Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Katie (Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel)]: You are live.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: All right, we are live, and this is Cicco de Mayo. How's that? And this is Center Health and Welfare, So we can go do the Macarena afterwards.

[Katie (Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Nolan, thanks for being here. We're going

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: to look at September and the fiscal information that's included in that bill.

[Nolan Langweil (Senior Fiscal Analyst, Vermont Joint Fiscal Office)]: Yeah, say I ought to zoom in here. I'm doing it right now. Let's go. Knock on the door.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: I know we've had this for a bit but now that we've gone through the bill we might be able to ask some questions or at least have a different perspective I on

[Nolan Langweil (Senior Fiscal Analyst, Vermont Joint Fiscal Office)]: was going to echo, sorry. And one more step from here. I come bearing gifts. I I love my sheets, but I did it this way because I left it on pro paper, but I was anti confusion. So and often, easier for you guys to have something to,

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: you know, one more. You got two there. Okay. Alright.

[Nolan Langweil (Senior Fiscal Analyst, Vermont Joint Fiscal Office)]: So if this note posted again, really what the purpose of this is is to sort of rehighlight the bucket. So the left side, you have the gov rec, and this is all the different pieces that were in the gov rec. The next column you see is H938 is passed by the house, And you can see we've broken out by base GF, one time GF, general fund. And that is such with federal funds, and then GCs global commitment and then totals. And then the last column is the delta. What you'll notice, so there'd be some ups and downs throughout, if you notice the bottom line of the delta is zeros, but that highlights that the House intended to, as I mentioned earlier last week, which seemed like years ago, that the House was trying to live within the same bucket that's been governor, and that the budgets on both the House and the Senate also reflect the same budgets. So the idea is human services said we're gonna keep the same bottom line, but we're gonna move things around based on our priorities. So you can see, for instance, POP grants, they took 1,100,000 out of POP grants, or 3,000,000 out of Shelton. And they moved it around, so they moved one time to one time, base to base, GF to GF, and they moved things around based on what they think the priority should be. And now that the budget has passed, the budget passed with the same foundation. The idea was that you guys can move things around within the bill, say this is where the money goes, but ultimately you want to have the same base GF, the same one time GF, etcetera, so you get this done. So that's what this is here. So you could say, okay, we wanna put more in the shelter development, or less in the shelter development. This is your place to do it, but you just have to make sure the bottom lines match up to what you've already taxed in your budget.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: Okay, so as we go through it, so for instance, one of the questions, the questions that we have, I guess, is how the numbers were derived. How do we determine how much we need? I look at the agency as much as I look at the house and for their recommendations. One of the larger numbers here, the biggest number, the hotels and motels. And how does that compare with last year?

[Nolan Langweil (Senior Fiscal Analyst, Vermont Joint Fiscal Office)]: I don't know, I have to defer to the friendly faces behind me.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: The friendly faces, or someone who knows what the 2026 budget cabinet for hotels and hotels is gonna do it? Okay. And then eligibility staffing, can you define what that means?

[Nolan Langweil (Senior Fiscal Analyst, Vermont Joint Fiscal Office)]: Those are the positions that the governor had recommended to. So you just work in the house, so we don't need that many positions.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: So is this for case management, for example, for people who are homeless?

[Nolan Langweil (Senior Fiscal Analyst, Vermont Joint Fiscal Office)]: Yeah, and I will defer to the Friendly Fix behind her team.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: I'm gonna ask all these questions and then we'll come back and ask them again. So I see case management under there as another number and eligibility staff thing is another number. I know that eligibility determination is something really important, especially if we have the new definitions and tiers available for different types of housing. You have a number. You have something for me.

[Katie (Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel)]: I have something on the eligibility staffing. I'm sorry. Good morning. For the record, Miranda Gray, the deputy director of the Economic Services Division. And so I can talk about staffing and we're confirming the number.

[Miranda Gray (Deputy Director, Economic Services Division, DCF)]: Okay. Hotel and motel. So the distinction here is the eligibility staffing are those that engage with the they, one, determine if someone is eligible for a GA hotel or motel based upon the criteria that would be in the bill, but then they're the ones that are engaging with the hotels and motels to say, do you have a room that's available? And kind of doing all of that behind essentially booking a room, as any of us would do. So that's what eligibility staffing is doing. And then the other staffing that is mentioned would be those that would be assisting people in the program, making sure they're connecting to serve the best case management, more on the ground and really assisting people where we're more of the majority of our staff are a contracted call center that help determine eligibility staffing or eligibility. Okay.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: And then we have permanent family supportive housing here. What is included in that? Are there community organizations included in that for providing permanent and family supportive housing or is this DSHA? What is included in that money?

