Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: It was. Okay. Great. Welcome back to set of economic development and housing and general affairs. It is Wednesday, February 4. And we are turning to our economic development bill s three twenty seven. And we're going to begin going through elements of three twenty seven, which we should all have. And we're gonna begin going through the elements of the downtown tax credit, I believe, that we're gonna begin with Alex, who thank you very much. I'm gonna bring a copy of your question from you. Okay. Great. So you all have a paper copy if you wanna write notes on the bill and or as Thomas is following along, I think we're going to section apologies. Think we're beginning with going to section two. So because we're jumping around because of time issues with our presenters. So thank you witnesses for being we're all trying to be flexible. So, Alex, welcome.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: Thank you, madam chair.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And I just would say we have heard high level on this already. We had a great presentation from Caitlin. Yep. But now that we're actually taking up the bill, we wanna begin to substantively dive into things and look at the amounts and then check them off if we're in agreement. You know, we're gonna just move through

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: it because we That's great.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: But I I'm praying now.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: I'm sorry. Then I won't I won't use

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: that. No. No. Not today. I just mean but in terms of chat meeting and crossover.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: Absolutely. Well, in any event, section two, so what's proposed here is an increase that in prior years had been proposed by the administration, increasing the cap on tax credits from 3,000,000 to 5,000,000. That is not included in the governor's budget this year, so not be in here advocating for that, but I I

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: So 3,000,000 is, currently, in the bottom.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: That's right.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: That that No. I mean, I think we have to keep that in mind. And if we wanna put additional 2,000,000 in it, it could be in our sandbox if that's, so this is that one of the choices we have to.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: That's right, that's right.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: Kiara, if you could give me sharing authority, I'll just pull

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: up one slide that highlights the scale of things. Should be. Thank you. So looking at program demand, again, this is a slide you've seen before with Caitlin, but you can see what we've received in dollars demanded, that's the green line, versus awards made, that's the blue line. Product list program is always oversubscribed. For 2023 through 2025 applications exceeded, and one year far exceeded $5,000,000. And I would anticipate demand staying above that.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And just remind us, Caitlin said this returns not we thought it was 17 to one. We had a return on investment, but it's actually more like 25. I think she said it one

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: That's right.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: I Tom. Tom.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: On that question, commissioner Barrow, with the last slide that you had there, is it your experience that those that don't get the funding that year come back the next year and they they just keep coming back, or do the projects happen without these credits?

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: Typically, they come back to us, and especially the small town projects, they keep coming back to it again. That

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: may have a follow-up.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: Yeah.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: Sure. They could usually get rejected again the next year for the same reasons or is it really just a matter of available capacity, and is there some sort of prioritization based on the fact that they previously applied and get it? It's a capacity thing. In a lot of

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: cases, they didn't get it, we offer feedback so they know what strike was there. Or their funding has shored up in that, the incubated twelve months.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Right.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: That's all I've got. Okay, right. And I did utilize it for 5,000,000.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: So are we correct in understanding? Because Randy's big question is, of course, return on investment and that's it, return on investment only is growing.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: Oh, absolutely. Every year

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: has grown.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: It's because it's one of our biggest returns on investment. Yes. And it's it's not and could you sort of expand on its importance in terms of spurred economic development, not just housing development, that's what's in the economic development, Phil, is that it's really more downtown economic development broadly.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: Sure, I'd be glad to. This really focuses in on our commercial centers. Centers. Historically, our downtown and village center programs have focused on areas where, you know, we look at them now as an opportunity to alleviate regulations for housing, but really the design of those programs is where, what's the commercial and civic core of these areas? So oftentimes, CALUS, this general sort of the CFPR East CALUS General Source is a great example. Our rural economic centers have rotted out, you know, I think of turnaround that you've seen in Branda in Vermont, for example. I mean, many of those buildings use tax credits. What's so impactful about this is that it's property owners getting to take the initiative and then leverage whatever dollars they have to double down to improve their properties. I mean, housing obviously benefits from this program, but, I mean, in a town like Brandon, in smaller towns, all the way up to the city of Burlington has used this, some sales tax reallocation went into the city books project. It really works at all scams. Now, to be clear, it's more of a it has a larger impact the smaller the town. So the smaller the town, smaller the project, greatly impacted this has. And one of the things we look at when we're scoring these projects, especially when it comes out of prioritization, is where we're really making a big difference. Obviously, we'll we wanna see dollars leveraged, but if it's gonna be a small project in, say, Ennisburg that's gonna rehab the building, we won't score that highly.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: So do you in I guess, the so you see the the bigger impact in smaller hands? Certainly. Any other questions? I think that I think you have big fans in this committee of this program. We've always loved it, and I've been wanting to increase this to 5,000,000 since Paul Broome died, but they were hoping to change it because it's been search level funded at 3,000,000 for many, many years. And I guess my question is you were in total, we could add capacity, a fairly substantial capacity, we had $2,000,000,000 is what I recall.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: $2,000,000 go a long way towards the projects that Senator Chittenden is talking about, that rather than make them come back twelve months later because this is the thing that's gonna make them go, we can keep these things moving. It would alleviate a great deal of our back pocket. Right. Great.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Anything else? Right. Thank you. Thank you.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: Thank you, Caitlin. And thank

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: you, Alex. This is just a program we're very proud of and so grateful for. It's one of our most important economic development tools for it.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: All thanks to KAPER. Yeah. And thank you for being

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: quite generous. Thank you. You. Thank you. And good luck elsewhere. Thank you. I think then we are welcoming Jessica because I think you both have the same feeding challenge. We do both have. It is only ten of eleven.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: Will find out if you aren't needed until noon.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: I like my remarks to sound prepared even if

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: they're Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: Alright. So We're gonna talk about, happy to We're

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: gonna do both. We're gonna go first just because you're here Yeah. And because Chip has won Yeah. We need an update. Sure. It's very exciting. You you just quickly give us a Chip update.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: Yeah. So I knew you were gonna ask me that question. Oh, Chittenden. So as of this morning, we have formally received five interest form, pre application interest forms.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And it opened when? Just remember.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: The portal opened last Friday at 4PM, we met our January launch date. We have three communities that we believe are eligible at this time to file full applications with projects appearing to be shovel ready as early as '26. Spring of twenty sixth, summer of twenty sixth, and fall of twenty sixth.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: That's pretty exciting.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: Tom? Were you expecting those five or what was the surprise?

