Municipalities Face New Ethics Standards While State Lawmakers Loosen Their Own

State legislators have quietly rolled back their own accountability through H.1, a bill that critics argue undermines the very principles of transparency they once endorsed.

In a state long celebrated for its commitment to transparency and community-driven governance, Vermont's political landscape is facing a troubling paradox.

On January 1, 2025, municipalities across the state implemented a robust new Municipal Code of Ethics, a landmark achievement born from 2024's H.875 legislation. This law, championed as a step toward greater accountability, empowered the Vermont State Ethics Commission to oversee ethical conduct at the local level, ensuring public officials adhere to high standards.

Yet, just months later, state legislators have quietly rolled back their own accountability through H.1, a bill that critics argue undermines the very principles of transparency they once endorsed. This stark contrast has sparked outrage among ethics advocates and raised questions about the Legislature's commitment to leading by example.

A Tale of Two Standards

The Municipal Code of Ethics, effective January 1, 2025, was a hard-won victory for those seeking to restore public trust in government. Passed as part of H.875 in 2024, the law established clear guidelines for municipal officials, from selectboard members to town clerks, mandating ethical conduct and empowering the State Ethics Commission to investigate complaints.

The commission, though underfunded, gained new authority to enforce standards, a move hailed by groups like the Campaign for Vermont as a "significant step" toward accountability (Campaign for Vermont, 2024). For Vermont's 246 towns and cities, this meant a new era of scrutiny, with local officials now answerable to a state body tasked with upholding integrity. But while municipalities embraced these higher standards, state lawmakers moved in the opposite direction.

On June 5, 2025, H.1, "An act relating to accepting and referring complaints by the State Ethics Commission," became law without Governor Phil Scott's signature. The bill, passed unanimously by the House Government Operations and Military Affairs committee, exempts panels and boards investigating misconduct by legislators, judges, and attorneys from mandatory consultation with the State Ethics Commission. Instead, it replaces a 60-day consultation requirement—set to take effect under the 2024 ethics law—with vague "upfront recommendations," a change critics call a deliberate carveout for the powerful.

"This is a step backward," said Christina Sivret, executive director of the State Ethics Commission, in a statement to VTDigger (March 14, 2025). "By reducing our role, H.1 weakens accountability at the state level, just as we're asking municipalities to step up." The League of Women Voters of Vermont and the Campaign for Vermont echoed her concerns, with the latter issuing an action alert condemning the bill as a betrayal of recent ethics reforms (Campaign for Vermont, 2025).

The Governor's Reluctant Approval

Governor Phil Scott, in a letter to BetsyAnn Wrask, Clerk of the Vermont House, expressed unease about H.1, noting that it "softens the Legislature’s commitment to the statutory State Code of Ethics." He warned that Vermonters, who expect their state government to set a high standard, might view the change skeptically. Yet, despite these reservations, Scott allowed the bill to become law without his signature, citing its "balance of remaining ethical requirements" as insufficient grounds for a veto (Governor's Letter, June 5, 2025). His decision has drawn criticism from ethics advocates who argue that a veto could have forced a broader debate.

Scott's letter also reaffirmed his administration's adherence to Executive Order No. 19-17, a 2017 directive that imposes stringent ethical standards on the Executive Branch. "The Executive Branch will continue to lead by example," he wrote, urging the Legislature to revisit H.1 in the next session. But for many, this commitment rings hollow when contrasted with the Legislature's apparent reluctance to hold itself accountable.

A Legislative Double Standard?

The passage of H.1 has fueled accusations of a double standard. Municipal officials, often volunteers or part-time employees, now face rigorous oversight from the State Ethics Commission, with limited resources to navigate the new rules. Meanwhile, state legislators, who wield far greater influence, have insulated themselves from similar scrutiny. Rep. Martin Lalonde, a sponsor of H.1, defended the bill, arguing that it addresses separation-of-powers concerns by limiting the commission's role in legislative and judicial investigations (VTDigger, March 14, 2025). But critics counter that this justification prioritizes institutional autonomy over public trust.

The timing of H.1 is particularly striking. Just last year, the Legislature united around H.875, a bill that expanded the State Ethics Commission's powers and applied ethics standards to all branches of government. This rare consensus signaled a commitment to transparency in a state where public faith in institutions has wavered. Yet, H.1's passage suggests that some lawmakers are unwilling to live under the same rules they impose on others—a move that risks alienating Vermonters already skeptical of Montpelier's priorities.

The Public's Reaction and What's Next

The backlash against H.1 has been swift. The State Ethics Commission, already stretched thin with a small staff and budget, is preparing to challenge the bill in the Senate, with Sivret calling for greater public scrutiny (VTDigger, March 14, 2025). Grassroots organizations, including the League of Women Voters, are mobilizing to pressure lawmakers, while the Vermont League of Cities and Towns has advocated for local control over ethics, highlighting tensions between state and municipal priorities (VLCT, December 8, 2023).

For Vermonters, the contrast between municipal accountability and state-level retrenchment is a bitter pill. Towns like Brattleboro and Burlington, which have long championed progressive governance, now face stricter oversight, while state lawmakers appear to dodge the same standards. This disparity could shape the 2026 legislative session, with Governor Scott's call for a review of H.1 likely to spark heated debate.

A Test of Vermont's Values

Vermont's motto, "Freedom and Unity," reflects a belief in balancing individual liberty with collective responsibility. The state's new municipal ethics laws embody this ethos, holding local leaders to account for the sake of their communities. But H.1 suggests that some in Montpelier are less willing to embrace that responsibility themselves. As the State Ethics Commission navigates its expanded role and Vermonters demand greater transparency, the Legislature faces a choice: recommit to the high standards it once championed or risk eroding the trust that binds the Green Mountain State together.