Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Alright, we are live. Alright, everyone. Welcome back from lunch. It is little after 1PM. And apologies for the delayed start, but we're gonna have our first conversation, in and around federal funding, food security, and, we'll start off with John Sales, CEO of HuBank. John, good to see you again. Thanks, Ben.

[John Sayles, CEO, Vermont Foodbank]: Thank you for having me. Appreciate the committee's time. I am for the record, I'm John Sales, CEO of the Vermont Food Bank, and I live in Montpelier, right up the hill a little bit. Thank you, mister chair and committee members, for your time today. Appreciate it. I'm here today with some partners. I am gonna hopefully yield most of my time to them, and neighbors for Three Squares Vermont Awareness Day. We are acknowledging this essential program and ask for support for your support on requests requests that together will ensure the best outcome for people here in Vermont in our communities, for our farmers, and for our economy. I'm also here to ask for your support for the Vermont Food Bank's FY twenty seven budget requests. It's a total of $5,000,000, including $1,000,000 for Ready Response, which is the food bank's ability to respond along with the state to disasters and emergencies, to fully fund the administrative costs needed in fiscal year twenty seven for the Three Squares Vermont program, the federal government has reduced its support for administrative block of the Department of Children and Families and to support NOFA Vermont's request for $500,000 in ongoing funding to strengthen our farm viability and address food security through its crop cash plus and farm share programs. So three squares Vermont, it's three squares Vermont day, is known nationally as SNAP, but, many households, it's actually known as a lifeline. Nearly 10% of Vermont Vermonters, about six 64,000 Vermont families or individuals c three Scrubs Vermont benefits. It's a a monthly benefit, comes on an EBT card for grocery purchases. Almost all of the folks who receive that are children, are older adults, or are people with disabilities who are navigating tight budgets and having a hard time making ends meet. As I often say, food insecurity is really financial insecurity. There's plenty of food out there. It's just that people are not able to make the ends meet at the end of the month. More than $12,000,000 in federal SNAP benefits, Three Squares Vermont, are distributed directly to those 64,000 people a month in Vermont. So that's close to a $150,000,000 a year coming into Vermont's economy and being spent immediately. 90% of that money is spent within thirty days at local food retailers, at country stores, at farm stands, and farmers markets, because you can Vermont is actually a leader in the ability to redeem staff benefits at farm stands and farmers markets. Three squares is the most effective and efficient anti hunger program in Vermont and in the country. But at the same time, it does not reach many Vermonters at risk of hunger. In fact, the food service about 70,000 people a month. A lot of those are the same folks because Three Squares does not last the entire month. But there are lot of folks who who aren't making ends meet who are not eligible for Three Squares Vermont. Other food needs supports come from the Vermont Food Bank and from our partners, and you'll hear from one of them. These parts of the food safety net are important sources of food year round, but especially critical in disasters. Disasters like the flooding we've had in 2023, 2024, but also disasters like the withholding of Three Squares Vermont benefits during the government shutdown in November when the state, through the emergency board and the administration, the governor responded admirably and very quickly and and backfilled that lack of SNAP benefits with state dollars, that had been reserved for federal emergencies and also with $250,000 to the Vermont Food Bank that went directly to food shelves and meal sites in communities across Vermont to purchase food so that folks could have some extra resources during that week when there were not SNAP benefits available. Two people joining me here today, Stella and Denise, will share with you their experiences of that emergency in November and what that meant to them. And the you know, this experience from the charitable food systems perspective, is the kind of mobilization that we're gonna be required to do coming into the future, and that's really what I think is important to this, this committee. You will hear about how this emergency impacted people and how it stretched and stressed the emergency food system. Stella was just saying that the but the food shelves are the ambulance service.

[Stella James, Executive Director, Hardwick Area Food Pantries]: Or the ambulance being social services.

[John Sayles, CEO, Vermont Foodbank]: Ambulance for social services, but she could tell you about that. It it really stressed the emergency food system. We cannot continue to ask so much of our partners without together doing the work required to plan ahead and source and stage food resources. So when this happens, we are prepared, ready, and really recognizing that there are different needs and different structures and different systems in our different communities. So thank you for your time, and your support for the Vermont Food Bank's FY 27 requests, for again $5,000,000 total to $1,000,000 in ready response, $2,000,000 to support our network partners directly, and $2,000,000 for the Vermonters Feeding Vermonters program, which is a grant from the agency of agriculture that's used to purchase locally grown Vermont foods and distribute it throughout the food bank's network. With that, I would like to turn it over to Stella. And a hand for my hand. Oh, please.