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: The interest forms? Yep. No, we were expecting. We've So we have been receiving inquiries from municipalities throughout the summer and have participated in a number of webinars and in person educational forums. So far, since interest forums have launched, we have received emails from 14 municipalities. So since Pareda started in November she started 11/03/2025, We've had 14 municipalities reach out, inquire, or express interest in Chittenden, and we've had two developers reach out to us in the last couple of weeks expressing interest. Additionally, our webinar series that we held with CDFA, we've had over two fifty folks register for those webinars. They were free. They are now posted on our website. We had on average about 175 participants online for each of those webinars. Now that the portal has launched, we are also going to be hosting office hours. Virtual. Virtual office hours. We intend to hold six of those throughout the month of February for municipalities who have questions about utilizing the application portal. We have a user guide online, but it is the Gears portal, and we want to make sure municipalities understand how to use that Cares portal. They have used it for other types of applications, but we really want this to be

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: So one weekend, we already have five possible applications. Three really ready to Three seem viable. Right. Three seem viable and shovel ready, and maybe we might even see action in '26.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: Very exciting. Yeah. To come before the council for sure. So really exciting. Just, again, continue to be grateful for all the support that the legislature provided and that the hard work of, our staff and just to be able to pull this out.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Given our time, I'd love to ask you to pivot to section ten and eleven. We have two proposals, one of which we're all familiar, which Yep. Is the elimination of the veggie sunset. Yep. So if you'd speak to section 10, that's the shortest. Yeah. And then section 11, we've chosen because it's veggie Yep. An added enhanced veggie incentive Yep. To look at section 11, which is That's the ESOPs. Right? That's the ESOPs that Wendy Harrison's bill addressing.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: Sure. So let me just get on the line and share my side deck.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And as you do that, we will just remind everybody then we're gonna get into Brownfields. Okay. Yeah. And we have other people wanna take notes on it.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: Just everyone knows what BevC is, but for those that don't, we're an independent board, who our members are. We approve the Veggie program, Tax Income and Finance program, and the CHIP program. We receive our administrative support from ACCD and from the Department of Taxes. The Department of Taxes is instrumental in the VEGI program as they are the ones that do all of

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: the

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: verification for the incentives that are granted in the VEGI program. So the legislative purpose of the VEGI program is to generate net new revenue to the state by encouraging a business to add new payroll, create jobs, and make new capital investments. This is a very high level, how how the VED Day program works. I would be happy to provide to you our more in-depth handouts if you feel those would be helpful to you. But given the time constraints for today, this is the high level overview of the program. A business applies for the Veggie program by outlining their proposed job creation, their wages, and their capital investment. They create those proposals, their projections for a five year period, and then they submit a pre application for PhePSI staff to review, and then we submit that pre application to our state economist who analyzes the economic impact, the net fiscal benefit, and determines what a proposed potential incentive calculation might be. Once that is done, that is provided back to the applicant who then decides whether it is up to the business to decide whether they'd rather pursue an initial veggie application. If the business decides to pursue an initial veggie application, they fill out the entire initial application form in that GEARS system. They work with the RDC to do that if they have questions about the application. Then the RDC and the business come to the VEPC Council, and the Vepsy Council reviews the initial application at a Vepsy Council meeting. Once an application is approved by the Vepsy Council, the business would then get a letter from the Vepsy Council approving the eligible incentive award. The award is actually not paid out, however, until the business meets the agreed upon performance benchmarks.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Which on average is how many years? It's five years that they have

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: to meet those benchmarks and they have to maintain those benchmarks. So the Veggie program is actually a nine year program. The incentive is applied as a credit against the firm's withholding tax. The Department of Tax verifies whether approved applicants achieve their payroll and investment targets in order to receive their incentive payout.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: So Go ahead.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: Is Yeah. Is it common that we offer these veggie incentives, but they don't actually realize them?

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: So the Department of Tax does those calculations on a yearly basis. There are times where businesses will not meet their performance target, and they do not get that incentive. I can't tell you specifically what those numbers are.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: But it's not prevalent. Just that it does happen.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: It does happen.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: Thank you.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: Yep.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: So just to dispel the myth of what veggie is and what veggie isn't, veggie is actually a tax expenditure. It is included in the JFO's tax expenditure report. Yep. And for everyone's awareness, a tax expenditure is a statutory provision that reduces the amount of revenue that would otherwise be collected to encourage particular activity or limit the amount of taxes collected from certain persons. The tax expenditure for Veggie is actually included in the individual income tax expenditures under other personal income tax expenditures. For reference, this is actually an error. It should be the twenty twenty three individual income tax expenditures were $377,000,889. Of that total amount, the percentage of the veggie incentive was point six percent. Point 6%. The way that the Department of Tax provides information to the JFO is because Pepsi approves an incentive fee from incremental tax revenues generated from that economic activity, and then tax verifies whether they achieve those payroll targets, and then it's applied against the withholding taxes, it's paid out incrementally over that five year period. JFO actually then extrapolates out a five year period for the legislature to look at. So for purposes of this JFO tax expenditure report from 2025, they looked at a period of 2018 to 2022. So on average, the Department of Tax pays approximately $2,000,000 to companies in the form of a rebate of their withholdings. So this is an impact over a nine year period, which is basically a life cycle of a VEGI recipient. So over this life cycle, from 2015 to twenty third '23, $170,000,000 of new capital investment has been generated, 640 jobs were created, $43,700,000 in new qualifying payroll, and on average, the average wage is $68,326. And what it doesn't say here, which

