Tom Chittenden provided the responses below and asked the we include the following statement in his posted responses to this survey: “I appreciate the opportunity to answer these questions to members of your political action committee. I respectfully decline to be considered for endorsement by the Voice of the Environment Political Action Committee and will not accept it if offered.” [Note: Voices of the Environment does not expect to operate as a Political Action Committee in respect of the 2022 Chittenden County Senate Race. We are a grass roots group of voters concerned about the environment and working to elect representatives that share our concerns.]
Please name three specific pieces of legislation that are important to you and why.
By ‘specific’ do you mean bills as introduced this past biennium or topic areas?
If the former: modest but important gun control measures in S. 4 now signed into law, affordable housing investment and permit reform in S. 226, funded governance study committee on the Burlington International Airport in the Transportation Bill H. 736.
If the latter:
More sensible gun control including safe storage, waiting periods, universal background checks and gun/ammo taxation.
Transportation sector climate emissions reduction through rational assessment with emissions variable car registration fees & road usage assessment using automated vehicle identification methods as well as public transportation usage tracking for income sensitive time subsidies through state income tax policy.
Permit reform to foster more affordable high density housing in our urban cores served by existing municipal infrastructure balanced with increased forest block protections in our rural swaths.
How would you preserve the environment while ensuring a supply of affordable housing?
Act 250 reform to include downtown exemptions, on-the-record-review, forest block protections and enhanced countywide review of proposed local zoning regulations to align with our state global warming solutions climate action plan.
What’s your plan to save the water quality of Lake Champlain and our many tributaries?
Reliable and rational funding sources to improve our aged infrastructure in our larger cities like Burlington. Local sales option taxes are enacted city by city or town by town as a rational assessment to collect a tax on commercial activity within a towns borders that increase the need for municipal services (e.g. roads, traffic management, police, fire, ems…). For the past few years, online sales to addresses within a municipality also are assessed (or are supposed to be) that options tax (but ONLY IF that municipality has a local option tax). Those delivery trucks rely on roads throughout the state including local roads in communities that don’t have this 1% local sales option tax. I propose the state assess all online/home-delivery sales the 1% across the board which would then include our smaller communities that are still paving/maintain roads to enable these delivery of goods. And I further propose that this revenue is solely directed to address our water quality issues in lake Champlain. Our roads create a lot of stormwater run off and these delivery trucks need these roads well maintained so in directing these fees to things like the Burlington stormwater and sewer system needed upgrades would be a form of rational assessment.
Are you in favor of putting a price on carbon?
Yes. A governing principle mantra I offer on topics like this is to ‘Tax what you don’t like and subsidize what you do’. If we are serious about addressing our climate change crisis, we need to rationally assess carbon emissions and direct those revenues to subsidize solutions & alternatives to our carbon emitting activities. This is one of the reasons I supported and voted for the Clean Heat Standard and why I support variable car registration fees (based on the car make & model manufacturer listed mpg) to directly subsidize public transportation services in Vermont.
If elected, what will be your top 3 legislative priorities?
I believe I answered that in question 1 above but pasted here again:
More sensible gun control including safe storage, waiting periods, universal background checks and gun taxes.
Transportation sector climate emissions reduction through rational assessment with emissions variable car registration fees & road usage assessment with automated vehicle identification methods as well as public transportation usage tracking for income sensitive time subsidies through state income tax policy.
Permit reform to foster more affordable high density housing in our urban cores served by existing municipal infrastructure balanced with increased forest block protections in our rural swaths.
What are the first three actions you would take to address climate change? What would you do in support of the Global Warming Solutions Act?
As mentioned in previous question answers:
Transportation sector climate emissions reduction through rational assessment with emissions variable car registration fees & road usage assessment with automated vehicle identification methods as well as public transportation usage tracking for income sensitive time subsidies through state income tax policy.
Permit reform to foster more affordable high density housing in our urban cores served by existing municipal infrastructure balanced with increased forest block protections in our rural swaths.
Property Assessed Clean Energy state supported/fostered funding mechanisms for commercial properties to align the financial benefit of energy saving investments with the property owners over the useful life of the building & the investments.
What steps would you take to protect the natural environment in Chittenden County and Vermont?
I supported and voted for H. 606 (an act relating to community resilience and biodiversity protection) and H. 697 (an act relating to eligibility of reserve forestland for enrollment in the Use Value Appraisal Program). In addition to these two votes, I would continue to advocate for smart growth development patterns to steward our rural working landscapes while encouraging more in fill and concentrated development.
Would you support H.175, which would expand Vermont’s “bottle bill” to cover additional containers, like bottled water and wine bottles?
If the bottle bill is expanded as proposed in the final version of H. 175, I support expanding it to bottled water and wine bottles (as I voted for the amendment to do so) BUT I do not support expanding the bottle redemption system for the same reasons articulated by the Chittenden Solid Waste District. Expanding this bottle deposit system will NOT increase recycling but WILL increase the cost to the consumers and the carbon emissions in the collection process with a redundant collection system with regressive time, storage and sanitation issues for our poorest Vermonters and will not increase our recycling.
Would you support S.234, which makes changes to Act 250?
I supported for and voted for the March 25th version of S. 234 (https://legislature.vermont.gov/Documents/2022/Docs/BILLS/S-0234/S-0234%20As%20passed%20by%20the%20Senate%20Official.pdf). I did not, nor do I, support the version that came back from the house with the governance changes from H. 492 for the same reasons articulated by seven of the eight mayors in Vermont (see attached letter).
Would you support H.715, the “Clean Heat Standard”?
Yes. I did and I do.