Reported violent and property crime, police reporting coverage, and Vermont public-safety context.
Reported violent-crime rate227.1 per 100k2024 · #40 of 50 · highest first
Reported property-crime rate1,667.4 per 100k2024 · #27 of 50 · highest first
Police population reporting coverage100%2024 · #1 of 50 · highest first
Vermont over time
Explore Vermont readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Vermont officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Vermont effect.
Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Vermont change.
Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear
Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.
Reported violent-crime rate Vermont · source units
VermontPublished U.S. benchmark
Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.
8 of 8 reviewed Vermont actions match · 8 date markers shown. 33 major events shown separately.
Vermont · 2024: 227.1 per 100k · Rank #40 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: Not available
FactVote sums the 12 monthly state offense rates returned by the FBI Crime Data Explorer for each calendar year. The accompanying coverage value is the mean of the 12 monthly population-coverage percentages returned with the same query. These are crimes reported to law enforcement, not all crimes that occurred. Vermont's average monthly population coverage remained at or above 97.6% throughout this series, but coverage still varies and does not equal complete statewide reporting. Reporting systems, agency participation, and later revisions can change the published series. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.
View observations and export data
Vermont Reported violent-crime rate · source units
The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.
Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.
Vermont · state comparison
Reported crime over time
Compare the same calendar year across states. A lower reported rate can reflect fewer crimes, incomplete reporting, or both.
Vermont · 2024227.1 per 100k
Vermont rank#40among all 50 states
U.S. benchmarkNot availableSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Reported violent-crime rate
FactVote sums the 12 monthly state offense rates returned by the FBI Crime Data Explorer for each calendar year. The accompanying coverage value is the mean of the 12 monthly population-coverage percentages returned with the same query.
These are crimes reported to law enforcement, not all crimes that occurred. Vermont's average monthly population coverage remained at or above 97.6% throughout this series, but coverage still varies and does not equal complete statewide reporting. Reporting systems, agency participation, and later revisions can change the published series.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Vermont
2024 · Vermont: 227.1 per 100k · Rank #40 of 50, highest first · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Vermont Reported violent-crime rate history
Period
Vermont
Compare
2015
122.3 per 100k
2016
131.5 per 100k
2017
175.9 per 100k
2018
179.8 per 100k
2019
202.8 per 100k
2020
181.5 per 100k
2021
190.1 per 100k
2022
224.4 per 100k
2023
216.2 per 100k
2024
227.1 per 100k
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Vermont stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Vermont has a dark outline.
Lower value · 102.6 per 100kHigher value · 744.7 per 100kStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Vermont · 227.1 per 100k2024 · Rank #40 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Vermont with every state · 50 ranked
Reported violent-crime rate · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
New Mexico
744.7 per 100k
—
#2
Alaska
731.9 per 100k
—
#3
Tennessee
604.3 per 100k
—
#4
Arkansas
589.6 per 100k
—
#5*
Louisiana
504.5 per 100k
82.0% population coverage; below the 90% threshold.
#6
Colorado
486.8 per 100k
—
#7
California
478.4 per 100k
—
#8
Kansas
474.7 per 100k
—
#9
Missouri
472.7 per 100k
—
#10
Michigan
442.6 per 100k
—
#11
South Carolina
440.8 per 100k
—
#12
Arizona
433 per 100k
—
#13
Oklahoma
429.3 per 100k
—
#14
Montana
428 per 100k
—
#15
Maryland
425.9 per 100k
—
#16
Nevada
408.6 per 100k
—
#17
Texas
397.8 per 100k
—
#18
New York
392.2 per 100k
—
#19
North Carolina
382.9 per 100k
—
#20
Alabama
380.8 per 100k
—
#21
Delaware
368.4 per 100k
—
#22*
South Dakota
356.9 per 100k
89.6% population coverage; below the 90% threshold.
#23*
Indiana
349.2 per 100k
87.2% population coverage; below the 90% threshold.
#24
Oregon
341.1 per 100k
—
#25
Washington
331.8 per 100k
—
#26
Georgia
328 per 100k
—
#27
Massachusetts
317.9 per 100k
—
#28
Ohio
311.9 per 100k
—
#29
Illinois
294.5 per 100k
—
#30
Wisconsin
287.6 per 100k
—
#31
West Virginia
263.8 per 100k
—
#32*
Florida
262 per 100k
81.0% population coverage; below the 90% threshold.
#33
Minnesota
259.4 per 100k
—
#34
North Dakota
258 per 100k
—
#35
Pennsylvania
251.3 per 100k
—
#36
Iowa
247.2 per 100k
—
#37
Utah
237.8 per 100k
—
#38
Idaho
236.6 per 100k
—
#39
Hawaii
230.3 per 100k
—
#40
Vermont · your comparison
227.1 per 100k
—
#41
Kentucky
226.7 per 100k
—
#42
Nebraska
224.6 per 100k
—
#43
Virginia
223.7 per 100k
—
#44
New Jersey
221.9 per 100k
—
#45*
Mississippi
219.6 per 100k
65.1% population coverage; below the 90% threshold.
#46*
Wyoming
212.5 per 100k
89.9% population coverage; below the 90% threshold.
