Remote voting allowed for joint committees

Summary#

J.R.H.12 is a Vermont joint resolution, signed into law, that temporarily authorizes remote voting by members of joint committees through December 31, 2026. It does not amend the ADA or create a general right to attend committee meetings remotely; its title frames the resolution as addressing the ADA, and its text adds a specific remote-voting option for some members with disabilities.

  • Each joint committee member may vote remotely for up to three days during the period.
  • A member using those days must notify the committee chair or co-chairs and the committee clerk. The member counts toward the committee quorum (the minimum number needed to conduct business).
  • The clerk must record remote votes and track how many days each member uses.
  • A member with a disability who is at the meeting site but cannot enter the room because of the site’s physical condition may vote remotely from the site, count toward the quorum, and avoid using one of the three days—but only if the meeting cannot be moved to an accessible location.

What it means for you#

  • Joint committee members: They may use remote voting for up to three days, subject to notice to the chair or co-chairs and clerk. The resolution does not say that members can attend every meeting remotely.
  • Members with disabilities: The additional option applies only when the member is at the site, cannot access the room because of the site’s physical condition, and the meeting cannot be moved to an accessible onsite location.
  • Committee clerks: They must record remote votes and track use of the three-day allowance.
  • General public: The resolution does not directly change public access to committee meetings or public voting rights.

Money#

No publicly available information on the cost.

  • The resolution assigns notice, recording, and tracking tasks to committee members and clerks, but gives no estimate of staffing or other costs.
  • It does not set out an appropriation, fee, fine, or payment.

What is unclear#

  • The resolution does not explain how remote voting will be carried out or what technology may be used.
  • It does not define “disability” or explain how a member’s eligibility for the additional voting option would be determined.
  • It does not explain how a decision would be made that a meeting cannot be moved to an accessible onsite location.
  • It does not set out procedures for disputes, oversight, or reporting on use of remote voting.

Case for#

  • The resolution allows members to cast votes without being physically inside the meeting room, while still counting toward the quorum.
  • The disability-related provision offers an option when a member is at the site but cannot access the room and the meeting cannot be moved.
  • The three-day limit and advance notice requirement set boundaries and let committees track use.

Case against#

  • The resolution leaves important practical details—such as how remote voting works and who decides whether a meeting can be moved—unspecified.
  • The disability-related option is limited to members who are physically at the site and cannot access the room because of the site’s physical condition.
  • The general remote-voting allowance is capped at three days per member, so it does not authorize routine remote voting throughout the rest of 2026.