Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Agency Definition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Judiciary advances S.44 to expand 'public agency' definition; committee reports bill out 4-1
Summary
Committee members agreed to replace a hard list of covered entities with a cross-reference to the statutory definition of "public agency" in 1 V.S.A. §3(17), a change committee staff said would broaden coverage to include sheriffs and municipal subdivisions; the panel voted to report S.44 out by a 4-1 margin.
The Senate Judiciary Committee agreed to report S.44 out of committee after accepting a revision that replaces a specific list of covered entities with a cross-reference to the statutory definition of "public agency" in 1 V.S.A. §3(17).
A legislative staff member told the committee the draft (1.2) substitutes the cross-reference to the public-agency definition so the statute will cover "any agency, board, department, commission, committee, branch, instrumentality or authority of the state or any [political subdivision]," which the staff member said would include sheriffs and municipal bodies that might otherwise be omitted by a hand-compiled list. The staff member said the change is intended to avoid creating loopholes by excluding entities not named in an enumerated list.
Committee members discussed whether the cross-reference would inadvertently import public-records exceptions or carve-outs that exist elsewhere in statute. The staff member and other committee participants clarified that the revision brings in only the definitional scope (who counts as a public agency) and does not automatically import unrelated exemptions found in other statutory sections.
Supporters said the definition promotes uniformity and reduces the risk of leaving entities off an enumerated list. One committee member characterized the change as preferable to a static list, saying it "feels much more comprehensive" because the statutory definition adapts to entities recognized elsewhere in law.
Senator Norris voted "no" on the motion; Senators Vyhovsky, Baru, Maddox and Hashim voted "yes." A committee roll call recorded the tally as 4-1-0 and the chair moved to report S.44 positively out of committee. No sponsor name for the motion was recorded on the transcript.
The committee indicated the revised draft (1.2) will be the version forwarded; staff and members said they will continue to review downstream wording to ensure the change does not unintentionally import unrelated statutory exceptions.