[Lily Sodron (Director, Office of Economic Opportunity, DCF)]: Hi. Morning, Lily Sodron, our director of the office of economic opportunity at the department for children and families. So that is the two programs that the department manages. One is the family supportive housing program that is contracts to community providers around the state to provide family supportive housing, which is a combination of general fund and Medicaid fund. And then the second component of that is the permanent supportive housing assistance program, which is a relatively new Medicaid budget for adults with complex health needs who are exiting homelessness and receiving that service. And currently that funding supports providers in six communities. It's not yet a statewide program. We have capacity for just over a 100 households right now. So if I were looking for my local

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: cap agency providing shelters, where would I find my cap agency in this list? I believe I

[Lily Sodron (Director, Office of Economic Opportunity, DCF)]: don't know. Yeah. Oh, you need to see the list.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: I just wanna make sure.

[Lily Sodron (Director, Office of Economic Opportunity, DCF)]: That would be under the first row, the thank you so much. Thank you. The hops? That would be under the hop grant operations. That for gov for the governor's recommended, that includes the scope under the housing opportunity grant program. So that emergency shelter, transitional housing, coordinated entry assessment and housing navigation, homelessness prevention, rapid rehousing family, financial assistance, homeless management information services, administration of shelter and services, and training and technical assistance. And then also in the governor's recommended, we included some new specialized shelters as well as some additional funding to help support natural support connections as another form of financial assistance. Okay, so there are a

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: lot of questions here and then how that 40,000,000 is going to be appropriated going forward as compared with the other appropriations, some of which are one time and some of which are face. And so we need to, we'll come back to look at this in detail, but it would be helpful. I understand that there are linkages with these things within the bill itself, but it's helpful just to keep asking questions and say, what is this linked to? I think that helps everyone around the table. So we'll come back and do that. 09:38 is on our agenda tomorrow, 09:00, so we'll, after we've gotten there, we'll start out in looking, we'll talk with Kaylee a little bit on some of the markup that we have done, and then we'll, ultimately we're gonna get back to this. I can't tell you exactly when, see how it flows. That's who we are, I guess.

[Miranda Gray (Deputy Director, Economic Services Division, DCF)]: I have the answer on the budget for hotel and motel room. Uh-huh. The state fiscal year is 32,600,000.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: That's what we budgeted. It was 26,000,000. For the

[Miranda Gray (Deputy Director, Economic Services Division, DCF)]: '26. For '26, it's 32,600,000.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: All right. Thank you. All right, good. So, Nellen, thank you for doing this, and we'll have you back in the hot seat soon. Looking forward to it. The So, forward John, I do have Sure. I have copies of this. Perfect. So we can jump on to H. Six fifty seven and approve priorities amendment that came up after we had voted on the bill. I think we had talked about some of the bills. I think there's a couple of different.

[John Morley III (Member)]: I can also screen here if that's helpful, but I'm

[Nolan Langweil (Senior Fiscal Analyst, Vermont Joint Fiscal Office)]: happy not to if you don't.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: Anybody, do you want one? Anybody else need one? No, we're good.

[Lily Sodron (Director, Office of Economic Opportunity, DCF)]: We're booking at

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: H657. We've actually finished 09:38 for the day, but thank you all for being patient and in the room. I know everyone's interested in this. So good. So,

