A Q&A with Charlton and Chase, candidates for Vermont House for Windsor-Windham District

©2024 Telegraph Publishing LLC

Heather Chase, the Democratic incumbent, and Thomas Charlton, a Republican newcomer to politics, are running against each other for a two-year term in the Vermont House of Representatives representing the cross-county Windsor-Windham District consisting of the towns of Athens, Chester, Grafton and Windham.

Voting will take place on 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. 5 by Australian ballot at: Chester Town Hall, 556 Elm St., and at the Grafton Town Office, 117 Main St. It will take place from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. at the Windham Meeting House, 26 Harrington Road, and at the Athens Town Office, 25 Brookline Road.  Or you can pick up an early voting ballot at your Town Hall.

Tell our readers about yourself.

THOMAS CHARLTON: I am an 8th generation Vermonter who loves this place and understands why people want to be here. Chester has been home for 50 years. During 25 of those years I served as a full time pastor, growing to know the community and their needs with regard to a wide range of life experiences.

I have quite literally sat at hundreds of kitchen tables over the years, and have shared life deeply with local families at some very profound moments. I am a graduate of Green Mountain Union High School (as are all three of my sons) and went on to study at Colby College, the University of Aberdeen, Jerusalem University College and Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary.

I now run my own timber framing business and have received an immersion experience with regard to business in Vermont. An avid outdoorsman, I have worked at various times as a wilderness trekking guide, and an executive with the Boy Scouts. I am personally very aware of the road we have traveled as a community and state; the challenges and the changes. It has affected me in many of the same ways it has impacted my neighbors. I believe it is time to change the trajectory.

HEATHER CHASE: Vermont is a special place, where I have raised my four children and the place I call home.

Locally, I have served on the Chester Select Board for nine years and briefly as Town Health Officer. And I am active as a justice of the peace and as chair of the Chester Board of Civil Authority.

Statewide, I was appointed by Gov. Phil Scott to serve on the Vermont Economic Progress Council.  I have served as a Vermont state representative for one term, representing the Windsor-Windham District.

And, as a Registered Nurse, I have run a successful small business for nearly 30 years that provides healthy nursing experiences to mothers and their infant children.  I have received my Bachelor of Science in Nursing from Seattle University in 1983 (magna cum laude) and a Master’s in Community Health in 1989 from San Jose State University (magna cum laude).  In 1995 I earned my certification as an International Board-Certified Lactation Consultant.

My experience and joy in raising a family, running a small business and serving in community affairs greatly influences my decision making in Montpelier.  Often during this past legislative session, I have reflected on how my nursing career has prepared me for my legislative work as I use my professional skills of listening, problem solving, and respecting differing points of view.

Running a small business and raising a family also brings a focus on spending wisely and managing a budget. All of these experiences contribute to being a thoughtful and empathetic legislator and understanding the impact of legislation on our families, senior citizens and small businesses.

Education taxes have been a major issue with voters and there is currently a commission looking at how to make quality public education more affordable and sustainable. As a member of the Vermont House, what do you see as the actions that should be taken to achieve those goals?

HEATHER CHASE: Public schools are the backbone of our democracy. We must maintain and strengthen our public education system to ensure our students have access to high quality education at a cost that is affordable and sustainable.

Our current funding system is unnecessarily complex and lacks transparency.  The Commission on the Future of Public Education, established by legislative action, is studying these complex issues and will issue its report and recommendations in 2025-2026.

In the meantime, the legislature can look at consolidating administrative functions among supervisory unions and take action to reduce the cost of health care which directly impacts our school budgets.

THOMAS CHARLTON: A thorough analysis of the report being prepared by the Commission on the Future of Public Education should be the starting point, before rejecting or accepting its recommendations out of hand. Of the possibilities being discussed, mergers have not proven to be effective in reducing overall or administrative costs.

Before considering the merger option further, a real savings in administration needs to be convincingly demonstrated. The state should take the lead in cutting this overhead cost by reducing or simplifying mandated administration responsibilities, rather than assigning the same work to fewer people. While I recognize that social services are valuable, I do not believe that the school is the place to shape the “society of tomorrow.” Too many competing ideologies want this leverage. I support a return to strong academics, while the community at large reshapes itself.

To be clear, I do not support a reduction in teaching staff. Make it simpler for them to teach by reducing the ‘red tape in the classroom’ burden. Don’t push the cost of their housing up with higher taxes and fuel costs. Deal with the reasons their health care (and everyone else’s) has become so expensive.

What is the state’s role in expanding economic growth when Vermont has an unemployment rate that is second lowest in the nation? And if increasing affordable housing is part of the solution, what role should the state take in making that a reality? How can we address the lack of affordable housing in Vermont?

