[{"_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",6225701,"mediaKeyId","3535371-70cc45bf6d37bed6b3399dab17ae31e1","parentId",3535371,"title","Senate Transportation panel weighs bill language after DMV warns Real ID wording could cause federal compliance risk","audioSeconds",981,"startMs",2223000,"endMs",3204000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3535371-70cc45bf6d37bed6b3399dab17ae31e1&start=2223&end=3204","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3535371-70cc45bf6d37bed6b3399dab17ae31e1/thumbnail_2223000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6225701/Vermont/Senate-Transportation-panel-weighs-bill-language-after-DMV-warns-Real-ID-wording-could-cause-federal-compliance-risk","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6225701-14f2ca029dfedcc4b5b6de1a03c818e5/orig.mp4?Expires=1770968093&Signature=hEF449DqQS0aaTvXebF-yRUFyuVsDU--Lxtp5WNovtb4tzErhnnOyh1U3SOzrn8K5HOOqAJOuWojhDxICZg9WJi-vA7LZmf-NfI~SqiemK6YYKrFxQnY2xN0RuK4Qe8Ez2gdBouXOuMyEUU101XZUBO6l5UrxYTyloY0yzpJyVN8uESxHYVCAfxvCWOiAzmuMnPGsvHDX9zd0RbOMyNesb~hV90imkvytqzEcI70mffg~u51XL8pGOpmPiSLNG9bEmcR61ESXGhJkab3asHzamd5ZSvuLA2W1BM3E20PV6MoUllrhPC22nLmdz68BSB3M5kmVn-27hodfOfBSBeXbQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-05-28T04:29:07Z","article","Senate Transportation members spent a large portion of their meeting debating language in a miscellaneous DMV bill that would require DMV staff to \"shall continue to be informed\" applicants about options such as operator privilege cards or non‑driver IDs after a REAL ID application triggers a federal check.

The discussion matters because DMV officials said the mandatory phrasing could be read as requiring the agency to provide an alternative credential immediately even when a federal database flag—such as evidence of fraudulent documents or other law‑enforcement flags—appears during a REAL ID check. \"To the extent permitted by federal law,\" Daniel Leonard of the Office of Legislative Counsel read as a possible insertion to narrow the language.

Daniel Leonard, office of legislative counsel, walked committee members through the House and Senate differences and suggested the phrase that would limit state requirements to what federal law allows. The DMV's Andy Collier said the agency was concerned that a blunt statutory \"shall\" could lock DMV into a practice that conflicts with federal requirements and risk federal funding or compliance. \"Yes. That's our interpretation of it,\" Collier said when asked whether the provision, as drafted, could create such a conflict.

Committee members probed DMV staff about what kinds of \"flags\" could appear during a REAL ID application check. DMV described instances that can include expired or suspect visas and, rarely, hits that indicate criminal or fraudulent records tied to the submitted documents. Committee members asked for more precise legal guidance; one committee member requested a written opinion from DMV counsel to explain whether the proposed language would imperil federal requirements.

There was no formal vote during the meeting. Members directed staff to seek legal clarification and to provide written guidance and recommended language for any conference committee. Daniel Leonard said the drafting team and DMV had already discussed a potential insertion: \"to the extent permitted by federal law,\" placed immediately after the statutory clause that would require informing applicants of alternative credentials.

The committee also asked DMV to provide a legal memo and examples of the types of database hits that raise compliance concerns. Members scheduled follow‑up discussions for the next meeting; DMV agreed to supply counsel's written advice before further action.

Background: the provision sits alongside other changes in the miscellaneous DMV bill, including rules about early renewal notifications and language clarifying applicants' ability to self‑attest gender markers on certain credentials. Committee members emphasized they want to preserve access to non‑REAL ID credentials for eligible applicants while avoiding unintended conflict with the federal REAL ID Act of 2005.

