Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: That is Shane. Good afternoon.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: This is the House Appropriations Committee. It is Tuesday, 01/13/2026. It's 01:00 in the afternoon, and we are just starting our second week of this legislative session. And we're delighted to have the Secretary of the Agency of Administration, Sarah Clark, here to give us an update on what's happening with federal funds and health state. So Sarah, welcome. Great for coming here. And you know Marty?

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: We do. Welcome

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: back. Yeah, familiar things. Indeed. Are you working at Joint Fiscal the year that

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: Yes, yes. The year that she retired. And then we're happy that she's back. Yes.

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: Well, I'm glad you're at your spot.

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: It's just great

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: to hear. All working out well. So introduce yourself, and let's take it away.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: Great. Sounds good. Thank you, everyone. It's nice to be back with you. I'm Sarah Clark. I'm the Secretary of Administration, here today to talk to you about federal funds. I think most specifically, some tracking that we set up in the Agency of Administration to assess adjustments to federal appropriations, primarily during the off session for the legislature. And so I thought I could give you a little bit of context on that language and how we implemented it. For some of you, you heard it at the Joint Fiscal Committee over the summer. But for some of you, it might be a refresher. But you can tell me the speed along if you've already been kind of reminded of that language in the big bill. So Yeah.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: So that's great, Sarah, because I think the viewing audience may not recall. And so this will be the, like, what is the governor and you get to do and what to join fiscal and when do

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: we get called back? Exactly. On that, that would be great. Yeah. Perfect. So I did I handed it out, and it's also available online. But if you want the document that's like a solid green front slide. And then if you just I

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: have two in case anybody Perfect. Perfect. Extras.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: So if you go right to the second slide, that's what gives a little bit of a reminder about what was included in Act 27 from last session, which was the big bill. In section E-one 127.2, it created a process for how the state should be monitoring and responding to potential federal funding reductions set up based on governmental function area. So that would be natural resources, human services, transportation, so that we're not assessing every single appropriation, but kind of big picture major functional area, what changes could we potentially have seen over the summer and still now? So that was sort of the

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: 100s, the 200s have been Exactly. Exactly.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: Yep. And and I think that the theory, when it was added to the budget last year, it was building on some of our established processes for interim budget adjustments in terms of sometimes we notify the Joint Fiscal Committee. Sometimes we notify but ask for a recommendation to go to the emergency board, just kind of how effectuate budget changes when needed off session. And so the table on this first slide lays out that reduction threshold that was established. And so if we As we got monthly information from across state government, if we were to see a reduction of less than 0.5% or $2,000,000 in each functional area, whichever was greater, then the Secretary of Administration would have notified the Joint Fiscal Committee, and we would have prepared a plan to how we would handle that reduction. We did not trigger that at all. And then the next tranche, which was a more significant reduction, which would be greater than zero point five percent and $2,000,000 but less than a 25% reduction or $50,000,000 whichever would be lower. And if we had triggered that, which we didn't, we would have had to prepare a reduction plan for the Joint Fiscal Committee, which you would have had to review or they would have had to review and approve. And some of you would have been part of that process. And then we would have had the Joint Fiscal Committee make a recommendation to the emergency board to implement.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: And the reason we did percentages and dollars is because the Department of Labor is pretty small, and 2% could be a lot or whatever. And then we have human services, which has all the Medicaid. And so we're trying to figure out how to do this that would appropriately trigger these responses without creating unnecessary work.

[Rep. Wayne Laroche, Member]: Yeah. Right? Yeah. Well, touched on each government function unit. I think last year we had a discussion that should we Is there any or each the right way to do it? So how do you actually do it? So if any functional unit was met that threshold, it any?

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: Yes, Yes, it is any. And I think you'll I actually the other of the larger sheet I handed out to you is actually the reporting mechanism. And so we'll you've got that to look at, and we can even walk through it if you want. So then you can kinda see, like, how we evaluated it.

