Last year, the Vermont Legislature made history by passing the nation’s first “climate superfund” law. This year is about figuring out all of the follow up questions that come with setting precedent. 

One piece of that is how much money and time state agencies will actually need to carry out the research the law tasks them with.

Act 122 takes the polluters-pay framework from the federal hazardous waste Superfund and applies it to the costs of climate damages, like flood recovery or harm from extreme heat. Essentially, the law rests on the idea that Vermonters should not be the ones left with the bill for messes caused by climate change. Instead, the multinational oil companies responsible for extracting the fossil fuels driving climate change should be.

But figuring out what those companies are liable for and how much climate damages actually cost is no small order. It relies on the rather-nascent field of climate attribution science, which essentially uses modeling to figure out how likely a weather event would be if greenhouse gas emissions were at pre-industrial levels. 

Scientists have gotten really good at doing this for heatwaves, but when it comes to flooding, especially in the unique mountain-valley topography of Vermont, a lot of the research simply doesn’t exist yet, Deputy Treasurer Gavin Boyles told the House Committee on Energy and Digital Infrastructure Friday afternoon.

That’s why the Office of the State Treasurer and the Agency of Natural Resources are asking the Legislature for an extra year to do these assessments and for an additional $825,000 and $675,000, respectively, in order to hire people who can help them assess climate damage costs to Vermont. ANR is also hoping to put a portion of those funds toward hiring an additional attorney to navigate incoming lawsuits.

That brings us to the second piece of this: in December, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and American Petroleum Institute filed a legal challenge.  

Among its claims, the lawsuit hinges upon an argument that the federal Clean Air Act preempts Vermont’s law. It cites existing legal precedent that says the Clean Air Act allows the federal Environmental Protection Agency the power to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, not just air pollution. 

The fact that this comes as the EPA is acting to dismantle the powers included in the Clean Air Act, leads to “complete cognitive dissonance,” Anthony Iarrapino, an attorney who lobbied for the law’s passage, said in an interview.

Changes at the EPA would not affect the ability of Vermont’s climate superfund to go into effect.

However, those changes might muddle the fossil fuel industry’s argument in the lawsuit “What the Trump administration is doing to weaken the Clean Air Act only strengthens our argument that states have a right to act and fill in where the federal government has retreated,” Iarrapino added.

The lawsuit itself appears to be moving slowly; “I totally thought I’d be subject to depositions and records requests, but I’ve heard nothing,” Legislative Council Michael O’Grady told the House Committee on Energy and Digital Infrastructure. “It’s curious that it’s been pretty silent.”

— Olivia Gieger

In the know

The Vermont Agency of Transportation expects that it will pave about 220 miles of state-owned roads over a yearlong period that ends in June. In the year after that, though, it’s set to pave only about 125 miles, according to the agency’s latest spending plans — a nearly 45% reduction.

That drop has raised concerns among the leaders of the Legislature’s committees on transportation in recent weeks, who said that while the amount the state paves varies each year, the projected change from the 2025 to 2026 fiscal years stands out. 

Miles paved over the 2026 fiscal year, which starts this July, would be the lowest since 2020, agency data shows, when the state paved 157 miles of roads it owns and operates. 

“We’re in a bad place,” said Sen. Richard Westman, R-Lamoille, who chairs the Senate Transportation Committee.

Read more about the state of the transportation fund here. 

— Shaun Robinson

The Green Mountain Care Board unanimously approved a settlement with the University of Vermont Health Network Friday, paving the way for a deal in which the hospital network will pay millions to primary care practices and the state’s largest private insurer, and will fund an outside observer to oversee the hospitals’ spending and operations.

It’s not yet clear who that observer — officially called a “liaison” — will be.

But Mike Smith, a former Secretary of the Agency of Human Services and the Agency of Administration, said in a brief interview Friday that he had had conversations with the board and the health network about the role.

“There’s a process, and let me just say that I’ll let the process play out and see where it leads,” he said. But, he added, “I mean, obviously, if I’m talking to people, I’m interested.”

Read more about the Green Mountain Care Board’s vote here.

— Peter D’Auria

For the second time this legislative session, Gov. Phil Scott vetoed a mid-year spending package Friday over disagreements with lawmakers about Vermont’s motel voucher program. 

In his veto letter, the five-term Republican governor rebuked lawmakers for continuing to use the mid-year budget adjustment bill to seek an extension of the voucher program’s winter rules, which ended earlier this week, forcing out hundreds of Vermonters who have been staying in motels. 

Read about the veto and the response here. 

— Habib Sabet

Visit our 2025 bill tracker for the latest updates on major legislation we are following. 

More than a thousand protests against President Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s policies are planned around the country Saturday, including several in Vermont.

Several grassroots organizations are coordinating the rallies, which are called “Hands Off!” The organizers say the mobilization is in protest of what they call “the most brazen power grab in modern history.”

They come days after Trump imposed tariffs on imports from all countries. Similar protests have been held around the country since January.

In Vermont, rallies are planned in Burlington, Montpelier and more.

What is the ‘Hands Off’ protest?

The April 5 rallies are in protest of a slew of Trump’s actions, including Social Security, Medicare and immigration policies, according to the protest’s website.

Several groups are co-sponsoring the “Hands Off” protests, including 50501, Indivisible and Women’s March.

“Trump, Musk, and their billionaire cronies are orchestrating an all-out assault on our government, our economy, and our basic rights—enabled by Congress every step of the way,” the website says.

‘Hands Off’ protests in VT include one in Burlington

There are more than a dozen “Hands Off” protests planned around Vermont for Saturday.

