Meetings
Transcript: Select text below to play or share a clip
[Unknown clerk/member (possible clerk)]: Okay.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: We're live. This is the conference committee on h seven ninety, the budget adjustment act of f y twenty six. This is the first meeting, and we're going through the differences.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: I don't
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: know how you how you want to do that.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Well, I have a few things to say and propose and agree with or not, and we appreciate what you all put together. I think, we're really pretty closely aligned in many things. And the things we have to talk about, there just aren't that many of them. But there are a couple. You got new information about some things, and we've gotten new information since then. So we can just go through that. I'm just trying to coordinate with my notes from other stuff I got and then your the gray out sheet. Sheet.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: I don't know if the gray out sheet is easier or that
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: I don't know if you got this. Yeah. You got one of those too. Okay. So it's all right because I know what I want to say. So the first thing about Meals on Wheels, is the Vermont Center for Independent Living, they came to us and they came to our public hearing and specifically asked for $30,000, and so we granted their request. And we noticed that you increased that by two and a half times. I'm concerned about us setting a precedent. When somebody asks us for a specific amount that we give them a whole lot more than what they've asked for. And I know that you got the money from two different places that we had left about 18,000 on the bottom line, and you used 10 from there. And then you took 40 from the Vermonters feeding Vermonters, which is kind of supporting our farmers as well as people who need to eat. So I'd like to propose from the house that we keep the 10,000 that's in the that that you had additional 10,000. So that would make that 40,000. They ask for 30, and then we return the other 40 back to, the Vermonters feeding Vermonters program. So we keep them, whole what they ask for. So that's what we'd like to compromise.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay. Do you want to talk about it, or do you want to go through your other
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: However you'd like to do that. You're the chair.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay. Well, I'll let Westman respond to the Neil Glenn Wheels request.
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: Well, last year, Neil Sons Wheels program had to raise about $7,000,000 to rebalance their budget. I think that most of the there's a huge number of people that deliver meals for free. Yeah. And our volunteers, they go all around the state to do that. This is not a wealthy program there is of
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: the 43 Meals on Wheels site, at least half of
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: them aren't hanging on by a shoestring. So any indication that the Meals on Wheels organizations you know, most of the people that do volunteer work, my food shelves, my Meals on Wheels sites that have volunteers, they're very reluctant to ask for help. Yes. And any help they get is really needed. Yeah.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: And I agree with my
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: Any indication that while they didn't ask for more, I, I everybody that works on my Meals on Wheels site, works very hard. So any help we can give them.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: But so what I'd like to say is that this is not their standard Meals on Wheels program. This is a specific program. It's not the it's not the Meals on Wheels that you're thinking about and that my husband volunteers for. I'm pretty familiar with how Meals on Wheels works. This is for the Vermont Center for Independent Living, specifically for meals that are delivered across the state to individuals with disabilities who are under the age of 60. So it's not the it's not all the people that you're talking about that are it's just this one specific program, which is why they're asking for less. I think we'll probably hear from Meals on Meals folks in public hearings for the broader program, but this is a very narrow program, that supports a significant number of people. So that's why we kinda felt that that was
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: the reasonable thing. Any of these programs, the money inside of the organization are completely fungible. And none of these programs try to turn anyone down in any of this. So in any, place that we can help it. And it was very weird that this, of the group that this was
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: It's a specific group as opposed to the
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: whole specific group that's harder to serve and and needs help.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Right. So that's why we gave them what they asked for. And I what we're willing to do is give them another 10, which is what you'd put in and but then keep the Vermonters feeding Vermonters, which also supports farmers and our people who are hungry, across the state. So, anyway, I'm presenting that for you to think about.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: So that's one and That's one and eight.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: One and eight.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: And then we're fine with the modifying the language for a one time payment increase. Did I miss one? No, that's one time section. Okay. I think this makes sense to us, the allowable portion of the pro appropriation for the women's recovery residents. Could you just tell us about it? What wasn't sure what that was. I it looks like it's going to the Hope recovery. What's the We 20% or had put
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: in their last budget so that they could buy a building. They ended up getting a grant that helped them to buy the building, but they had operational costs that they were hoping to use some for that to, you know, for setting up this new building. Not ACCD, maybe it is ACCD.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: The Department of Economic Development, yeah.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: They were like, you can't, the way the program is, you can't use them, you have to use it only for capital costs. Okay. And so they were saying, that's just the way the program is set up. So you either need to get a change or you need to change your budget. And so they asked if this could be something. They don't know if it needs needs 50,000, but they thought that would be Okay.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: And was that up to 50,000?