#47
Rhode Island
154.9 per 100k
—
#48
Connecticut
139.2 per 100k
—
#49
New Hampshire
112.3 per 100k
—
#50
Maine
102.6 per 100k
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Violent offenses reported to law enforcement per 100,000 residents in participating jurisdictions.
This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.
Method and limitations
FactVote sums the 12 monthly state offense rates returned by the FBI Crime Data Explorer for each calendar year. The accompanying coverage value is the mean of the 12 monthly population-coverage percentages returned with the same query.
These are crimes reported to law enforcement, not all crimes that occurred.
Vermont's average monthly population coverage remained at or above 97.6% throughout this series, but coverage still varies and does not equal complete statewide reporting.
Reporting systems, agency participation, and later revisions can change the published series.
Average monthly population coverage in 2024 was 100%; this is not complete statewide reporting.
Property offenses reported to law enforcement per 100,000 residents in participating jurisdictions.
This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.
Method and limitations
FactVote sums the 12 monthly state offense rates returned by the FBI Crime Data Explorer for each calendar year. The accompanying coverage value is the mean of the 12 monthly population-coverage percentages returned with the same query.
These are crimes reported to law enforcement, not all crimes that occurred.
Vermont's average monthly population coverage remained at or above 97.6% throughout this series, but coverage still varies and does not equal complete statewide reporting.
Reporting systems, agency participation, and later revisions can change the published series.
Average monthly population coverage in 2024 was 100%; this is not complete statewide reporting.
Firearm deaths include suicide, homicide, and other intents. Mortality is separate from reported crime.
Vermont · 202476
Vermont rank#48among all 50 states
U.S. benchmarkNot availableSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Firearm deaths
Deaths with firearm injury recorded as the cause, all intents.
Counts reflect population size. They do not measure shootings, crimes, or the effect of a policy.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Vermont stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Vermont has a dark outline.
Lower value · 55Higher value · 4,389Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Vermont · 762024 · Rank #48 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Vermont with every state · 50 ranked
Firearm deaths · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
4,389
—
#2
Florida
3,191
—
#3
California
2,853
—
#4
Georgia
1,985
—
#5
North Carolina
1,835
—
#6
Ohio
1,745
—
#7
Pennsylvania
1,624
—
#8
Illinois
1,563
—
#9
Tennessee
1,448
—
#10
Arizona
1,331
—
#11
Missouri
1,234
—
#12
Michigan
1,228
—
#13
Alabama
1,212
—
#14
Indiana
1,196
—
#15
Virginia
1,153
—
#16
South Carolina
1,064
—
#17
Louisiana
1,031
—
#18
Colorado
961
—
#19
Washington
915
—
#20
New York
896
—
#21
Kentucky
870
—
#22
Mississippi
810
—
#23
Oklahoma
794
—
#24
Wisconsin
735
—
#25
Maryland
716
—
#26
Oregon
663
—
#27
Arkansas
638
—
#28
Minnesota
582
—
#28
Nevada
582
—
#30
New Mexico
563
—
#31
Utah
454
—
#32
Kansas
446
—
#33
New Jersey
393
—
#34
Iowa
389
—
#35
Idaho
331
—
#36
Massachusetts
287
—
#37
West Virginia
281
—
#38
Montana
247
—
#39
Connecticut
224
—
#40
Nebraska
218
—
#41
Alaska
182
—
#42
Maine
181
—
#43
South Dakota
159
—
#44
New Hampshire
152
—
#45
Wyoming
143
—
#46
Delaware
123
—
#47
North Dakota
95
—
#48
Vermont · your comparison
76
—
#49
Hawaii
56
—
#50
Rhode Island
55
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Deaths in which firearm injury was the underlying cause, with the rate age-adjusted per 100,000 residents.
This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.
Population-adjusted measure
Age-adjusted firearm death rate
10.6 per 100,000
Method and limitations
CDC National Vital Statistics System death-certificate data.
The total combines firearm deaths across intents, including suicide, homicide, legal intervention, and unintentional or undetermined injury.
With a small count, the rate can be statistically unstable; it does not measure nonfatal injuries, firearm ownership, defensive uses, or policy effects.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
8 of 8 reviewed Vermont actions · newest first
Jun 15, 2026 · H.606 signing · Signed H.606: An act relating to firearms relinquishment and storage procedures · Signed · Act 134Governor · H.606 signing
Signed H.606: An act relating to firearms relinquishment and storage procedures
Jun 15, 2026 · Signed · Act 134
Gov. Phil Scott · Signed
FactVote reviewed summary
Gov. Phil Scott signed H.606 on 2026-06-15. H.606 became Act 134 on June 15, 2026, effective July 1. For firearms surrendered under abuse-prevention or extreme-risk protection orders, it sets a court-approval process for third-party storage and requires the proposed holder to undergo a NICS background check, with the result provided to the court. This connection concerns custody safeguards for surrendered weapons, not a ban on all firearm possession.
Signed by the governor 2026-06-15, Act 134. The history entry date (2026-05-29) is distinct from the signing date recorded in its text.
Why this record is included
The firearm mortality fact includes suicide, homicide and other intents. Safeguards for firearms surrendered under abuse-prevention or extreme-risk orders concern access to weapons in a subset of risk situations; they do not establish fewer firearm deaths. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Vermont evidence context: Firearm deaths · Homicide deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
The court may order an alternative relinquishment to a third party if after a hearing the court finds that the alternative relinquishment adequately protects the safety of the protected parties.
