[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6084889,"mediaKeyId","2907094-33fbeedbc1d94ac627dba259aea113e6","parentId",2907094,"title","Committee considers renaming rail chapter, new rules and penalties for state rail trails","audioSeconds",637,"startMs",2994000,"endMs",3631000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2907094-33fbeedbc1d94ac627dba259aea113e6&start=2994&end=3631","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2907094-33fbeedbc1d94ac627dba259aea113e6/thumbnail_2994000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6084889/Vermont/Committee-considers-renaming-rail-chapter-new-rules-and-penalties-for-state-rail-trails","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6084889-567afb3dd55abf826087ab9c39f68d5f/orig.mp4?Expires=1777696728&Signature=Vi7SQPl~4k1oBXARQwBjLlGvqfgO6Z~IPMCX-JQhnqTgjyG~tdRxAZUVNdctPVJJrICWELb28hfUrBNL093KhGqzkwFl9-2hyOFo-WaOqxMbAX6OKZK6wU1HcYzFrh-4Ogo1ovHo0j21r4EmWmhcurBZ3b3KrvpdpHPfZLKf~ym05CiWtpbFxic7DsVikB~NzlpuDtR95vTxQDH8r23U-jfJWbrFwSY0fhR~lKKFCBIM4t3IRLNQEY6WAz22TuYVVUh9Q5WqYLmqhGE5b6GhdRMHz77wCjLyK~5WzqT2u6IjMLhNoQ3mHKIvp~YvOmQiwQl-pKDuDaCiPZlbNklBIg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-04-09T04:09:44Z","article","Senate Transportation committee members reviewed changes to rail‑related session law that update chapter titles, add statutory cross‑references and authorize the Transportation Secretary to adopt rules governing interim trail use of state‑owned railroad rights‑of‑way.

Committee staff said the title change — from \"state acquisition of railroads\" to a broader name referencing state‑owned railroads and rail trails — does not change legal authority but better reflects current practice. The bill adds a new section requiring rules for management of rail‑banked corridors and restates that violations of trail rules are subject to an existing statutory penalty of up to $300.

Agency staff and committee counsel discussed drafting details. One committee member favored referencing the existing statutory penalty rather than re‑stating the dollar amount in multiple places, to avoid inconsistent language later. That drafting change — amending the bill to cross‑reference the existing penalty provision rather than repeating the $300 figure twice — was discussed as a clarifying amendment staff could prepare.

The committee also discussed the policy issues that can arise if private grants are used to finance pilot programs or technology pilots on rail corridors; staff raised procurement and conflict‑of‑interest questions and advised careful drafting to avoid binding the state to a specific vendor if private funds are accepted.

Ending: Committee members signaled general comfort with renaming the chapter and with rulemaking authority, and asked staff to adjust cross‑references to the existing penalty provision for clarity.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Transportation - 2025-04-08 - 10:00AM","oneSentenceSummary","The committee reviewed session‑law edits that rename the state chapter to reflect state‑owned railroads and rail trails, add cross‑references, authorize the secretary to adopt rules for interim trail use, and clarify that rule violations carry the existing $300 penalty; staff said language mirrors current practice and statutory prohibitions.","taxTitle","Senate Transportation, SENATE, Committees, Legislative , Vermont","taxId",51841,"location","Vermont","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6084894,"Senate committee reviews transfer of 2.834 miles of VT Route 36 to Town of St. Albans",172,2764000,2936000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2907094-33fbeedbc1d94ac627dba259aea113e6&start=2764&end=2936","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2907094-33fbeedbc1d94ac627dba259aea113e6/thumbnail_2764000.jpg","/articles/6084894/Vermont/Senate-committee-reviews-transfer-of-2834-miles-of-VT-Route-36-to-Town-of-St-Albans","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6084894-de1f08b074708747c91df3a3cf1ed5e4/orig.mp4?Expires=1777696728&Signature=Tm-SF8yKvwV-enprscSzJtw4zjXRyaEeyk8Hcx5n8VJmYxWDJUn0ztyd-3AMcbg1S-Q180COJk-SJFva8axr3qSgvi-KNpPX7TkPdkqQw1CWi9hQhXAl-92beifscGFrZb4d4lG73432GNXgtGbrqw1PG94rWav-K~Q~S5GKA5CnPoP9GtNEzW2Bw4M8BQNX8jfTBSfMcTNtKOHfOAZadP7T1I8FIBrSBNwsRa80Iru5e0Z3qXRwWCcgGvJsduALUaI1ia4cEJkKXJpWfqy~KrEsTQHIaXUkSOwsDr8xcZu79Jdw1ikXYz2qN86ZIKkXiruq0-dnud57zwVVGLc2-A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Transportation Committee reviewed a proposed transfer of jurisdiction that would relinquish 2.834 miles of Vermont Route 36 (Lake Street segment) from the state to the Town of St. Albans.

