Dean Corren, Progressive candidate for Lieutenant Governor, announced this morning that he will qualify for public financing, having collected donations from more than 800 Vermoters totaling more than $18,000. The public financing will allow Corren to run a financially competitive race with incumbent Repubilcan Phil Scott. The public funding will bring his total campaign kitty to $200,000.

Now, time for the Democrats to step up. John Bauer has until tomorrow afternoon to qualify. He’s speeding down the homestretch, but isn’t there yet. Secure online donations can be made via ActBlue. Every donation of $50 or less — even a buck or two — counts toward the goal.

C’mon now, Democrats. You don’t want to fail where the Progs succeeded, do you?

That aside, it’s great news for a competitive race and for the very concept of public financing that at least one candidate has qualified. It’s a very high bar to reach — at least 750 donations from registered Vermont voters, each donation no more than $50, totaling at least $17,500.  Indeed, it’d be best for the system if the bar were lowered just a bit. Still, nice to know that the system can work.

Corren released this statement:

I am deeply gratified and inspired by everyone who stepped up so quickly, not only to contribute, but to help us gather small contributions from friends and neighbors. It was a terrific group effort. …Our campaign will now be fully competitive, and free to focus entirely on the critical issues facing Vermont. In particular, I look forward to advancing our state’s healthcare reforms in the months ahead.

Congratulations to Dean Corren and the Progs for an impressive organizational feat. Will the Dems be able to say the same?  

I’ve got to make something right.

As you can see in the comments on my “Froth” diary,  which I wrote in haste, I’ve had time to regret in my leisure.

Relying solely on the Stowe Reporter’s account of the meeting, and my seasoned distrust for the motives of local government, I seized on the wrong take-away.

I think I owe Brian Leven a bigger apology.

What I should have been doing was celebrating Mr. Leven’s instinct to recuse himself from deliberations on the applications of his friends.

Though it was simply the proper thing to do, in actual fact, recusal under such non-statutory terms as “friendship” (which we all know can be a powerful influence) is so rare in local Vermont deliberations, that I could not find a single other instance.  

It’s quite a big deal and actually makes effective, in this single instance, the practice of self-determination that is built into most  conflict of interest codes.  Usually, the board member judges him or herself to have no conflict of interest and forgoes recusal.

That Mr. Leven is our Deputy Secretary of State may explain this heart-warming anomaly.  Or, we may have simply gotten lucky and found the “one honest man.”  

As the petition deadline approaches rumors are starting to come true. Try to pay attention over the sound of champagne corks popping (on both sides of the aisle) over the announcement that Peter Galbraith won't be running for reelection.

First, Martha Heath has made it official. Throughout the legislative session the State House was filled with speculation that Heath, the long-time chair of House Appropriations, would not be returning. Yesterday she announced it was the end, quoted by VPR as saying,“You know there are a whole lot of reasons, but when you add them up they come down to the fact that my head and my heart are telling me that it’s time.”

More of a surprise was the announcement of Kathy Hoyt. Just appointed by Governor Shumlin to fill the seat vacated by the resignation of Margaret Cheney in September, Hoyt told the Valley News that her resignation is due to health problems.   “I turned 72 last week, and that just said that if this is happening, and no one in the medical community can tell me why I passed out and hit my head and woke up two hours later, it’s very unsettling. So I decided that the timing’s not right,” she said.

 Potential Democratic candidates to replace her include Tim Briglin, who is currently serving as the Treasurer of the Vermont Democratic Party, and Jill Michaels, who has served in various capacities in the State Democratic Committee.

 Of coures everyone's waiting for the biggie–what's Shap going to do?–but that will have to wait for another day. 

You’ve heard of RINOs — Republicans In Name Only. Now, I guess we’ve got Republicans In All But Name, which is unfortunately not so catchy an acronym.

Earlier today came news that former Douglas Administration Ag Secretary Roger Allbee is running for State Senate as a Democrat in Windham County — a liberal province where no Republicans are likely to run for the two available Senate seats.

Well, no Republicans are likely to run as Republicans.

And now we’ve got another.

Former State Representative Oliver Olsen, who stepped down in 2012, is making another bid to represent his south-central Vermont district. This time, as an Independent. (He actually announced a couple weeks ago, but I just came across the news in the Manchester Journal.) His explanation sounds almost exactly like Allbee’s:

He said he has always been fairly independent and considers himself a centrist.