[Lisa Hango (Vice Chair)]: Thank you. Before you turn it over, we're asking anyone who comes in, you had budget requests to write us a specific budget letter to the chair of the committee and myself, vice chair, the committee assistant as well copied.

[VL Coffin IV (Member)]: Absolutely do that.

[Lisa Hango (Vice Chair)]: Help everything in one place when it comes time to write our budget letter to appropriations.

[John Sayles, CEO, Vermont Foodbank]: Thank you. We're very happy

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: with Thank you. Anything else for John before we move to our next guest?

[Neil Kamen, Deputy Commissioner, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation]: Thank you. Have Denise Walton next. It's Stella's gonna be talking about that.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Oh, okay. I'm sorry. Yes, please.

[Stephanie Smith, Deputy Director, Vermont Emergency Management]: I think I'm live.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: No. No. No. No. No. I just looking at my sheet, I'm going just, like, down the list as as enumerated. But yeah.

[Kate Nugent (Member)]: No. Go for it. Go for it right there. Yeah. Yeah. Totally cool.

[Stella James, Executive Director, Hardwick Area Food Pantries]: Alright. Hi, everyone. My name is Stella James, and I live in West Danville. I'm the executive director of the Hardwick Area Food Pantries. Thank you for having me here. One of the network partners that John was just talking about. I'm here to support the Vermont Food Bank's request for a $5,000,000 total appropriation in the fiscal year 'twenty seven. And this includes $1,000,000 for Ready Response to ensure food access in disasters and emergencies. So just to give you

[Stephanie Smith, Deputy Director, Vermont Emergency Management]: a little bit of a

[Stella James, Executive Director, Hardwick Area Food Pantries]: sense of what we do at the Hardwick Food Century, we're at three sites in Craftsbury, Albany, and Hardwick. And we serve four counties, as far South as Woodbury, we travel as far North as Irisburg. We do a lot of home delivery, see a lot of folks who are kind of hidden from everyone and the most exposed to any kind of emergency you could imagine. Day in and day out, our sites protect people undergoing personal emergencies. And when floods come, personal emergencies aren't put on hold. They're compounded. All inbound and outbound roads in Hardwick are flooded. They trap the local specialty grocer in our food pantry above water. We learned this in both 'twenty three and 'twenty four. And when these floods receded, there were more than damaged roads and homes that needed rebuilding. This year, in the '25, the snap freeze, much like the years of flooding, created unprecedented urgency for our operations. We braced for impact without any knowledge of what was coming. We had forty eight hours to procure, receive, and store enough food for an emergency we'd never seen before. No one grows accustomed to the stress of survival, and many of my visitors were deeply concerned. And though the food bank and our community supported us, we could not continue to bridge the demand. Food disappeared from our shelves at alarming rates. And unfortunately, our usual problems never ceased. People continued to get injured, ill. They suffered job loss, deaths in the family. And it's just too much to ask of our private donors, of elderly volunteers, and of our donated food system. We really need well laid plans. We need equipment. We need a backup generator. We need funds to purchase and store food for emergencies, because we are the disaster relief for our visitors every day. And we need additional funding to weather the next emergency. Again, I'm here to support the food bank's request for the $1,000,000 of Ready Response to ensure food access in disasters and emergencies. Thank you for your time. Does anyone have any questions?

