Sunday, March 1, 2026

March 1, 2026 Legislative Update

 I’ve been fairly quiet thus far this year, because most work has been in committees rather than having bills ready for action on the House floor. That will change in the next few weeks, since we are nearing the deadlines to send bills over to the Senate – and the Senate to us – if they are to move at all this session. The key areas being addressed in my Human Services Committee are a homelessness bill and addressing the treatment of youth in need of intensive residential care. Swirling in the background are the annual state budget and the question of reforms to education funding. So, this is an update on those topics.

Homelessness

Ever since the COVID crisis, when we wanted people to be isolated in hotel rooms rather than in congregate shelters, we have maintained a major backlog of homeless households who have no shelter options at all. Everyone recognizes that using hotels and motels is not the right way to support these folks, even if there was enough money (or enough hotel capacity) to do so.

We have attempted to increase shelter capacity for cold weather months, but that still isn’t enough to have a place out of frigid conditions for all who need it. It also results in the exodus to the streets every spring when the “cold weather exemption” ends. We are trying to develop a bill that has levels of support based on needs, that reduces hotel use, and that builds shelter capacity. The biggest obstacle is that it isn’t possible to move people into stable housing, if no affordable housing exists. That’s what is maintaining the backlog.

We are also focused on staying within the governor’s budget. That includes recognizing that if we increase case management support, we may decrease the number of households that can access help, at least for a transitional time. No choices are easy.

Kids in Care

Ever since the Woodside Rehabilitation Center closed down amid issues of mistreatment, Vermont hasn’t had a locked detention facility for the limited number of adolescents who need that highest level of attention. Planning has been slow, with one significant delay being finding a site where neighborhood opposition doesn’t close the planning down. As an interim measure, a 4-bed program was opened in Middlesex last year after rehabbing the old trailers that were previously a secure mental health residence. A 3-bed “crisis stabilization” program is now about to open in Windham in a rehabbed basement space of the sheriff’s office there.

We have struggled for the past two years to get a picture of the overall costs of the “master plan” that the Agency of Human Services is working on. They say they don’t have estimates for future budget years. Last year, we were disturbed by the cost of the contract that was signed for an out-of-state agency to run the Middlesex program. This year, we were aghast at the contract just signed for Windham County.

Make sure you are sitting down when you read this.

The contract is for $4.3 million per year. That amounts to almost $4,000 per day per bed – billed whether the bed is used or not – for this 3-bed program. (It’s $4.1 million for the four beds in Middlesex, which is slighter lower but the same per-bed price as for inpatient hospitalization for a child at the Retreat, but without any of the services that a psychiatric hospital provides.) The out-of-state provider who just signed the contract had its license suspended in its home state for violations of child protection regulations. It cost somewhere around $2 million to do the rehab work for the three bedrooms and common area.

We are suggesting freezing the budget from use for further development until the administration produces the cost estimates on the full plan that we have been asking for. It is painful to see this kind of expenditure while the same budget from the governor proposes cutting funding for child abuse and neglect prevention and for post-adoption supports due to lack of resources.

In the meantime, we’ve also been concerned for several years about reports of overuse of restraint and seclusion at some of the state’s residential facilities. And there are still instances where youngsters who pose no threat at all are being transported in shackles. So we are working on a bill that would put more teeth into oversight by the state on these practices. (That’s not to say there isn’t a lot of good work happening in these agencies; but even occasional violations can cause serious harm to a child.)

Speaking of Budgets

Inflation and other cost-drivers are making it a tough budget year. The governor’s budget proposal holds to a 3% inflationary increase, and legislature leaders are saying they are committing to keeping the budget in balance without any new taxes. The directions from our Appropriations Committee to policy committees was that we could not recommend restoring a budget item that is targeted for a cut unless we identified a replacement source of funding (a cut somewhere else.)

I’ve heard some committees did not come as close as ours did in abiding by that, which only ends up putting more pressure on the Appropriations Committee to make decisions. We did recommend saving the abuse prevention and post-adoption programs, for example, by cutting a tiny percentage from the juvenile detention program budget.

One big driver of needed budget cuts is the plan to once again transfer tens of millions extra from the general fund into the education fund, so that school budgets voted on by towns don’t crush people with the degree of property tax increases. Every year that happens, the “debt” back to the general fund keeps growing. So that’s a segue into the education funding reform issue…

Education Funding Reform

Last year, Act 73 was a desperate effort to respond to the number of defeated budgets by moving a reform plan forward. Getting enough votes in the legislature to support it was a bit dicey, so it was constructed with multiple “off ramps.” If certain next steps did not occur in sequence, the plan would collapse. And collapse it has, with disputes about just about every aspect stalling the progress. It’s hard as an outsider (and I am an outsider, pinned in my committee room while debates go on in the Education Committee room) to predict where it will end up.

For years, we have allowed the façade of “home rule” to stay in place, allowing towns to vote on their local budgets that get merged into a statewide pool of money and distributed back to towns – but you don’t necessarily get back what you raised in taxes. The distribution system is highly complicated in how it shares the resources, and some schools operate for much lower than the state average, and others, at much higher. If it is a statewide funding system, it needs to be raised the same way for everyone, so that it can be shared equitably. We are mandated by our Supreme Court to have a statewide funding system, but the one we’ve created doesn’t work. To do that requires much larger districts and the kind of funding systems that most states use, called a “foundation formula” that equalizes the playing field for all students. The state legislature then controls that funding, not individual towns.

There is a push this year to give towns a few more years to make their own decisions about how to combine existing districts into larger ones. Only if they can’t, would the state step in. There’s lots to complain about in how it might roll out, but the bottom line is that the longer we wait to act, the worse the situation will get. Waiting a few more years for changes to get underway is not a sustainable plan.

It’s important to remember that it is well established that small schools in upper grades are detrimental to educational opportunities for most kids. Given our current testing scores, the one thing that we can’t do is pretend that, aside from the tax issue, all is well with how we educate our children in Vermont.

Thanks for the honor of representing you. Please be in touch with your questions and concerns. All of my updates can be found at representativeannedonahue.blogspot.com. I can be reached at adonahue@leg.state.vt.us, and Rep. Ken Goslant can be reached at kgoslant@leg.state.vt.us.

No comments:

Post a Comment