“I have been encouraged to run by, and have support from, a number of Republicans and Democrats in our district as well as Democratic and Republican elected officials,” he said in an email. “With the challenge of having to juggle full time work responsibilities, I simply don’t have time to deal with overhead that comes with a party label.”

‘Overhead”?

Huh. I’ve never been a candidate, but what “overhead” exactly?  

Olsen served one-and-a-half terms in the House, and was one of the more vocal members of the Republican super-minority during the 2010 biennium. Some considered him a rising star in the party. Not any more, I guess.

Is this the beginning of a trend? Former Republican politicos making comebacks under different labels? We’ll see if anyone else comes out from under his/her rock by the Thursday deadline.

As I said in my Allbee comment previously, it’s strange timing. I can understand why center-right Republicans would feel disaffected during the “Angry Jack” Lindley regime. But now, with Phil Scott leading the charge for a more inclusive VTGOP, I’d think his fellow “moderates” would give their party another chance, and give Scott a little support in his ongoing battle with party dead-enders.

But time and tide wait not for the politically ambitious. And the non-Republican candidacies of Allbee and Olsen appear to be signs that the VTGOP brand is just too toxic for a whole lot of people.

On the other hand, maybe this is a pro-wrestling style swerve: after the election, Olsen and Allbee will appear at the Republican “victory” party, having re-registered as Republicans on Election Day, and sneer at the suckers who fell for the ruse.  

No, we don’t have anyone legally changing their name to enhance their otherwise dim electoral prospects. But we do have a former Jim Douglas cabinet official running for the State Senate…

… as a Democrat.

Paul “The Huntsman” Heintz:

On Monday, Grace Cottage Hospital CEO and former Vermont secretary of agriculture Roger Allbee announced that he, too, would run.

… Though he worked in former governor Jim Douglas’ administration and ran for the House as a Republican in 2004, Allbee said he planned to run for the Senate as a Democrat.

“I’ve been a liberal Republican, but I’ve always voted across party lines, supported [U.S. Rep.] Peter Welch, [U.S. Sen.] Patrick Leahy and others.”

Good on ya, Roger. And maybe he’s had an authentic Jim Jeffords change of heart. But the timing — after the “moderates” have taken a measure of control in the VTGOP — is curious to say the least. You’d think he’d want to stick it out and help Phil Scott rebuild.

Which makes me suspect that he’s just a rank opportunist who knows he can’t win as a Republican in Windham County — the VTGOP hasn’f fielded a single candidate so far, and likely won’t — so he’s trying to backdoor his way into office.

His entry will mean a crowded Democratic primary with incumbent Jeanette White, newcomers Joan Bowman and Becca Balint, plus the freshly-minted Democrat Roger Allbee. And the thankfully departing Peter Galbraith aimed a swift kick at the other Dems on his way out the door:

While Galbraith would not yet offer a direct endorsement, he appears to support Allbee’s bid. The incumbent senator joined his Townsend neighbor at Brattleboro’s Gallery Walk Friday evening as the latter collected signatures to win a place on the ballot.

Thanks a lot, Citizen Peter.  

Mr. Leven has responded by e-mail to this diary, and in all fairness, since he made the effort to reasonably explain the circumstances, I think his perspective should be available to our readers.  Please read it in the comments below.  

_______________________________________________________________________

We all love our Heady Topper some; but the wildly popular brew has outgrown the Alchemist’s Waterbury digs, forcing the brewer to stop offering on-site retail sales.

The new plan is to move the retail face of the Alchemist to Stowe, and locate it on property belonging to Stoweflake Resort and Spa, where craft beer devotees, from near and far, might gather to pick up a case or two of Heady Topper then wander over to a “visitors’ center.”  Presumably, that’s where they will buy branded novelties, tacky t-shirts and other specialty items you can’t possibly find anywhere else in Stowe.

‘Problem is, the same issue that ended retail sales at the Waterbury cannery, threatens to scotch the brewers’ permit application in Stowe.  That issue is traffic, which, I am told, is a sight to behold whenever the Alchemist opens its doors to retail buyers.