[Denise Walton, Community Member and Advocate (Concord, VT)]: Good afternoon, committee. Thank you for having me here. I'm Denise Walton, and I'm a community member in Concord, Vermont. I'm also an advocate for our local food pantry, Sid's Pantry, which is housed at the Concord Health Center, run by Northern Counties Health Care. Sid's Pantry serves 16 families of all ages. It's a monthly pantry. It's held along with past offerings of an additional veggie drop, a lunch serve pop up style, and all of these projects have been made possible with Vermont Food Bank programs and or grants and many volunteers who give their time. I'm here today to ask you to fully fund Vermont Food Bank's request for $5,000,000 for the fiscal year '27, with $2,000,000 for the Vermont Eating Vermont Grant program, 2,000,000 to support Vermont Food Bank Network food shelves and partners and meal sites, and 1,000,000 for the ready response food access and emergencies. In my community, we have a population of almost 30%, 65 and over. Most live alone and have limited fam local family. We are very rural, and we have no public transportation in a in a very small community market, but no grocery stores unless one travels to New Hampshire or Saint Johnsbury. Current population of Concord is approximately 1,669 people with a 16.9% living at poverty level. It's a perfect partnership for SIDS Pantry to be at the health center. Food access is available during the health center hours. Patients and residents of Essex County can get a referral to the pantry. And the produce is always of highest quality. It comes from the Vermont Food Bank in our monthly pantry drop off. And it's supplemented with our Vermont Feeders Vermonter grant, which is used to purchase the fresh food from local farmers, eggs, milk, seasonal veggies, and fruits and veggies. And our community can also help support the local farms while they can eat fresh health foods. Each month, the shelves are well stocked. We have staples. They're ordered and paid for through the various grants. And our community is also very generous. During the year, we have a big food drive at Concord School. Miles Pond Association donates at the end of summer, as they head out and empty their camps, they donate their leftovers. They also donate, funds. And the health center sponsors a local turkey, throughout on Thanksgiving morning for fun, and they collect canned goods. And local groups bake breads at local churches to add to the holiday baskets. This is all part of our community and part of many communities here in Vermont as we continue to implement projects of survival. We are proud, we are humble, and in our current status, we are in need. We ask that you please consider funding the Vermont Food Bank's budget request. Lastly, I will talk about Ready Response for floods, ice storms, and emergencies. I myself experienced one of these emergencies on 11/01/2025. Government shutdown with the government shutdown, there were no SNAP benefits paid to anyone. As an elderly disabled person, I qualify for SNAP. And with the tiny window of prior knowledge and preparedness, I was able to grow my own sprouts, make soups, and I made do. The store was vacant as I entered that that day, November 1. To get my two item list, I saw the shelves were piled high, things I could not have. Fresh veggies were wilting as there was no one to buy them, and the meat department bulge with its big loads. That feeling, it ignited me. I may do, but the families, the kids, the elders, and our veterans, what if they couldn't? In response to this federal emergency one week later, Vermont stepped up and helped its people so we wouldn't have to make do. Elders could have more than crackers and tea. Kids could go to bed with a nice full tummy. Thank you. We appreciate it. Thank you for the action that you took as legislators to ensure that those of us who needed the help could get it to buy our groceries. The food shelves got help to keep their shelf stock, and that support was critical. That showed people like me that you also believe that poor folks shouldn't and do not deserve to have to suffer. And we do deserve to talk to, ask for, and have choices of fresh, healthy foods and safe, adequate programs to access these foods. I recently was surprised to hear that each month the Vermont Food Bank and our partners serve an estimated 70,000 people across Vermont with 14,000,000 pounds of food delivered, two twenty two farms are supported, and 217 network partners shared food with neighbors. With a current population of close to 648,000 in our state, that number of estimated people that are utilizing food access programs is continuously growing. In closing, it is in gratitude that I'm here today and ask you to please consider full funding for the FY '27 for the healthy well-being of our residents, of our communities of Vermont. Okay. And they sent me with some Vermont Food Bank and three squares.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Anybody would like these? Oh, wonderful. Thank you. And I trampled our agenda a little bit, so we have till 01:30 so we can have some conversation, question, table if there's anything.

[Mary-Katherine Stone (Member)]: I definitely have a question, but I have a comment, which is thank you all so much for the work that you do. It's so important. It is so appreciated.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: So we heard from other stakeholders around this probably two weeks ago, I remember in our sort of backwards calendar map here. So we've received inputs from a multitude of groups on this. I guess it's, yeah, total dollar sum, but how it's gonna would get broken down. So, I just wanted to plant a seed for members to think about this one as we start putting together the forthcoming budget proposal, prioritizing stuff, because we've done a lot of work in and around this with these groups over time. We'll be very conscious of their requests.

[Mary-Katherine Stone (Member)]: Yes, requirements. Are you taking opinions right now?

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Five more minutes of the airtime here.

[Mary-Katherine Stone (Member)]: Well, I think that if we are out of all of the things that we paid for, and all of the money that we spend on all of the things, I think there's no fathomable reason why anyone should be hungry, and why we should do anything, but give them all the $5,000,000 That's what I think. And I wish that we had more for this. It's it's the start of fixing a lot of things that are challenges for people. If you're not hungry, so many other things are possible.

[VL Coffin IV (Member)]: Yeah,

[Unidentified Member]: and I think this feeds nicely into a lot of the conversations we've been having around emergency response and the events like we were on a couple weeks ago in The Kingdom, where people were literally left stranded as community members and helping with group response. And that is a form of emergency response, too. And it's really important. And also, a lot of the folks in the room are shining lights of a lot of our communities and just directly impacting so many folks. That's really important to me as well.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Anything else from members?

