Former secretary of state urges letting certified Bennington winner serve while committee clarifies map language

Former Vermont Secretary of State Jim Condos told the House Committee on Government Operations & Military Affairs on Jan. 31 that the law and precedent point to allowing the certified winner from the Bennington contest to remain seated while the Legislature corrects language in the redistricting description.

Condos, a 12-year former secretary of state and eight-year former state senator, told the committee that the redistricting process “should never be rushed” and that multiple checks — software, legislative review, the secretary of state’s office and town clerks — are part of how maps and voter rolls get implemented. “The house has already ceded the winner, the supposed winner or the certified winner,” Condos said, and he recommended the House allow that person to “maintain the office through this election cycle” while lawmakers revise the language so the issue does not recur in future elections.

That recommendation matters because a judge and the current secretary of state have both said they lack authority to resolve the dispute about which voters were properly assigned to the district; Condos told the committee the Legislature is the body that ultimately reviews qualifications and seating of members. Condos also urged that if the Legislature decides to hold a new vote, it should be open to “all voters within that district” rather than a targeted subset: “If you're gonna go forward...all members, all voting members, from the district, which would include 4 or 5 towns, should be allowed to vote,” he said.

Committee members said Condos's view aligned with testimony the panel heard the previous day from former Deputy Secretary of State Paul Gillis. The committee did not take a formal vote on any statutory language during the Jan. 31 session but agreed to ask the current secretary of state and the elections director to return for one more on-the-record conversation at the committee’s next meeting, which members discussed scheduling for Tuesday afternoon.

Representative Nugent asked whether a petition revote is perfectly analogous to a budget revote; Condos replied there is no perfect analogy but emphasized that budget revotes and petitioned revotes are typically open to all district voters rather than a targeted subset. Members stressed they want to give lawmakers and stake-holders time to digest any proposed language before voting. The committee paused the hearing to await a subsequent panel of presenters from the National Guard.

The committee's next steps, as discussed on the record, were to bring the current secretary of state and the elections director back for additional testimony and to draft language clarifying how map descriptions should be interpreted going forward. No formal motion or final legislative language was adopted at the Jan. 31 meeting.