Things got busy quickly this week in anticipation of the coming two week break. Usually the House has passed its version of the budget before the Town Meeting events back home; but this year is anything but usual. As you already know, the governor and the legislature are miles apart on the solution to the current and coming budget shortfalls. And the judicial branch is caught right in the middle of that. The governor’s recommend for the judiciary is one million dollars less than the courts need and want. If the governor’s proposal wins out, we may be looking at 12 furlough days in FY 2010 for all judicial branch employees. The Chief has said there is no other way to absorb that cut. Now is the time for you to speak with your house reps and senators and let them know that access to justice is a fundamental right and cannot be jeopardized.

Perhaps the biggest non news story of the week was the unanimous positive votes by the retention committee on the Judges Crawford, Grearson, Teachout,and VanBenthuysen. The four judges impressed the retention committee members with their views of service on the bench and their insights into how to improve justice in the courts. In fact, since nothing really arose at the public hearing last Thursday, the follow up meeting with the judges this past Tuesday became an informal round table discussion on those topics. I give great credit to committee chair Willem Jewett. He moved the meeting to a smaller more intimate room and further set the conversational tone. In all the years I’ve followed the retention process I can’t remember one with so little controversy. The joint assembly to vote on retention will be held on Thursday, March 19th.

I had the opportunity to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday to testify on S.36, a bill that would require that votes on retention of judges be by voice or roll call. Presently that vote is taken by paper ballot. The VBA Board discussed the proposal and, although it agreed that either alternative is supportable, it decided to oppose the change. The grounds were simply that there does not appear to be a problem which a change in process would solve. I communicated that position and the committee moved on to other business. I’m not sure they will return to that bill this year.

The Uniform Limited Cooperative Associations Act (H.109) is on its way to the senate having gained house approval this week. The bill is a uniform act managed through the house by Commissioner Peter Langrock. The House Commerce Committee did the bilk of the work but the bill did stop at House Judiciary for review. We hope to see it enacted before adjournment this spring.

I want to recognize the efforts of two of our members who served on the uniform trust code study committee in conjunction with some others as well as trust officers. The study committee worked on a Vermont Trust Code for about a year and a half. The committee met about every three during that period. Well, it culminated in S.86, a 121 page bill that was the subject of review by the Senate Finance Committee for three days this week. Appearing at each hearing were Paul Hanlon and Mark Langan, the study group chair. They devoted three afternoons to their testimony which, although it may be detailed and difficult for non lawyers to understand, was clear and engaged the Finance Committee members. I have rarely heard a committee thank and compliment witnesses for their clarity in explaining the intricacies of a piece of legislation. Here is Paul’s email to his fellow study committee members:

Mark and Dan are on their way home from our third day of testimony. We wrapped it up a little over an hour ago.

The Senate Finance Committee was very receptive and gave us their full attention. Our testimony was interrupted by other committee business several times, but we got through the whole bill with them, and they appear prepared to vote the bill out of committee. Sen. Cummings, the chair, was away today, so the committee will deal with the bill again on March 17, the first day of business after the town meeting recess. At that time, anyone who wishes to testify about the bill will be able to be heard. Also at that time, we will discuss with the committee a proposed fee schedule that Judge Belcher will be preparing. We are not sure if the fees will be added to the bill or added to a separate bill dealing with other fees that seem sure to be increased.

Dan and Chris spoke on the first day about the benefits of the bill to trust companies and trust departments, and they were very effective. Judge Belcher joined Mark and me during the discussion of Article 2 to support the migration of living trusts to the probate courts. Mark and I alternated in presenting all chapters of the trust code.

The Senators recognized the volunteerism of our study group, so all members of the study committee should hear that they were appreciative of our efforts. I think the "good will" that they feel will show up in their presentation of the bill to the full Senate.

It seems likely that we will need to give a brief presentation to the Senate Judiciary Committee before the bill reaches the full Senate. The Senators on the Finance Committee have already asked us to prepare summaries so that they can more easily present the bill to the full Senate, so Mark and I will likely have the "Cliff Notes" version ready by then. Senator Cummings expressed confidence that the bill would pass the Senate by "crossover."

Thanks to you for your work on the committee. I'm tired but excited by the prospects that we are a step closer to making the Vermont Trust Code a reality.

Paul

I am always concerned when our members are asked to testify at legislative committee hearings. They travel on their own time and their own expense to Montpelier, often to learn that the house or senate is on the floor bogged down in debate and we wait and wait. It’s not unusual for the witness to be told he or she will have to come back. In fact, that happened to Eric Avildsen, Executive Director of Vermont Legal Aid just this week. He was asked to present to House Judiciary, he arrived and set up a brief DVD presentation only to be delayed a half hour and then sent away. So for all of you that have experienced this or have yet to, thank you for your efforts in improving the law and advancing the administration of justice.

In fact, this morning the Senate Judiciary Committee passed H.11, the probate bill passed and vetoed in 2008. Although the bill passed the House in the second week of January, the committee waited to consider it. Their time was spent on S. 13, the comprehensive sexual assault response bill. Now that that battle is over the committee is cleaning up other pending matters. Although the committee made two technical changes it unanimously voted to recommend passage. The full senate should consider the bill during their first week back. I’ll keep you posted on this one as it will take effect upon signing. With luck, we should be looking at early April.

Thanks, as always, for reading. I’ll report next on March 20th. I hope to see you all at the Mid Year Meeting.

This site was last updated on