THOMAS CHARLTON: The state has an obligation to expand the economy (reducing the per-capita tax burden) or to reduce its budget. Its role begins with addressing the ways the state compounds the problem.

There are short-term solutions to housing, including the easing of Act 250 in developed areas. Whether or not the result is affordable remains to be seen. The only legitimate long-term goal is to help Vermonters earn enough to afford housing they want to be in, where they want to live. This requires good jobs, which requires a robust economy.

Vermont is a difficult place to do business in: property is expensive (a perfect storm of taxes, market demand and interest rates), insurance is high (per state mandates). Taxes are high (we know this). Utilities, including heat, are high (and heading higher). Employees are few (they will, after all, go where wages are higher and bills are lower).

The conundrum is this: We need more working age people to solve our problems, but our problems are keeping them away. To break that cycle, we must solve the challenges first. We choose between a tough solution and an impossible future.

Convincing businesses to relocate here is a hard sell. I propose we make it simpler for businesses already here to thrive and expand. Residents of rural areas have as much right to thrive as others. This does not describe the effect our incumbent has had on our local economy.

HEATHER CHASE: Vermont is fortunate to have a low unemployment rate. As our population ages, we will need to expand our workforce and opportunities for employment. Developing housing, especially workforce housing, housing for teachers, nurses, and police and firefighters, is essential for growing our economy.

Last session, I supported initiatives to increase the supply of affordable housing, including funding for the development of permanently affordable housing, renovation of existing structures, creation of new rental units, grants for first generation homeowners, and support for updates and repairs to manufactured housing.

When re-elected, I will encourage the legislature to evaluate these investments to ensure they are working as intended.

The Clean Heat Standard is controversial. How should Vermonters deal with climate change and what should state government’s role be?

HEATHER CHASE: It is my view that Vermont can and should lead the way with solutions to our climate crisis – our grandchildren’s futures depend on it.

There has been a great deal of misinformation about the Clean Heat Standard, the purpose of which is to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and assist Vermonters in transitioning to cleaner heat measures, including installing cold weather heat pumps and insulating older buildings. The legislature is continuing to address climate change by providing incentives and support to reduce the cost of winterizing homes and installing heat exchangers as we transition from fossil fuels and reduce emissions consistent with the Global Warming Solutions Act. These measures will provide financial relief to many of our citizens while reducing environmental impacts.

As Vermonters face increased flooding due to climate change, investing in prevention, planning, and infrastructure is more important than ever. Reducing costly flood damage calls for holistic statewide regulations to guide development.

Enacted last session, S. 213 builds on existing programs to assist towns with managing development in river corridors and floodplains. Because wetlands provide effective, low-cost flood prevention, the Act expands wetlands protections and provides funding for the inspection, removal, and repair of dams. Vermont has over a thousand dams with only a few built to control flooding. To prevent dangerous conditions downstream, dams must be well-maintained.

THOMAS CHARLTON: The state government’s first responsibility is the safety of its citizens. Hardening our infrastructure (transportation, communication and utilities) helps prevent casualty and ease rescue. Flood control must continue to be addressed to reduce the level of  future loss. Local emergency services need to be equipped to safely mitigate situations that arise. While the state can assist in this, it is best directed by local services.

FEMA should be responsible for long-term recovery and rebuilding efforts, the state should maintain specialized response teams, and stockpile water, food, bedding and shelter in multiple locations to be distributed immediately in a crisis. Local authorities should have the final authority to prioritize needs, allocate resources, and delegate responsibilities.

They know their community better than anyone else, and they will be the first ones there. Our long-term responsibility is to the health of the environment, regardless of convictions on global warming. It is not the government’s role to set us up for short term failure, or long-term success will not follow. The Clean Heat Standard and Global Warming Solutions Act are too expensive and too sudden. The government’s role is to make the effort to alleviate our impact on the environment possible, to serve, assist and advise.

It needs to put forth a plan that is achievable, offers viable options, and is practical. We are not ready for all-clean electric – when we are ready at the production and infrastructure level, then we can encourage individual change. Infrastructure first. Inspiration second.

Last year, Vermonters overwhelmingly passed a constitutional amendment to guarantee access to reproductive rights. If Congress passes – and the next president signs — a nationwide abortion ban, what should Vermont do?

THOMAS CHARLTON: I do not expect this to take place. Former President Donald Trump has repeatedly asserted that this is for states to regulate, not the federal government. I rather suspect Vice President Kamala Harris would not support it either. However, in the unlikely eventuality it does happen, Vermont should continue the conversation in a democratic manner and within the framework of the law.