Ashley Atkins, deputy director of district maintenance and fleet, explained the town and AOT are working closely on the transfer and that there is no controversy in agency discussions. She said the town would gain full ownership and responsibility — including control of the right‑of‑way needed for speed management, access management, and utility work — and that the transfer would allow the town to better support planned water and sewer extension projects.

During the hearing a committee member asked whether the town would immediately begin using the right‑of‑way for utilities; Atkins said some utility work can be done within a state right‑of‑way already, but town ownership provides more expedient authority for certain projects and access. The agency clarified that for routine resurfacing projects that affect the corridor, the state would still handle recurring full resurfacing work tied to the state program; other maintenance and jurisdictional responsibilities would become municipal.

The committee did not vote at the hearing; staff said the transfer process would advance as the T bill becomes effective and after the agency and town finalize transfer language and an effective date.

Ending: AOT will finalize transfer paperwork and the committee expects additional language to appear in the bill prior to final enactment.

","The committee considered proposed relinquishment of 2.834 miles of Route 36 (Lake Street) to the Town of St. Albans; AOT staff said the town sought control to facilitate water and sewer extensions and local development projects and that the state would keep centerline resurfacing responsibility for recurring resurfacing projects.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6084895,"Senate committee moves rail budget line to cover repairs at White River Junction station",126,2448000,2574000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2907094-33fbeedbc1d94ac627dba259aea113e6&start=2448&end=2574","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2907094-33fbeedbc1d94ac627dba259aea113e6/thumbnail_2448000.jpg","/articles/6084895/Vermont/Senate-committee-moves-rail-budget-line-to-cover-repairs-at-White-River-Junction-station","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6084895-eeeb5ff6ffc8f84fc435826149389912/orig.mp4?Expires=1777696728&Signature=Eigddf3OLdePXqKCjgU2MthjDk40EN63MkqFubGQyb8Ernk9yakwDKdzualGl6HSX1qk8PcxQkV8fXxYYVjOvcoL37Yz0i1cFSMuB1TSQowiTs~B08icnAcX1aPIxEDFLsSDeaztuze7mV5XHQnhsS-1eFpvi4Qz1D6bxIF6Kh0qs4t-a68qFN8dVI5SWxjA-4JkZIbxILWSj6vDeGHVQ~qEWHUnGoPXUlX79XWXaRzXBtvF8M6uV149MVXEO759H5qCbkCjeZrahE0jROevcl~CbhaVGSGiQ~jUmMc11NQXjRPOc~ssMX2lUpOdTN8kg3OZL7wOShMXh5vLllpMuw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Transportation committee members heard a request to reallocate a rail budget item toward repairs at the White River Junction station, where state staff reported a leaking cupola, water damage to second‑floor offices, failing sewer line and an electrical panel problem.

Dan Delabrio, rail section, told the committee the change corrects a prior line item that had funded a longstanding subsidy (referred to in testimony as the “Wacker subsidy”) that is no longer required. He said the state instead needs to address several structural and utility issues at White River Junction station.

Delabrio described the work as more than a simple roof repair: the agency lists roof replacement as the major element but also identified interior ceiling repairs, an electrical panel replacement and excavation to replace a problematic sewer main that has been causing backups. Committee discussion cited a cost estimate in the hearing of roughly $260,000 for the combined project work.

Committee members asked whether the concentration of rail projects in White River Junction was equitable; Delabrio and other staff noted the station is a state‑owned building in active rail use and requires upkeep. The committee did not take a formal vote at the hearing but recorded the agency’s intent to reassign the previously budgeted subsidy money to the station repairs and to bring project details forward.

Ending: AOT staff said they will return with specific project paperwork; committee members urged the agency to provide scope and cost documentation to justify the transfer.

","Committee staff said a longstanding rail subsidy line item was corrected to fund needed repairs at the White River Junction rail station, including roof, sewer and electrical work; AOT staff described the change as a bookkeeping correction to address building damage.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6084904,"Senate committee shifts mileage-based user fee start to July 1, 2026, pending funding and federal grant decision",3775,624000,4399000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2907094-33fbeedbc1d94ac627dba259aea113e6&start=624&end=4399","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2907094-33fbeedbc1d94ac627dba259aea113e6/thumbnail_624000.jpg","/articles/6084904/Vermont/Senate-committee-shifts-mileage-based-user-fee-start-to-July-1-2026-pending-funding-and-federal-grant-decision","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6084904-7c45f00b18e3c915e1267bd53d8ee723/orig.mp4?Expires=1777696728&Signature=c6vdXeZ7Duv4V-jliSSWs6BmGbVc4EIp0x0~CoVS7RktiXM6oZGvZekLBCqfO7KswUg6LOExTai8uR7~be0JMHVGzNWMZZqmQAvuuen7vKRY3wjPSoYPXcRSapXsd9tmfCwhs6u3M0ezdBMBAHL2VfwF3Tj2vSuw3kM-rNuBHXmnza3b3-E9ywJGjE~XG55JMUwI~vcRoCjc4kdDKADe~m8rOY9ugDgZF7Um7V-OY5~yw9fAHKdQTigA1Kljv2Yl92-SNMjZgY8VGrFNtHmG6-Hf9I59sfMzoQ43tK~pCcC2nXi4-o0JUBwqVyeU0Us5f6JzeEn4wWTAaEbEEgEmBw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Transportation Committee on Tuesday reviewed updates to the T bill that push the earliest start of a mileage-based user fee — often called a mileage-based user fee (MBUF) — to July 1, 2026, and make that date explicitly contingent on “sufficient funding” and successful federal grant awards.

