Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Committee debates language to clarify municipal authority to maintain legal trails amid pending lawsuit
Loading...
Summary
Members discussed options including findings-only language, adopting the Senate language to add maintenance authority to 19 V.S.A. chapter 3, or adopting statute plus intent; no formal vote was taken and committee scheduled further consideration.
The House Committee on Transportation debated draft changes to statutes governing "trails" and municipal authority, focusing on whether to clarify towns' authority to maintain legal trails while a court case over trail maintenance remains pending.
Damian Leonard, legislative counsel, reviewed the draft revisions to 19 V.S.A. chapter 3 that would update terminology (for example replacing "selectmen" with "legislative body"), define "trail" as a public right-of-way not considered a highway in that chapter, and add repeated clarifications that municipalities "shall have the authority to maintain trails" while also noting they are not required to do so. Leonard said the changes "add two references to the maintenance right, three references to the right to maintain the trails to clarify that right throughout 19 V.S.A. chapter 3."
Committee members debated three broad options: do nothing and wait for the court case outcome; adopt findings and intent language that states the committee's view of the law without changing statute text; or adopt the Senate-passed statutory language (with optional intent/findings language) clarifying municipalities' authority to maintain trails. "I feel very strongly, that we should go ahead and keep them... and the court case is a separate thing," Representative Burke said, arguing for statutory clarification rather than findings only.
Other members said they preferred a lighter approach that would state legislative intent without altering statute text while the litigation proceeds. Several members also said they had heard from towns that want clearer authority to maintain trail systems. Committee members discussed drafting a short findings section and an intent clause and were asked to review a posted draft of findings and intent language before reconvening.
No formal motion or recorded committee vote occurred during the session. Members signaled a working majority in favor of advancing language that preserves municipal authority to maintain trails and to present options to the committee chair for a formal vote at the next meeting. The committee set a follow-up meeting at 8:30 a.m. the next day to finalize language and take a formal vote.
If adopted in statute, the draft would amend definitions, add explicit authority for municipalities to maintain trails in 19 V.S.A. chapter 3 and clarify that trails "shall not be considered town highways" under certain provisions; the draft also retains a clause saying nothing in the provision "shall be deemed to independently authorize the condemnation of land for recreational purposes or to affect the authority of legislative bodies to reasonably regulate the uses of recreational trails."
