by Gina Galfetti
Last week in Montpelier, the decision was made by the Republican Minority to use the legislative process to try and move H.70. H.70 is a simple, straightforward proposal that would recognize the farmers, foresters, and generational conservationists who have placed their land into current use. If we recognized these land stewards in the Act 59 inventory, we would meet our conservation goals and continue Vermont’s long history of working hand in hand with private landowners. Without including land enrolled in the Use Value Appraisal Program in our inventory of conserved land, we will not meet our goals and will once again fail to meet deadlines the Legislature imposed on itself.
This mirrors other failures: we have failed to meet carbon output reductions codified in the Global Warming Solutions Act, opening Vermont up to lawsuits, and we failed to meet the 2026 deadline for electric vehicle sales. Fortunately, Governor Scott was able to pass an executive order preventing enforcement of Vermont’s adoption of California’s Advanced Clean Car rules. However, Vermonters deserve to be represented by people who consider reality and achievable goals. We cannot rely on the Governor to clean up legislation hastily passed by the majority. It is time for the majority party to consider the logic and reason of the minority in the first place and craft better legislation.
That brings us to last Thursday’s motion. House Republicans moved to have H.70 relieved from the House Committee on Environment and placed on the Notice Calendar so the full House could vote on the bill. H.70 is a simple, straightforward proposal that would recognize the farmers, foresters, and generational conservationists who have placed their land into current use. If we recognized these land stewards in the Act 59 inventory, we would meet our conservation goals and continue Vermont’s long history of working hand in hand with private landowners.
Unfortunately, the motion failed along party lines. Many cited the claim that the legislative process had been ignored. But here is the catch: the process is broken in this case.
H.70 has been hanging on the wall in the Environment Committee since January of 2025, a shining example of simplicity and reason. Yet the chair of that committee, Amy Sheldon of Middlebury (D), has expressed no appetite to take it up, despite extensive testimony this year demonstrating Vermont’s inability to meet the goals set forth in Act 59. Chair Sheldon refuses to consider the reasonable solution H.70 proposes and instead chose to take a planned ten-day vacation during the height of the session, which is unheard of and has cost other reps their seats.
And that is just the tip of the iceberg. Numerous bills addressing energy policy reform, Act 250 permitting reform, and housing also hang dormant at Chair Sheldon’s discretion. What she has chosen to spend valuable committee time on may surprise Vermonters. Days of testimony have been devoted to a bill proposing the reintroduction of the catamount, as well as to legislation establishing additional wildlands devoid of management. These are not the priorities Vermonters sent us here to address in the midst of a housing, healthcare, and affordability crisis.
With nearly 900 bills drafted at a significant cost and introduced this biennium, it is the responsibility of the majority party and committee chairs to sift through proposals and focus legislative time on issues that are critical for the survival of Vermonters.
Vermonters must demand more from the majority party when it comes to using legislative time effectively. The majority should work in good faith with the minority to craft thoughtful legislation, not force through one-party initiatives that set the state up for failure and lawsuits.
The majority has brought Vermonters policies like Clean Heat, also courtesy of Chair Sheldon. Clean Heat failed, and the majority must be held accountable for the boondoggle it became. The minority raised objections, and testimony clearly identified its many flaws, but the bill was rammed through regardless. Vermonters were then forced to spend millions studying and investigating the program, only to confirm that the minority was right all along. Listening to dissenting voices from the outset would have saved Vermonters millions of dollars.
We must do better in Montpelier and be laser-focused on the affordability crisis Vermonters sent us here to address, not set tax dollars on fire trying to light the way for foolhardy initiatives.