ANR lawyer: Vermont can’t get out of fossil-fuel car ban because of GWSA lawsuit provision

By Guy Page

The Vermont House this afternoon is poised to give final approval to creating a felony penalty for abuse of a corpse. 

H.41 passed on a voice vote Wednesday, February 12. In emotional testimony to fellow members, sponsor Tom Burditt (R-W. Rutland) described how the bill was requested by surviving family members of the horrific murder, and subsequent sexual abuse and mutillation, of an Enosburgh woman last July. 

Assisted reproduction adoptions – The lower chamber also will review H.98, Streamlining Adoptions for Children Born Through Assisted Reproduction. The bill is in the tradition of the 2018 Vermont Parentage Act, by which “the Vermont Legislature re-wrote Vermont’s laws on parentage to be modern and reflective of the great diversity of families in Vermont. What this means for children and families in Vermont is that there is greater clarity on who can establish parentage and how to establish parentage,” according to GLAD.Org, a leading national LGBTQ+ advocacy organization.

House Bill 98, if enacted, would streamline adoption of children born through assisted reproduction, including intrauterine insemination, gamete donation, embryo donation, in vitro fertilization, and intracytoplasmic sperm injection.

H.98 sponsors are Democrat members of House Judiciary: Reps. Barbara Rachelson, Angela Arsenault, Kevin Christie, Ian Goodnow, Troy Headrick and Martin LaLonde, as well as Dem. Rep. Troy Headrick (Institutions and Corrections). 

Key provisions of H. 98 include: Simplified Petition Process: Parents seeking to confirm parentage through adoption can file a petition that includes the petition signed by all parents, a marriage certificate if applicable, a declaration explaining the circumstances of the child’s birth via assisted reproduction, and the child’s birth certificate.

No Additional Consent or Notice: The complete petition serves as the parents’ written consent, and no additional consent or notice is required.

Donor Anonymity: If donor gametes or embryos were used, the court will not require notice or consent from the donor.

Reduced Court Requirements: Unless there is a specific reason with written findings of the court demonstrating good cause, the court is not required to have an in-person hearing or appearance, investigation or home study by the Department for Children and Families, criminal-record check, verification that the child is not registered with the federal register for missing children, or a minimum residency period.

Expedited Adoption: The court will grant the adoption and issue a decree promptly after a complete petition is filed, and upon finding that the marital parents were married at the time of the child’s birth and the child was born through assisted reproduction, or for nonmarital parents, that they consented to the assisted reproduction and that no other person has a claim to parentage.

Parentage Recognition: The bill clarifies that a petition to adopt a child will not be denied because the parentage of the petitioners is already presumed or legally recognized in Vermont. Additionally, the fact that a person did not petition for adoption under this section cannot be used as evidence when parentage presumptions conflict.

The House will also several resolutions:

Joint Resolutions: J.R.S. 12 and J.R.S. 13 concern the election of a Sergeant at Arms and three trustees of the University of Vermont and State Agricultural College. Candidates for these positions must notify the Secretary of State by 4:00 PM today. The elections will be held on February 20.

Concurrent Resolutions: The House will also consider several concurrent resolutions, including congratulating the Bellows Free Academy-Fairfax High School Bullets baseball team and runner Elinor Purrier St. Pierre, and honoring the lives of Donald H. Turner Jr., Mary Jane Dickerson, Lucrecia Wonsor, and Charles Buttrey. There is also a Senate concurrent resolution honoring the Vermont Old Cemetery Association. 

Also, House members were told the Joint Fiscal Committee has received notice of two grants to the Agency of Human Services, Department of Health: $2,335,401 for crisis counseling assistance and $250,000 to provide trainings for crisis staff and to make improvements to the state’s crisis system dispatch platform. – Rewritten from February 13 House Journal. 

Citizen lawsuit provision ties Vermont to California zero-internal combustion vehicle rule

As long as the citizen lawsuit provision in the Global Warming Solutions Act remains law, Vermont must follow the California rule banning the sale of internal combustion vehicles by 2035, the lawyer for the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources told the House Transportation Committee Wednesday, February 12.

ANR lawyer Rachel Stevens was giving House Transportation an update on Vermont’s legal commitment to follow California regulations wherever they lead. 

Stevens said California is getting feedback from manufacturers concerned the market for EVS is too weak to justify a ban on internal combustion vehicles. If California lightens up on the 2035 ban, Vermont can too. But not until.

Vice-Chair Tim Corcoran (D-Bennington) asked the question everyone else was thinking: “Would there be any repercussions on us saying, ‘nope, we made a mistake, we want out of this now?’”

Stevens answered: There is a citizen supervision in the Global Warming Solutions Act that allows any person to sue the state if we do not if the agency does not adopt a rule required in the climate action plan. So that would be a consequence.”

See YouTube clip of the exchange here, courtesy of “GoldenDomeVT.com.”

Here’s the backstory – The 2020 Legislature gave ‘citizens’ [AKA renewable-power industry funded legal advocacy groups] the explicit right to sue the State of Vermont if the climate action plan isn’t followed and the emissions reduction goals aren’t met. One lawsuit already has been filed. So unless the Legislature repeals or amends the GWSA, or California loosens up its regs, Vermont is stuck with the California fossil-fuel vehicle ban. 

The House Energy & Digital Infrastructure Committee leadership has already said it won’t repeal the GWSA. An alternative would be amending the 2020 law to remove the lawsuit provision. But it hasn’t shown any interest in that, either.