A bill passed the Senate Government Operations Committee that would grant the State Auditor access to any of the books, records, and returns of private businesses that contract with state government as it relates to performance. This would be a significant expansion of authority for the political office. The Vermont Chamber will work to support partner organizations such as the Associated General Contractors of Vermont and Vermont Bankers Association, as well as hospitals and other healthcare organizations, to raise concerns. If this legislation passes, it could lead to lengthy and costly interferences with business operations for any of the thousands of businesses contracting with the state of Vermont and will test the willingness of contractors to work on essential contracts such as hospitals, healthcare providers, construction companies, and information technology companies. 

It remains likely that additional litigation could be expected over the interpretation of what records are related to the performance of an audit. S.9 was voted out of the committee along party lines by a vote of 5-1-0.  Given the importance of contractors, hospitals and financial institutions to the operation of the state government, this bill should be reviewed by additional committees including Senate Transportation, Senate Health and Welfare, and Senate Institutions. 

To address liquor liability insurance concerns, the Vermont Chamber and Vermont Independent Restaurants (VTIR) are advocating for H.288, legislation that would amend the statutes governing liability for the sale of alcoholic beverages. Vermont’s statutes, which have not been amended since 1987, make Vermont an outlier and undesirable state to insure in. VTIR leadership members Chris Karr of the Killington-based Karr Group and Alex Crothers of Higher Ground testified that if this issue is not addressed urgently, their businesses are at risk of becoming inoperable in Vermont. 

The Vermont Chamber also provided testimony to amend the statute. Specifically, by updating Vermont’s dram shop laws to be in line with neighboring control states such as Maine, and to also remove the landlord from the chain of liability. The current chain of liability includes the server, the business owner, and the landlord.  

A bill has been introduced to address the issue of why it is so costly, or not possible, for licensees to obtain liquor liability insurance in Vermont. With the help of the House Speaker, this issue has received timely attention. The Vermont Chamber and VTIR will be advocating for legislation that updates state dram shop laws to be in line with neighboring control states. Specifically, by amending the statute so that liability is established on negligence and landlords are removed from the chain of liability in the unlawful sale of alcoholic beverages. Vermont ranks with Alabama as the two worst states for liquor liability insurance.  

Currently, Vermont is an outlier because liability is established on a strict basis and includes the server, owner, and landlord. H.288 proposes to amend the statutes on liability for the sale of alcoholic beverages to reduce the scope of liability and limit the persons who may be subject to an action for damages that result from an unlawful sale of alcoholic beverages. These changes would ensure Vermont businesses do not have to pay exorbitant rates, or, become uninsurable. Initial testimony on this issue was taken by the House Government Operations and Military Affairs Committee.

The House General and Housing Committee voted 9-3-0 in support of H.66, with the three Republican legislators all voting against the paid family and medical leave (PFML) legislation. As the policy committee of jurisdiction, the committee has tackled challenging and complicated conversations in recent weeks concerning how this extensive new mandated benefits program would work. However, many questions remain unanswered and the contrast between paid leave legislation crafted in 2019 is stark. 

Multiple aspects of the current bill were reviewed and altered at the suggestion of the Vermont Chamber, including a further definition of “personal bond” regarding familial relationships that require care to qualify for benefits. The removal of refund payments to employees making under $25,000 in wages was also addressed. However, the legislation still aims to create the most expansive PFML program in the nation and relies on the State Treasurer to create a new insurance program rather than working with the already established private insurer. This is opposite to the precedent set by other states that have created PFML programs. The cost and effort that this would take are largely guesswork and likely to be staggering. The legislation will now be reviewed by the House Ways and Means Committee.