[VL Coffin IV (Member)]: Well, thank you, everyone, who came

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: in on this. It's greatly appreciated.

[Neil Kamen, Deputy Commissioner, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation]: I hope you're having success with the evidence of it.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: So, we're gonna do the committee discussion on H567 until after we have a conversation with emergency management and DEC on six, seven, nine. So that is a shift in the agenda right now. I just don't want to say that again. So we're gonna I see our guests from that for that have just arrived. So welcome. The Chearos are dismissed.

[Unidentified Member]: We'll grab some seeds.

[Neil Kamen, Deputy Commissioner, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation]: We'll give him a whole duffle bag.

[Unidentified Member]: Yes,

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: please.

[Stephanie Smith, Deputy Director, Vermont Emergency Management]: Are you ready? Good. How are you? All set to jump in?

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Yeah, let's do it. Yes.

[Stephanie Smith, Deputy Director, Vermont Emergency Management]: All right. Well, thank you so much for having me this afternoon. I'm Stephanie Smith. I'm the deputy director at Vermont of Reducing Management. So I sent in my testimony, my comments today are going through the bill, specifically section one and two. So I know if I'll be able to get through all of it, but feel free to interrupt me if you have questions as I'm going. So looking at the bill, just starting at the top in section one, the subcomponents under there are number one and number three, so emergency response costs and local infrastructure repairs. So this section addresses the funding through FEMA's Public Assistance Program, which is managed it's FEMA funding, but it's managed by Vermont Emergency Management. And the section requires VEM to cover expenses incurred due to all hazards while awaiting reimbursement for FEMA. My biggest concern here is that FEMA will see this as supplanting. So if the state pays for FEMA eligible costs following a disaster event, those costs will not be eligible for reimbursement by FEMA. FEMA will look at it and say, Funding has already been appropriated for that purpose. So if we appropriate funding to fix the bridge in a town that was damaged while waiting for FEMA funding and pay the town, FEMA will come in and say, The state already put money towards that. Therefore, we're not reimbursing it. So that's my biggest concern. If you take anything away from what I said.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: I absolutely That's a big I really understand what you're saying with a level of personal, like, come on, man, at the FEMA level. Yes. I do know if

[Stephanie Smith, Deputy Director, Vermont Emergency Management]: I'm not a lawyer, but I know FEMA very well. That's a big concern that I have. And just as an example, so following the flooding in 2023, the State Recovery Office worked with the Bond Bank to set up low interest loans to fill this purpose because they weren't able to give grant dollars to communities. And if there's a loan and then FEMA comes in, they can reimburse the loan, they can pay interest on the loan, and that works. But if it's grant funding, it doesn't. So if you have more questions on how that worked, I think Doug Farnham is your best bet in terms of what happened after 2023, but that's the high level of what happened there. My other question is around the intended funding here. So, just for context, just the one event, 07/09/2023, was over $500,000,000 That's a pretty significant amount of dollars if we're looking at funding in full disasters that happen. So that's that first section. Questions on that?

[Neil Kamen, Deputy Commissioner, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation]: Questions from

[Kate Nugent (Member)]: the table on that third part?