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: But if it was each, then They'd all, that would be kind of all.

[Rep. Wayne Laroche, Member]: It'd have to be an aggregate. Yes.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: So pretty clear on it was just, you know, just give me a blunt. Yeah.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: So if you go to the next slide, it actually has the language that required the Secretary of Administration to monitor the changes in federal funding and the difference between the baseline federal funds for fiscal year 'twenty six and how we would calculate the reduction for the unduplicated totals for each governmental function unit. So back early in the summer, before July 1, finance and management on my behalf, we issued a requirement to all our agencies and departments to submit on a monthly basis any sort of adjustments to federal funding that they had actually received. So not we also are kind of constantly surveying the land to understand, like, what may be coming down the pipeline. But in this case, we were looking for actual federal adjustments. So a reduction primarily. And so departments and agencies, on the first of every month, they respond to finance and management in the template that was provided to them and letting us know of what those adjustments were. And then so we've collected five months of reporting July through December. Maybe that's six months. And we haven't yet triggered any of the thresholds in the bill. But I think what was helpful this summer coming to the Joint Fiscal Committee and you can on the larger report where we did identify reductions so that we could be sharing that to the Joint Fiscal Committee members and also just understanding how our funding was shifting and what some of those impacts may be.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: So we didn't trigger anything that way. But at the airport in July, there was a downgrade in the energy and transportation,

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: and that's why they had the decision of $7,500,000

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: So that was sort of separate from this process. But that was something that happened off session.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: Yeah, it was a busy off session because we did have that, as well as with the federal government shutdown, which wasn't necessarily like, we've cut your funding. But because funding was paused, I think in a you know, we took action collectively in nonpartisan way to work with our SNAP program to make sure we took care of the neediest Vermonters during that period of shutdown, I thought was really important work that we did together. And I think it was complicated in some ways, but eased by the fact that we had

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: set up these processes to begin with.

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: Sarah, do you think this was a help than to do having someone maybe done there a year or two before, but it certainly made it easier for you to keep track of all the financial comings and goings of all these different?

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: Yeah, I think the structure was helpful so we could understand. And if there had been something that triggered it, that we would have had noticed and been able to have that conversation in a more formal manner. We do we are this is unprecedented times, I would say, in our relations with the federal government. And so I think because of that, keeping a closer eye behooves all of us. And it's finding the balance between the right level of monitoring and communication and allowing both the executive branch and the legislative branch to do their work.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: And so did you feel that that generally played it all

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: right, which it was okay?

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: Yeah. Says the person that receives all the information, right? So like, I'm at the top of the mountain, which is helpful sometimes, but not always. And so it did put workload. But it's all things that we need to be monitoring anyway, especially during the shutdown. I think that, like, more so than this process, like, shutdown, I think, was what probably put the greatest strain across state government trying to predict what the impacts were going to be and, like, what one week out would look like, what one month out would look like. I think that was the greatest strain.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Because you were still trying to pay for things that you weren't getting reimbursed for or just tracking it? Or what was the

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: Understanding because if you recall, we took action on the SNAP program, but we also talked about funding to some Head Start programs. And they had a pause in their funding. And these are organizations that don't have a lot of cash reserve. Just by the nature of how they're structured, the federal government directly funds them. And so working through, well, how long can they last? Which they really couldn't last very long without their federal dollars. And we put together a plan, I think, working with joint fiscal committee members, where we essentially agreed to grant them money as a loan during the shutdown that they would repay once they were reimbursed from the federal government. And so which it was great because we came up with these contingency plans, and then the federal government actually did open up pretty quickly after we had resolved some of these issues or a path forward. But that was the greatest strain, trying to understand how long we could go program by program, because not all programs are created equally in terms of how they're reimbursed from the federal government and the services that they provide.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: And the timing of when they get the money. Because they don't get it

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: at the same time either. Yes.