[…]
(i) Firearms shall not be held by a third party unless approved by the court using the process set forth in this subdivision (2).
[…]
(iii) To be considered as a third party eligible to hold surrendered firearms, the third party shall agree to undergo a background check through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to verify that the person is legally permitted to have a firearm. The background check required by this subdivision (iii) shall be provided to the court.
[…]
Date Governor signed bill: June 15, 2026
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Jun 15, 2026 · H.606 · An act relating to firearms relinquishment and storage procedures · Enacted · Act 134Vermont Legislature · H.606
An act relating to firearms relinquishment and storage procedures
H.606 became Act 134 on June 15, 2026, effective July 1. For firearms surrendered under abuse-prevention or extreme-risk protection orders, it sets a court-approval process for third-party storage and requires the proposed holder to undergo a NICS background check, with the result provided to the court. This connection concerns custody safeguards for surrendered weapons, not a ban on all firearm possession.
Signed by the governor 2026-06-15, Act 134. The history entry date (2026-05-29) is distinct from the signing date recorded in its text.
Why this record is included
The firearm mortality fact includes suicide, homicide and other intents. Safeguards for firearms surrendered under abuse-prevention or extreme-risk orders concern access to weapons in a subset of risk situations; they do not establish fewer firearm deaths. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Vermont evidence context: Firearm deaths · Homicide deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
The court may order an alternative relinquishment to a third party if after a hearing the court finds that the alternative relinquishment adequately protects the safety of the protected parties.
[…]
(i) Firearms shall not be held by a third party unless approved by the court using the process set forth in this subdivision (2).
[…]
(iii) To be considered as a third party eligible to hold surrendered firearms, the third party shall agree to undergo a background check through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to verify that the person is legally permitted to have a firearm. The background check required by this subdivision (iii) shall be provided to the court.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Jun 8, 2026 · S.227 · An act relating to creating immigration protocols in Vermont schools · Enacted · Act 125Vermont Legislature · S.227
An act relating to creating immigration protocols in Vermont schools
Jun 8, 2026 · Enacted · Act 125
Sen. Martine Larocque Gulick · Sponsored / Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky · Sponsored / Sen. Joseph "Joe" Major · Co-sponsored / Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale · Co-sponsored / Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White · Co-sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
S.227 became Act 125 on June 8, 2026, effective on passage. It restricts schools’ collection of student or family immigration status, with exceptions for legal requirements and supported educational programs, and limits voluntary disclosure of student information. It preserves compliance with the lawful federal requirements named in the act. Model policies are due January 1, 2027, with school policy adoption beginning in 2027–2028. The connection does not establish actual implementation or a change in the foreign-born share.
Signed by the governor 2026-06-08, Act 125. The history entry date (2026-05-29) is distinct from the signing date recorded in its text.
Why this record is included
The foreign-born population includes naturalized citizens and noncitizens across many origins and ages. School privacy rules concern a subset of those residents and their families; immigration status is not equivalent to foreign-born status, and this law does not change federal admission or citizenship rules. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Vermont evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(3) “School” means a public school or an independent school approved under section 166 of this title.
[…]
(c) Student information privacy. School districts and schools are prohibited from: (1) collecting or requesting information regarding citizenship or immigration status of a student or of a family member of the student except as required by State or federal law or as required to administer a State- or federally supported educational program;
[…]
(3) voluntarily sharing student information, including immigration status, citizenship, place of birth, nationality, national origin, sexual orientation, status as a survivor of domestic violence or sexual assault, status as a recipient of public assistance, or school discipline records, with a third party unless required to do so by State or federal law.
[…]
(f) Applicability. Nothing in this section is intended to prohibit or impede any public agency from complying with the lawful requirements of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1373 and 1644. To the extent any school, school district, or supervisory union policy or practice conflicts with the lawful requirements of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1373 and 1644, the policy or practice is, to the extent of such conflict, abolished.
[…]
(g) Policy required. (1) Model policy and recommended procedures. On or before January 1, 2027, the Agency of Education, in consultation with the Office of the Attorney General, the Vermont Independent Schools Association, and the Vermont School Boards Association, shall develop, and review at least annually, a model policy along with recommended procedures that reflect the requirements set forth in subsections (c) and (d) of this section. (2) Adoption of policy and procedures. (A) Beginning with the 2027–2028 school year, each school board shall develop, adopt, ensure the enforcement of, and make available in the manner described under subdivision 563(1) of this title an immigration protocol policy that shall be at least as stringent as the model policy developed by the Agency. Any school board that fails to adopt a policy shall be presumed to have adopted the most current model policy published by the Agency. (B) Beginning with the 2027–2028 school year, each independent school shall develop, adopt, and ensure the enforcement of an immigration protocol policy that shall be at least as stringent as the model policy developed by the Agency. Any approved independent school that fails to adopt a policy shall be presumed to have adopted the most current model policy published by the Agency.
