By Jefferey Bartley

If you’ve been following Irene Wrenner’s campaign, you may have noticed her describing herself as a “moderate” or “small-D democrat” who often votes independently and aligns with Governor Scott.

However, as Vermonters grapple with rising costs, both Senate candidates claim to prioritize affordability and support working families. So, which candidate’s record reflects these values?

Wrenner frequently emphasizes her independence from party leadership, but her voting record suggests otherwise. Since joining the Vermont Senate, there have been 42 roll call votes on bills in which both she and Senate President Phil Baruth voted. Wrenner has aligned with Baruth 88% of the time, including on bills that raised property taxes and DMV fees.

On several key issues, Chris Mattos and Irene Wrenner have taken different paths. For instance, regarding the property tax bill that raised rates by 13.8% statewide (H.887 of 2024), Mattos voted against it, while Wrenner supported it. On the 20% DMV fee increase (H.494 of 2023), Mattos voted no, while Wrenner voted yes. And on the new $82 million payroll tax affecting Vermont workers and businesses (H.217 of 2023), Mattos again voted against it, while Wrenner voted for it. Each time, Mattos supported Governor Scott’s vetoes, while Wrenner voted to override them.

One of the top issues in this year’s election cycle is the “Yield Bill,” which kicked the can down the field (again) and property owners in all four towns in this Senate district saw double digit tax increases. Wrenner voted to override the Governor’s veto. Why? Well tune into her appearance on Kurt and Anthony in early October to find out why…

Spoiler: During the interview she falsely claimed the Governor proposed a 20% tax increase. He did not. She also bragged that “her” four towns didn’t see as high as other towns in Vermont.

Amid rising costs for Vermonters, Wrenner also voted to significantly increase legislative pay (S.39 of 2023). She took to social media in mid-September and stated “I did not vote to increase my pay.”

But she did. Twice. 

April 13, 2023 Roll Call Vote 
April 23, 2023 Roll Call Vote: 3rd Reading 

Wrenner even doubled down on it this week, when on another appearance on the same Kurt and Anthony show, where she once again suggested the Legislature should be a full-time, year around body; not the citizen legislature we have celebrated for centuries.

Wrenner has also made comments suggesting that her decision not to commute, her status as an empty nester, and not having another job make her uniquely effective. However, this perspective could come across as disconnected from the realities faced by many families in Fairfax, Westford, Essex, and Milton, who are juggling work, family, and rising expenses. Personally, I think if she spent more time at home during the session, she would be hearing and listening to her constituents; not hiding in the bubble of Montpelier.

Even more so, when discussing Mattos’ record. Irene states publicly that only she can get things done because she is part of the supermajority! Imagine that! The pitch only one party can bring forth meaningful ideas in drawing a line in the sand — we will do what we want. We will not work collaboratively. “I get re-elected that is. My opponent doesn’t introduce bills — and as a member of the minority party, if he did, they would sit on the wall.“

The hubris of this post is stunning. Not only is she claiming only Democrats can move legislation, she falsely states Chris Mattos doesn’t introduce legislation. Mattos signed on to 16 pieces of legislation (2 passed) and 34 HCRs.

When questioned by Representative Ashley Bartley (Yes, she’s my amazing wife) on her statement:

“Senator Wrenner, I may be misunderstanding your comment, but are you suggesting that people shouldn’t vote for me or others in the minority party simply because the bills we introduce might not be taken up?

In my last term, I introduced several bills—two of which had tri-partisan support from over 30% of the House—focusing on maternal health and housing. Unfortunately, as you noted, neither was taken off the wall. This practice is something we should challenge, not accept. After all, we represent constituents from all parties, and their voices deserve to be heard.”

Irene didn’t respond.

With regards to saving Essex voters money, Irene Wrenner falsely claims she saved property tax payers money because she “led 9 successful issue campaigns” against the merger; a hotly debated issue in Essex Junction in Essex for decades. 

When asked about the 22% tax increase Irene was responsible for, she states: “It’s not unexpected,” said state Sen. Irene Wrenner, D-Chittenden North, who lives in Essex and was a vocal opponent of merging the town and the village of Essex Junction. “Anytime 41% of your tax base goes away, your taxes will probably increase.”

And about her campaign tactics… I doubt Irene handing out condoms that say “Say no to STDs (special tax district not sexually transmitted diseases) at polling locations is something Fairfax, Westford, and Milton voters would find acceptable. Essex certainly didn’t. If anything, it’s repulsive.

The truth is Wrenner is not honest. Her record leans consistently toward her party’s left wing, despite her portrayal of being a “moderate.” She says one thing then does another. When she faces questions, she freaks out and calls her constituents “trolls”.

Finally, and most importantly, Wrenner’s stance on affordability may not align with her voting history. I urge you to vote for Chris Mattos. Let’s restore balance and integrity to Montpelier.