[Rep. David Yacovone, Member]: Yeah. So

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: as you're getting these monthly data reports, agencies here,

[Rep. Wayne Laroche, Member]: about

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: that Transportation kind of been a big news of summer.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Yeah, yeah.

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: There was a shortfall here. Did you find, even at that first threshold, less than 0.5% or 2,000,000, did you have some areas that were close to that but didn't quite meet that threshold?

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: In the transportation area or

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: just in Outside of transportation. So generally speaking. Yeah.

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: We

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: were watching. And you can if you want to

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: go to this larger sheet, though, I acknowledge it's a little hard to read.

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: I'm here. We'll get to it.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: But I think the area So should we do the back one? So the back one, yeah, why don't Let's get into that, your question. And so the back one is just a reminder, We the budget included contingent appropriations for the end of fiscal year twenty five that ended up all being in the money, if you will, and that the general fund allowed for us to fully fund these three areas, which $50,000,000 to the agency of administration, that if we experience a reduction in federal funds, this is the money that we would have used via the e board to fill that shortfall in federal funding. It's what we used for the SNAP program, which was There's $43,500,000 left, I believe. Exactly. Exactly. And the second $30,000,000 you see on this sheet is reserved in the general fund for future appropriation by the General Assembly for federal funding shortfalls. And then the last $30,000,000 also reserved in the General Fund is to address federal funding shortfalls, Vermont Medicaid or other human services needs, property tax relief, housing initiatives. It's a more broad use of things that we could contemplate using that for.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: So the only thing we used out of that $110,000,000

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: was the 6,500,000.0

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Yep. So it's still $2,011,000,000 We do. Yeah.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: We're all actively monitoring, right? It's January 13. January 30, we will run into some federal appropriation challenges again in different areas. But I think once we get through the budget on my end, we'll be delivering our budget next Tuesday. And then I think focusing on what's going to happen at the federal level will be a top priority to the extent we can't necessarily control it, but understanding what to expect.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: And we'll have had the e board and the revenue forecast update this. Exactly. A lot is happening.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: A lot going on in the next couple of days and weeks. So now we'll go to the Great. So I apologize if it's hard to read. My eyesight definitely has not improved as I've aged. So the top sheet is kind of a cover sheet, if you will, a summary. The column all the way over on the left lists the functional areas of government. So to the chair's point, that's like the B100, B200, etcetera. It gives you, as you move across the columns on the page, it gives you the unduplicated total amount of appropriation in that functional area. And then it calculates for you what a 0.5% would be of the federal appropriation then the $2,000,000 So it'll tell you which is higher in each of those areas. To the chair's point, sometimes $2,000,000 in the agency of human services is not significant, but it would be in the other functional areas. So that's why that 0.5% is helpful. And then so the blue is like the kind of smaller level of change that I talked about. And then moving across the page with the green shaded area, that's the 25% or $50,000,000 whichever is lower. And so it gives you those thresholds by functional area. And then the second to the last column where it says revenue reductions, revenue reduct, that's where we were able to quantify actual cuts to budgets in those functional areas. And so you can see that that was in human services, it was in protection, labor, and natural resources. And then the column all the way over on the right is simply yes or no. Did it hit the threshold? And it did not. So that gives you a quick glimpse of the thresholds and what we saw and we have seen through December. Because again, we haven't had any action, any updates to this report since the November joint fiscal committee meeting. And we do. We receive the reporting on a monthly basis, and there's been nothing that's triggered a So the details. Yeah, so the next couple of pages and again, this is very hard to read. So it gives you the nature of what those reductions were by specific section of the budget. So you'll see the first one, Section two twenty four, which is agriculture development. They received a reduction actually in March 2025, So when you were in session. But it is the local food purchase assistance cooperative agreement was terminated early. And this is the resulting funding that was reduced from their federal budget that would have been used to support food purchases in underserved areas for underserved community members. I think some of this is, if you recall back to that time, late spring, it was in the news, some of these program reductions. So So quantifying that's why Yeah. Then the next one is in the Secretary of State Section B-two 32. This was a reduction in their base funding for the Help America Vote Act, HAVA, election security, it went from $1,000,000 in the base to $272,000 roughly in the base. So a reduction overall of a little more than $700,000 And then do you want me to run through all of these my level? Sure.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: They all are. Yeah.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: So the next is Section B two thirty three, which is in the Public Service Department Regulation and Energy, which is the loss of solar for all award. All that was a much larger award of $62,000,000 These funds of about $400,000 were going to be for limited service positions that were not filled. And so no impact on the ground in terms of having to do a reduction in force for our filled positions. But that's what those that $400,000 would have done.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: And the $62,000,000 that was canceled basically wasn't in our state budget. So it didn't trigger any of the pieces of budget.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: Yeah, that's a great point, because this is off of what was in the 26 base federal funding. And so there are some finance pieces outside of that grant that we didn't get. Yeah. So the next in there's a big chunk of Agency of Human Services. This first one and you may recall this from Budget Adjustment Act is there was reductions related to the Planned Parenthood of Northern New England and Medicaid funds. And so that was roughly a $1,100,000 general fund impact that you actually are seeing in the budget adjustment request using next two are both in the Department of Health, and they involve three of the same grants that were reduced by the federal government, but they're in two different appropriations. That's why I've kind of grayed off around those two. And so these were grants that were also canceled in March 2025. Health Disparities grant, which involved the cancellation of some recipient grants and two staff reduction in force. Also, the Environmental Justice Program grant, again, cancellation of subrecipient grants. And the Immunization COVID Supplement grant. So the grant was not extended in the case of the COVID supplement grant, which is the largest share, about $4,000,000 of this combined reduction. And so it was not extended, and it impacted subrecipient grants. And there were some positions that were eliminated, but through attrition. In the Department of Mental Health, the reduction here is a cancellation of an American Rescue Plan Act mental health block grant for about $750,000 These funds supported youth with serious emotional disturbance and adults with serious mental illness. It was a work and grant that was scheduled to end at the September 2025, and so this was an early termination.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: And so if we had

