who's in the running?

Well, normally east or normally district elections.

So every other year it's four councilors out of the 12.

Normally the ward elections are the most exciting of mixing it up.

But this year, it's supposed to be really exciting in the balance.

Really?

Does it really just hang in the balance?

The power on council.

So in the East District, which is represented by two progressive ward councilors, that seat is empty.

It was previously held by a Democrat, actually.

But Tim Dougherty, became a judge, so he had to vacate his seat on the council.

And then in the South district, longtime incumbent Joan Shannon, who was on the council for more than 20 years, retired.

So she's leaving that seat open as well.

And Democrats right now have a 6 to 5 majority.

So extremely slim.

And, you know, progressives could pick up either or both seats.

Democrats could hold it steady.

Some political experts I've spoken to believe it will probably stay.

It will probably become six six, a split council, which makes things really, really hard to push through.

And, you know, it's if tensions are rising, which it has seen watching recent council meetings, it does feel like tensions are are bumping up a little, people voting way more strictly along party lines.

It could be really hard for the progressive mayor, Emma mulvaney, to get through anything that she wants or really anyone, to do anything.

So I'm expecting that if it is the six six split that there will be a lot more backroom talking people having to come to a compromise.

Compromise isn't always a bad thing, but that means everyone isn't happy about everything.

But it will be super interesting to follow that.

But also there's some serious capital needs that are on the ballot as well.

Wastewater, stormwater, drinking water.

All together there's two bonds, totaling $172 million.

So that means water rates are going to go up 89% if this is passed by 2030.

But the water department says these are immediate needs following decades of deferred maintenance.

You know, just putting a Band-Aid on things instead of actually fixing major issues.

And Burlington is also looking at what they hope will be a population boom with serious development coming in.

But in order to have that development, they need to have the capacity within their wastewater.

The only issue here is voters will see this very large price tag of $172 million.

But that was what I was going to say.

Is that going to turn people off just right off the bat at the ballot box?

It could.

But the water department has significantly pared this actually back.

It was supposed to be over $220 million that they were going to be voting on.

But the water department has signaled that even if this passes, they're going to need to come back in two years because of what they say are serious, serious needs.

So voters could expect having another bond in a couple of years.

But according to the water department, they desperately need it.

But one of the real challenges here is this comes on top of the $160 million bond.

Oh yeah, just recently for a new high school.

So you know, and they keep saying, well, it's only another, you know, $25 a month, $50 a month.

But you know, those start to add up.

You talked about the expansion.

I mean that's really how they're selling this that there's going to be all this construction going on downtown, all these new units.

So it isn't just patching what's there.

It's really expanding the capacity.

I mean, this is a massive project.

If you've been in downtown Burlington, I mean, it's there's a number of places you can't get to as a result of it, but it is it is a huge project.

And the problem was, I mean, they didn't expect for the construction to take so long, but the second they started digging, these pipes are well over 100 years old.

Yeah, pipes are just crumbling, you know, and that has been a massive issue for businesses, especially around the holidays.

It's hard to get around Burlington.

So but like Mark said, it's all about future development and so we'll see if it's, you know, that voters have the appetite for it.

Let me just turn one thing on the council.

What's fascinating, I have covered Burlington for too many years.

I didn't realize this could be the first time that the progressives have the city council and the mayor or mayoral seat at the same time.

I mean, as you say, it's unlikely.

I think you're right.

The six six outcome is more likely than not.

But still, that's that's pretty amazing.

I have to ask the question here.

Are there any Republicans running for city council?

No, no, there are not.

There's been 1 or 2 that have run in the past.

In the last four years, I've been here.

Kurt Wright was actually the last person who ran, and I believe he was done in 2020, who actually held a city council seat for Republicans.

And I was actually speaking with Kurt yesterday, and I was like, what will it take to get a Republican back on the city council?

And he said, far right wing politics do not play in Burlington and will not play.

In order for someone to be on the city council again as a Republican, they need to be like way more of a centrist.