[Stephanie Smith, Deputy Director, Vermont Emergency Management]: Then, I said one and three. Number two in that section is around temporary housing and shelter services. So that addresses funding through FEMA's Individual Assistance Program, which is actually managed by the Agency of Human Services and not Vermont Emergency Management. So there's a little bit of confusion on how that works, of the three main buckets of FEMA funding after a disaster, VEM manages two of those. We manage public assistance and then the hazard mitigation program. But the individual assistance, which is direct to individuals' funding, flows through the Agency of Human Services. So public assistance is that put the emergency repair, put back the Bridge that Broke program. That's us. But shelters, temporary housing is through the Agency of Human Services. Just to clarify that. And then the second subset, so Section B here, requires VEM to cover all local match requirements for FEMA flood recovery under the Public Assistance Program, I think is what they're addressing here. So generally, FEMA covers 75% of those eligible project costs. There's a required 25% local match. Under really significant events, like in 2023, FEMA might cover a higher cost share, so they covered 90% in 2023, but usually it's that 70 fivetwenty five. And currently, the Emergency Relief and Assistance Fund is the mechanism for supporting communities in their local match requirements, so that's in '20 BSA 45. This program was created by the legislature following Irene in 2032. So it was created there. The ERAP rule lives within the Agency of Administration, and it's implemented through the Public Assistance Program. So it allows the state to cover a certain portion of the match, but it's an incentive program. So if you do nothing of that 25%, the state will cover 7.5% of it. If you do four specific things, we'll split the match with you and say 12.5%, 12.5%. If you do one additional thing, the community would pay 7.5. So it's an incentive program to ask communities to do specific things. That's all in statute and rulemaking with AOA. So one other note is ERAP is not exclusive to flooding, which the language here is. And it's used under other events such as ice disasters. So from the language here, it's not clear if the intent is to do away with the eRAF program or how it speaks to that existing program. It's adding new language to say we'll cover all the match, which is separate from the current incentive program. Questions on ERAF and how that works? Okay. So those were the first two, and if I keep moving down to section two, so flood prone properties assistance programs. So A here requires VEM to develop a voluntary buyout program. So VEM has an existing voluntary buyout program. Following the flooding in 2023, we created a new state managed program. So we, the state, VEM, could act as the self applicant to FEMA on behalf of interested property owners sorry, interested municipalities, specifically which significantly reduced the administrative burden to those municipalities. So we're managing all the funding, we're hiring contractors. They need to say yes, they need to be willing to own the parcel, but we're taking on that administrative burden for all the buyouts following 2023. So it's unclear what this is intended to do outside of that existing work. ACCD, so Commerce and Community Development, is specifically called out as a partner in this effort, which is currently managed by VEM in partnership with DEC, actually. So I'm not clear what the intended connection is there. But we do work very closely with the Rivers team at DEC and all of our flood mitigation projects. We really rely on them and the experts in how we reduce flood risk to develop those projects. The bill also notes in this section that funding will be provided for buyouts at a fair, full market value. Currently, funding for buyouts is based on a day before the storm fair market appraised value for any flooded property, So it's not based on the town assessed value, which came up in the testimony last week. It is that appraised fair market value generally the day before the storm. If it hasn't been damaged or becomes current, it's usually the day before. In the case of funding projects with FEMA, that's currently a 75 percent federal and a 25% state match mix, the same way public assistance usually works. The language in the bill, one of my concerns is it requires that we pay 100% in full. We currently have state match that we're using, but it's one time allocations to cover the match. So anyone getting a buyout now is getting 100%, but that language could prevent us from doing buyouts when we don't have match funding, which we did between Irene and 2023, do a few buyouts that fell into that squishy middle. And just the higher sentiment here is not a lot of time today, but if we have more time, would love to dig into giving you guys a really deep overview of the buyout program. Started after Tropical Storm Irene. That was one framing that we created under it, really building the program very quickly following a significant influx of funding during that event. And then in 2021 and 2022, we received ARPA funding and created, in partnership with DEC, the Flood Resilient Communities Fund, which was a really incredible opportunity to create the flexible state program that we all wanted to have but couldn't do with the FEMA requirements. So we were able to take what made sense from FEMA, create our own state program as a pilot with that ARPA funding, and then to the new state managed buyout program following 2023. So I was deeply involved in that work. I'm incredibly proud of this program and I also fully recognize that it will never be fast enough for someone who was flooded. And now we are dealing with FEMA bureaucracy, there's a lot of requirements around it, but we've made substantial improvements, especially since Irene, but over the years between, in how that program is administered and streamlining that program. Okay, so that's the buyout piece. And then, the next section, so B1, speaks to the elevation of residential buildings. So the Community Resilience and Disaster Mitigation Fund was created by the legislature in 2024 under Act 143. It's also in BSA 20. An allocation was made specifically under that program in 2024 to provide funding to do elevations in communities that were hard to fit following 2023. So I'm not clear on how this would differ from that program or if the intent is to connect it to that existing program that was created in 2024. The number two in that section speaks to the relocation to other permanent housing, and that's again an example where individual assistance and Agency of Human Services is really the lead there and not Vermont Emergency Management. So they manage the FEMA Individual Assistance Program. They manage FEMA's Disaster Case Management Program following 'twenty three and 'twenty four. So I would speak to them about that component in particular. And then the last piece on here, my last note for you guys, speaks to the rebuilding of residential structures. So this is something that VDM is not currently set up to do. From the testimony last week, you heard about the significant importance of local groups to fill this gap, the long term recovery groups and their significant work in this area. In order for the state to take on that level of service, it would require significant capacity and investment to really fill that need at the local level. So partnering with the community groups is how that's happening now. And that was the end of my testimony.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Could you speak on that last piece just because we've dealt with some community groups for you guys. How was that relationship in your opinion working out within the wants, needs, and desires of what we're facing right now? Sort of a quick assessment of the functionality.