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: That was the up to
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: 50,000. Yeah. Okay.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay. And
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: it's for the recovery people. It's not for DED to do administrative stuff.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay. It's for Hope Recovery Center for their operating. Okay.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Are we does that clarify? Are we okay with that?
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: I think so.
[Unknown clerk/member (possible clerk)]: Yep.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Okay. So we will agree to that. K. Number five. Number five. Yeah. The LAOB modifying the language, I assume it sounds like they came to you and said, could we be clearer on the language? Is that what happened with that?
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: They did. Yeah. Okay. Because the resilience grants was the main reason. And since it didn't mention resilience grants, they wanted to make sure that
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: was Okay. And we had said homes for all, and we also included phase two. But I guess if we just say homes for all, that covers the whole initiative. Right. Okay. So that's fine. Go with that. This is, again, the, non emergency medical transport language again. That's fine.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Which we appreciated the house putting that in because it was something we had been thinking about.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Yeah. And this is a long term longer term structural issue Yeah. That needs to be dealt with by the administration. Right.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay. So Transportation will figure it out.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Good. We'll look forward to hearing what you have to say. So one and eight, we'll get back to because they're related. Yep. And then the childcare contribution reserve, sounds like what the language that we had put in was maybe a little bit redundant or something that was part of the technical letter that the governors said we didn't need to have that sentence.
[Unknown Senate member]: Right. Reconcile.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: It's not hurting anybody getting anything, and it doesn't change anything. So that's fine.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: K.
[Unknown member]: Okay.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: And then we talked about the 50,000,000, and you had proposed another, additional use to, support municipalities primarily with public safety, issues if they were determined to be needed, and we are fine with that language.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay. Okay.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Section eight. Let's and vouchers. Let's just pause on twelve and thirteen for a moment. 14 is related to one and eight. And then fifteen and sixteen, just clarifying language, those were fine. Okay. So getting back to twelve and thirteen, the language with section eight housing vouchers and the payment reform. We are going to have language for you at 08:30 tomorrow morning, which is why we're gonna need to meet at
[Unknown member]: 10:30. Okay.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: On on these two, I think we're not gonna have I'm looking at Nolan. I don't think we're gonna have the language for the payment reform, but I can sort of tell you what we're thinking about now and then, please, everybody jump in if I get this wrong and everybody in JFO. Nope. That's Dale. Okay. So we've had subsequent meetings with the Vermont State Housing Authority, and Jerry Piskill has also
[Unknown member]: had additional phone calls, and,
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: it continues to evolve. And I think where we are now is that, we want to put a specific dollar amount and do the 5,000,000. I said to JFO, can we do up to? And he said, no. We have to just do an amount. But we haven't figured out on the other end to get it back. So so we would the proposal would generally say that we would transfer $5,000,000 from this fund to DCF for the purposes of the housing. And then, so that would be the designated state entity that you had sort of, you know, weren't sure what that would should be. And then, and then what we would do on the other end, and I'll get to some of the other details in the middle, is that we would we want them to, have all of the age of the housing authorities apply by July 1 so that we know what the amount is. They would apply by July 1 so we would know they would have the universe of applicants so that we wouldn't need the whole proportional thing because the problem with the proportional is there's not necessarily a relationship between the number of vouchers and the need. Some public housing authorities are in better shape than other housing authorities. But but if DCF has the universe of what the requests are, then they can make their decisions based on what the need is for for everybody. So I think we understood what you were trying to get at, but we wanted to ensure the funds are available.
