The Vermont Senate on Thursday voted to mandate that its own members publicly disclose additional information about their personal finances and potential conflicts of interest.
The voice vote, which appeared to be unanimous, came nearly nine months after VTDigger documented deficiencies in the transparency rules governing Vermont lawmakers in an award-winning series called “Full Disclosure.”
Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Baruth, D/P-Chittenden Central, who introduced the rules change, said it had been inspired by VTDigger’s reporting.
“I would say it’s the press doing its work and us doing our work,” he said in an interview Thursday afternoon.
In the series, VTDigger documented how difficult it was for Vermonters to obtain information about their legislators — and how little was revealed by mandatory disclosure forms. To increase access to what information was available, VTDigger collected and digitized the forms and built a searchable, sortable database. Reporters also examined the potential conflicts many of Vermont’s citizen legislators face, given their outside employment, board service and status as landlords.
After VTDigger published the first story in the series last April, the Senate moved to post its members’ financial disclosure forms online for the first time. Previously, one could obtain them only by traveling to the Statehouse in Montpelier and requesting physical copies from the secretary of the Senate.
At the time, Baruth said the Senate would also examine whether to require more information of its members by expanding the scope of its financial disclosure forms. On Thursday, the body did just that.
Prior to the rules change, senators were asked only to report income sources exceeding $10,000 a year, majority ownership of a corporation and board service.
Senators will now be required to file a more comprehensive form mirroring one required of candidates for state office. It asks about employment, investment or other income greater than $5,000; board service; greater than 10% ownership of a company; leases or contracts with the state; and lobbying activities. Importantly, senators must also disclose such information about their spouses or domestic partners.
Baruth said he understood that some would argue that senators should disclose even more to the public. But, he said, “I think any information that we can provide is gonna help people have an understanding of where their elected representatives are coming from.”
The pro tem also made clear that he continues to oppose any sort of verification of the information senators file.
“If people discover discrepancies — if we have a George Santos among us — we’ll hear from people outside the building,” he said, referring to the disgraced former New York Congressman.
Baruth said he faced no pushback from senators over the changes. Indeed, the rule was considered and passed in mere moments Thursday afternoon with no debate and no discernible opposition. Speaking on the Senate floor, Baruth encouraged his colleagues to submit the new forms by Friday.
“Getting that information filed on time shows that we’re doing our part, and I would appreciate that greatly,” he said.
Despite the rules change in the Senate, the Vermont House has no immediate plans to follow suit, according to Conor Kennedy, chief of staff to Speaker Jill Krowinski, D-Burlington. Kennedy said the House Rules Committee would likely discuss the matter this session.
The House disclosure form asks even less of its members than the previous Senate form did — only a lawmaker’s employer and any board affiliations — though the House does require its members to file the candidate disclosure form.
Secretary of State Sarah Copeland Hanzas on Thursday praised the Senate for its rules change, saying it made sense for there to be “alignment” between forms filed by candidates and officeholders. “So I think it’s great,” she said.
As VTDigger documented in its series, those candidate disclosures forms had been virtually impossible to find on the secretary of state’s website — and Copeland Hanzas pledged after the stories’ publication to make them more accessible. She also said at the time that the state should explore creating a new database or portal to improve user experience.
But Copeland Hanzas said Thursday that her office was unlikely to be able build such a system anytime soon, given that it’s currently at work on four information technology upgrades, including to its campaign finance, lobbyist disclosure and election management systems.
Then there’s the matter of cost.
“The question we’d want to ask the Legislature is, will you appropriate money for it?” Copeland Hanzas said. “Because these projects are ridiculously expensive.”