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: spent

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: more before then, they would have only clawed back what we had had spent? Yeah, believe that's the case. And that was in what month? That was in March. March. So six months early. Yep. Okay.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: Moving down the list, in the Department for Children and Families, the Office of Economic Opportunity, this you also probably read about in the news, the SNAP Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention Program, SNAP Ed. It was see, it was ended I don't think it was ended early, but the program would have provided nutrition education and physical fitness for SNAP eligible households. And so this is what the estimated impact in state fiscal year 'twenty six was, dollars 347,000.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: And, Right, because the fiscal years are different. So we got some of it for last fiscal year. Exactly. And I

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: am assuming that that work, because a lot of it, or most of it was contracted out, is not picked up by any other department or agency. I mean, was for a very specific purpose, right? Yeah.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: I know DCF worked with the health department on it. I didn't hear as part of this process that the work was being picked up anywhere else, but I want to confirm before I Yep. So moving out of the Agency of Human Services, the Department of Labor had an unemployment equity grant program from the federal government that was terminated early, leaving $900,000 unspent. I think the positive news is that the work was 90% complete. And they were able to finish it using language access plan dollars that were actually appropriated to the Office of Racial Equity a couple of years ago for this same type of work. And so they are able to complete the work using those state dollars that were set aside for language access planning. I remember that we had money back there for language access. Yeah, we had a couple million dollars that they're still working to deploy across state government. And then the last one, which I think came closest to your question, came closest to triggering the threshold, was in the agency of Natural Resources Environmental Conservation, Office of Water Programs, which this is the rescission of the Technical Assistance Fund for the USDA NRCS Regional Conservation Partnership Program. The funds were going to be used for contracts to provide technical assistance to farmers and forest landowners for water quality practice implementation. So these funds for the technical assistance were cut. I think the larger impact that we don't see here is that there were going to be funds direct to the, you know, to the farmers and the forest landowners that were also cut. And so these were just the technical assistance funds that would have helped them implementing the grants that were cut. So this is like we got really close to $2,000,000 on this one.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Yes. You did. Yeah. We did. So yeah. So the total for all of these is just over 12,000,000. That's correct. Yes.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: That's through December. And so

