[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-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],{"_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",6272281,"mediaKeyId","3027967-800ae51bcc8aeda764bb1a0e3ecdfd08","parentId",3027967,"title","Committee narrows municipal stormwater language, discusses $1M grant carve‑out with possible sunset","audioSeconds",2042,"startMs",3811000,"endMs",5853000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3027967-800ae51bcc8aeda764bb1a0e3ecdfd08&start=3811&end=5853","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3027967-800ae51bcc8aeda764bb1a0e3ecdfd08/thumbnail_3811000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6272281/Vermont/Committee-narrows-municipal-stormwater-language-discusses-1M-grant-carveout-with-possible-sunset","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6272281-b8ecad36e1a21753013c22c783486e30/orig.mp4?Expires=1771181526&Signature=TrxLLr0P2LPjCXKugk18dmArwmrFUpBgPlQfekUnpX7Ss6gW6ZueVtutioWrxFAM4luIjpaWibHFJFKJRt0HxT66DELgoww4zMwB8FvuVdaHFafg25sPYQ0GHOn0rRQk2EWhWhRsZH8N1SeEowYDwjUv7YvU5vt97bz44Svpk0KacDHVMM8OhCrU6APibGysjrmZGlg6iztC1EfnOcTtjYWQppLHGW~s2~W5QIhfbakvRyYYPpHYf3BKjiN9Mo65f1tpO5ELbb0r784ptOGogHNl0F0e0aPUXWI03f-LcoUcwlgCIME54KfvB2Toiay7V-oAFIzAOk9xfM9hlgzJnw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-04-17T00:21:59.11Z","article","The Natural Resources & Energy Committee on April 16 discussed revisions to stormwater language in bill 03/19 that would expand municipal access to state municipal stormwater implementation grants and make 3‑acre regulated sites eligible for certain grant funds.

Committee counsel Mike Grama walked members through a revised draft that adds notice and procedural clarifications for the \"permanent\" three‑acre permitting requirement and edits to the municipal implementation financing program. Counsel said the revisions clarify when a municipality assuming responsibility for stormwater (for example, in a residential subdivision) can access grants intended to help municipalities meet regulatory obligations.

Neil (staff) and others raised concerns that the draft language could be read as requiring a municipality to \"assume full legal responsibility\" before accessing funds. Committee members asked that the language be made explicitly permissive and expansive so that municipalities are not forced to take on private obligations. As counsel summarized, a simple insertion of \"also\" or similar clarifying wording would make clear the program is additive — municipalities can access assistance to comply with municipal permits even if they do not assume full legal responsibility for a private site.

The committee also debated a financing question: whether to set aside $1,000,000 annually from the municipal/developed lands programs for 3‑acre projects. Conservation districts and regional planning commissions expressed concern about permanently earmarking a dedicated $1 million because it could divert funding from other projects that yield larger water‑quality or equity benefits. Committee members discussed placing a sunset on the $1 million carve‑out; one proposal was a sunset through fiscal year 2028 to allow near‑term support while preserving future flexibility.

Committee members requested clearer statutory language so that the municipal stormwater implementation program is ‘‘expansive and not restricting,\" and directed bill authors and counsel to incorporate edits making the grant program permissive, to clarify notice requirements, and to confirm whether the bill will be referred to the Joint Fiscal Committee (finance) given fiscal impacts. Members also noted that municipalities with limited staff capacity may need technical assistance or regional approaches to apply for funding.

What happens next: Committee counsel will produce an updated draft showing the permissive language (for example, adding \"also\" where appropriate), add clarifications about municipalities that already have assessments in place, and include a proposed reporting timeline. The committee indicated it would consider a time‑limited appropriation (through 2028) if the draft moves forward.