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: is one of the reasons for veggie incentive is to grow wage to grow wages. So what isn't here and what would be interesting in this graphic would be to tell us what percent that 68 of growth what percent of growth that 68 represents. I mean, how at what how is that salary growth? Is that growing 10%? Is that is that growing 20%? What's the value of that Yep.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: In terms of growth? Right. I don't know

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: how we might be able to extrapolate that data from those individual companies. I can certainly talk to Ellie about how we might be able to beat them or the department attack.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And the other thing that would be interesting just because to go back to Randy's question always is what do we leverage in terms of Gonna get to that. Yeah. Okay. Because the 170,000,000, we didn't spend a 170,000,000, but that leveraged that much investment. So that would be interesting to know too, but the dollar amount is there that leverage that investment. Here you go.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: So over the life of the VEGI program from 2007 to 2023, the VEGI program has had $1,200,000,000 in new capital investment. We've created over 10,000 new jobs, $613,000,000 in new qualifying payroll, and we've paid $41,500,000 in incentives through 2023. For every dollar that is on Veggie from 2020 '20 2007 to 2023 on those earned incentives, meaning that the company has met those targets and the Department of Tax has verified that and paid them, at least an additional $42.70 has been generated in payroll and capital investment that otherwise would not have occurred in state. These incentives matter, and just we learned a lot about why incentives matter this past fall, and senator Clarkson and senator Ram Hinsdale were at the Vepsey retreat where we had Bob Isaacson and Tyler Baines from the Centers for Regional Economic Competitiveness. We hired ACCD and BEPC hired the CREC to kind of do an analysis for us about why the veggie program and the business incentives matter to the state of Vermont. I would strongly encourage you to We invite would

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: like to have them back. Yeah. Kesha and I were just talking about this the other day. Yeah. So we would they were terrific.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: Yeah. I will happily provide

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: you sign up to send

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: us the assignment. Right? Yes.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: I would happily send you their contact information, and they can give you the data. They were wonderful at explaining the need for incentives to remain competitive as a state. So, as

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: an

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: example, Weidman Electrical Technology in St. John Barry is a VEGI recipient. The VEGI program was integral in Weidmann's decision to expand their facilities in St. John Ferry and not expand out of state. As a result, the photo you see is from our site visit that we had this past summer. They have a $43,000,000 capital improvement project underway. They've created 67 new jobs, and it's had a ripple effect through the Northeast Kingdom economy, supporting the businesses that they purchased their materials from, and they're using local contractors at all stages of this build. Right.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Got it.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: In terms of S-three 27, that's Which is now section 11. Which is now section 11, okay. DEPCI supports the elimination of the sunset on Veggie. The repeal of the sunset would create more sustainable program structure, and it also provides predictability for employers and the

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: state of That's section 10,

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: right. Yep. We

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: support the continued annual reporting and program evaluation by the legislature. I think that's very important for continued accountability and transparency. As we heard in our retreat, we have the most rigorous standard for business incentives in our reporting and in our program guidelines. I think it works. Making Veggie permanent provides opportunities for VEPSI to focus on program improvements rather than legislative renewal. We'd be happy to continue to work with the legislature on ways to improve the program. And the retreat really was a great way to begin that conversation, and we would be happy to continue to have those conversations with the legislature. In terms of, I believe it's section 11. Yeah. Last year I came in, I believe at the May. I have not had the opportunity nor has the council had the opportunity to review section 11 language since that last legislative session.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Your are your meetings still, I I think?

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: We just had a meeting. We had a meeting at the last Thursday of January. It was not on our agenda. We had other TIF projects that were on our agenda for that meeting. So, I would strongly encourage this committee, if you're interested in how this business enhancement might reach or help employee owned businesses to reach out to Matt Brock at the Vermont Employee Ownership Council. I believe he briefly testified last May, but I have not had the opportunity to look at, and I don't believe the administration has had the opportunity to look at. Right.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: So we either have tech do that work here or we wait for you to review this. You have added two new you've added two enhanced incentives. Those were both and and it was before your time. We we currently And the question, I think, is the time it takes for the council to review a new proposed enhanced incentive. And, if you would prefer that you review it first and propose it in that regard. I mean, the the process for adopting and accepting, those enhanced incentives, I think, is a question. I can't remember if they came legislatively or if they came organically from the Pepsi accounts. They wouldn't have come from the Pepsi Council, be is my understanding, because my understanding is that the Pepsi Council has typically not gone the advocating for So they have actually, I think, begun in the legislature, both of those enhancements. I remember our discussing, and Kesha and I were on ways and means when we added the enhanced green veggie. But we'd have to check the date on that and we'll do that Yeah, with our

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: there are two enhancements. One is for the LMA, the labor market area enhancement, and then

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: the other is for the green veggie. Right, believe both of those were legislative, initiatives and, I could have been just so people don't remember that. Yeah.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: So I can't speak to that section. Unfortunately,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: people are not. We will have Matt and others in on this. Yes. Great.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: So just some closing thoughts. Based on the retreat that we had and in my two years as the executive director and reviewing Veggie applications and in my work with the tax department. The Veggie program has very rigorous accountability and oversight. There are strong statutory safeguards that are in place. We provide regular reporting to the legislature. And I think most importantly, that there is performance verification and a rigorous evaluation of the payroll target achievements via the Vermont Department of Taxes before any payments are made. This is not money that's just, you know, the count you come before the council, you're you're provided an incentive of a million dollars and a checking cup. It is you earn that over five years of projections and then maintaining for another four years.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Any questions? Yep, they

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: do. So it's pretty obvious, but it's a successful program. Mhmm. You guys are doing good work. My question is, why did why did you advocate for repeal of the sunset versus the movement of the sunset five, ten years into the future? I

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: think it's important for the legislature to recognize that this program is a success for the businesses that utilize the program. And that incentives matter when businesses are looking to move or relocate here or to expand here. And this is the only tool that we have to offer our businesses currently. So as a matter of public policy, I think it is a good choice to send a message to our business community that we want businesses and we want to remain competitive in the national market. And in order to remain competitive in the national market and the worldwide market, we need to offer incentives, and that's something that also came out of our retreat, that we are competing against neighbors that have very deep pockets. I think, so this came out in the conversation. Another point they made is we don't put throw it into question every two years, not in the legislature. Yeah. They like even if it's a similar amount of money or just a little bit more, they're not like fighting all

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: the time.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Right. The whole instance is really just stability. And and knowing this program is gonna exist in the because as we also established at this retreat, veggie this veggie program is not for every business, and it's not it's for a business that wants it to matured enough to be able deal with this and look nine years into the future and plan on this. So businesses plan into vegee and I think it's critically important that they know it's going to be there for them to plan into that future.