The second clause of Article VI of the U.S. Constitution states that federal law takes precedence over state laws. Initially this would render Vermont’s amendment ineffective. The future legality of the issue would at that point be a matter for our congressional delegation, and further change would be possible with a repeal of the same amendment. With or without such a ban, moral and ethical conversation will continue as protected free speech, hopefully with respect and compassion.

HEATHER CHASE: As a nurse and an advocate for women’s health, I will continue to support a women’s right to choose.  I was proud to vote for a shield bill in my first term as state representative.

Vermont’s shield law protects Vermont’s health-care providers who provide reproductive health care and gender-affirming health care to non-residents.

Recently, I was approached by a constituent needing IVF treatment.  Currently legal in Vermont, I will fight to ensure IVF treatment and abortion remain safe and legal in Vermont. When elected to my second term I will assess the need for further legislation in this area.

If there was a nationwide abortion ban, I would do everything in my power to fight the ban, including supporting the attorney general in taking legal action to protect Vermont from a national abortion ban.

Working “across the aisle” is important for all political parties, but especially for minority parties. How do you or would you reach across the aisle to build consensus for legislation that you would propose?

HEATHER CHASE: During my first term, I realized that the best way to collaborate with other House members was to participate in caucuses.  I joined the rural caucus comprised of Democrats, Republicans, Progressives and Independents. We typically met on a weekly basis to discuss issues that impact rural Vermonters.

Although this takes more time and energy, I found it worthwhile for building relationships and reaching consensus.

In my role as legislator, whether fielding questions from constituents, holding coffee hours, responding to my constituent’s questions or going door to door, party affiliation rarely comes up in conversation.  I understand that while serving as your legislator, I am your legislator irrespective of the party to which you belong.  As a problem solver, I believe I better serve the people of the Windsor-Windham District by viewing the issues and concerns of our community and state through the lens of non-partisanship.

THOMAS CHARLTON: The starting point for this is for the voter to eliminate the supermajority that has produced some of the most expensive legislation in years, if not ever. Dialogue and compromise will return when it is once again a necessity. It will only stay once it becomes normative again.

In that setting all parties should be at table from the beginning, participating and allowed to participate in the conversation. “Consensus” is not simply voting your party line and telling others that they should also. It is being willing to eliminate the line and vote a solution that is workable from multiple political perspectives.

Ultimately the answer to this need lies in character and maturity. Ignoring those giving testimony to a committee because their perspective doesn’t suit, voting down a good bill simply because it is proposed by the “other” party, not even socializing with the other team …. These are realities that require a cultural change, not a policy change. It will take some brave advocates to set the tone, and it will require voters to insist on it. I’m willing to hear all parties – and I’m just as willing to call them both out. Gently.

What local legislation – bills that impact a specific area – would you propose in the next session?

THOMAS CHARLTON: I am more focused on simplifying existing policy and dialing back mandates than in adding to them. I would, however, welcome a dialogue to consider the following items (among others), though this is by no means a definitive list. What can be done will depend on the team our voters choose.

• State programs should continue to be re-examined for options to make them cost effective, in the same manner a business would do so to remain competitive.
• I am open to any measure that contains health care costs and ensures access to health care.
• Spouses who are primary caregivers to disabled partners should be supported to same extent as others hired to do so.
• I would consider the option to release some acreage from “current use” without penalty, for the purpose of rural housing development.
• I would eliminate the proposed tax on heating fuel and the provision allowing others to sue the state for failing to meet the benchmarks of the Global Warming Solutions Act.
• Any legislation that provides equal opportunity to rural communities as is given to developed areas is worth my attention.
• I recommend we consider tighter scrutiny of the voting process, not only for security but for confidence.
• I would support discussion of a “Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights” similar to that in effect in Colorado. While this process formally begins in the Senate, a wider conversation should start sooner rather than later.

HEATHER CHASE: Having served on the Chester Select Board for nine years, I have a good understanding of the needs of our local communities. I hear regularly from constituents regarding issues of concern to them and hold monthly coffee hours in our communities to stay in touch and keep abreast of matters of concern.

This next term, the legislature must prioritize and stabilize property taxes and protect income sensitivity in years of reappraisal. Disparity in education funding statewide led to significant disparity in property taxes caused in part by reappraisals in property values.

This impacted residents on fixed incomes. If reassigned to the Commerce and Economic Development Committee, I will focus my efforts on legislative action that supports our goals.

• Other items of interest include reintroducing a bill to clarify the role of the Agency of Education in enforcing the mascot bill.  Much of the consternation that Chester went through could have been avoided had the AOE established clear deadlines for responding to complaints.
• Having heard from a constituent with concerns about insurance coverage for IVF treatment, I will be looking at what measures can be taken to address the lack of coverage.
• I also continue to be interested in increasing government oversight, transparency and accountability.