Tuesday, the Stowe Develpment Review Board met at a warned meeting to consider the proposal, and a number of citizens on both sides of the argument made time in their lives to attend the meeting and express their views.

Apparently, this demonstration of public interest was insufficient to persuade board chair Brian Leven to go ahead and conduct the hearing with just five of the seven DRB members present.

According to board chair Brian Leven, the board did not have suitable numbers to discuss the topic adequately. Only five of the seven board members attended Tuesday’s hearing, and Leven is likely to recuse himself from the discussion, since he is friends with the applicants, Alchemist owners John and Jen Kimmich.

When asked if the public could at least be permitted to discuss the plan, since they had gathered for that purpose, Leven decreed that they should submit their opinions in writing and the whole matter would be taken up at a later hearing when, presumably, a fuller number of board members could be present.

Now, four board members represent a quorum, and as such, are legally qualified to vote on any business before the DRB.   A quorum is a simple majority of the total number of board members.  It is the minimum number of members who must be present in order to conduct a vote.  

As anyone who has attended DRB meetings anywhere in the state can attest, it is not all that unusual, particularly in summer, to have one or more DRB members absent at any given meeting. That is precisely the reason for the quorum rule.

But, obviously, when an applicant may experience some opposition to his/her project, the odds of a favorable outcome improve considerably if the project is reviewed by all seven members.  Then if one, two or even three members aren’t sufficiently warm to the plan, it can still be passed by the other four.

Needless to say, public attendees at the warned meeting were quite unhappy that their open participation had been quashed; and one might wonder if the manner in which this meeting was conducted satisfied that portion of the open meeting law which reads:

At an open meeting, the public shall be given reasonable opportunity to be present, to be heard and to participate regarding matters considered by the public body during a meeting, subject to rules established by the chairperson. This does not apply to quasijudicial proceedings.

Then there is the spectre of conflict of interest to consider.  Mr. Leven is “likely to recuse himself from the discussion,” but that does not change the fact that his decision as chair to postpone the hearing until a larger number of representatives is present favors his friends the Kimmichs.

If members of the public, who were told to submit their comments in writing, choose instead to make an issue of the decision, it will, at the very least represent some embarassment for Mr. Leven, the City, and even the applicants.

Bad form, Mr. Leven.

Wowee, great news from the southeast today, where The Most Hated Man in the Senate has decided that two terms are enough. VTDigger:

Maverick Windham County Sen. Peter Galbraith said Monday that he won’t seek a third term in November.

Yahoo! Whoopee! Good riddance to annoying, egotistical rubbish.

Y’know, we could have a substantially improved State Senate after the November elections. At least some of the Democratic deadwood is thankfully departing, and Franklin County could significantly upgrade its delegation.

Of course, Galbraith has a typically self-aggrandizing rationale for his departure.

The Townshend Democrat said his growing involvement in an informal effort to find a political solution to the Syrian civil war won’t allow him to continue serving as a state senator.

Ah yes, The Great Diplomat hasn’t got time for the petty problems of us Vermonters, because The World Awaits His Genius. Well, I’m sure he’ll do a bang-up job with his next peace mission. Or possibly a “boom rat-a-tat-a-tat bang ka-pow blammo” job. Personally, I wouldn’t want Peter Galbraith diplomatizing a recess dispute at an elementary school.

I’m extra relieved at his departure because I saw a developing scenario that might have eased his way to a third term. Windham County’s other Senator, Jeanette White, is presumably safe. Two other candidates, Becca Balint and Joan Bowman, had already announced bids for the Senate, which could have led to the distressing scenario of the two newcomers splitting the anti-Galbraith vote and inadvertently ensuring his victory in a Democratic primary.

But that’s all academic now.

My only regret is that I won’t get the chance to post excerpts from “The Operators,” the late great Vermont journalist Michael Hastings’ book about American involvement in Afghanistan. He supposedly had some very caustic things to say about Mr. Galbraith, and I was looking forward to sharing. Oh well.

The Slummin’ Solon couldn’t exit the stage without some additional self-aggrandizement, of course:

“I think I did many things that antagonized the powers that be,” he said. “But I think they realized that I was not going to be subject to pressure.”