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: So as a tool of public policy what's necessary this decade is not necessarily what's necessary next decade and government has a potential of ever expanding and without some sets of programs they just remain indefinitely. So I was curious what the rationale was for a successful program like this just completely have its end date in the road as opposed to some maybe liberal end date of ten years from press. That's, I just wanted to have

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And conversation about as a result, we have had these, delayed subsets for years and years, and I think given its success, it's now 18 years old, right, since 2007. Yeah. Now 18 years old, and it's, I think, proven itself enough to have been incorporated in as a a real program we offer and plan to offer into the future. And we can always repeal it. You know? If it all of a sudden falls on its face and it's a disaster, we can always repeal it and change it. And as you know, we're surprisingly nimble when we need to be. Right. And you too.

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: I think she could always argue, does it deter you from figuring out better things to do in your life? And that goes to what you have talked about here is changes to bed. What would you do to make it even better or to make it to determine whether or not the program is better than that? And does the sunset kind of force you to do that? I don't think it does, quite frankly, because you focus on sunset, not on That's right.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: Yeah. We're constantly having to come in here and

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: we waste a lot

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: of time, quite Yeah.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: A small amount of your packs. Right. And give it Oh, I think this has been very helpful. Great. We look at this and we'll have Matt crop in anyone else you suggest we have been to look at it because this will be the third time the legislature has looked at possibly having it against the system.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: Yeah. I will think about it if I think of any others. But right now, Matt is

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: the one that Matt's the one I know. Yeah. Great. Thank you so much. Good luck. Thank you. With the press conference. Yeah.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: I hope

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: you're talking about Chip.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: So I'm told. Yeah. Good.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Well, you just did your dress rehearsal, my dear. The right committee is doing it. So, thank you, Jessica. That was very helpful. And we are going to shift to our brownfield program, which is, I believe, section Section one. Is that right? No. Section one is our purpose. And What's our what is Brian? Anyway, welcome, Matt. We're gonna begin with you. And it is section six. So we are going to begin with Sarah and Rich.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: And, Matt, you're back up? I am here to answer questions if the committee needs me.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Okay. Welcome. Introduce yourselves, and let's chat, Rutland. Sure. Thanks. And their importance to the economic vitality, a renewed and renovated vitality of our downtowns and village centers.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: I'm Sarah Barkit. I'm the Brownfields program coordinator for DEC. I'm Trish Capolino. I'm the Senior Program Manager for Contaminated Sites Program. Sarah's gonna do

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And you're based at A and R, right? Yes. You're based at ACCV?

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: No, DEC. Okay. Oh, you're both best. Anna.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: Right. Yep. So Sarah's program is within the contaminated sites program.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Got it. Okay.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: So Sarah's Sarah's gonna do the majority of the presenting. I'm gonna figure out how to share the screen so that you can see our presentation. We're hoping to talk about the Brown Bucks program generally, and the report that we submitted, and findings from

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: the report, and how we're trying to work through that. Great. And you, I believe, have this report, here as kindly as this for us.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: And we've tried to summarize it as best we can because I do recognize that it was quite lengthy.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: I'm ready.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: I'm gonna run through a little bit of a, a little bit of

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: a, just a general information. Just setting the table for us.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: Yes, exactly. Exactly. And so when we're talking about brownfields, what is a strong field? And there is a specific definition per EPA, which is a real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of hazardous substances or contaminants. And so when it comes down to it, Brownfield can be a lot of things, right? And there's a lot of obvious things that you take up when you think of Brownfields. They're the properties that had historically had a lot of stigma associated with them. Old manufacturing and industrial facilities, gas stations, abandoned properties, etcetera. But then there are also properties that maybe you wouldn't necessarily think of as brownfields that still qualify, right? And this can include green spaces, parks, it can be downtown office spaces, buildings that you wouldn't necessarily think of having uses that past history that would have resulted in injury and damage issues. And this comes up a lot when you're talking about redevelopment. Because there are so many incentives at this point for redeveloping, particularly with housing in downtown spaces, at this point, particularly when you're talking about affordable housing developments, when you are talking about, you know, the housing development corporations, the kind of big players in housing creation in Vermont, they are really pushed into projects that are happening in downtown and built in shutters. There are incentives both in terms of financial incentives, but also the reuse of existing infrastructure is a big component of why they're working in these areas. Water and sewer? Water, you know, and even things like better road infrastructure, potential access to Exactly. Walkability. Walkability, access to grocery stores, all of those things that play into where, you know, where people want to be living. The trade off, of course, being that when you're talking about, you know, properties in downtown areas that have substantial development histories, is that you're increasing the chance that they will have been impacted by some form of contamination at some point in the past. So, I'm going to take a minute to talk about the state Threat Lift program, the Brownfields Reduce and Environmental Liabilities Act. It's a statutory program that allows innocent current landowners and prospective purchasers of properties to enroll, go through the process of doing environmental assessment and cleanup work in conjunction with their redevelopment, and at the end of the process, they get a release from state liability. Federal liability is a separate thing, But the reality is that as long as they've conducted their due diligence, they kind of have they're covering their bases with the federal government. This is the only mechanism in the state for an applicant to receive those liability protections. Otherwise, when you purchase a property, if it is contaminated, even through no fault of your own, you are purchasing ownership of that contamination in response to it.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And then what just while we're going through this umbrella is the state program, what's the federal program and how often do we are able to draw down federal doll what dollars are available from the Fed on Brownfield cleanup, and how do we draw down those dollars? Yeah. I'm actually Or you're beginning to.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: I'm gonna get to that. Okay. So But because BRELA is not a funding program. BRELA is a mechanism that gives applicants liability protection and also opens up avenues to access funding at both the state