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: It's a pretty good number. But it's Yeah.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: Could have been worse. It still impacts people. It does. And we are still watching, I'm sure, as we've already discussed, coming to the January, what's going to happen with federal appropriations bills. And we're still watching programs across state government. We've got some watching closely in the Department of Labor and our workforce programs, funding that will likely run out in February. In the emergency management area, they're waiting on some emergency management plans to be released from FEMA.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: The whole FEMA thing is another,

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: yes, worry. Yes. Yes. Yeah. And then I think in the Agency of Human Services, HUD funds and the housing, I think you've got some testimony later today about Section eight vouchers, as well as in the child care arena. So we're watching closely. I think, as you've heard, it's not always all bad news, which is good. Vermont was a pretty successful in the competitive process for the Rural Health Transformation grants and that we got $195,000,000 to spend in the next year, which is a lot of money. And I think we were very successful in the context of our neighboring states in New England and when you look across the country.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: So I look forward to just having

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: the money in hand. Yes.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: I know they have to get back. They came in last week, and, you know, they have to get back with a full budget, and then it gets to get approved finally. Yeah.

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: Not keeping our chickens quite yet, but looking forward to doing that. Great,

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: any other questions for Sarah?

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: Thanks for So this triggering mechanism that we put in the budget last year in the budget that we're in right now, will continue until we get to the end of the fiscal year. And you will continue to do the monitoring in case we get these triggers. And I think we'll continue

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: to do the reporting, but I think it wouldn't be I don't know that we would necessarily go to the Joint Fiscal Committee because we'd be in session. I think we'd probably come to the appropriations committees as opposed to the Joint Fiscal Committee. Right. Primarily done

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: for the off session to give the authority. But I think the general assembly would be involved. Yes,

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: for sure. Doctor. Wayne? Do

[Rep. Wayne Laroche, Member]: you need to put this language in company's budget?

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: In FY twenty seven?

[Rep. Wayne Laroche, Member]: Does the language stand from year to year? Do we need to put that language back in for

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: '20 Well, this isn't about having money. This is not a contingency thing. This is a trigger thing Yes, for we may need to. Because there's a bunch of things that don't happen until next fiscal year, including some things happen in September and some things happen in January. But we've now set up a framework for doing that. So that may be something that we do, but it's something that we should definitely look at, but we'll see where we land.

[Rep. Wayne Laroche, Member]: Yeah, just shouldn't forget about it.

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: That's right. I'm counting on you, me. Dave?

[Rep. David Yacovone, Member]: This is in regards to the 195,000,000 grant and the requirement to spend it within a year. Would you know, and we can ask the team, the federal government say, Jill, for instance, said there's 40 different projects we want to fund that I imagine are all going to be a grant or a contract, which can take time, understandably, through state government to get it out the door. Do the Feds look at when you get it out the door? Or do they look and say, when did the vendors spend it?

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: I don't know the answer to that. I haven't seen the actual terms of the grant. So I think I would want to defer to AHS.

[Rep. David Yacovone, Member]: That could get a little daisy.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Yeah. I think they told us that date started the day they got the award announcement. Right, but But that's already, we're gonna lose at least two months, so hopefully they're keeping their thing. That's the reason if that's the case.

[Rep. David Yacovone, Member]: Right, I understand when the clock starts, but measuring did you spend it or not could be, I'm trying to think with our part, I think it was just when we got it out the door.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: It's a date. Obligated, it had

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: to be obligated by December '4 and had to be totally spent by December '6. So if they had a grant or contract by last December, they were Okay. And then they have two years to finish it up.