Votes at a glance: No formal committee votes were recorded in the April 16 session; members gave drafting instructions and discussed a possible $1 million annual carve‑out with a sunset.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Natural Resources and Energy's Zoom Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","The Natural Resources & Energy Committee reviewed revisions to stormwater language in bill 03/19 on April 16, aiming to clarify municipal access to implementation grants for 3‑acre regulated sites and debating a proposed $1 million carve‑out for developed‑lands grants.","taxTitle","Natural Resources & Energy, SENATE, Committees, Legislative , Vermont","taxId",48480,"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},6272276,"Lawmakers review H.125: agencies, nonprofits urge focus on forward‑looking indicators and note data gaps",2986,7207000,10193000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3027967-800ae51bcc8aeda764bb1a0e3ecdfd08&start=7207&end=10193","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3027967-800ae51bcc8aeda764bb1a0e3ecdfd08/thumbnail_7207000.jpg","/articles/6272276/Vermont/Lawmakers-review-H125-agencies-nonprofits-urge-focus-on-forwardlooking-indicators-and-note-data-gaps","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6272276-3c6b8119b23aba39aa4d1a058fafab80/orig.mp4?Expires=1771181526&Signature=nj6MWaaFjs08wz~UvqQ5hMfU91HZtIRAAp3NZJ~bZu4fNGDqGHUbueokF2zdmd5bqojfIYGi5a4twjPnZQf3ryYKNDOS5IEZVxAJ3RdCCK9mRMN-TmQ~oDOIbMwQSfzZgSGLPKyob4-RxJtrTs~p4Rghh5wEfrLnE6~KCDzbIxEpAjh3ve9p9NhC~pJ-VmbwqH59IH6nT45R1Yaqja8DbSytNHL6fMRZx27ptOA1mrC0MufVb4yhCyFfuCX-gqL9F88FTIVbId-EXbf84DWpvTnFmnVzN2cs9ESjnsNAGBUuAOrnjraHzi009nuSXKRawND8K5gwjmYd4XJcdbS7Ig__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The committee heard from the Public Service Department and Energy Action Network on bill H.125, which would require periodic statewide reporting on energy prices, distributed generation, fuel sales and related indicators.

TJ Ford, Director of Regulated Utility Planning at the Public Service Department, told the committee that many of the requested data points already appear in the department's annual energy report, and that duplicative reporting could be a poor use of resources. \"The last section of the report, which asked ... for analysis of the data and recommendations ... is really the most valuable piece of this legislation,\" Ford said, arguing that the state would get the most value from a one‑time analysis that identifies forward‑looking indicators and the resources needed to collect them on an ongoing basis.

Ford noted some specific gaps and burdens: tracking active Certificates of Public Good (CPGs) for distributed generation is labor‑intensive because CPG filings are not available in a readily machine‑parseable database; forecasting EV rate adoption and disaggregating charging revenues by customer type are additional areas requiring more work. He recommended that the committee focus the bill on identifying the leading indicators that will be most useful for policymakers and then fund data collection accordingly.

Jared DuVall, executive director of Energy Action Network (EAN), presented EAN's existing data tools and said EAN's public dashboards already provide county‑ and town‑level tracking for many measures (weatherization completions, residential heat pump installations, EV registrations). DuVall also presented an economic snapshot: \"Total energy spending in Vermont [is] estimated to be about a little over $3,000,000,000,\" with more than $2 billion a year spent on fossil fuels during each of the last three years, figures he said underscore Vermont's exposure to global commodity price swings.

DuVall and others flagged additional gaps and constraints: employment data for the thermal trades are not collected with the same detail as renewable trade counts; EAN's clean energy industry report is federally funded and its future depends on grant support; some fuel prices (wood chips, cordwood) are hard to obtain consistently. Committee members responded that they wanted usable forward indicators (for example, utility‑level EV adoption forecasts, CPG application trends, and counts of weatherized homes by income cohort) and asked agencies and partners to propose a prioritized set of data elements and the resources required to maintain them.

What happens next: Department staff said they would coordinate with ANR and other agencies, and with external partners such as EAN, to identify which items can be provided now, which require modest additional resources and which would need new data systems. The committee indicated it prefers a focused, forward‑looking analysis that recommends how to measure progress going forward rather than duplicating already published lagging indicators.

