The legislature takes a week off after today for the Town Meeting break. The week they return, beginning Tuesday, March 13th, is the so-called crossover week. That’s the deadline for bills to make the calendar in each chamber if they are to have any hope of action by the other chamber and passage this year. This deadline is not as important in the first year of the biennium as it will be in the second.

This week many committees upped the speed with which they looked at bills in order to give as many as possible a hearing before today. So, a number of bills of interest to the VBA were on the calendar. Here is some of what happened this week.

The House Government Operations Committee spent time on Thursday on H.111, a bill that would delay by two years the deadline for towns to identify and map so called “unidentified corridors”, maybe better known as “ancient roads”. The Committee decided to take no action on the bill this year, thinking it too early after last year’s extensive work on the issue. However, the bill does contain an appropriation of $400,000 for the municipal and regional planning fund for grants to towns to do the research and mapping. That piece will be considered by the Appropriations Committee in the budget bill. Even though no action will be taken this year, the bill remains alive and may well be revisited next year after a second year of experience with the research and mapping program. Remember also that there is a Senate bill that would undo the entire program. More on this next year for sure!

The House Fish, Wildlife and Water Resources Committee is working on H.296 and H.303. These are the bills that deal with water supply and wastewater systems under universal jurisdiction beginning July 1, 2007. There doesn’t seem to be much disagreement on the “clean slate concept” although the administration opposes the “time of sale inspection” piece as too costly. The argument is being made that market forces will require time of sale inspection, certification etc. making it unnecessary to mandate it in statute. More on this to come. (The VBA is doing a program on this at the Mid Year Meeting on Friday, March 23rd at the Sheraton). Here are links to the bills:

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/legdoc.cfm?URL=/docs/2008/bills/intro/H-296.HTM

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/legdoc.cfm?URL=/docs/2008/bills/intro/H-303.HTM

Another issue (not yet a bill) of interest to real estate practitioners as well as municipal and environmental law practitioners is the Uniform Environmental Covenants Act. It is being considered by the Senate Economic Development Committee. A copy of the draft, as well as a statement by the National Conference of Commissioners of Uniform State Laws is on our website HERE

The act is supported by the Vermont League of Cities and Towns as well as other groups. The Vermont Bankers Association is currently opposed but is re-examining its position in light of new testimony heard this week. The VBA was unaware of the draft but it is now in the hands of three of our Sections for review and comment: Real Property Law, Municipal Law and Environmental Law. Please review and send me any comments you may have. We need to return to the Senate Committee during the week of the 12th as the Committee wants the bill to make crossover. The Agency of Natural Resources has a concern about being named the repository of the remediation plans; they’d prefer that the plans reside in the land records along with other filings affecting title to real property. Of course, you know the response to that: the vaults are too full already and, at $7 a page, this is going to add up to a real expense. The Committee hopes to work this out by mid March.

The Vermont Trial Lawyers Association (VTLA) is following S.142 a bill that would create screening panels for medical injury claims. The Senate Judiciary Committee spent Thursday morning hearing from the medical provider side as well as from VTLA. Read S.142 here:

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/legdoc.cfm?URL=/docs/2008/bills/intro/S-142.HTM

Family law practitioners may be interested in this week’s conversations in the Senate Finance Committee on S.62, a bill that would allow continuation of group health insurance coverage at no additional premium for the spouse of an employee following divorce or legal separation. Even after the remarriage of the former spouse, the insurance could continue through a rider to the policy. The Committee held two hearings this week and then put the bill off until mid March or later. The VBA has not yet testified on it although our Family Law Section has it out for discussion. After hearing from legislative counsel on the purpose and effect of the bill, the Committee heard from insurance company representatives who were opposed to the bill. For example, Blue Cross-Blue Shield of Vermont raised these issues: the costs of administration would be high as this would have to be done by hand. BC-BS raised the availability of Catamount Health as the alternative for the former spouse of the employee; Cigna agreed. They also raised HIPAA and HSA concerns. Privacy concerns do appear to be compromised if medical information is to be shared among ex-spouses. The availability of tax deductions for HSA contributions complicates the continued tie between former spouses. Some questions are raised of course about self funded plans being beyond the reach of the bill.

BISHCA offered a strike all amendment to the bill. It would replace S.62 with this language added to 15 VSA 762: “The court shall make explicit provision in any final order or divorce decree to assure that persons with health insurance or other health coverage prior to divorce or separation remain insured, and shall allocate responsibility for the cost of maintaining such coverage.”

As I mentioned above, the Family Law Section has been discussing this bill and I’ll keep it on the radar screen and report back to you in a couple of weeks. Here’s the bill:

It is hereby enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Vermont:

Sec.1.  8 V.S.A. § 4090b(b) is amended to read:

(b)  Contributions shall be due on a monthly basis in advance to the insurer or the insurer’s agent, and shall not be more than the group rate for the insurance being continued under the group policy on the due date of each payment.  In the case of coverage for any individual whose insurance under the group policy would terminate because of divorce or legal separation from the covered employee, the former spouse of the covered employee shall remain eligible under the group policy.  The premium shall be computed to ensure that the total premium shall be no more than the premium that would be due if not for the divorce or separation.