Committee members closed the discussion by requesting a formal legal explanation from DMV counsel and legislative counsel before placing any mandatory statutory language into the bill file.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Transportation - 2025-05-23 - 11:30AM","oneSentenceSummary","Senate Transportation members spent a large portion of their meeting debating language in a miscellaneous DMV bill that would require DMV staff to \"shall continue to be informed\" applicants about options such as operator privilege cards or non‑driver IDs after a REAL ID application triggers a federal check.","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},6225687,"House narrows vehicle purchase‑and‑use tax study into a report; inspections review broadened",227,1109000,1336000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3535371-70cc45bf6d37bed6b3399dab17ae31e1&start=1109&end=1336","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3535371-70cc45bf6d37bed6b3399dab17ae31e1/thumbnail_1109000.jpg","/articles/6225687/Vermont/House-narrows-vehicle-purchaseanduse-tax-study-into-a-report-inspections-review-broadened","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6225687-9dfb6af2f670e9eb8571c7e1d8dad386/orig.mp4?Expires=1770968093&Signature=U~7AI2PmJHB~U6rN08Sdcc2COeAYY~ztrl~duoKhUuK5klM170WEJ1~BQaa6YyWuDnD7226c7ECoYwVwyx-Ie13slMomHGA9Dk8SOC8xLB-wWd-ogmAbJiVpDIfgCt15~uQWVa~HEDmbTKHdXi1A~SQy-0OUrZWmZJmIzyBvNKhHw5Fi3rHPW6EdagY0qg2MCPcXBzN62dt878LmMkbgEIkxzLgu25v5MOZlOYCIH6fp6~FDppAtQtNIMNvVeDP72KvDUzkVtg0VhN~0rY-GCTOT2t4DkEL9ZZ5Ze6CLMRaZjHSiqKy92OoJ9gUs7RMcqn3RjV7qh1gfIsrMVm9Hig__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Transportation members reviewed House edits that convert a proposed motor vehicle purchase‑and‑use tax study committee into a DMV report and expand the inspection review to cover funding and options to reduce the fiscal burden of annual inspections for low‑income Vermonters.

Daniel Leonard, office of legislative counsel, said the House language focuses the purchase‑and‑use tax work on data the DMV can compile: how often dealer appraisals were used in the last two calendar years, the age and type of vehicles involved, differences between appraised values and trade‑in values, counts of appeals filed and revisions, and a web portal for customer feedback. On inspections, the House added a requirement to summarize assistance programs for lower‑income Vermonters and to examine approaches such as reducing inspection frequency to every two years.

The House also converted the Senate study committee—where members could have received modest compensation if not otherwise reimbursed—into a DMV report to reduce potential study costs, committee members said. Leonard contrasted the bodies' approaches: the Senate had proposed a study committee focused more narrowly on onboard diagnostic issues, while the House broadened inspection topics and narrowed the purchase‑and‑use tax effort to a DMV report.

Committee members asked about cost and staffing for a study committee; the House change was presented as a cost‑saving measure. The committee did not take final action and left the language for conference committee work and further drafting.

Members signaled interest in the web portal and in ensuring the report includes concrete counts and fiscal implications for any recommended changes to tax assessment methodology or inspection frequency.","The House changed a Senate study committee on vehicle purchase‑and‑use tax into a DMV report and broadened inspection study topics to include funding assistance and potential frequency changes.",{"_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},6225692,"Committee reviews bicycle provisions: two‑abreast clarification, bike control signals and outreach",489,1386000,1875000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3535371-70cc45bf6d37bed6b3399dab17ae31e1&start=1386&end=1875","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3535371-70cc45bf6d37bed6b3399dab17ae31e1/thumbnail_1386000.jpg","/articles/6225692/Vermont/Committee-reviews-bicycle-provisions-twoabreast-clarification-bike-control-signals-and-outreach","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6225692-e4f81952effc0dee25e21f1be0af339d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770968093&Signature=iJZB634N9TM7qF20jutvmI-YxhzkQUJ2gxhk1oz6QN028SfD61sWHBhGOCO9s-ORwTGP9Qb1fI9Tz~eaGY6uIZvMeJe-Qd2HunV~jh7CeaRInvdAQ0WsJ-QKEO87br2~yWL9YPq6o9gF6NA61f92WollTwz8p9pRXNqRMOsOoiyzL1sAGWu3ZvHL-Lv~7-ffTT~IxZaIwCB5mHpDBU8EsJIwUEv6zGiU4adhKLTQYAbpeKZVzMAufN93bTdg9R2DmBtRItJ0x-qrM2SNGRPB2mScsefFnBMvm13A9SQIluVuYWUVIR8sXo40EjQ46Mtelpd8Wam1JY789rW1rd5XKQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Transportation reviewed House provisions on bicycle operation that add paragraph headings clarifying existing law on riding abreast, describe behavior at bicycle‑specific traffic signals, and require public outreach about bicyclist and motorist interactions.

Daniel Leonard, office of legislative counsel, told the committee the bill does not adopt an \"Idaho stop\" but does allow a bicyclist to proceed through an intersection on a walk signal if they yield to vehicles or pedestrians already in the intersection. The measure also defines how bicyclists should respond to a dedicated bicycle control signal and directs outreach on safe passing distances and operation at signalized intersections.