What a frickin’ hero. What a gasbag, making himself sound like some kind of political Steven Seagal. (Hmm. Actually, that’s about right; Seagal’s a phony tough guy, and Galbraith is a phony politico.) The only reason he wasn’t “subject to pressure” is that he was an entirely self-funded politician, who bought his way into the Senate with $50,000 of his oil millions.

But wait, there’s more:

Galbraith thanked the voters of Windham County for their support and wrote in an email that, “I intend to remain engaged in the affairs of the community and state that has always been my home, but, for the time being, I will do so under the title of citizen.”

Oh, just shut up.

In reality, Galbraith will continue to “remain engaged” under the same title as ever.

Bozo.  

Hey there, bunky. Having trouble finding candidates for the big election, hmm? Well, fret not, my friend. I’ve got just the thing for ya.

Take a look toward the great Southwest, in particular the great state of Arizona, where a perpetually losing Republican named Scott Fistler came up with a novel idea for his lack of appeal with voters.

He legally changed his name to Cesar Chavez, and is running for Congress as a Democrat. The theory being, I guess, that Hispanic voters (and Dems in general) are too damn stupid to realize that the real Cesar Chavez has been dead since 1993.

Shameful enough for you? How about this: His campaign website used to feature photographs of colorful pro-Chavez signs and rallies. Which were actually celebrating the real Cesar Chavez and the late Hugo Chavez of Venezuela.

Any old port in a storm for a down-on-his-luck Republican, I guess. And speaking of down-on-their-luck Republicans, it gives me a great idea for our own VTGOP. With the filing deadline looming on Thursday, the party has no known candidates for Treasurer, Auditor, Attorney General, or Secretary of State, and may or may not have an actual Republican running for Governor.

Well, Scott Fis — I mean, Cesar Chavez to the rescue. And without further ado, I present my dream Republican ticket for 2014.  

Drum roll, please…

For Governor: “Howard Dean.” A name with national stature as a liberal leader, and of course a long tenure in Vermont.  

For Attorney General: “TJ Donovan.” The real Donovan almost beat Bill Sorrell in the 2012 Democratic primary. Maybe the fake Donovan can pull it off in November.

For Auditor: “Tom Salmon.” The real one or a fake one, what’s the diff? (Actually, I think the real one WAS fake.)

For Treasurer: “Jeb Spaulding.” The real Jeb used to be Treasurer, and he’s still got a high profile, right? And if voters see an unfamiliar-looking “Spaulding,” they might just think he finally got around to shaving off that oddly disquieting beard.

For Secretary of State: “Jim Condos.” Because you cannot hope to defeat Jim Condos, you can only hope to contain him.

There you go, VTGOP. No charge. All you need is a handful of loyalists willing to legally change their names for the sake of their party.

It may be a longshot that the fake candidates can get through a campaign without being exposed, but hell, it’s better than no shot at all, right?  

Vermont law requires municipalities to publish an annual report. From the Rutland city charter, which is codified in state law:

The City report shall be published annually, on or before the 15th day of November each year, by the direction of the Mayor. It shall contain a clear statement of the financial affairs of the City, including a record of all expenditures, receipts, and disbursements of the City moneys, and the name and amount of compensation for services from the City of every person receiving compensation by way of salary or otherwise in amount of $300 or more a year.

Okay, fine. Cities are required to publish information about their operations. No one is required to actually read the things, but still, it’s good fundamental public policy.

But in Rutland, they didn’t do it. The Killington-based Mountain Times:

The Rutland city report, a comprehensive summary of all financial affairs of the city and city employee salaries for the current fiscal year, was not distributed this year prior to town meeting in March when voters vote on exactly that – the finances of the city and city schools.

… Rutland City Clerk Henry Heck, in emails dating back to March and April, said the city report was not produced because of a problem with a printing company and acquiring a printing company to make the correct size of report. There was not a local company that could do it, Heck said at the time.

So, state law mandates an annual report no later than November 15. There was no report as of Town Meeting Day in March. There still isn’t one.

And it’s because of a printing problem? Seriously? Six months, you can’t find a printer?

After the jump: lame excuses, lots of questions, and conspicuous silence from one Wendy Wilton, champion of accountability.  

The Times made a public records request on April 16 for “any email correspondence, written correspondence, contracts and/or bids related to the FY13 City Report.” Y’know, to verify the claim about a six-month-long printer problem. Six weeks later, no response from the city.