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: and federal level.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: Brownfields has come up a lot in recent years and there's been, it seems like an increasing perception that there are problems with the Brownfields program, particularly when it comes to timing and the work being conducted. And so last year, we conducted a pretty extensive study, the results of which you've all on our website. Webpage. Yep. But maybe have not given a thorough read. Again, can't blame you. And so I wanted to run through kind of the findings, the major findings of that of that report and and talk about how they kind of fit into where we are now and where we are going. One of the things that we did

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Just to remind everybody, we asked for this in our bill letter. Correct, yes.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: So, one of the things we did, the very first thing we did perspective, there was a section of the report on licensed site professionals as well. I'm not going to really be covering that today. We conducted a stakeholder survey. We developed a survey. We sent it out to pretty much anyone who was ever engaged with our program in some capacity. We really tried to catch the widest swath of stakeholders that we possibly could. We, in particular, were looking for developers, you know, government officials, folks from the regional planning commissions, our consultants, attorneys, etcetera. All of the all of the folks that kind of are the primary drivers with Brownfield redevelopment in the state. Our response rate was okay. Not amazing, but it was an acceptable response rate. And most of our respondents did have significant experience working through the Brownfields process in this day, which was great.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Given how long these projects, I'm so impressed that so many of them had so many had multiple experience.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: We we have many frequent flyers. Yeah. Believe believe it or not.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: But once you're an expert in it, it's it's just so valid. Absolutely.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: You know, so I'm gonna start off with with the things that that, you know, were kind of came across through the survey as as being really positive, appreciated attributes of the program. Folks obviously will take liability protection. Is a huge driver. They they want to cover their own butts. They also really like access to the funding resources that they wouldn't have access to otherwise. As I mentioned, I will be kind of building more into that in a minute. In general, folks appreciate collaborating with our program. We try, particularly for projects that are coming through Brownfields. We try really hard to make sure that that it's a constant stream of communication, very open, very available. And in general, I think that that our respondents as a whole, appreciate the avenue to address kind of the idle, abandoned, flooded properties that would otherwise, go to waste. We had a couple folks call out the fact that it forces them, or not forces them, but allows them the opportunity to think about redeveloping in areas that they might have in the past overlooked and gone to undeveloped. So there's also the aspect of preserving our big space in the state as well. Pretty much everyone said that it's a really critical tool to make these projects a success. That said, there are challenges with with Rutland's redevelopment that I think we're all aware of, but I wanted to speak to the ones that were identified the most. And that was issues with contaminated soil management. The fact that as you mentioned, it is a very time consuming and complex process. There were some concerns justifiable about, different regulatory requirements for different programs that often kind of all impact these projects. And then, you know, just just the cost and availability of funding.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: So, I'm just curious. One of the challenges I think that we've heard voice in this committee and in others is not just the cost and the regulatory overlap, but the ever increasing number of contaminants that are considered contaminating and, well, and that make more projects eligible, I mean, more projects challenging. That a fair way to put it? Yeah.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: You know, and I think that we did some looking into other states in the region and generally speaking, what we are regulating is fairly consistent with what other New England states are regulating. I think that the reality of this landscape, not just in New England, but the wide is that, you know, every time we find something new, you know, it unfortunately just kind of gets added on.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: It's like,

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: oh, now we know PFAS is bad for you, and now we have to make sure that we're paying attention for when that might, you know, exist as well, etcetera. Yeah.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: Can I just add that there? Yeah. I think we were talking about that this morning. So, just for background, I started in the Brownfields program in 2004, and then I managed to promote on hand it over to Sarah, and Sarah enhanced it and made it so much better. What we were talking about was when we first started, that we were really excited for the school board to come to our program. We were just trying to get people to join the program because there was a stigma associated with brownfield sites, and redeveloping on them, and the potential for health concerns. Because we've been able to work through that issue, and show that the work we're doing is health protective, and that the redevelopment that are happening on those sites are safe for the people who are going there, that we've built up some respect within the community that that's not the issue that people are worried about for rapid redevelopment because they know that what's happening afterwards and what is available is health protective to the people that are now on those properties. Yes, we are looking for contamination, and every now and then, new science shows us that something else needs to be regulated or should be looked at, but I think in general, the path that we've

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: been working through has really helped build confidence in redeveloping those properties. That's great. I'm just going to put a pin in, I know you've switched to the next slide, the regulatory overlap. I don't know if that's our committee or natural resources, but we would like, I'd like to know what those regulatory overlaps are and let's reduce them ASAP. We'll align We will look at you. Yeah. Yeah.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: So a big one, and I'm sure I'm sure that everyone sitting at this table has heard about this, it's contaminated soil management. This is a huge issue for particularly for, you know, redevelopments that are happening on smaller urban parcels. Just the reality of of, you know, new buildings, new developments, you know, needing certain substrate, you know, for engineering purposes means that materials often need to be moved. They often can't stay on-site when they're impacted historically. The options for removing them have been fairly limited. I'm going to, a little bit later, cover some some of the steps we've taken in the last year to