[…]
Sec. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE This act shall take effect on passage.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Jun 8, 2026 · S.227 signing · Signed S.227: An act relating to creating immigration protocols in Vermont schools · Signed · Act 125Governor · S.227 signing
Signed S.227: An act relating to creating immigration protocols in Vermont schools
Jun 8, 2026 · Signed · Act 125
Gov. Phil Scott · Signed
FactVote reviewed summary
Gov. Phil Scott signed S.227 on 2026-06-08. S.227 became Act 125 on June 8, 2026, effective on passage. It restricts schools’ collection of student or family immigration status, with exceptions for legal requirements and supported educational programs, and limits voluntary disclosure of student information. It preserves compliance with the lawful federal requirements named in the act. Model policies are due January 1, 2027, with school policy adoption beginning in 2027–2028. The connection does not establish actual implementation or a change in the foreign-born share.
Signed by the governor 2026-06-08, Act 125. The history entry date (2026-05-29) is distinct from the signing date recorded in its text.
Why this record is included
The foreign-born population includes naturalized citizens and noncitizens across many origins and ages. School privacy rules concern a subset of those residents and their families; immigration status is not equivalent to foreign-born status, and this law does not change federal admission or citizenship rules. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Vermont evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(3) “School” means a public school or an independent school approved under section 166 of this title.
[…]
(c) Student information privacy. School districts and schools are prohibited from: (1) collecting or requesting information regarding citizenship or immigration status of a student or of a family member of the student except as required by State or federal law or as required to administer a State- or federally supported educational program;
[…]
(3) voluntarily sharing student information, including immigration status, citizenship, place of birth, nationality, national origin, sexual orientation, status as a survivor of domestic violence or sexual assault, status as a recipient of public assistance, or school discipline records, with a third party unless required to do so by State or federal law.
[…]
(f) Applicability. Nothing in this section is intended to prohibit or impede any public agency from complying with the lawful requirements of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1373 and 1644. To the extent any school, school district, or supervisory union policy or practice conflicts with the lawful requirements of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1373 and 1644, the policy or practice is, to the extent of such conflict, abolished.
[…]
(g) Policy required. (1) Model policy and recommended procedures. On or before January 1, 2027, the Agency of Education, in consultation with the Office of the Attorney General, the Vermont Independent Schools Association, and the Vermont School Boards Association, shall develop, and review at least annually, a model policy along with recommended procedures that reflect the requirements set forth in subsections (c) and (d) of this section. (2) Adoption of policy and procedures. (A) Beginning with the 2027–2028 school year, each school board shall develop, adopt, ensure the enforcement of, and make available in the manner described under subdivision 563(1) of this title an immigration protocol policy that shall be at least as stringent as the model policy developed by the Agency. Any school board that fails to adopt a policy shall be presumed to have adopted the most current model policy published by the Agency. (B) Beginning with the 2027–2028 school year, each independent school shall develop, adopt, and ensure the enforcement of an immigration protocol policy that shall be at least as stringent as the model policy developed by the Agency. Any approved independent school that fails to adopt a policy shall be presumed to have adopted the most current model policy published by the Agency.
[…]
Sec. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE This act shall take effect on passage.
[…]
Date Governor signed bill: June 8, 2026
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑May 1, 2025 · S.9 · An act relating to after-hours access to orders against sexual assault · Enacted · Act 12Vermont Legislature · S.9
An act relating to after-hours access to orders against sexual assault
May 1, 2025 · Enacted · Act 12
Sen. Ruth Hardy · Sponsored / Sen. Martine Larocque Gulick · Co-sponsored / Sen. Robert Norris · Co-sponsored / Sen. Robert Plunkett · Co-sponsored / Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky · Co-sponsored / Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White · Co-sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
S.9 became Act 12 on May 1, 2025, effective September 1, 2025. It requires after-hours, weekend and holiday access to emergency sexual-assault protection orders under the procedure for persons other than family or household members as defined in 15 V.S.A. § 1101(2). Stalking complaints retain regular-hours filing. The new process includes electronic applications and telephone oaths in the specified circumstances. A judicial officer still decides whether to grant relief from the submitted affidavits; access is not an automatic order.
Signed by the governor 2025-05-01, Act 12. The history entry date (2025-05-02) is distinct from the signing date recorded in its text.
Why this record is included
Rape is one of the four categories in the FBI violent-crime measure. After-hours protective orders concern sexual-assault victims and prevention of further harm; Vermont’s legal definition is not identical to the FBI category, and access to an order does not establish fewer reported crimes. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Vermont evidence context: Reported violent-crime rate. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(a) In accordance with the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure, a person other than a family or household member as defined in 15 V.S.A. § 1101(2) may file a complaint for a temporary order against stalking or sexual assault. Stalking complaints shall be filed during regular court hours.
[…]
(2) The Court Administrator shall establish procedures to ensure access to orders against sexual assault after regular court hours or on weekends and holidays in accordance with subdivisions (A)–(D) of this subdivision. (A) The court shall designate an authorized person to receive requests for ex parte emergency relief orders against sexual assault submitted after regular court hours pursuant to section 5134 of this title, including requests made by reliable electronic means according to the procedures in this subdivision (2). (B) If a secure setting is not available for processing an ex parte emergency relief order against sexual assault submitted after regular court hours, or if the authorized person determines that electronic submission is appropriate under the circumstances, the authorized person shall inform the applicant that a complaint and affidavit may be submitted electronically. (C) The affidavit shall be sworn to or affirmed by administration of the oath over the telephone to the applicant by the authorized person and shall conclude with the following statement: “I declare under the penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the State of Vermont that the foregoing is true and accurate. I understand that making false statements is a crime subject to a term of imprisonment or a fine, or both, as provided by 13 V.S.A. § 2904.” The authorized person shall note on the affidavit the date and time that the oath was administered. (D) The authorized person shall communicate the contents of the complaint and affidavit to a judicial officer telephonically or by reliable electronic means. The judicial officer shall decide whether to grant or deny the complaint and issue the order solely on the basis of the contents of the affidavit or affidavits provided. The judicial officer shall communicate the decision to the authorized person, who shall communicate it to the applicant. If the order is issued, it shall be delivered to the appropriate law enforcement agency for service and to the holding station.