So that'll be definitely an interesting thing.

I mean, Democrats in Burlington are looked at as more Republicans, you know, because when you have a progressive Democrat split, that's kind of how it goes, which is part of what makes it so fascinating to cover.

And it used to be that the new North End was all Republicans, but just not anymore.

Public safety expected to be an issue that voters in Burlington are weighing in on, on town meeting day.

Catherine, the city Police Department is undergoing a big change in leadership, with Chief John Murad stepping down and then South Burlington Police Chief Schonberg returning to the Queen city to lead the department.

Is that already affecting some of the conversations around policing in Burlington?

Absolutely.

And I it should be noted that it's not just the police chief that's leaving.

There's two deputies as part of the department structure, and one deputy chief left last year and another deputy chief is going to be leaving this year.

So we will have the very top triangle of the department, three vacancies or new people.

So the South Burlington Police chief, Sean Burke, is coming over to be the interim chief.

Now, this is a very important title because I spoke to him and he said he's not intending on taking that permanent job or throwing his hat into the ring.

But with Sean Burke, you get stability.

Because he spent most of his career with the Burlington Police Department and Burlington, as we all know, has had a massive struggle with losing officers.

As part of that 2020 decision.

Progressive led decision to reduce the force by 30%.

A mass exodus followed with covered a million times.

And now they need someone who's going to bring some sort of stability.

So I believe the idea is that Chief Burke will come in, have that stability, at least until the end of the year, when they hope they will be able to hire another chief.

And then at that point, Chief Burke will step back into a leadership support role because, as they said, there's plenty of open, positions in the police department that he can fill until his two year contracts.

You know, the sigh of relief was palpable coming out of, City Hall.

I mean, Mayor Mulvaney Stanek was running against John Shannon, who is really all about law and order.

There's been some criticism of the mayor that she hasn't been moving quickly enough and cutting down on the crime downtown.

You know, bringing in Sean Burke was just a real coup for her to have somebody 21 years of experience in Burlington, another eight out in South Burlington.

I mean, wow, it was a it was a great grab.

Are they going to agree?

You think the mayor and, interim Chief Burke on these, some of these public safety issues, because that was some of the issue with Chief Murad, was that he and the mayor's office kind of had a differing view on what should be talked about in terms of public safety in Burlington and what should be highlighted.

I would say yes, given Sean Burke's record in South Burlington.

I would, you know, to overgeneralize it.

I would say he's got a very progressive approach, very much bringing in, you know, mental health counselors to work alongside.

Police officers did a lot of work with the with the homeless population.

So I think I think they're on the same page, you know, I'm not sure, John Murad was really that, you know, far off the beaten path that, you know, I don't know what you think about that, but, I think John Murad may look better in retrospect than he may look right now.

I mean, on to that point.

The officer count dwindled, but they significantly built up the unarmed or non sworn officers on the department.

And more often than not, you're seeing the CSOs and CSL.

These these unarmed positions out in public is really the public facing representatives of the police department, which is as they wanted it, where the police officers could actually respond to things that need a more significant response.

But I do agree with you.

I think looking back, the department has shifted, I mean, just in several years pretty significantly.

But Chief Burke told me, and he stressed that he hopes he can be a real advisor to the mayor on all things policing issues within the city, especially as they're in this massively transitional time in the department.

And we'll see how that one goes.

And kind of unusual hearing at the state House this week about Abenaki heritage.

And it got heated.

Loella tell us what happened here.

What's the setup for this meeting?

Yeah.

Well, formally progressive now, independent lawmaker Troy Hedrick.

Hedrick, invited, the Abenaki tribes from Quebec, to the state house for a panel.

And, you know, there's been this long running controversy where the Quebec tribes have accused the state recognized tribes of being pretentions of being white people, pretending to be indigenous.

You know, and, you know, they say maybe you're sincere, but you're, completely misinformed.