[Unknown member]: Is there language that JFO is gonna propose as it relates to that issue of I think so.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Geography. Yeah. Okay. So Grady's working on some language, we, will get that figured out. And that's when we present to you the details of that.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Mean, like, equitable distribution geographically or what do you mean? Well,
[Unknown member]: I I don't I think that's interesting because I equitable what I mean, what's the basis? Right? Because and I think proportional was a little more on mark but I think that that there are there are some housing authorities that don't are not going to need to apply for the funding. And so, you know, I I was just thinking in my head as we were talking about this, is there a way to just indicate that DCF should take into account geographic diversity in its funding decisions or, you know, whatever.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: We don't want one housing authority, which is I don't think you didn't want one housing authority to just scoop up all the money. So so but this was a little too prescriptive and not necessarily addressing the issue because the need the need varies. So Grady's gonna, you know, come up with some miracle language.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: DCF that ability to make that decision?
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: I think so. Yeah.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay. With some criteria?
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Yeah. Yeah. And so Center line?
[Unknown member]: I was
[Unknown member]: just gonna say the word proportional makes a little more sense than geographic, but
[Unknown Senate member]: I mean, I'll Mhmm. Yeah. I I don't think I don't think we really meant geographic. I think we meant just reviewing the needs of the whole state. Got it. And whoever needs some money and you need some money, but you need more than this guy does to make you whole, and so we look at it that way. Not dividing it up by eight or Right. Whatever the total number.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: DCF makes that Yeah.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Call. Yeah. But if we well, we have sort of general language to to lead in
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: an interaction. And can I ask another question? Or do you
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: wanna finish? I I've got, two more things. In section, b two under here, it says if funds are transferred, they may be made available for one of the following purposes. And the second one said with prior approval from HUD, and we wanna stay with prior written approval from HUD because there are lots of times there's conversations that the PHAs have with HUD and just saying, oh, they said it was okay is not, you know, good. So we wanna have that. And then, we also are gonna ask for a progress report to the Joint Fiscal Committee at the September meeting.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: From DCF?
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: From DCF, because they all know the universe of need by July 1 as it is, and then so they can report to us in September. And then there will be language that says anything that's unallocated by 12/31/2026. So we'll, basically, we'll have the authority to, it'll revert back so that so that the administration and DCF and they aren't gonna be able to use the money for something else. They can't use it and revert it and repurpose it or do anything. So we're trying to make sure that we have control over anything that is unspent on the other end. It comes back to this, pool of funds. It'll sound a lot better when Grady writes the language.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: No. That that seems to make sense. I'm glad you're doing that. Yeah. July 1 seems like a plenty of time. Why did you pick July 1? Well,
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: for one thing, we felt that it's gonna take DCF a couple or more months to stand up a program.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: So it's more on DCF side than on the
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: And a little bit on the housing because they'll you know, as every month goes by, they have more information, but we don't wanna wait till they we want them to know that the money will be available. They can do some planning, and then that will give them time to Okay. Make their intentions, you know, their wishes now.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: And DCF was fine with that.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: We haven't we haven't given them the language yet. We we because we don't have it to give them. Yeah.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Yeah. I just went around the date. Like, if they said, well, yeah, we could set up and
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Right. So we're gonna have the administration look at it. We're gonna have Cameron in ledge counsel look at it because he's been our legal adviser for Section eight, which is why we don't have any of that
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: for you yet. Yeah. Okay. Because I know there was a concern of trying to get as many rented months
[Unknown Senate member]: Yes.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Into the program. So
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: That's right.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: But also understand we need time to figure it out. Yeah. They need some time to know exactly what they're doing.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Right. And if they know this is in here, then that's gonna help them, you know, the Make the plan. Make their plan as well. Right.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Maybe they don't have to retire a voucher because they don't Right. Have to
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: They might delay that sort of
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: thing. Yeah. And I think it would be interesting to see the language on how DCF is gonna make the decision on how to divide the money up or how much money to provide.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Right. So that will be, yeah. We don't have that We
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: have your best minds working on
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: it. We have the best minds working on it. Thank goodness. So that's where we're headed with that.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Okay? And then the payment reform, developmental services payment reform, we I don't know where we are on that, Nolan. We have some oh, wait. I have something, don't I? Yeah. Where's my notes? So there were, like, four different dates about when things were supposed to happen. Our concern was that we would like things to happen as much as possible while the general assembly is still in session.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Perception. And
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: so it isn't June 30, and it isn't July you know, that sort of thing. So what we're looking at is, the October 1 date for the final stabilization plan, 10/01/2027, we're fine with that. That's not a change. We're looking at, the DAs and SSAs submitting to the department, on or before April 1, and we checked. Was that you Chittenden checked and said they're they they're usually they're giving this information to Dale anyway so that it's not that's not a hardship for them to do an April 1 date. And then we thought that the meeting with all the committee related people, and I already have my designee if this goes through, would be on or before April 15.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Mhmm.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: And then down in d, it would be on or before May 1 instead of April 15. They should submit a written progress report because that needs to happen after the meeting. Right. And then I think we're gonna ask were we asking for another date, Nolan, to
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: No. But what we did was we there's a bunch of cleanup languages that we had done from the senate version to kinda streamline a
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: little bit. So the essence is there.