[…]
Sec. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE This act shall take effect on September 1, 2025.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑May 1, 2025 · S.9 signing · Signed S.9: An act relating to after-hours access to orders against sexual assault · Signed · Act 12Governor · S.9 signing
Signed S.9: An act relating to after-hours access to orders against sexual assault
May 1, 2025 · Signed · Act 12
Gov. Phil Scott · Signed
FactVote reviewed summary
Gov. Phil Scott signed S.9 on 2025-05-01. S.9 became Act 12 on May 1, 2025, effective September 1, 2025. It requires after-hours, weekend and holiday access to emergency sexual-assault protection orders under the procedure for persons other than family or household members as defined in 15 V.S.A. § 1101(2). Stalking complaints retain regular-hours filing. The new process includes electronic applications and telephone oaths in the specified circumstances. A judicial officer still decides whether to grant relief from the submitted affidavits; access is not an automatic order.
Signed by the governor 2025-05-01, Act 12. The history entry date (2025-05-02) is distinct from the signing date recorded in its text.
Why this record is included
Rape is one of the four categories in the FBI violent-crime measure. After-hours protective orders concern sexual-assault victims and prevention of further harm; Vermont’s legal definition is not identical to the FBI category, and access to an order does not establish fewer reported crimes. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Vermont evidence context: Reported violent-crime rate. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(a) In accordance with the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure, a person other than a family or household member as defined in 15 V.S.A. § 1101(2) may file a complaint for a temporary order against stalking or sexual assault. Stalking complaints shall be filed during regular court hours.
[…]
(2) The Court Administrator shall establish procedures to ensure access to orders against sexual assault after regular court hours or on weekends and holidays in accordance with subdivisions (A)–(D) of this subdivision. (A) The court shall designate an authorized person to receive requests for ex parte emergency relief orders against sexual assault submitted after regular court hours pursuant to section 5134 of this title, including requests made by reliable electronic means according to the procedures in this subdivision (2). (B) If a secure setting is not available for processing an ex parte emergency relief order against sexual assault submitted after regular court hours, or if the authorized person determines that electronic submission is appropriate under the circumstances, the authorized person shall inform the applicant that a complaint and affidavit may be submitted electronically. (C) The affidavit shall be sworn to or affirmed by administration of the oath over the telephone to the applicant by the authorized person and shall conclude with the following statement: “I declare under the penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the State of Vermont that the foregoing is true and accurate. I understand that making false statements is a crime subject to a term of imprisonment or a fine, or both, as provided by 13 V.S.A. § 2904.” The authorized person shall note on the affidavit the date and time that the oath was administered. (D) The authorized person shall communicate the contents of the complaint and affidavit to a judicial officer telephonically or by reliable electronic means. The judicial officer shall decide whether to grant or deny the complaint and issue the order solely on the basis of the contents of the affidavit or affidavits provided. The judicial officer shall communicate the decision to the authorized person, who shall communicate it to the applicant. If the order is issued, it shall be delivered to the appropriate law enforcement agency for service and to the holding station.
[…]
Sec. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE This act shall take effect on September 1, 2025.
[…]
Date Governor signed bill: May 1, 2025
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified Vermont officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Oct 5, 2026.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about crime, victimization, policing and criminal justice from FactVote’s Vermont candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.
7 statements from 4 candidates
2026 Vermont Governor — General Election
1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement
Establish the nation’s strongest public standards for AI, requiring independent testing, transparency, human oversight, ongoing audits, and public accountability while prohibiting predictive policing, social scoring, automated benefit termination, emotion recognition, and AI systems designed for mas…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: National security, foreign policy, technology, and veterans
Candidate campaign source
Establish the nation’s strongest public standards for AI, requiring independent testing, transparency, human oversight, ongoing audits, and public accountability while prohibiting predictive policing, social scoring, automated benefit termination, emotion recognition, and AI systems designed for mass political or immigration surveillance.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
John supports providing law enforcement with the resources they need to protect the public while ensuring the justice system holds offenders accountable and stands with victims. Strong communities begin with public safety and respect for the rule of law.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Public safety and criminal justice
Candidate campaign source
John supports providing law enforcement with the resources they need to protect the public while ensuring the justice system holds offenders accountable and stands with victims. Strong communities begin with public safety and respect for the rule of law.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
With a clear and consistent record of supporting sensible gun safety reforms, Sarah has been a steadfast advocate for common-sense measures to prevent gun violence. By prioritizing public safety and the well-being of Vermont communities, Sarah continues to lead the charge for meaningful action on gu…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
Candidate campaign source
With a clear and consistent record of supporting sensible gun safety reforms, Sarah has been a steadfast advocate for common-sense measures to prevent gun violence. By prioritizing public safety and the well-being of Vermont communities, Sarah continues to lead the charge for meaningful action on gun safety, ensuring that Vermont remains a safe and secure place for all.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026
This section matches specific crime, victimization, policing and criminal justice terms in retained, attributed source text from published Vermont candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.
Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.
Vermont incumbents
What incumbents are proposing
Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Vermont legislators and Vermont’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Vermont’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.
6 matching sponsorships or proposals · 5 Vermont incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.
Rep. Angela Arsenault
Vermont House of Representatives · D–VT
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Angela ArsenaultVermont Legislature · H.606
An act relating to firearms relinquishment and storage procedures
H.606 became Act 134 on June 15, 2026, effective July 1. For firearms surrendered under abuse-prevention or extreme-risk protection orders, it sets a court-approval process for third-party storage and requires the proposed holder to undergo a NICS background check, with the result provided to the court. This connection concerns custody safeguards for surrendered weapons, not a ban on all firearm possession.
Signed by the governor 2026-06-15, Act 134. The history entry date (2026-05-29) is distinct from the signing date recorded in its text.
Why this record is included
The firearm mortality fact includes suicide, homicide and other intents. Safeguards for firearms surrendered under abuse-prevention or extreme-risk orders concern access to weapons in a subset of risk situations; they do not establish fewer firearm deaths. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Vermont evidence context: Firearm deaths · Homicide deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
The court may order an alternative relinquishment to a third party if after a hearing the court finds that the alternative relinquishment adequately protects the safety of the protected parties.
[…]
(i) Firearms shall not be held by a third party unless approved by the court using the process set forth in this subdivision (2).
[…]
(iii) To be considered as a third party eligible to hold surrendered firearms, the third party shall agree to undergo a background check through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to verify that the person is legally permitted to have a firearm. The background check required by this subdivision (iii) shall be provided to the court.
H.606 became Act 134 on June 15, 2026, effective July 1. For firearms surrendered under abuse-prevention or extreme-risk protection orders, it sets a court-approval process for third-party storage and requires the proposed holder to undergo a NICS background check, with the result provided to the court. This connection concerns custody safeguards for surrendered weapons, not a ban on all firearm possession.
Signed by the governor 2026-06-15, Act 134. The history entry date (2026-05-29) is distinct from the signing date recorded in its text.
Why this record is included
The firearm mortality fact includes suicide, homicide and other intents. Safeguards for firearms surrendered under abuse-prevention or extreme-risk orders concern access to weapons in a subset of risk situations; they do not establish fewer firearm deaths. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Vermont evidence context: Firearm deaths · Homicide deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
The court may order an alternative relinquishment to a third party if after a hearing the court finds that the alternative relinquishment adequately protects the safety of the protected parties.
[…]
(i) Firearms shall not be held by a third party unless approved by the court using the process set forth in this subdivision (2).
[…]
(iii) To be considered as a third party eligible to hold surrendered firearms, the third party shall agree to undergo a background check through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to verify that the person is legally permitted to have a firearm. The background check required by this subdivision (iii) shall be provided to the court.
Rep. Martin LaLonde · Sponsored / Rep. Angela Arsenault · Co-sponsored / Rep. Sarah "Sarita" Austin · Co-sponsored / Rep. Alyssa Black · Co-sponsored / Rep. Elizabeth Burrows · Co-sponsored / Rep. Kevin "Coach" Christie · Co-sponsored / Rep. Peter Conlon · Co-sponsored / Rep. Leonora Dodge · Co-sponsored / Rep. Karen Dolan · Co-sponsored / Rep. David Durfee · Co-sponsored / Rep. Lori Houghton · Co-sponsored / Rep. Mary E. Howard · Co-sponsored / Rep. Kathleen James · Co-sponsored / Rep. Emilie Krasnow · Co-sponsored / Rep. Kate Lalley · Co-sponsored / Rep. James Masland · Co-sponsored / Rep. Kate McCann · Co-sponsored / Rep. Brian Minier · Co-sponsored / Rep. Michael Mrowicki · Co-sponsored / Rep. Daniel Noyes · Co-sponsored / Rep. Kate Nugent · Co-sponsored / Rep. Carol Ode · Co-sponsored / Rep. Monique Priestley · Co-sponsored / Rep. Robin Scheu · Co-sponsored / Rep. Kirk White · Co-sponsored / Rep. Theresa Wood · Co-sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
H.534 became Act 128 on May 30, 2024, effective July 1. For retail theft of merchandise worth more than $250 and no more than $900, subsection (b) sets maximum imprisonment of six months for a first offense, two years for a second, three years for a third, and ten years for a fourth or later offense, subject to the specified two-year repeat-offense windows and fine alternatives. Subsection (d) preserves separate penalties for the specified receipt, UPC-label and theft-device offenses, overriding this value-based schedule for those offenses. These are maximum penalties, not mandatory sentences, and this connection does not cover all property crime.
Signed by the governor 2024-05-30, Act 128. The history entry date (2024-05-10) is distinct from the signing date recorded in its text.
