On October 21, 2020

An invasion of privacy

Dear Editor,

Think your vote for the Legislature doesn’t matter? You might want to consider the new “red tag” rule that prevents hundreds of Vermonters from filling up their heating oil tanks AND shames them in front of anyone with an internet connection. Read on if you value your dignity and privacy.

H571/Act 76, the above ground storage tank rule, was passed in 2016 by a legislature controlled by Democrats and Progressives. We have come to know it as the fuel tank “red tag” rule. Essentially, the “red tag” rule directs fuel dealers to inspect your fuel tank prior to delivering heating oil. If your tank does not meet the standards, as set by the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, a red tag is affixed, and you cannot receive heating oil until the tank is brought up to said standards.

The bill, introduced by then Representative Daniel Connor (D), included a section on creating a list of those not in compliance for the fuel dealers. The bill made its way through the philosophically lopsided statehouse and was signed into law by then Governor Peter Shumlin (D). Without any public fanfare, this list was started and made publicly available on the VtANR website!

To make matters worse, the list continues to grow as new “red tagged” tanks are discovered and reported. Is this the state government that you want?

For those of you who have yet to vote, please, take a little time and reach out to your current Representatives and Senators and find out if they voted in favor of this invasion of your privacy. Unfortunately, you will have to take them at their word as they only held a voice vote every step of the way. That means there is no actual record of how they voted. There is NO accountability. For the Representatives and Senators who were not serving then, ask them if they are even aware of “the list.” Again, is this the state government that you want?

As candidate for Representative of Rutland-6 (Brandon, Pittsford and Sudbury), I call upon the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources to IMMEDIATELY password protect this list you have created. Our state government must respect and protect the privacy and dignity of the citizens of Vermont!

Please vote for the change Vermont desperately needs!

Dave Soulia

Candidate for Representative Rutland-6 (Brandon, Pittsford, Sudbury)

Do you want to submit feedback to the editor?

Send Us An Email!

Related Posts

The public reality of private schools

June 25, 2025
Dear Editor, In their June 13 commentary, “The Achilles’ heel of Vermont education reform,” the Friends of Vermont Public Education state that, “Since the early 1990s, we have been operating two parallel educational systems — public and private.” The organization calls upon the Vermont Legislature to create “one unified educational system,” arguing that, “The current…

Alternative steps for true education reform

June 25, 2025
By Jim Lengel Editor’s note: Jim Lengel, of Duxbury and Lake Elmore, started teaching in Vermont in 1972, worked for the state board of education for 15 years, and retired back in Vermont after helping schools all over the world improve the quality of teaching and learning. Our executive and legislative branches have failed during…

Protect SNAP—because no Vermonter should go hungry

June 25, 2025
Dear Editor, As a longtime anti-hunger advocate, a former SNAP recipient, and a proud Vermonter, I am deeply alarmed by proposals moving through Congress that would gut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), known here in Vermont as 3SquaresVT. If passed, these cuts would devastate thousands of families across the Green Mountain State that rely…

The Good, the Bad & the Ugly of H.454

June 25, 2025
By Sen. Ruth Hardy Editor’s note: Ruth Hardy, of East Middlebury, represents Addison County in the Vermont Senate. She wrote the following reflection (originally posted at ruthforvermont.com) on voting “no” on H.454, the eduction transformation reform bill that passed last week.  On Monday, June 16, the Legislature passed H.454, the education transformation bill that was…