[Stephanie Smith, Deputy Director, Vermont Emergency Management]: Yeah, so it's not something I can speak to too much because it's through the Agency of Human Services. About relationships within thinking

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: took notes while you were speaking.

[Stephanie Smith, Deputy Director, Vermont Emergency Management]: I know, I talk fast, but it's all written down. The biggest component where we do have that individual level is through the buyout program, because that is much more of a direct technical assistance, but any of the other disaster case management is handled through AHS.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Any questions for the Deputy Director?

[Stephanie Smith, Deputy Director, Vermont Emergency Management]: Thanks for the time. Really appreciate it.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Yes. No, no, no. This is valuable. Oh, I'm sorry, Kate.

[Kate Nugent (Member)]: I keep asking you.

[Neil Kamen, Deputy Commissioner, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation]: I guess I'm giving nine things at once

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: in a That's great.

[Kate Nugent (Member)]: I just was wondering if you could elaborate a little bit on the ERAP program. And you said that in the bill, as written, that you're thinking that it eliminates it, I'm wondering about what the issue would if that happens, what would happen?

[Stephanie Smith, Deputy Director, Vermont Emergency Management]: So I think it's not eliminating it, but it's adding a new so the ERAC still exists in statute. This is adding a new statute to say that the EM will cover all eligible match. So they're in conflict, I guess. So I'm not sure what the intent is. Because right now, we don't cover all match through the ERAP rules existing statute. We cover a portion of the match and incentivize some really important work that communities are doing through that process.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Anything else?

[Stephanie Smith, Deputy Director, Vermont Emergency Management]: You very much.

[Kate Nugent (Member)]: Good

[Neil Kamen, Deputy Commissioner, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation]: afternoon, folks. Nice to be back. My name is Neil Kamen. I am the deputy commissioner of the Department of Environmental Conservation. Some of you have met me, happy to be here. With regard to this bill, I'm going to limit my remarks to sections five and six, which materially affect on DEC's activities. Similar to Stephanie, I'm going go through each section, what I interpret as intent to be, some additional information for you all to consider, and then the department's position on it. So, with regard to section five, and I've submitted testimony, the intent as we understand it would be to establish a program that would implement and improve streamflow projects in response to flood risk. And these would include debris management, so think big chunks of trees stuck in the river, reservoir sediment, so think you have a dam and behind it there's a whole bunch of sediment that's accrued into that reservoir. River channel modification, so think a big yellow machine digging the river channel out. And alternative flood mitigation strategies. So here think, floodplain restoration projects, things like that. So, in regards to debris management, when disasters happen, there are mechanisms that exist to clear major debris jams. Yes. BEM assists in that. But not all debris jams need to be cleared, and in fact, part of the manner in which rivers adjust themselves naturally, you need some of that material in that river to allow the river to readjust to a new normal that is less erosive, less flood prone than prior. Now, sometimes it looks really ugly and for a while, but those rivers do adjust. So, typically we don't subscribe to pulling all debris out of a river at every flood. So I'll leave that there. Except for those areas where, you know, you've got dense development, you've got a a a debris plug that's right upstream of critical infrastructure, those need to be dealt with and they get dealt with. In regards to sediment in impoundments or behind dams, so this is an interesting one because I think it stands to reason that if you have a dam and it holds water, that that creates flood resilience. Right? And then if you fill that dam up with sediment and there's no water storage left, that that flood resilience is gone. The truth of it is that 90 plus percent of the dams that are on the landscape right now provide zero flood attenuation benefit, and it's actually only the flood, the purpose built flood control reservoirs like Waterbury, Eastbury, Wrightsville, Ball Mountain, North Springfield. Those are designed and built for true flood storage. Small dams, you might think they provide some flood benefit, but under a real flood event, they're overwhelmed. It doesn't matter whether there's sediment in the basin or not. So you would be putting a lot of public dollars into nominally removing sediment from privately owned structures to confirm no flood benefit. So, be careful on that one. In terms of the yellow machines in the rivers, I think you may have heard testimony on that before, but it sounds like it makes sense that if a river is deeper, it holds more flood water. Right? It just seems intuitive. But if you think about the mathematics of a foot of water, 12 inches of rain having fallen on a watershed and all that water loading into that river, you could deepen that river down to, you know, a 100 feet and it still wouldn't hold the flow. That's the the nature of the volume of floodwaters. So what you need is the river to have space to move from side to side, not down. And in fact, if you do channelize rivers by going down under the idea that you're creating more flood storage in that river, all you're really doing is creating a fire hose out of that river. You're making it easier for water to move faster down a highly channelized conduit, which means whatever's downstream is in the way of that fire hose. In regards to flood mitigation, we do a lot of this work. We do a lot of river corridor and flood attenuation work with a whole host of partners, millions and millions of dollars of clean water fund and federal dollars go into flood mitigation projects. So I don't think we need to create a new mechanism to incent that. We have good work going on there, and a lot of partners that do it. And in fact, having the state kind of pursue, construct, build those projects would be in conflict with the fact that the state actually has to regulate those projects and make sure that they're properly constructed and built. So we would be regulating ourselves, which is a little bit awkward. Plus taking the business away from a whole sector of clean water folks that are doing a great job as it is. So, needless to say, the department doesn't support the inclusion of section five if this bill moves forward. In terms of section six, so this would create a new program that designates areas of significant risk of severe flooding and create floodways to mitigate prospective damage and support riverbank re naturalization projects. This is the foundation of the river management program going back over 20. So, before Irene, Act 110, post Irene, Act 138, it's been the policy of the state of Vermont to pursue river management by making giving those rivers the space to move and getting people out of the way anywhere that we can. We have a number of programs that do exactly what section six intends already. Again, a number of partners that pursue that. This includes mapped river corridors. Act 121 of 2023 now requires the state to regulate those mapped river corridors to common standards across the entire state, all municipalities, likewise with flood plains. So section six is well intended, but we're doing it and it's not needed, because it's already being done. And that is my perspective on those two sections, the department's perspective on those two sections.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: No, no, no, thank you. And we did speak to this when we had the sponsor of the building here that these were components of the bill that was introduced last year.