[Rep. David Yacovone, Member]: Could you let me know?

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: Yeah, I will follow-up because I need to know as well.

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: Yeah. And

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: we're obviously working with the agency of human services to do whatever we can do to expedite

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: I'm guessing the Joint Fiscal Committee has to accept the grant. We will be having a meeting. But I think we can't have the meeting until the last two pieces of the back and forth on the budget have been. So we aren't going to do that this month. But it'll happen sometime this spring.

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: Can you explain, having done this monitoring, what would the time commitment be, or what's the obligation for the administration and all the different agencies? What's the time crunch for them if we continue this beyond just this year?

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Yeah, mean, think it

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: is there is definitely a resource constraint and a resource pool for all the agencies and departments to do this work. I don't know exactly. It probably depends on the complexity of your federal program. Certainly, a place like the Agency of Human Services with multiple funding programs that could be impacted. They also have resources in their business office, more so than maybe the Agency of Agriculture, Food, and Markets, which would have fewer resources to do it. So it will really vary. I think it depends on the environment that we'll be operating in on a federal level. And as we get closer to finalizing the budget, I would welcome the opportunity to think with this committee about what would make the most sense on an ongoing basis to maybe minimize the resource, but also meet the need of understanding shifts in our federal funding. Because as you know, federal funding shifts all the time. It's a normal course of operating state government going back for decades. I think we're just operating in a different environment now with the federal government that we have to be measured in our evaluation of what they say and understanding actual cuts, not just the threat of cuts. And so

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: And it's unpredictable. So that's just the added piece. Yeah. Yeah. Great. Sarah, thanks a lot for coming to see you again. Yes, you will. It is Alice. You. We'll chat again later. Great. Thank you. Committee, we're going to switch gears completely and go to S-sixty and Michael Brady is here from

[Rep. Wayne Laroche, Member]: Do

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: we have anybody from the committee here too?

[Sarah Clark, Secretary of Administration]: We don't.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Printed off this printer in here? Fixed. It has been fixed. Sends something to print. It's so

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: much cleaner. Oh, is it? That is beautiful. So,

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: committee, you'll remember that we talked about S-sixty when we were here in December, and we asked Michael Brady to do an amendment for us. So we're not going to go over the entire bill again because we already did that. We want

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: to chat about the amendment.

[Rep. David Yacovone, Member]: Good afternoon, buddy.

[Rep. Wayne Laroche, Member]: Well

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: Good afternoon. Thanks for having me. In front of you, as the chair noted, you will have an amendment with the draft numbers 2.1, the date of 12/2325, and a timestamp of 02:20PM. This amendment does four things that you requested in Jan in December. You requested that the term climate or climate change be replaced to avoid any controversy that that might cause. You ask for technical changes because remember last year, you codified the Vermonters, feeding Vermonters program in the same sub chapter and sections that this would have gone into. So you have to move these sections to another sub chapter and sections. You also, agreed to implement or include representative Grainings amendment regarding material that was supplied or information supplied during the application process.

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: Mhmm.

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: And then you wanted a contingency clause for, there are no appropriations, and the secretary of agriculture will be responsible for implementing the program. You also ask that we, as an office, come up with default contingency language, grid work with JFO to come up with the language that's in the draft. If you don't like it or you want changes, it would be helpful to know so that we can refine and get it out to our staff.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Great. So let's take this in order. I know the number changes in the middle I'm not too worried about. But I had Yes. Had a quick email. And so do you want to just kind of walk through the language changes, the instance of amendment, which there's a couple in there? Yeah.