Committee members asked whether the bill changes the existing rule that bicyclists may ride two abreast. Leonard said the change is primarily clarifying: historical drafting sometimes used \"may not\" where the drafters now prefer the clearer mandatory phrasing \"shall not\" for consistency. The statute continues to allow riding more than two abreast in exclusive bicycle lanes or with permission from the commissioner of public safety for races or events.

Local cycling advocacy group Local Motion sent a letter supporting sections related to bicycle operations, committee members said. The committee did not take a formal vote and left the language in place for further consideration with outreach and education components highlighted for implementation planning.

The committee signaled interest in ensuring public information materials accompany any change to clarify how bicyclists use bike‑specific signals and how motorists should pass bicyclists safely.","Senate Transportation reviewed House language about bicycle operations that clarifies two‑abreast riding, creates rules for bicycle control signals and requires public outreach on safe passing and signal use.",{"_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},6225697,"House deletes Senate window‑tint changes; committee debates enforcement and past delayed rules",203,587000,790000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3535371-70cc45bf6d37bed6b3399dab17ae31e1&start=587&end=790","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3535371-70cc45bf6d37bed6b3399dab17ae31e1/thumbnail_587000.jpg","/articles/6225697/Vermont/House-deletes-Senate-windowtint-changes-committee-debates-enforcement-and-past-delayed-rules","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6225697-3e187206daba83591ac7881bfa393e34/orig.mp4?Expires=1770968093&Signature=SD73JCC9HtawCIgFsdaQlj19nQj9WzmLgiBwnaQ7uBIOakgOnHVzzcA0PkavGvojw5yPpApF6eO9fCwWMQRtsClnG2fNDdyj8wmN-TA1YS39icqtgG9MoU3xkWeegYA7MZ5IifNyhCxO3Nki2sG7UEQNiqICNp~aQVqFW5r4-98EquwkFhgAivKtjfx0IStcTFE9XkrTkvfUEUmeS9yKhby7IW6KzQWiJGgZ8GM1HGuZ7YWq-y2IVgSqRpc29mcpRKk3QNMLXeXye43PupZE3SkemvwMcafPpd6FD8ghXNvXO3upy8C5WvfbdUHOsAz0z7iiTOx6G4UOj7XmyZeD-A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Transportation members reviewed a House amendment that removes the Senate's proposed changes to vehicle window‑tint rules, returning the statute to the \"existing law\" approach and reviving questions about enforcement and rulemaking from last year.

The change matters because last year's DMV bill (Act 165) had prospective amendments to the tinted‑window law with a delayed effective date intended to give DMV time to adopt rules; the House deletion removes those amendments from statute and leaves the earlier law in place. Committee members discussed a Senate proposal to set a 70 percent visual light transmission (VLT) standard and noted DMV had not completed rulemaking for the delayed provisions.

Daniel Leonard, office of legislative counsel, summarized the positions: the House removed the new tinting language and \"stay[ed] with existing law,\" while the Senate position had been a 70% VLT standard. Committee members recalled that the amendments in last year's bill were to take effect July 1, 2025, and that DMV had not enacted associated rules because the Senate language had inserted a delayed effective date.

Members also discussed enforcement tools and testimony the committee received about measurement devices. Law‑enforcement and inspection‑mechanic testimony, committee members said, indicated a device that meets enforcement standards and could withstand a challenge might cost more than $100 to calibrate and maintain — a cost that could affect how strictly agencies enforce a VLT standard.

No formal action was taken; senators said they would discuss how to proceed in conference or future drafting. Several members noted confusion about whether deleting this year's bill would restore last year's statutory changes, and Leonard clarified that if the current bill were killed, the result would be a return to the prior statutory state depending on other moves in conference.

The committee left the matter open for further discussion and signaled interest in reconciling differences in conference committee work.","Senate Transportation members reviewed House deletion of last year's proposed window‑tint rules and discussed enforcement, a 70% visual light transmission proposal, and testimony that enforcement equipment calibration could cost more than $100.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Senate Transportation panel weighs bill language after DMV warns Real ID wording could cause federal compliance risk

House narrows vehicle purchase‑and‑use tax study into a report; inspections review broadened

Committee reviews bicycle provisions: two‑abreast clarification, bike control signals and outreach

House deletes Senate window‑tint changes; committee debates enforcement and past delayed rules