[Neil Kamen, Deputy Commissioner, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation]: Yeah. And included some pieces that we worked on

[Stella James, Executive Director, Hardwick Area Food Pantries]: and

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: never hit it over the finish line. They came back in conversation. So I'm just saying that's the committee's recollection that these are components that were spoken to, if not in the exact form of a form that was very, very similar to this proposed language. How in the past year, to the best of your ability, how has the systems that are in place that you're speaking to that are spoken to in this bill, how are they functioning? How is the, like, how is the process of what this language is proposing to do? How has that been going over the last four years since we Did it include the language? Yep. Because this was a very similar conversation. Can you give me assessment just on the review? Yeah. No.

[Neil Kamen, Deputy Commissioner, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation]: I can absolutely do that in in two different ways. Right? So, in regards to sort of developing the regulations around river corridors and around flood plains, that's all part and parcel of Act one twenty one of 2023. We've been reporting in our committees of jurisdiction, House and Senate, House Environment, Senate Natural, on our progress or lack thereof on those. One of the things I was actually describing to the House Environment Committee earlier today in our budget testimony is that if a flood comes along, I would say that that flood basically knocks the state's DEC River program back by one year, in terms of the comportment of the normal business, because the River Management program works lockstep with VEM, and essentially pivots to help all the landowners that have been affected, document their substantial damages, document where buyouts are appropriate, document their expenses, and we can provide testimony on this. It's a tremendous body of work. So every time the big flood happens, like a major flood like 2020 and '24, that knocks the program back by a year. So we are delayed in our implementation of Act 121, but we are making good progress on it and have provided testimony upstairs on that. In terms of the projects, so like building river improving river corridors, acquiring easements, building floodplain. So we have a we have a kind of a flagship report that comes from the department. It's the Clean Water Performance Report, and it documents investments that have been made towards clean water projects. And these are at their core clean water projects, even and flood resilience projects. So I can't give you the exact amount expended on flood plain projects or the exact number of acres built, but that report has the exact number of dollars spent and the exact number of floodplain restoration acres, the number of river miles, protected by corridor easements and the like. There's a lot of amazing work that happens. Yeah. No. I I know you've had

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: a tremendous amount of work before you, you know, years since the twenty twenty three flood and a recognition of, like, what we need to do within that. So I do wanna say that out loud. It is recognized. Rep Coffin.

[VL Coffin IV (Member)]: Yeah. Just a question. I understand the purpose. You know? Don't make the rivers deeper because it creates the fire hose. But what I noticed with the different flood situations, the rivers in my town in my areas where they were filled up with debris from all the washouts, everything, and we lose several feet of depth.

[Neil Kamen, Deputy Commissioner, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation]: Yeah. You've got no depth left.