Votes at a glance: No formal motions or votes were recorded. The committee asked agencies to return with recommendations and cost estimates for collecting forward‑looking indicators.","Public Service Department and Energy Action Network officials told the Natural Resources & Energy Committee that much of H.125's requested information exists but recommended the bill focus on forward‑looking indicators and identify the resources needed to collect them.",{"_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},6272286,"Committee considers expanding Vermont paint stewardship program to aerosols and related products",3474,30000,3504000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3027967-800ae51bcc8aeda764bb1a0e3ecdfd08&start=30&end=3504","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3027967-800ae51bcc8aeda764bb1a0e3ecdfd08/thumbnail_30000.jpg","/articles/6272286/Vermont/Committee-considers-expanding-Vermont-paint-stewardship-program-to-aerosols-and-related-products","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6272286-e059743996fb68c3b927f6a927ac1291/orig.mp4?Expires=1771181526&Signature=KfaINtHhNX629XpXiZkYmoM-b2~E-ywB9-79fy4jEcZefCws85V5prfuhwoW41caCbjKdYXwsKQMmFkv0UsfD-v0GwRalUHd2VVFz3bLjkJi2JPTssGA41OK029~cM5wmtWIL1mF06c~OWcKy~PeHoUkLRs997OHusVDJYS7~e-0Ue0GW5ZBKDbCU32yw0-aY4YC~jr5rUzv-9i8-XljOFXj085wmWuX8aDOOSNxQjpZ6hhZ7KMpQWfXG6go1sfBlS6XrFxpEXgo5vIo4X8p5SVb7plyGOPck67V4olLuIpLKl-l7mfRgd~D2ThAL9UiR-qpfklRN5tMHLtuRkVPXw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Natural Resources & Energy Committee on April 16 reviewed draft changes to bill 03/19 that would bring aerosol spray paints, paint thinners and other paint‑related products under Vermont's existing extended producer responsibility (EPR) paint stewardship program.

The draft, described by Department of Environmental Conservation Director of Waste Management Prevention Matt Chapman as an \"ANR discussion draft revised, with paint technical corrections,\" would add new definitions to the paint statute including \"aerosol coating products,\" \"coating related products\" and \"nonindustrial coatings,\" and create a broader definition of \"paint product\" to include architectural coatings plus the new categories. Chapman said the language represents consensus edits developed with PaintCare (the product stewardship organization), solid waste districts and ANR staff.

Committee members and stakeholders said the change would simplify public guidance and program logistics by moving many materials now handled through household hazardous waste programs into PaintCare's stewardship system. \"The paint care program's been in existence for a while now, and it's an incredibly successful program,\" Chapman said, noting PaintCare's response to flood‑related debris in recent years. Heidi McCallum, senior vice president of the American Coatings Association, said PaintCare operates 82 permanent year‑round drop‑off sites in Vermont and has collected over 1.2 million gallons of paint in the state since it began operations there.

Committee members pressed staff and PaintCare representatives on the bill's fee provisions, which keep the current fixed fee model for architectural coatings while giving PaintCare a statutory range to set fees for the newly added product categories. Chapman and McCallum described the fee process the stewardship organization uses: an independent financial auditor evaluates collection, transportation and processing costs and manufacturers report sales in the state; PaintCare then proposes a fee schedule. Committee members said the draft language should be clearer that retailers will collect a fee set by PaintCare (and approved through the process) rather than allowing retailers to choose the assessment amount.

Committee direction and next steps were procedural rather than legislative votes. Members agreed to refine the draft language to make the fee‑setting and retailer collection mechanics clearer and to require PaintCare and ANR to report back to this committee and the money committees with proposed fees for aerosol coatings, coating‑related products and nonindustrial coatings by Dec. 15, 2025. Committee staff and sponsors also noted the bill may need to be routed to the joint finance committee depending on final draft language.

The discussion touched on implementation timing. The draft implementation schedule described in the meeting would keep the existing architectural paint plan in place while requiring producers of all paint‑related products to submit stewardship plans by a scheduled implementation date (the draft sets program start dates in mid‑2026 with reporting milestones into 2027). Stakeholders told the committee they need time to finalize cost estimates for the new product categories before precise fees can be set.

What happens next: Committee staff will circulate an updated draft that clarifies who sets the fee, how retailers are reimbursed, and the reporting deadline. PaintCare and ANR will prepare the detailed fee proposal, supported by independent financial audits, and must report back by Dec. 15, 2025 so the Legislature can act on statutory fees if it chooses.

Votes at a glance: No formal motions or votes were recorded on 03/19 during the April 16 discussion; the committee instead provided drafting direction and set reporting expectations.","The House Natural Resources & Energy committee reviewed draft language to expand the state's PaintCare stewardship law to include aerosol coatings, coating‑related products and certain nonindustrial coatings, discussed fee‑setting mechanics and timeline, and directed program operators to return with proposed fees by Dec. 15, 2025.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee narrows municipal stormwater language, discusses $1M grant carve‑out with possible sunset

Lawmakers review H.125: agencies, nonprofits urge focus on forward‑looking indicators and note data gaps

Committee considers expanding Vermont paint stewardship program to aerosols and related products