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: So in the first instance of amendment, you're amending the findings clause, and there are several references to climate or climate change in the findings. In the first instance of amendment in subdivision one of section one of the underlying bill, it had previously said Vermont experienced extreme flooding and other climate fuel disasters, and you replaced climate fueled with weather based. Similarly, in the findings in subdivision four a, where there was a reference to, the state should establish a permanent funding support program to maintain the viability of farms and forestry operations in order to ensure food security, climate resilience, and rural economic vitality. You struck the term climate resilience.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Could we just say resilience? Resilience is an issue. Know. I don't know if that's whether we can just do the word resilience. I mean, I'm just thinking of all the flooding and that we're trying to build resilience into the things that we're doing regardless. So I'm wondering if does that even make sense if we just use the word resilience, or does that mean something else?

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: I think that's fine. I think, the term resilience has become so part of emergency response and emergency planning that people will understand what happens.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Would the committee be alright with that if we just I

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: maybe I don't know whether it would, but operational resilience. Because I see that next the next line down, you talk about operations impacted by. Am I on track? I don't know if this resilience is just operational resilience because there's planning resilience that's involved in the two.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: I think I'd try to leave it broad. Yeah. Okay. So we can just make the word yeah. Just strike out

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: the word climate and keep resilience.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: K. Okay.

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: And then in subdivision four c, again, in section one in the findings that I previously said provide a source of relief funds permanently available to farmers and forestry operations impacted by climate emergencies and extreme weather. This is something the chair pointed out to me in a email earlier. I had replaced climate emergencies with weather based emergencies. And the chair pointed out what's the difference between weather based emergencies and extreme weather. And I meant it's duplicative. Yeah.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Right. So do we say weather based emergency?

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: That's that's what I was thinking.

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: Steers? Mhmm. Okay. At

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: least if we're gonna make you do another amendment, there's two things to change.

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: So the second instance of amendment and and several of the subsequent instances of amendment change make those technical changes in order to move these sections into the appropriate subchapter and section numbers. That first one, second instance of amendment changes the subchapter heading for the Farm and Forestry Operations Security Special Fund to subchapter five of chapter two zero seven of title six. The third instance of amendment in the definitions under that new subchapter, it's changing the section number from forty six thirty one to forty six forty one. In one of the definitions in the bill, specifically the Farm and Forestry Operations Security Special Fund Review Board, there is a cross reference to the actual creation of that board in 4634. That number forty six thirty four is being changed to forty six forty four. The fifth instance of amendment is changing the creation of a farm and forestry operations special security security special fund from 4632 to forty six forty two. Sixth instance of amendment in the actual payments from the fund changes the section number from 4633 to 4643. And then in that 46 that new forty six forty three in subsection b, this is where representative ratings amendment would be incorporated in the information that the secretary shall develop a streamlined application for awards under this section that shall include, the application shall include a list of any state grants or loans received for the purposes of the farm or forestry operation business in the past five years to include amount source and purposes of the funding received.

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: That was the new That was

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: the only new that we put in there. Yeah.

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: And then should I move on?

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: Yes.

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: In the seventh instance of amendment, we're back to changing the section numbers in section forty six thirty four, which had been the creation of the special fund review board, changing that number to forty six thirty four to forty six forty four. And in that new forty six forty four, in the creation of the members or specifically the terms of the members, there were some incorrect cross references. That first subdivision b three that is cross referenced, that if you look at the text of the amendment as it exists today, Subdivision B 3 would be the state recovery officer. The state recovery offers officers ex officio. You don't want that person to have a staggered term. So it really was supposed to be referencing Subdivision B4, which are representatives of agricultural organizations. And similarly, on the next page of the amendment, the reference to Subdivision B 5, that's supposed to be reference to farmers, and then the reference to Subdivision B 5 in the house ag report is supposed to Subdivision B 6, which were the new forestry operators that were added to the board. And then the ninth instance of amendment is the contingency for funding. So the duty to implement section two of this act, Farm and Forestry Operations Security Special Fund, is contingent upon an appropriation of funds in fiscal year twenty twenty seven from the general fund to the agency of agriculture for the specific purposes described in section two of this act.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: So, just to be clear on this, section two is the creation of the special fund. And if we don't appropriate any money, there is no special fund created, or could we create the special fund and not fund it?