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: kind of alleviate work through an opportunity last year Yes. Mhmm. To but created another opportunity Exactly. Which we hope is being used. Yeah. It is.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: It is. It's good. That's great. Are And certainly always on the lookout for for additional solutions as well.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: I think we have about four projects working through that new process. That's great. Yep.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: So they don't have to track it as far. They can use it constructively locally. Yeah. All good. Yep. Right.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: Yeah. We're hearing positive things in general in the community about these options. Another challenge that we heard a lot about is the process complexity and timeframes. So really quick, I wanted to highlight kind of the timeframes that you see in Vermont versus the other states that we looked at when we were conducting this study. In Vermont, there's a subset of contaminated sites that come through a process of going through a supplement cleanup that aren't going through the Brownfields program. Based on our numbers, those projects do take longer in Vermont than Brownfields projects do primarily because when folks are coming through the Brownfields program, we are prioritizing those projects over others and we're prioritizing As I've asked

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: you to. Right. Particularly for housing.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: Working with them and sticking with their schedules and and doing everything we can to kind of shepherd them through this the process as quickly as possible. That being said, I think that it would be beneficial just to look at what the process is. Well, also,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: can you just quickly illustrate the difference between a brownfield and a non brownfield? I mean, maybe nobody else on the committee, but I don't understand why I can't a contaminated site under any other

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: name is something else? A contaminated site by any other name, unless it is a Superfund site, can be a Brownfields. The difference is whether or not they're going through a redevelopment process and coming through our program that way. So there are some set of sites that we that come to us simply because someone has reported a release. So I think the the one that would be easiest for everyone to conceptualize would be like a gas station, where maybe their storage shutters have leaked. And we get a call that says, hey, we were doing some maintenance at this station and we have a patrol from the lake. Going to come through our site management section process, but it's not necessarily going to be enrolled in the ground field program.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: There's not If it's an active gas station Correct. Crisis, that's something that's being redeveloped Correct.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: Would be And then the

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: other A gas station that was a gas station, but is now being redeveloped for housing.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: Which does sometimes happen. But the other piece is that when we are talking about projects that come through brownfields, we're looking at them holistically. We're giving those liability protections at the end of the process, the expectation is that you're going to start with that phase one environmental. I just went back for

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: a second, because I think the numbers that are shown here, the Brownfields are really the Brella sites. The ones that have been enrolled in our Brella program. Right. So we might have some projects that come through the regular study process that might go through redevelopment, but they're not enrolled in the live programs.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Right. That's Oh, so is that the difference here? That's the difference.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: It's not up here right So the ones that are enrolled in the liability program are the ones that get our attention and more shepherding process. So

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: they may be they're all contaminated. Are all contaminated.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: And they all go through this process. Yes. That's what Sarah was jumping.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Okay. Sorry.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: Yeah. Didn't interrupt. Yeah. So when when we're talking brownfields, we are talking about a holistic view. And this process looks like a nightmare. I'm I'm just gonna acknowledge that that you look at that and it is horrifying.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: I don't wouldn't wanna touch it with a dense sort of barge ball.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: It it does also look expensive. Yes. It looks expensive

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: and like, oh, leave it.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: And I and I think that that particularly since frequent complaint, I think that all of us here is the time it takes to go through this process. What I think is really critical for us to emphasize to you all is that this process is consistent with the process that's required by EPA, and that is used nationwide.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Much of Doesn't mean it's good. It just means understood.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: But we are bound by by conforming to their requirements because so much of the funding that is directed to Brownfields comes from EPA. So even if they were not or any project that's using federal funding would need to meet this process even if we found some way to cut orders.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: So we can Okay. HUD in that requirement also. So this process would be required if someone was using HUD money. Yes. These government block grant funds also work in this process.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: And now here's a critically important question because the governor, as you know, did not include for some inexplicable reason. Sorry. But true. Didn't include any Brownfield money this year. I guess one of my questions is, do the feds match our state allocation, or do they give us money independent of our state allocation? They give us money independently. We have to apply for it every

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: and and the money that comes to DEC is generally almost fully utilized just to run our program, to cover our staff time, and to cover our But operating

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: it doesn't cover the actual cleanup. Correct.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: We have, over the last four years, enjoying supplemental bill funding that has been used primarily for assessment and cleanup work at these sites. All of our regional planning commissions right now receive funding from EPA. They also have to apply. They can apply every two years. All 11 of them do have assessment money right now. Six of them have revolving loan funds that can be used for cleanup with the revolving loan funds that come from DPA. Nonprofit developers can get loans or grants and for profit developers can get loans. But

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: none of it enough, which we'll see

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: in a minute. Yes, I will

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Just to give you a time check, have just less than twenty minutes. Yeah. You got it. Okay. So we get the impression of this, we

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: I think, Tom, we're all clear on this solution is. Yes. And just to just as a as a real world example, because that previous one was hypothetical that we kind of built as a best case scenario. This is how long this process takes and what it looks like. This is a real fast product that you got you've about, you know, in recent weeks, the Newport Crossing. And what it take what it takes from kind of the moment of the project's inception to, you know, today, which they're still working on their cleanup implementation and redevelopment. So, this project is not complete. Even though

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: it has a final date of 2024?

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: So that's just the last step that we have touched on with them. We approved their corrective action plan in 2024. So it's finished? No. So the corrective action plan is the plan for implementing a cleanup. Then once they're done with, can you actually go back? Once they're done with their path implementation, their consultant submits a completion report to us, and that's when we can issue our closure documents. So so they have to document to us that they've implemented their cleanup as we approved it.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: I'm just going to pause here for a minute. Don't think you can see me, you're catching me with a cursor. Sarah's gonna get into the timing conflicts that you asked about, and I'm just gonna highlight that it starts around this corrective action plan report where the conflicts really start to become an issue for some of

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: the developers. Particularly the housing.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: I just want you to see it on the scale of what that looks

