Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Green Mountain Transit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Draft bill clarifies Green Mountain Transit service area; drafters preserved non‑exclusivity for other providers
Summary
Legislative counsel said H.488 language was amended to specify Green Mountain Transit’s service area as the Chittenden County urbanized area and to clarify that nothing in the section prohibits other transit providers from offering connecting or on‑demand services with AOT approval.
Draft H.488 language presented to the Senate Transportation Committee clarifies the charter language for Green Mountain Transit (GMT), specifying the agency’s proposed area of operation and preserving room for other providers to operate connecting or on‑demand services.
What the draft says
Legislative counsel Damian Leonard told the committee that Green Mountain Transit proposed wording stating its area of operation would be “the urbanized area of Chittenden County as established by the U.S. Census Bureau,” and that GMT “may operate service outside the urbanized areas with approval from the Agency of Transportation.” The draft also includes text reading that “nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent other transit providers from offering transit connecting to the urbanized area or providing on demand services in that area with approval of the agency,” language Leonard said GMT requested to avoid implying exclusivity.
Why it matters: The clarification was intended to treat the charter as defining GMT’s rights without preventing the agency or other providers from offering complementary services.
Transcript notes
Leonard explained the drafting choice: “Because this is a charter, it deals with the rights of Green Mountain Transit and not others. So that's why we provided ‘nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent’ because... we couldn't say other transit providers may operate, because it's not their charter.” He added this followed GMT’s request to be clear that the draft was not meant to bar other providers with AOT approval.
No formal committee action was taken during the hearing on the GMT language; the changes were described as inserted in the current draft for committee consideration.