Sec.2.  8 V.S.A. § 4090c is amended to read:

§ 4090c.  TERMINATION OF COVERAGE

Continuation of insurance under the group policy shall terminate upon the occurrence of any of the following:

(1)  the date six months after the date that insurance under the policy would have terminated due to the death or loss of employment of the employee or member, the divorce or legal separation of the covered employee from the employee’s spouse, unless there is a court order providing for the continued eligibility of the employee’s spouse for the group coverage, or a dependent child ceasing to be a dependent child under the generally applicable requirements of the policy of the employee or member;

* * *

(4)  the date on which the group policy is terminated or, in the case of an employee, the date the decedent’s or terminated employee’s employer terminates participation under the group policy.  If such coverage is replaced by similar coverage under another group policy:

(A)  the person shall have the right to become covered under that replacement policy, for the balance of the period that he or she would have remained covered under the prior group policy;

(B)  the minimum level of benefits to be provided by the replacement policy shall be the applicable level of benefits of the prior group policy reduced by any benefits payable under that prior group policy;

(C)  the prior group policy shall continue to provide benefits to the extent of its accrued liabilities and extensions of benefits as if the replacement has not occurred ;

(5)  the remarriage of the former spouse of the covered employee, in the case of coverage for any person whose insurance under the group policy is based on the former marriage to the covered employee.  In the event of remarriage, the former spouse shall have the right to continue to receive benefits as are available to the covered employee by means of a rider to the family plan or the issuance of an individual plan, either of which may be at additional premium rates as approved pursuant to section 4062 of this title .  

The legislature will delay the vote on the retention of the seven judges that went through the process this year. It now appears the vote will occur on Thursday, March 22nd and not on the 15th as I reported to you earlier. Since the VBA will be at the Mid Year Meeting on the 22nd and 23rd, I’ll be out of the building but will report to the membership on Friday.

The following bills came in this week and will have to wait for next year for action. For each, I’ll copy the statement of purpose from the bill as well as add the link to the text of the bill:

H.364: Statement of purpose:  This bill proposes to remove certain restrictions on the ability of the administrative judge to assign the environmental judges.  It also proposes to redirect appeals of the district environmental commissions’ decisions to the land use panel of the natural resources board.

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/legdoc.cfm?URL=/docs/2008/bills/intro/H-364.HTM

H.395: Statement of purpose:  This bill proposes to provide a process for resolution of residential construction disputes prior to filing an action in court.

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/legdoc.cfm?URL=/docs/2008/bills/intro/H-395.HTM

H.445: Statement of purpose:  This bill proposes to make various changes to the laws governing wills and estates.  The bill:(1)  repeals various provisions that define the surviving spouse’s share of a decedent’s estate if the decedent died without a will that distinguish between real and personal property in the estate, and that distinguish between men and women;(2)  specifies that a will that provides for the transfer of a decedent’s probate estate to the surviving spouse is revoked upon divorce or annulment of a marriage or by dissolution of a civil union;(3)  increases the surviving spouse’s share of a decedent’s estate if the decedent dies without a will; and(4)  makes various changes to the share of the surviving spouse if the spouse chooses to elect against the decedent’s will.

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/legdoc.cfm?URL=/docs/2008/bills/intro/H-445.HTM

H. 458: Statement of purpose:  This bill proposes to amend the corporations and limited liability companies’ statutes to address organizational and operational activities, including matters pertaining to share and stock ownership, voting, the conduct of meetings, and the use of electronic documents and means of communication.

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/legdoc.cfm?URL=/docs/2008/bills/intro/H-458.HTM

H. 470: Statement of purpose:  This bill proposes to clarify that eligibility requirements for members of the judicial nominations board apply only at the time of appointment or election; permit legislative vacancies to be filled by appointment instead of election; establish more detailed requirements for judicial candidates regarding the practice of law and residency; and clarify the law regarding confidentiality of board proceedings.

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/legdoc.cfm?URL=/docs/2008/bills/intro/H-470.HTM

S. 161: Statement of purpose:  This bill proposes to replace the uniform management of institutional funds act with the uniform prudent management of institutional funds act.  Subject to the intent of a donor expressed in a gift instrument, the bill requires an institution managing and investing an institutional fund to consider the charitable purposes of the institution and the purposes of the institutional fund.  Each person responsible for managing and investing an institutional fund is required to do so in good faith and with the care an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would exercise under similar circumstances.

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/legdoc.cfm?URL=/docs/2008/bills/intro/S-161.HTM

There will be no report next week, of course, as the legislature will be in recess. The week after that is a short one for me as I have to travel to a conference out of state on Wednesday. The week of March 19th will find the VBA at the Sheraton in South Burlington for the 50th Mid Year Meeting. Please join us there.

This site was last updated on