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: like even when that inch point comes in. Ah, so to go back to that earlier slide.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: She'll get there, just wanted you to see it here. Thanks.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: So, the regulatory conflicts and overlap, You know, it's probably goes without saying that these projects require a great deal of regulatory involvement from a great number of programs. You know, not just ours, but often section six, you know, various permitting programs. But the big one, and the biggest source of problems when it comes to housing developments in particular, particularly affordable housing developments, is that NEPA environmental review process that the HUD requires.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Remind us, because we don't live in that world, it's National Environmental Protection Policy Act. Policy? Yep.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: So any, you know, for the purposes of this discussion, basically any affordable housing development is going to use HUD funding, as part as part of their, you know, funding stack to make their product successful. If they are using HUD funding, HUD has a requirement that they go through this environmental review process, which starts with the phase one for them. But they cannot make, for example, the Housing Development Corporation cannot purchase a property until they have cleared their HUD environmental review. And HUD says that they can't clear their environmental review until we have either said that the site is clean or that we have approved a corrective action plan. So there's a lot of work that has to happen before they can close on a property and get that, like get that release, environmental release and close on the property for them to get their funding that they have to do when they're still in that kind of uncertain phase of, you know, they've got an option agreement on the property, you know, or purchase and sales, but it could all fall through at any point in time. So there's a significant upfront investment that is risky and a big point of concern. And so going back to that process that we just had, HUD requires that process to happen, as we've laid out there. The phase one, the phase two site assessment, which is collecting samples, collecting the data, coming up with the cleanup plan. So, we kind of have to get them to the point of approving that cap before anything else can happen. And that's, I think

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Is there a way we can accelerate that process for housing? I know we've prioritized housing projects, but it doesn't mean, given that huge timeframe we just saw in this three slides before. So,

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: we've spent a lot of time looking at this. There are just certain realities of how long it takes to do the actual work. You know, we will often say that best case scenario to do a phase two, which is again, the sampling takes ninety days, And then they have to submit their report. And if federal funding is being used, we have to review the report. EPA has to review the report. There's a lot of steps of review that has to happen that can kind of extend that timing period out even With our Brownfields projects, we really try to minimize our review period at times as much as possible. But, you know, we're kind of bound by how long it takes to do the work, which is in turn bound by, you know, lab availability, consultant availability. There's a lot of pieces that kind of go into how long the process takes.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: So, I pick it even though you don't call them out except for the first one, these are phase one, phase two, phase three, the different color arrows. Well, this is more just

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: a kind of like working through that process of, you know, like if if they're for any property using HUD funding, they have to start with that phase one. HUD says they have to do it. If they identify recognized environmental conditions during that phase one, then HUD says that they have to do a phase two and work with our program and move through that process of doing, getting the approved cleanup plan, doing the

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: cleanup. Yeah, Thomas.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: We have a lot more slides, but if I could just jump in. One question that's come, first of all, great presentation. Thank you. This is a lot of background that I certainly need. You mentioned that other would comparable in our standards to other states. Where do you see a distance? Where is Vermont Apps changing the standards that would either require the umbrella standard to get the liability restriction or liability waivers or otherwise. Where is Vermont's standards in triggering more brownfield projects or demands, if at?

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: I don't know that our standards are triggering that at all. We do have a comparison. We'd be happy to share it with you that we have for soils and for groundwater. Not that the other regional states have different ways of looking at how they built their standards. I think some of the other states might have some more leniencies around soil, I know that Matt has been working on that with our union partners. There's a lot of pressure Just regionally trying to deal with contaminated soil and space and making sure that we're still being health protective.

[Alex Farrell (Commissioner, Dept. of Housing & Community Development, ACCD)]: I think it's good have another thing. Sorry, yeah. For the record, Matt Chapman, Director of the Waste Management Division at DEC. So this is actually I sit on a board with all of the other waste directors from the Northeast, so as far South as New Jersey, as far North as New Jersey. This is a common problem that all the states up and down the Atlantic Seaboard are having, and and it's the these contaminants are basically similar from a risk perspective.

[Matt Chapman (Director, Waste Management Division, VT DEC)]: They're a challenge to deal with because they're often in these types of redevelopments. We're actually spending about four or five hours regionally to talk about what the problems are, solutions other states have come up with, whether there's something we can do collaboratively along the Eastern Seaboard in about a month. I mean, maybe there's something that, you know, that comes out of that that can get shared, but I mean, I think,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: so that's Even an act a gun.

[Matt Chapman (Director, Waste Management Division, VT DEC)]: Exactly. And I think that the other thing, just to let folks know or remind, is that in the executive order that the governor put out, there is a review of the state standards process. So, you know, there's and that's kind of in my my sort of room, right, where where we're basically going in and establishing sort of a a standard on how we look at standards across ANR and and making it clear that we need to take into consideration tactic technical feasibility, which for the most part, these projects do, they're we're gonna open the door to having a conversation around economic analysis and cost benefit, incremental cost benefit analysis, which e which EPA does. I mean, I'll caution you, I don't know that it's gonna have a huge impact on our standards if we ultimately elect to do it, but we're gonna look at it and we're gonna talk about it, we're gonna talk about what it would cost to go through something like that and then come back with the set of recommendations for some reason.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: I think all of us having read the book Abundance this summer and fall, I think all of us fully appreciate protecting the public. All of us also appreciate the fact that the perfect often gets in the way of the good, and that the and that I think is the intersection of sure where you are at the at that moment with all those other players.

[Matt Chapman (Director, Waste Management Division, VT DEC)]: Right. I I mean, I don't mean to taking an abundance theme, think getting back to what sort of the ultimate outcomes of this presentation are and the recommendations that we're giving, you know, it's it's let's look at process, how we can streamline process and not let sort of, still achieve the environmental and health outcomes that we wanna and and redevelopment outcomes that we wanna achieve, but not frankly find ways to take our process and shrink the amount of time that people are spending going through sort of the procedural steps. And so there are some of those recommendations that we're gonna make. David,

[Sen. Randy Brock (Vice Chair)]: If I can. So we're gonna run out of runway here real quick. I'm just gonna go right to the point. What insights might you offer on the frictions which may have led to the governor not including Brownfield's injunction?