The initial Mountain Times article was published on May 28. A follow-up, posted on June 5, reported that…

Some, but not all, of the Rutland city report detailing financial information for the 2012/2013 fiscal year is now posted at  www.rutlandcity.org – six months after it was legally due.

The report, absent the fire, police and mayoral annual summaries, is published online. There is no indication it will be printed in hard copy and sent to Rutland residents as in years past.

The Times hasn’t been able to get a comment from Republican Mayor Chris Louras, but he reportedly told the Rutland Herald that the delay “primarily had to do with a printing issue and a lack of manpower in the mayor’s office.” (I can’t confirm that, because I don’t have access to the Herald’s paywalled website.)

Yeah, well, Mr. Mayor, it’s not a suggestion — it’s the frickin’ law.

Unfortunately, there’s no way to enforce the law. Deputy Secretary of State Brian Leven told the Times that “There is no process for reporting the apparent violation because neither our office nor the Attorney General’s has any authority to enforce a provision of a municipal charter.” The only recourse is for a citizen to file a lawsuit against the city — a suit the city would surely lose.

In this age of online “publishing,” one could argue it’s wasteful to publish a paper version of the city report. Fine. But the answer is to change the law, not ignore it.

A number of questions come to mind.

— Republicans like to talk about accountability and transparency, and often knock the Democrats for alleged lack of same. Well, Rutland’s a Republican town. Hypocrisy much?

— No one is laying any blame at the feet of City Treasurer Wendy Wilton. But her silence is, to say the least, interesting. When she ran for State Treasurer in 2012, she promised to provide:

*Strong, Independent fiscal leadership; checks and balances

*Improvements in Vermont’s financial transparency scores

*Support for state & local government on reporting and accountability issues

*Greater communication with lawmakers and the public about VT’s finances

That’s from the homepage of her still-extant campaign website. Funny, I haven’t heard any outrage from her about Rutland’s lack of leadership or financial transparency or accountability or communication with the public.

— How do you write a requirement into state law without including an enforcement mechanism?

— Why doesn’t anybody in Rutland care enough to file a lawsuit? I’d think a local Democrat would do it, just to embarrass the city government.

— The second-biggest city in Vermont is openly flouting the law. Why hasn’t this been a bigger story?  

You may have questions of your own, but that’s a good start. Seems to me, this ought be a big deal.  

Late add: Apparently the Republicans have an unnamed “in case of Peyton, break glass” emergency candidate. See below.

Oh boy oh boy oh boy. Time to throw tomatoes at the Republican lifeboat. VTDigger:

Republican Randy Brock will not seek a rematch with Gov. Peter Shumlin.

I don’t blame Brock; he did his good-soldier duty in 2012, taking on a long-odds challenge with a bankrupt and disorganized party “behind him,” and spending a goodly chunk of his own money because his alleged friends failed to muster sufficient resources. I’m actually surprised it took him this long to say “no.” But apparently, a lot of folks — most of them the same people who failed him two years ago — were strongly urging him to run. (Not for his sake, nor for Vermont’s; but so the party’s conservative wing could keep up the pretense of being influential.)

Well, he’s not gonna do it.

And where does that leave moderate Republican Scott Milne, who has said he would run only if Brock did, thus setting the stage for a primary battle that would help raise the party’s profile through the summertime?

“If Randy’s not going to run, I’ve got to rethink what the path is to victory, which is greatly reduced without a Republican primary,” Milne said Saturday. “It’s a tough row to hoe to beat Shumlin anyway. He’s publicly said he’s not going to talk until after September. I can’t talk to myself all summer.”

Milne apparently has petition signatures in his pocket, but won’t decide whether to turn them in until the Thursday deadline. And if he doesn’t?

Perpetual candidate Emily Peyton, advocate of legalized marijana and a state bank, and 9/11 truther, who’s already filed as a Republican candidate for Governor, may become the official face of the VTGOP.

Bwahahahaha.

__________________________________

Update. Brock told the Freeploid’s Terri Hallenbeck that if Milne decides against running, “another unidentified Republican is ready to step in at the last moment.” So, things not looking so good for Ms. Peyton, I guess.

As for the Mystery Man’s identity, please let it be Jack McMullen. Please please pleeeeeeeeease!