[VL Coffin IV (Member)]: You've got no depth left. Right. So your homes, everything become that floodplain. Where does the department stand with I say you're where you're talking about remove that removing that debris that was added due to the flood before it becomes a hazard to Plainfield

[Neil Kamen, Deputy Commissioner, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation]: one happened to be your district, would it? No. Okay. Well, that's that's a live that's a live topic in Plainfield.

[VL Coffin IV (Member)]: We we look we've run into that in Wethersfield. Yep. Running into that. Sure. Cavendish. Yep. Where you lose several feet of depth. We now create a floodplain where because the next flood, it overflows and wipes out homes, destroys businesses. Right. But the regulations there to clean that river out, to clean that out just of the road, just of the debris that was washed in from the storm should that doesn't deepen the channel, but it brings it back to its original depth.

[Neil Kamen, Deputy Commissioner, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation]: And and I was not necessarily referencing that, although I should have. So you're you're right in that dynamic. And that is certainly work that the department will authorize to get a pilot channel back to give that river someplace to go. I was more referencing, you know, the concept of going in and taking a river that had been eight, ten feet deep and making it twenty, thirty feet deep because it holds that much more water. There's a lot of technical to that. And if you wanted more testimony on it, our river engineers are really, really good at describing this. We don't stand in the way of it. And I kinda draw this distinction between debris, and in my mind, debris is big huge clumps of trees, somebody's manufactured home that got washed down along there, maybe a piece of chunk of dam and a piece of the Wethersfield Bridge, like debris. And what you're referencing is river sediment, and there is some amount of river sediment management that does need to happen in order to restore river flow. So when roads wash out, all of that gravel that used to be under the blacktop is now in the river.

[VL Coffin IV (Member)]: Yep. And, you know, removing thousands of yards of material out of the river that was just gravel that was used to build those roads would go a long way to preventing the next flood from over in the banks.

[Neil Kamen, Deputy Commissioner, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation]: Right. So our our river engineers do work quite a bit hand in hand, with the transportation agency, but also municipal road crews on a lot of the sort of road river conflict. There's a rivers and roads program that we do, and try and be as helpful as possible for municipalities. Your district, Marie Caduto, is our watershed planner there, and she's excellent. If you've not engaged with her, she knows how to access all the programs. Yes, c a d u t o, Marie Caduto. Really been a colleague of mine for many years and very effective. Need to speak with her. Yeah.

[VL Coffin IV (Member)]: Anything else

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: from the table for Michigan? Right. We started earlier today on a on a omnibus emergency response all hazards bill, we're kind of still poking at this because we have the vehicle we reached out to you folks, but we're also on this other one that we're taking testimony on. So, just putting the bug in your ear and your ear, that that's gonna be the vehicle for these conversations moving forward. So Well, we'll have a look at it. And if we can get someone in the room, I'll reach out. Thank you so much. It's very early in its development. Okay. Great. So I was just throwing that out there for you while I think both of your presences in the room. Super. Yeah. Thank you, sir, for

[Neil Kamen, Deputy Commissioner, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation]: your Thank you, chair Birong. Nice to see you. Yes. See you around.

[Kate Nugent (Member)]: Alright, Chittenden. We're right

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: on body mass right now. But we do have counsel's acne here on 05:30 '1, which is at two

[Kate Nugent (Member)]: don't know

[Neil Kamen, Deputy Commissioner, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation]: if he's on Zoom.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Oh. Yes.

[Stella James, Executive Director, Hardwick Area Food Pantries]: I just saw her in her seat. Sorry.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: So I guess we need to, like, open this up to the question. I wanted to have a conversation about the unclaimed property bill we've been working on, and I do have a part as a possible vote. You've taken a ton of testimony on this thing, and it seems that, broadly speaking, all the parties involved seem to be very amenable to it. But I would like to take the vote with better body mass in the room. So I think I'm gonna suggest that we hold that vote until we can get some bodies back in here and shift over to five thirty one for a moment. Yeah.

[VL Coffin IV (Member)]: It's kinda lonely in this room. The ping

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: You are looking very isolated there, VL. Yes. But, you know, confident he can handle that degree of isolation.

[Kate Nugent (Member)]: I'm on Zoom.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: Yes, we see you. How are you? Hi.

[Mary-Katherine Stone (Member)]: I'm good. I'll be there in five minutes. Okay.

[Matthew Birong (Chair)]: So why don't we just hit the pause button and go offline for five minutes until Repstone joins us?

[VL Coffin IV (Member)]: Brief.