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: I'll I'll go I'll go

[Matt Chapman (Director, Waste Management Division, VT DEC)]: ahead and I'll take that one too. Mean, so I I think everyone in this committee knows that there's a lot of competing pressures on the budget this year. We're we're leaving the American Rescue Plan funding stead that the state had. There's more compression from a federal level on the amount of funding. I have not had a conversation with finance and management or anyone else about the choices that were made, but I know that there's a lot of really hard choices that the 5th Floor and ultimately you are going to have to make around what the priorities are. You know, we are here to help identify what the need is, and we're happy to provide what those needs are. We appreciate it. Obviously we support the governors, but so. So, in case you're boss, not ours. That's right.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: I just wanted to say that for this particular slide that's still out, we're just putting a pin in it that we recognize the problem. I know Sarah's tried to work with HUD and Commerce and trying to find a solution. We haven't found it yet, but it is an issue that we know exists. Yep. Okay. And and we will

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: maybe back if you don't get through this because I everybody's dad retrenched in talking to about

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: that. Yeah, let's, I'm gonna kind of, that's a, go through this.

[Sen. Thomas Chittenden (Member)]: The clock is fast, madam chair, about two minutes, we gotta fix that too.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Minutes. Seven minutes. Yes. It takes seven minutes. Alright. And. And. You will also be able to come back if we need it. So, I mean, doesn't have to be the be all mentality. No worries.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: I think we can get through it. Okay.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Know, pull the wanna Don't make us seasick.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: Yes, I wanna touch on the funding briefly because you asked You about know, I mentioned that most of the funding right now is coming from EPA, to us, to commerce, to the RPCs. Know, one of the things we looked at was, you know, what shovel ready projects do we have right now? And what would they, what amount of money would be needed to get them through kind of their cleanup implementation. And these

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: are just the projects that have been identified already, correct? They're project savvy all the time.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: And these are just, to be very clear, we have somewhere in the realm of 240 active Brella sites right now. There are 36 of them that are at the point in their process where they could be implementing a cap, if not for having funding. For those 36 only, we're looking at a need of about $10,000,000.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Ah, this is for only 36 of the two forty active Yes. That's so great.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: Yes. And just for some context of these 36, 15 of them have a housing component. Great. So in terms of recommendations, we've already kind of covered the new option for dealing with contaminated soil. We are also working on developing an online hub specific to contaminated soil, because we get a lot of questions from folks all the time, and I think that having the information more accessible would be beneficial. And we're going to continue to work with our development and consulting communities to promote the idea of thoughtful site redevelopment designs that can maybe incorporate lightly contaminated material on-site more, rather than trying to prick it off.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: At least everyone would appreciate it.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: Right, exactly. Exactly. In terms of timeframes, mean, I think the big takeaway here is that we are looking into options for certain projects to kind of have a fast track. These will not be projects that require federal funding. We are just not able to kind of bypass any parts of the process when federal funding is involved. But there are some sites, privately funded products, that maybe there's some options there to kind of speed

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: up the process. Private or state funded?

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: Yes, exactly. Private or state funding, you're correct. We're gonna continue to gather data on review times and look for areas where we might need to look into time certain responses. And we also want to of beef up our compliance tools to make sure that we are receiving things from our consulting and development community in a timely fashion, because that is the big issue. The regulatory conflicts, we've already kind of touched on this. The environmental review, NEPA thing, is a big problem, and we have put a considerable amount of time into evaluating potential solutions. Unfortunately, we're no closer to a solution today than when it first kind of came on our radar a number of years ago. I think right now, the best we can do is to continue to work with our partners in commerce and their environmental officer to try to find the areas where we can streamline as much as Yeah,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: the overlap, you know, that just hangs there as a low hanging fruit for It us to

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: does, and yet it doesn't. Federal, it's

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: a problem, not a state problem. Like we, before, it was two or three years ago, I think HUD would allow

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: for a draft cap to move the process forward. No, it didn't have to be approved.

[Trish Capolino (Senior Program Manager, Contaminated Sites Program, VT DEC)]: Exactly, now it needs to be applied.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: We have a federal flexibility.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: Yes, there's less federal flexibility than there used to be. They used to allow us to run our comment period concurrent with their comment period, and they do not allow Our us to do that comment period has to be closed before the IRS can start, and that is not our choice. It's theirs. So, and again, I think just calling out the issue with best products are coming in and making sure that folks are planning for that time is the best we can do right now. So, you know,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: sorry to hear you.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: No, that's okay. And then in terms of costs, you know, think we all know everything's getting more expensive. So, we're gonna look into whether or not we need to be more closely tracking incoming projects and their potential funding needs. It's not something that historically we've had the mechanisms to collect data on really well. And we're going to continue to work with our consulting community to come up with, you know, creative cleanup solutions that reduce costs as much as possible.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Great. I think, so for our moving forward on this, I think, you know, this is such a critically important for our, and such a not very important work for us to actually accomplish our goals, which is to build more housing and create more economic development. Guess my question what I I'm I thought I heard you say in this presentation is that the money that the EPA provides is money that mostly goes into the administration of the program.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: And that's the actual To DEC.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Yes. And that the money for actual, the actual cleanup money, the work money, is what has been traditionally done in both in the state appropriation and in the RPCs Yes. Revolving loan revolving funds and in other monies gathered in different ways, but the state money has been mostly used for actual cleanup and the work. Correct.

[Sarah Barkit (Brownfields Program Coordinator, VT DEC)]: And the agency commerce does also have a revolving loan funds from EPA. That's used for actual work. That's used for remind me what that is attributable. It's used for cleanup. So, it's I don't know what their capitalization is right now.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Chair)]: Right, we'll have them in and remind us who runs that program now. Christy Forson. That's right. Steph. That's great. Any other questions? Thank you for those. This was terrific. This was really helpful. Great. Regrounding us as it were in an uncontaminated fashion. So thank you very much. And I think with that, we will go offline and we will continue this work. But this was really helpful. Thank you for having us. Wow. Thank you for your work.

[Jessica Hollar (Executive Director, Vermont Economic Progress Council)]: How many are employ