In Burlington, a rally is planned from noon to 2 p.m. at Burlington City Hall.

Here are the other areas taking part:

Melina Khan is a trending reporter for the USA TODAY Network – New England, which serves more than a dozen affiliated publications across New England. She can be reached at MKhan@gannett.com. 

“I think it’s below contempt.”

Rep. Conor Casey, D-Montpelier, did not mince words describing Vermont’s use of a for-profit, out-of-state prison to hold more than 100 people: “I know it’s cheaper, and it’s cheaper for a reason.”

The prison, Tallahatchie County Correctional Facility in Tutwiler, Mississippi, is operated by CoreCivic, a company that gleefully welcomed increased deportations and immigration detentions under President Donald Trump due to the economic implications for the corporation.   

Casey and his colleagues on the House Corrections and Institutions Committee were discussing H.191, a bill that would end Vermont’s use of for-profit prisons and prison services — including its health care contractor, Wellpath. But the lively discussion focused less on the bill itself than its philosophy — the idea that Vermont lets corporations profit off people in state custody, some of whom are held more than a thousand miles away. 

“I appreciate, I think, the spirit of the legislation,” Isaac Dayno, executive director of policy and strategic initiatives at the Vermont Department of Corrections, told lawmakers. “We just don’t have the beds.”

The state could end or limit out-of-state incarceration through several methods — reducing the number of people locked up, ending the use of state cells by federal agencies, or building more space to incarcerate people.

But the state has struggled to find communities willing to welcome a new prison. And then there’s the money problem.

“We can’t even build schools,” Rep. Shawn Sweeney, D-Shelburne, noted — a nod to Vermont’s school construction conundrum.  

Many committee members agreed with the legislation’s principle, but, as Rep. Mary Morrissey, R-Bennington, put it, “I’m not quite there yet.” 

Still, the bill drew support from the Vermont State Employees’ Association, the union representing state workers. Steve Howard, the union’s executive director, urged House Corrections to give H.191 “very serious consideration,” because the state’s existing arrangement is “not consistent with the values of the people of Vermont.” 

The committee ultimately decided to shelve the bill and wait for a study due in November that will answer some questions regarding ending out-of-state incarceration. In the meantime, lawmakers hope to hear directly from someone at CoreCivic to learn about conditions for people incarcerated at the Mississippi prison. Vermont’s contract with the corporation is scheduled to end in September. 

— Ethan Weinstein

In the know

President Donald Trump on Wednesday declared sweeping tariffs on imports from most nations, escalating a trade war that state officials and business leaders have warned could have dire consequences on Vermont’s economy.

At a glance, the Green Mountain State was spared the worst of Wednesday’s announcement, owing to Canada’s exemption from Trump’s comprehensive “reciprocal tariff” package. But Vermont consumers and businesses can hardly breathe a sigh of relief. 

“The bottom line is that consumers across the entire country are going to see their prices go up,” said State Treasurer Mike Pieciak. “Businesses not just in Vermont, but around the country are going to be feeling the effects of this broader trade war, and those effects are largely going to be passed down to consumers.”

According to an estimate from the state treasurer’s office using data from the Yale Budget Lab, price increases from the latest round of tariffs could collectively cost Vermont households approximately $1 billion annually, with each household seeing about $3,800 of additional costs per year.

Read more about the impacts here. 

— Habib Sabet

Vermont officials are assessing how residents may be affected after the mass firing of federal workers who administer the LIHEAP program, which provides millions of dollars in heating assistance to low-income households in the state. 

The cuts, reported by national news outlets Wednesday, won’t immediately affect Vermonters receiving the federal assistance, according to the state Agency of Human Services. But the agency is still evaluating potential impacts to the program in the long term, Economic Services Division Deputy Commissioner Miranda Gray said via email Thursday. 

The Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program provided $23 million in funding to Vermont in 2025 for the winter season, which runs from November to April. That money has already been allocated to the state, according to Tom Donohue, CEO of BROC Community Action.

Read more about LIHEAP program impacts here. 

— Erin Petenko

On the move

The Legislature has once again sent a midyear spending bill to Gov. Phil Scott’s desk, but a partisan standoff over Vermont’s motel voucher program continues to unfold.

On Thursday afternoon, the Senate gave final approval to its second attempt at an annual budget adjustment bill, after Scott vetoed the first version last month. But without a key change sought by Republicans to narrow criteria for the voucher program, the bill appears destined to meet the same fate.

Republicans brought forward an amendment Thursday to bring eligibility rules for the motel program in line with an executive order signed by Scott late last week. The order — which the Legislature’s chief lawyer has called unconstitutional — extended motel stays for families with children and certain people with acute medical needs through June 30. 

Read more about the standoff here. 

— Carly Berlin

Visit our 2025 bill tracker for the latest updates on major legislation we are following. 

On the hill

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., again unsuccessfully attempted to block certain U.S. arms sales to Israel Thursday, decrying the scale of destruction and death caused by that country’s war against Hamas.

Sanders forced a vote in the U.S. Senate on two joint resolutions of disapproval, which — if approved — would have prevented the transfer of heavy bombs and other munitions worth almost $8.8 billion to the Israeli government, his office said in a press release. 

“The United States must not continue to be complicit in the destruction of the Palestinian people in Gaza,” Sanders said in his speech to the body. “History will not forgive us for this.”

The two resolutions failed to reach the votes necessary to move forward, each garnering 15 Yeas and more than 80 Nays. Sen. Peter  Welch, D-Vt., voted in support of both measures.

— Kristen Fountain