Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mileage Based User Fee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Legislative counsel outlines 15-day appeals process for mileage-based user fee in House Transportation review
Summary
Legislative counsel reviewed draft changes to a mileage-based user fee in the House Transportation committee, including removal of an annual inflator, a clarification that the new fee is in addition to other fees and taxes, and a new subsection allowing a 15-day appeal to the commissioner consistent with 23 VSA 105–107. The Agency of Transportation indicated it supports the language.
Damon Leonard, legislative counsel with the Office of Legislative Council, walked members of the House Transportation committee through revisions to the draft “T bill” on March 18, focusing on a mileage-based user fee and several technical and procedural changes.
Leonard said the draft removes a prior annual inflator provision on page seven, explaining that "we'd gotten rid of the annual inflator in this section," which eliminated the need for separate subsections and cleaned up the language. He also noted a technical paragraph heading that clarifies "the mileage base user fee is in addition to any other fees and taxes."
The most substantive change Leonard described is a new subsection H establishing an appeals process for assessments. "This provides that a person may within 15 days after the assessment . . . appeal the amount of the assessment to the commissioner," he said, adding that the commissioner "shall establish procedures for filing and hearing the appeals that are consistent with the provisions of 23 VSA 105 through 107." Leonard said the procedures must include an option for an appellant to resolve the dispute with the department prior to a final decision, allowing settlement without a full hearing.
An Agency of Transportation representative told the committee the agency supports the proposed appeals language. Committee members signaled general assent to the described changes before pausing the meeting to break into caucuses.
The committee did not take a formal vote on the draft changes during this session; members aimed to get the bill text close to final so it could be printed and reviewed in full at a subsequent meeting.