David Leonard, legislative council, told the committee the bill text reflects a schedule change: “clearly, we are not starting a mileage based user fee this coming July 1,” and the language was updated to set the target to 07/01/2026, “subject to sufficient funding being available for implementation.”

The change matters because federal funding tied to the program is in a 90‑day administrative hold. Committee members repeatedly asked the Agency of Transportation (AOT) to report back to joint legislative fiscal committees with updates so the Legislature can decide whether to proceed if grant money does not arrive.

Legislative and AOT witnesses described the existing funding picture as incomplete. Committee discussion identified three separate strands of funding mentioned in the draft bill and related budget work: state T‑fund money, an appropriation in the T bill for non‑federal match, and a $1,000,000 general‑fund allocation in the House’s version of the larger budget bill (described in committee testimony as contingent). Committee members and staff repeatedly cautioned that those amounts, as discussed in the hearing, do not yet equal the program cost estimates described by AOT staff.

Committee members pressed the agency on implementation details that must be resolved before any launch. Changes in the bill clarify how mileage reporting would work: annual odometer checks at vehicle inspections, with an alternate reconciliation method where, in the absence of an odometer reading, “you would get a 98 percentile mileage based user fee for that year if you didn't have an odometer reading to report,” language the committee recorded as a penalty for non‑reporting. The draft also allows vehicle owners to choose whether to pay on an annual, quarterly or monthly basis, with reconciliation at registration renewal or within 60 days after a terminating event (for example, a sale or out‑of‑state move).

AOT staff said IT and administrative work remains. The agency expects to build on existing DMV inspection contractors and the agency’s IT modernization work (including prior contracts with Parsons and DMV vendors), but any IT module or billing system would need review under the state’s Agency of Digital Services process before contracts start. AOT staff told the committee that the federal grant office had indicated the award looked “promising,” but no timeline had been set for a grant agreement and the 90‑day hold remained a live uncertainty.

Committee members raised equity and affordability concerns and asked for a stronger check‑back process. One senator asked for a schedule from AOT showing the sequence of technical, procurement and outreach milestones the agency would need to hit to meet a mid‑2026 launch; another said that if the committee learns in the coming months the federal money will not arrive, the Legislature should have direct input on whether to spend limited state dollars on an unfinished, multi‑year effort.

The committee’s discussion also touched on intent language in the bill that directs the General Assembly’s expectations for initial rates: the draft instructs designers to propose a MBUF rate “approximately equivalent” to the amount collected in combined state and federal gas tax per mile for a comparable internal combustion pleasure car (with separate guidance for plug‑in hybrids that also pay an EV infrastructure fee). Several members asked for clarification because that guidance could limit future choices such as inflation‑adjusted rate increases; agency staff said proposed rates would come back to the Legislature for approval and that the current bill only directs the design, not the implementation.

Committee members asked AOT to provide: (1) a clear, dated timeline for federal grant steps and internal IT procurement milestones; (2) regular updates to Joint Fiscal/JTOC on the grant status and projected budget gap if federal funds are not awarded; and (3) an explanation of how the proposed intent language would affect the agency’s ability to adjust rates over time.

What happens next: Committee staff and AOT agreed to continue section‑by‑section review of the bill; AOT will return with more detailed schedules and with explanations of the funding sources referenced in the draft. No final vote or enacted change was recorded at this hearing; the committee was reviewing draft session law language and directed follow‑up.

Ending: Committee members emphasized they want more information on the grant decision and a no‑surprises timeline before the Legislature commits further financing or implementation steps.

","Committee members reviewed language in the T bill to delay design and implementation of a mileage-based user fee to July 1, 2026, and pressed the Agency of Transportation for clear funding plans after a federal grant entered a 90‑day hold; committee asked for regular check-ins if federal or state money is uncertain.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee considers renaming rail chapter, new rules and penalties for state rail trails

Senate committee reviews transfer of 2.834 miles of VT Route 36 to Town of St. Albans

Senate committee moves rail budget line to cover repairs at White River Junction station

Senate committee shifts mileage-based user fee start to July 1, 2026, pending funding and federal grant decision