You know, Vermont public and Vtdigger have both done a lot of reporting, on these claims of and I've, you know, shown that, the Quebec tribes certainly have a lot more documentation to back up their assertions.

You know, I think this was this event was so interesting, because, you know, this was one of the first times in a very long time, maybe ever, where the Quebec tribes were invited to the state House right to say their piece.

Right.

They were explicitly excluded back when Vermont actually came up with, their state recognition process because they were critical of it at the time.

But they also weren't invited by leadership.

Right.

This was a panel and, you know, organized by a lawmaker basically very much on his own.

And so this is this moment where you have kind of more people willing to say, it's very possible that Vermont got it dramatically wrong when it, designated these people as indigenous.

But this is also, you know, these people are now in the halls of power delivering that message.

But legislative leadership still remains, like very uninterested in that conversation.

Right.

They were not delivering testimony before a committee.

This was just an informal panel organized by a single lawmaker who's trying to raise this issue.

So, you know, we'll see if this continues to get more attention in Montpelier.

But it would seem, given everything else they've got to deal with, you know, school education, financing, these energy questions, we were talking about before, you know, one of the other things I think that's going on, this session started almost a week late.

There was a shortage of people in Ledge council who actually draw up the bills.

I mean, it could be very well that we run into another situation where the session gets extended and without anything really of consequence.

You know, and this Abenaki question, boy, it would just seem unlikely that they're going to push this a lot further.

Democratic leadership, legislative leadership is not going to touch this this year.

I, I completely agree.

There's there's no political reason for them to do so.

And they're very busy and very behind.

You know, not entirely their fault, right.

Like, I just I'd like I'll take that bet.

Now that the legislature legislative session is going to be extended this year, there's no way they'll be done in time town.

They supposed to be kind of a halfway mark.

And.

Wow.

There's not a lot not there's a lot more to go.

We only have a couple more minutes here.

So I want to get to, one thing that.

Catherine, I would like you to weigh on the state's largest hospital.

I think this affects a lot of people in the health care.

So the state's largest hospital, talking about expanding, getting even bigger.

What kinds of changes are we talking about here?

So this all came out of a discussion about an MOU between the city of Burlington and the hospital system.

The hospital says right now they have 481 beds, and studies that have been done said that they will need 242 new beds and like more than 800 parking spaces in the next ten years.

So they tell me, you know, any project when it first gets on paper, it's basically takes ten years to make happen.

So they were asking the city for a bump up and how high they're allowed to build.

So according to our calculations, they would be really asking to add basically ten stories, around ten stories to the highest building right now with that bump up.

So it could be pretty significant.

But 242 beds is a lot of space.

But they say that that will be the need in the coming years, especially as, you know, all the issues we're seeing in the health care system are happening.

They are the level one trauma center for so many people.

Upstate New York, people are driving in.

They need that significant amount of parking as well, and they're giving back to the city they've committed to, you know, looking into building a lot more housing, climate goals and everything.

So the city council did pass this and are allowing them to move forward with this.

But I have to stress this is nothing that's happening tomorrow.

You won't see shovels in the ground tomorrow.

But it's it definitely was signaling where they feel like they need to go in the future to stay to stay viable.

And we'll keep an eye on that.

Catherine.

Thank you.

Finally, here, the Northeast Kingdom radio station is getting a new owner, a Republican lawmaker from Essex, Senator Russ Engels, inked a roughly $1 million deal to buy seven stations in the neck in northern New Hampshire.

He told Vermont Digger he doesn't see a conflict between publishing local news and serving under the Golden Dome.

Worth noting he's not the only political figure taking to the airwaves.

On the other side of the political spectrum, former Lieutenant Governor David Zuckerman is hosting a public affairs show on Wdev since he left office in January, and that does it for this week's edition of Vermont this Week, thanks to our panel, Mark Johnson, host of 802 news podcast, Lola Duffot, education reporter with Vermont Public.

And Katherine Huntley, the city beat reporter at WCAX.

And thank you all for watching.

Take care everyone.