Why this record is included
Retail taking of merchandise overlaps the larceny-theft component of FBI property crime, which also includes burglary and motor-vehicle theft. State offense definitions differ from FBI classifications. Changing penalties does not establish deterrence or a change in the reported crime rate. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Vermont evidence context: Reported property-crime rate. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(b) A person convicted of the offense of retail theft of merchandise having a retail value in excess of $250.00 and not in excess of $900.00 shall: (1) for a first offense, be punished by a fine of not more than $500.00 or imprisonment for not more than six months, or both; (2) for a second offense, be punished by a fine of not more than $1,000.00 or imprisonment for not more than two years, if the second offense occurs not more than two years after the first offense; (3) for a third offense, be punished by a fine of not more than $1,500.00 or imprisonment for not more than three years, or both, if the third offense occurs not more than two years after the second offense; or (4) for a fourth or subsequent offense, be punished by a fine of not more than $2,500.00 or imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if the fourth or subsequent offense occurs not more than two years after the immediately preceding offense.
[…]
(d) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a) and (b) of this section, a person convicted of retail theft pursuant to: (1) Subdivision 2575(4) of this title shall be imprisoned not more than two years or fined not more than $1,000.00, or both. (2) Subdivision 2575(5), (6), or (7) of this title shall be imprisoned for not more than 10 years or fined not more than $5,000.00, or both. Sec. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE This act shall take effect on July 1, 2024.
1 proposalView proposals from Sen. Martine Larocque GulickVermont Legislature · S.227
An act relating to creating immigration protocols in Vermont schools
Jun 8, 2026 · Enacted · Act 125
Sen. Martine Larocque Gulick · Sponsored / Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky · Sponsored / Sen. Joseph "Joe" Major · Co-sponsored / Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale · Co-sponsored / Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White · Co-sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
S.227 became Act 125 on June 8, 2026, effective on passage. It restricts schools’ collection of student or family immigration status, with exceptions for legal requirements and supported educational programs, and limits voluntary disclosure of student information. It preserves compliance with the lawful federal requirements named in the act. Model policies are due January 1, 2027, with school policy adoption beginning in 2027–2028. The connection does not establish actual implementation or a change in the foreign-born share.
Signed by the governor 2026-06-08, Act 125. The history entry date (2026-05-29) is distinct from the signing date recorded in its text.
Why this record is included
The foreign-born population includes naturalized citizens and noncitizens across many origins and ages. School privacy rules concern a subset of those residents and their families; immigration status is not equivalent to foreign-born status, and this law does not change federal admission or citizenship rules. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Vermont evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(3) “School” means a public school or an independent school approved under section 166 of this title.
[…]
(c) Student information privacy. School districts and schools are prohibited from: (1) collecting or requesting information regarding citizenship or immigration status of a student or of a family member of the student except as required by State or federal law or as required to administer a State- or federally supported educational program;
[…]
(3) voluntarily sharing student information, including immigration status, citizenship, place of birth, nationality, national origin, sexual orientation, status as a survivor of domestic violence or sexual assault, status as a recipient of public assistance, or school discipline records, with a third party unless required to do so by State or federal law.
[…]
(f) Applicability. Nothing in this section is intended to prohibit or impede any public agency from complying with the lawful requirements of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1373 and 1644. To the extent any school, school district, or supervisory union policy or practice conflicts with the lawful requirements of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1373 and 1644, the policy or practice is, to the extent of such conflict, abolished.
[…]
(g) Policy required. (1) Model policy and recommended procedures. On or before January 1, 2027, the Agency of Education, in consultation with the Office of the Attorney General, the Vermont Independent Schools Association, and the Vermont School Boards Association, shall develop, and review at least annually, a model policy along with recommended procedures that reflect the requirements set forth in subsections (c) and (d) of this section. (2) Adoption of policy and procedures. (A) Beginning with the 2027–2028 school year, each school board shall develop, adopt, ensure the enforcement of, and make available in the manner described under subdivision 563(1) of this title an immigration protocol policy that shall be at least as stringent as the model policy developed by the Agency. Any school board that fails to adopt a policy shall be presumed to have adopted the most current model policy published by the Agency. (B) Beginning with the 2027–2028 school year, each independent school shall develop, adopt, and ensure the enforcement of an immigration protocol policy that shall be at least as stringent as the model policy developed by the Agency. Any approved independent school that fails to adopt a policy shall be presumed to have adopted the most current model policy published by the Agency.
[…]
Sec. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE This act shall take effect on passage.
1 proposalView proposals from Sen. Ruth HardyVermont Legislature · S.9
An act relating to after-hours access to orders against sexual assault
May 1, 2025 · Enacted · Act 12
Sen. Ruth Hardy · Sponsored / Sen. Martine Larocque Gulick · Co-sponsored / Sen. Robert Norris · Co-sponsored / Sen. Robert Plunkett · Co-sponsored / Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky · Co-sponsored / Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White · Co-sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
S.9 became Act 12 on May 1, 2025, effective September 1, 2025. It requires after-hours, weekend and holiday access to emergency sexual-assault protection orders under the procedure for persons other than family or household members as defined in 15 V.S.A. § 1101(2). Stalking complaints retain regular-hours filing. The new process includes electronic applications and telephone oaths in the specified circumstances. A judicial officer still decides whether to grant relief from the submitted affidavits; access is not an automatic order.
Signed by the governor 2025-05-01, Act 12. The history entry date (2025-05-02) is distinct from the signing date recorded in its text.