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: It just picks up so many extra words.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: The flowery.
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: We'll have we'll have some we'll have a copy. I think it's Katie's bill, and then we'll get a copy to
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: you tonight or
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: tomorrow. Okay. Yeah.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: And who are you?
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: Oh, for the record.
[Unknown clerk/member (possible clerk)]: Thank you. Never seen him before. Really? Where are you? Where So so there was a
[Unknown member]: March date in there, and then we moved it to April?
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: There was a May date that we moved to April.
[Unknown clerk/member (possible clerk)]: So you moved
[Unknown member]: the May date, and then you moved
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: We moved the June date to April and an April date to May. Got it. We kind of looked at the timeline of when things had to happen, and it would be good to have certain information before. And we may have also talked about having a progress report to join fiscal committee for this as well. Maybe we didn't. We might not have. Okay. I can't remember. Talk about it,
[Unknown member]: but I think no one does not think it's a good idea. Not necessary. Not necessary.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: The record, I
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: have no opinion.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Right. So that might be something we could look at too. So those are the two pieces of, language that we are gonna get cleaned up, and then we can give that to you. If we get it before the end of the day, we can let you see it, and we can talk about it in the morning.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: And has this been shared with the all the negotiating priorities that come up with the language we had in the senate proposal? Because that there was a flurry of
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Yes.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Negotiations. I know I was happy that they all agreed to it. So I'd hate to change something that breaks that all apart.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Right. They weren't thinking about the general assembly and all that they agreed to. Right. So we'll go we'll make sure we circle back and and that the affected parties that aren't just us know.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Correct. Yeah. That'd be great.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: So I think that's everything on the list. Is that
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Yeah.
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: So Let's see. Did we
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: do technical letters on wheels? There's a whole other three related meals on
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: 01/08/2014.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: And then two language, which we just talked about, the housing assistance and the payment reform.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Two isn't really a thing. No.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: It doesn't need a checkbox.
[Unknown member]: I agree with two. Yeah. Two and nine.
[Unknown clerk/member (possible clerk)]: I can do that. Two and nine.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Two, I think we're good
[Unknown clerk/member (possible clerk)]: on that. That's on box. Yeah. Yeah.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: So that's so it's really kind of three things that we're left with.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: We'll talk about the Meals on Wheels things and have a response at our next meeting. Okay. And then we'll look at the language for the section eight and the DA.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Yep. And if we get that early, we'll send that over to you so you have a copy of that too. And I I think we're talking about meeting at 08:30 tomorrow morning, and then I think we're talking about 10:30. I'm sure it's not. Yeah. Okay. Yes. So and then we can be done.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: So the question is can can we be at 10:30?
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: Yeah. Well
[Unknown Senate member]: It's TBA on transportation.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: I think it will be the 10:30 would be like a fifteen minute
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Kind of wrap up is my guess. We'll
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: but we'll do it unless your committee's meeting
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: We're we got a big we have
[Unknown member]: a heavy duty meeting in
[Unknown member]: the morning. Should be able to escape by 10:30. Okay. Certainly by 10:45.
[Sen. Richard Westman (Member)]: If we do if we have to operate committee and just tell them Yeah. Yeah. Would would 10:45 be better for you? Get a longer bathroom.
[Unknown member]: Okay. 10:45 is always better. 10:30 is fine. I can take care of it.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: We can decide that. Thirty. We don't have to decide the second either.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Because you're not on the floor or anything.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: No. We're on the we don't need to be
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: on floor. Go to the floor. Okay.
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Yep. We have flexibility in the morning. So
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: We'll confirm at our 08:30 morning whether it's
[Unknown House lead conferee (female)]: Okay.
[Sen. Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Exactly. Yeah.