Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transparency Reporting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate would replace granular 10‑G project reports with a dashboard and require JTOC revenue updates
Summary
The Senate added language to the T bill replacing the annual 10‑G, line‑by‑line project report with a dashboard that summarizes project delays and cost increases, and it requires two updates to the Joint Transportation Oversight Committee on state and federal transportation funding.
At the May 1 House Transportation Committee meeting, legislative counsel described Senate language that would replace Vermont’s traditional 10‑G project reports with a quarterly dashboard and require two targeted funding updates to the Joint Transportation Oversight Committee (JTOC).
David Leonard, legislative counsel, said the 10‑G reports — which list new projects, major cost increases, closed projects and large variances for the transportation program — would be replaced by a dashboard that shows the percentage of projects by program area delayed more than a year and the percentage with cost increases greater than 50% or $5 million (whichever is less). The dashboard would be updated quarterly, and the full 10‑G project list would be phased out for future programs.
The Senate version also requires the secretary to provide JTOC with two updates (Sept. 30 and Dec. 15) on state transportation revenues and federal funding for the FY26 program. If the secretary determines a “significant change” has occurred, they may call a JTOC meeting within 14 days; a defined 4% revenue decline would trigger a more detailed written report identifying program impacts and options to respond.
Committee members debated tradeoffs: some said the granular, project‑level 10‑G format is important for members representing many towns, while others said a holistic dashboard may be more useful for statewide prioritization. Counsel and staff said the department proposed the dashboard and that the Senate’s approach is intended to provide a higher‑level, more visual view of project risk and delay while retaining the ability to ask for project‑level detail as needed.
Ending: the committee left open whether to concur in the change and asked AOT staff about drill‑down capability and plans for public posting to preserve transparency.