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: So you could say instead of it saying well, it says special fund because that's the title of the subchapter.

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: Right?

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: So it's really the entire program that would not be implemented.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: So is does the bill become moot?

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: That's effectively what the contingents do. This will be codified. Right? If it's it's a if it's enacted Yep. Signed by the governor, it will go into the green books, but the secretary of ag will have no duty to implement the program if there are no appropriations.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: What if we are able to appropriate money for FY '28, not FY '27? Well, will the program will be

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: that's a good point. I think the language could say it's contingent upon appropriation of funds in fiscal year twenty twenty seven or subsequent fiscal years from the general fund.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: I think that would be better.

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: It's a

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: better safeguard.

[Rep. Wayne Laroche, Member]: Yeah. Well, right now, if you leave it at 2027, it's no option to go forward unless you

[Rep. David Yacovone, Member]: Right.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Then you start all over again. I don't think that's the intent.

[Rep. Wayne Laroche, Member]: That's a

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: good catch. Is there this has changed names. We need to account for that. So that's in the underlying report of the committee on agriculture. The name of the bill, is that what you're referencing? Yeah, so that's still there. You're just amending their report. Their report will go through And it will say, and that after passage, the title of the bill be amended to read an act relating to establishing farm and forestry operations securing a special fund to provide payments for farm losses due to weather conditions.

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: We want to say farm and forestry losses or is that

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: It does say that. Where in the retitled?

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: On the effective date. Provide the names for farm the version I have says farm losses. Oh, you're

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: where are we?

[Unidentified committee member (House Appropriations)]: I'm looking at section three effective date.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: I think you're looking

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: at the

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: side by side. I am. The bill said she'll be entitled to read an act related to farm and forestry operations security special fund. For losses. Yeah, that should be changed.

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: Okay, understood.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: All right, you've done another thing to amend. Good job, Martin.

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: Good.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: So now we have a few things to amend.

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: You do have one last change. It's the tenth amendment changing the effective date from 2025.

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: Right. 2026, which makes sense.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Any other questions for Mike? Is this all making sense what we're going to do? So Tom?

[Rep. Thomas Stevens, Member]: Yeah, I'm sorry I came in a little bit late. So just to be clear, most of these are technical changes, not all of them, but there's a lot of the technical changes in the 10 instances, but the graining what was the graining amendment is being inserted into our amendment.

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: Yes, amendment is just basically verbatim section, which

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: is really number three, item three of the budget. And we made another couple of little changes in the front, which

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: I'll check on when you notice are minor.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: But I think are we all good with what we think is going to come next?

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: I mean, I can summarize with the amendments. You, instead of it saying, striking out climate resilience entirely, you're just gonna strike out the climate for resilience. For that preference where it was gonna say weather based emergencies or extreme weather, you're just gonna have weather based emergencies.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Right.

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: Or on page three of the amendment in the contingency fund, it will say in year 2027 or subsequent fiscal years. Right. And then in the retitling of the bill, it'll say to provide payments for farm or forestry operation losses due to weather conditions. Anybody

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: got that? Okay. So I think we'll want to see it, and then we can vote on it. We are going to take a break. We're going to hear about Section eight housing. And if you want to come back around 04:00, we're now

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: opening

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: for a minute maybe, and then we can vote it out. Our clerk is not here today, so somebody else is going to to be the clerk to vote. But we'll do that.

[Michael Brady, Legislative Counsel]: Okay.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: So thank you very much.

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: I appreciate it.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: So, committee, we are a few minutes early. Why don't we take

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: We have a bit of a break.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: I wonder if Agency of Natural Resources didn't come

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: in a few minutes earlier.

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: Let's break for ten minutes and then

[Rep. Wayne Laroche, Member]: we'll

[Rep. Robin Scheu, Chair, House Appropriations Committee]: check and see

[Unidentified staff or committee member]: if