Why this record is included
Rape is one of the four categories in the FBI violent-crime measure. After-hours protective orders concern sexual-assault victims and prevention of further harm; Vermont’s legal definition is not identical to the FBI category, and access to an order does not establish fewer reported crimes. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Vermont evidence context: Reported violent-crime rate. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(a) In accordance with the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure, a person other than a family or household member as defined in 15 V.S.A. § 1101(2) may file a complaint for a temporary order against stalking or sexual assault. Stalking complaints shall be filed during regular court hours.
[…]
(2) The Court Administrator shall establish procedures to ensure access to orders against sexual assault after regular court hours or on weekends and holidays in accordance with subdivisions (A)–(D) of this subdivision. (A) The court shall designate an authorized person to receive requests for ex parte emergency relief orders against sexual assault submitted after regular court hours pursuant to section 5134 of this title, including requests made by reliable electronic means according to the procedures in this subdivision (2). (B) If a secure setting is not available for processing an ex parte emergency relief order against sexual assault submitted after regular court hours, or if the authorized person determines that electronic submission is appropriate under the circumstances, the authorized person shall inform the applicant that a complaint and affidavit may be submitted electronically. (C) The affidavit shall be sworn to or affirmed by administration of the oath over the telephone to the applicant by the authorized person and shall conclude with the following statement: “I declare under the penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the State of Vermont that the foregoing is true and accurate. I understand that making false statements is a crime subject to a term of imprisonment or a fine, or both, as provided by 13 V.S.A. § 2904.” The authorized person shall note on the affidavit the date and time that the oath was administered. (D) The authorized person shall communicate the contents of the complaint and affidavit to a judicial officer telephonically or by reliable electronic means. The judicial officer shall decide whether to grant or deny the complaint and issue the order solely on the basis of the contents of the affidavit or affidavits provided. The judicial officer shall communicate the decision to the authorized person, who shall communicate it to the applicant. If the order is issued, it shall be delivered to the appropriate law enforcement agency for service and to the holding station.
[…]
Sec. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE This act shall take effect on September 1, 2025.
1 proposalView proposals from Sen. Tanya VyhovskyVermont Legislature · S.227
An act relating to creating immigration protocols in Vermont schools
Jun 8, 2026 · Enacted · Act 125
Sen. Martine Larocque Gulick · Sponsored / Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky · Sponsored / Sen. Joseph "Joe" Major · Co-sponsored / Sen. Kesha Ram Hinsdale · Co-sponsored / Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White · Co-sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
S.227 became Act 125 on June 8, 2026, effective on passage. It restricts schools’ collection of student or family immigration status, with exceptions for legal requirements and supported educational programs, and limits voluntary disclosure of student information. It preserves compliance with the lawful federal requirements named in the act. Model policies are due January 1, 2027, with school policy adoption beginning in 2027–2028. The connection does not establish actual implementation or a change in the foreign-born share.
Signed by the governor 2026-06-08, Act 125. The history entry date (2026-05-29) is distinct from the signing date recorded in its text.
Why this record is included
The foreign-born population includes naturalized citizens and noncitizens across many origins and ages. School privacy rules concern a subset of those residents and their families; immigration status is not equivalent to foreign-born status, and this law does not change federal admission or citizenship rules. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Vermont evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
(3) “School” means a public school or an independent school approved under section 166 of this title.
[…]
(c) Student information privacy. School districts and schools are prohibited from: (1) collecting or requesting information regarding citizenship or immigration status of a student or of a family member of the student except as required by State or federal law or as required to administer a State- or federally supported educational program;
[…]
(3) voluntarily sharing student information, including immigration status, citizenship, place of birth, nationality, national origin, sexual orientation, status as a survivor of domestic violence or sexual assault, status as a recipient of public assistance, or school discipline records, with a third party unless required to do so by State or federal law.
[…]
(f) Applicability. Nothing in this section is intended to prohibit or impede any public agency from complying with the lawful requirements of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1373 and 1644. To the extent any school, school district, or supervisory union policy or practice conflicts with the lawful requirements of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1373 and 1644, the policy or practice is, to the extent of such conflict, abolished.
[…]
(g) Policy required. (1) Model policy and recommended procedures. On or before January 1, 2027, the Agency of Education, in consultation with the Office of the Attorney General, the Vermont Independent Schools Association, and the Vermont School Boards Association, shall develop, and review at least annually, a model policy along with recommended procedures that reflect the requirements set forth in subsections (c) and (d) of this section. (2) Adoption of policy and procedures. (A) Beginning with the 2027–2028 school year, each school board shall develop, adopt, ensure the enforcement of, and make available in the manner described under subdivision 563(1) of this title an immigration protocol policy that shall be at least as stringent as the model policy developed by the Agency. Any school board that fails to adopt a policy shall be presumed to have adopted the most current model policy published by the Agency. (B) Beginning with the 2027–2028 school year, each independent school shall develop, adopt, and ensure the enforcement of an immigration protocol policy that shall be at least as stringent as the model policy developed by the Agency. Any approved independent school that fails to adopt a policy shall be presumed to have adopted the most current model policy published by the Agency.
[…]
Sec. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE This act shall take effect on passage.
Only current Vermont officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.
Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Vermont statistic. Collection reviewed Oct 5, 2026.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
Vermont snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to Vermont, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.