Way back in February – when this year’s legislative session had just gotten underway – we shared a little about S.4, An act relating to maintenance and use of Legal Trails. The bill was created to clarify the right of municipalities to manage and maintain these public rights-of-way, a need that was made clear in the current battle over public access to a Legal Trail in Tunbridge. We’re excited to share that after a long and turbulent journey this past session, including repeated testimony and direct advocacy from the trails community, a bill with the language from S.4 has passed out of the legislature – albeit in a different bill, S.123 – and awaits the Governor’s signature. This post covers a bit more background on Legal Trails, why they are important, and the process – and VMBA’s involvement – for achieving this legislative victory.
What Are Legal Trails?
As defined in Vermont Statutes, Legal Trails are public rights-of-way that are not ‘highways’ (roads) and have no statutory maintenance requirements. In most cases, they are previously designated town highways or old roads, though a new public right-of-way may be laid out as a Legal Trail for the purpose of providing access to abutting properties or for recreational use. There are over 500 miles of Legal Trails in Vermont – which you can explore on this map – many of which have become vital recreational corridors and critical community connectors. In addition to being frequently used for gravel enthusiasts, Legal Trails also provide important access to numerous VMBA Chapter’s trail systems. The Vermont Trails & Greenways has a great Legal Trails page where you can learn more.
What a Legal Trail often looks like. This one is Lamphear (LT-15) down in Jamaica Photo: Heidi Pancake, former JAMBA Chairperson
What Happened to S.4?
Legislators, led by WAMBA supporter Alison Clarkson and in part inspired by the aforementioned conflict in Tunbridge, developed S.4 to clarify that as public rights-of-way, Legal Trails are and always have been under a town’s authority to manage and maintain. We first reported on S.4 when outdoor recreation advocates, including WAMBA Board Director and S6 trail boss Seth Westbrook, testified in the Senate Transportation committee on S.4 at Outdoor Rec Day.
Kingdom Trails Association Executive Director Abby Long testifies in the Senate Agriculture Committee (with WAMBA Board member Seth Westbrook awaiting his turn) Photo: Jeb Wallace-Brodeur
The bill’s progress stalled in the Senate Transportation Committee after legislative council expressed concerns about the risk of passing legislation while the Echeverria v. Town of Tunbridge court case was underway. Specifically, counsel warned that if the legislature asserted towns’ authority – but not obligation – to maintain Legal Trails and the court subsequently ruled in favor of the landowner, municipalities across the State could have to pay landowners with Legal Trails across their property for the “takings” of this right to maintain.
The Senate Transportation Committee remained stalwart in their support of the language and added it to the miscellaneous transportation – or “T bill” – to streamline its passage. The House Transportation Committee, however, pressed them to remove the amendment, and promised to take testimony and consider adding it to the miscellaneous DMV bill (S.123). After a week of hearings in early May, which included Nick testifying alongside other VTGC Board Members and engaging VMBA Chapter leaders to contact their legislators in support of the amendment, the House Committee ultimately passed the Legal Trails language by a vote of 11-0, added it to the DMV bill, and became vocal supporters of the need to clarify the authority in law.
Nick testifying along with Jeff Nugent, VTGC Board Member and Senior Planner with the Windham Regional Commission in the House Transportation Committee Image: House Transportation YouTube channel
While we thought our work was done, S.123 then went into Conference Committee, where members of the House and Senate align their differing versions of the bill, a few Senators signaled they were more concerned about the ‘takings’ risk than the risk to public access. Fortunately, we had developed several strong champions of protecting Legal Trails, and the Committee ultimately agreed to add ‘intent’ language stating that the legislature believes that municipalities have always had this authority and that this language should be seen as clarifying that right. They also pushed back the effective date for the statutory update to April of next year, in deference to the active court case.
What’s Next?
With the legislature having made their perspective on Legal Trails clear, S.123 is now headed to the Governor’s desk for his signature. At a recent press conference, Governor Scott was asked about Legal Trails and he expressed his support for them as permanent public rights-of-way. We are cautiously optimistic that he will sign the bill into law.
What remains, however, is the resolution of the Tunbridge court case. If the court rules in favor of the town, echoing the legislature’s assertion that the authority to maintain Legal Trails has always been held by municipalities (as one would expect for a public right of way…), then their ruling will align with the pending statutory changes S.123 will bring. If, however, the court rules in favor of the landowner, then the legislature may revisit the Legal Trails amendment next legislative session, putting all Legal Trails in Vermont at risk.
Want to Learn More?
As mentioned above, The Vermont Trails and Greenways council has a great Legal Trails Page, with more updates coming as the legislative session concludes. If you’re more into video, WCAX just posted a very clear story summarizing the state of play on Legal Trails, which includes video from an interview with Nick and was the result of educational efforts from the VTGX to ensure WCAX was well-informed on the topic.
Nick speaks with WCAX’s Calvin Cutler about Legal Trails as part of their June 4th story Image: WCAX