[John Morley III (Member)]: Doctor. A, on the school website, council as the chair forecast that this is H 657, which is already passed on committee. This is an amendment, and Senator Lyons' manual reports could be updated as appropriate. But this is two little fixes in response to two separate requests, one from the printer's office and one from ECF. The first instance of amendment, and just for orientation, we're talking about the sections of six fifty seven that relate to Social Security benefits for youth in foster care, and so you'll recall two measures from that. One is that DCF would be required to establish an account for each child who is a beneficiary, and in particular, the language was a trust account, which for children receiving SSI benefits, they would have that qualified ABLE account, which is a tax advantaged savings account. The first instance of amendment is striking the requirements of the account be a trust account, and instead, does that it be an account. It does not disrupt any requirement related to the qualified ABLE accounts. That would still be the case for anyone receiving SSI benefits. But for folks who are not receiving SSI benefits, if they're just receiving title two benefits under the Social Security Act, it wouldn't necessarily have to be a trust account. Request came from the treasurer's office. My understanding is it just relates to, like, administrative practicality of the situation that it might be harder to withdraw funds at the end. One thing I might note is that it doesn't disrupt anything about the obligation that DCF has to the children as beneficiary. Right? They still stand in that relationship where they're acting to manage the children's funds as they're required to do under the Social Security Act. So it doesn't disrupt that. It just says that when accounts are stood up for folks who are not receiving SSI benefits, they wouldn't necessarily need to be trust accounts. The second instance of amendment is pushing back the effective date for the program. You may recall that sections two and three for the Social Security benefits for youth and foster care went effective next summer, 07/01/2027. DCF had requested some more time. I'm sure you've heard about the capacities that they have to implement the program. The idea was to push this back a year to 07/01/2028, and potentially, in the interim, could either develop a phased in implementation plan that extends the program to different age groups, or perhaps by 07/01/2028, it could just outright be offered. But that's the two changes. One is striking the requirements of the accounts being trust accounts, and the other is just pushing back implementation of the program until 07/01/2028.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: So this pushes everything back. It's not one specific age group versus another, and that was something that I had asked for and I'm open to suggestions from the committee in two ways. One, it could be a cohort by age and then it could also be January 28, but allowing for DCF to have time to implement the program that they need to do, the work they need to do.

[John Morley III (Member)]: So this essentially just offers extra time in which you could develop treatment. Right.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: And we'll go back to the house, which will also comment. I mean, if if it must be, then it you know, that's what the hell the hell is happening. Yeah. Be nice to get it done sooner. Yeah. I know. Yeah. I'm wondering about putting 01/01/2028 in there instead of July 1. Can we do that?

[John Morley III (Member)]: I'm happy to do that, but if that's what you would like, The memo that I read, the 07/01/2028 figure came from the DCF memo.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: Right, so

[John Morley III (Member)]: you can change it to whatever you would like. The thing I would of course note is that if you put it at 07/01/2028, and they come back next year and have a plan, can accelerate it.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: We can also change it, right? It's promise to do it. Yeah.

[John Morley III (Member)]: Would you like it updated to January 1?

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: I'm fine with it at July, but it's also consistent with the budget year and it also allows for changes that could be made next year. Okay.

[John Morley III (Member)]: Thank you, guys.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: Yeah, that's good. Just a question. Would anyone else like to sign on to this committee members? Sure. Okay. If can follow me on file. Okay. Alright, let's all put the whole crew. And then, John, are you comfortable presenting the amendment on the floor on behalf of the committee? Okay. First, I thought

[John Morley III (Member)]: that was directed to me, and I was like

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: Would you like to? Sure, I'm comfortable with that. See, you just got promoted. Or demoted. Doctor. Trey Lyons. I won't. Okay. Alright. That's good. Thank you all. That's a good good thing to do. Then the other one one last thing, which is nothing to do with you, and I thank you very much for being so thankful. That eight sixteen, H816, that will be up on the floor tomorrow. There will be a supplemental amendment that I'm working with Senator Hashim and it's clarifying language that judiciary had concerns about. Katie, do you want to, can you?

[Katie (Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Sure. It's with the editors right now, so I can't pull it up. But it has language in subsections B and C of the big section, which is section three of the bill, it removes a reference to an individual because an individual who's not certified, licensed, fostered as a mental health professional because there was an interpretation read into it that a parent was trying to assist a child struggling with a mental illness. Maybe some of the things they would say to the child would fall within a mental health service definition and you would want to subject that person to enforcement by the aid duty's office. It was really meant to target chatbots. So individual has been removed. And then subsection B itself has been rewritten as a result and part of pulling out that language. Oh, I have it written if I don't. Hang on. Mental health services shall only be provided in Vermont through AI if a mental health professional reviews and approves the AI generated output prior to the information being transmitted to the patient, client, or AI user. So that does two things. One, as we talked about, it requires the mental health professional who's using AI as a tool to review and approve any content or output before the patient or client receives it. Also, if there is an entity that is hosting a chatbot and it's being used in Vermont to provide mental health services as defined in the bill, would have to be any output would have to be reviewed by the mental health professional before it goes to the AI user. Meaning that there would have to be, maybe the IT company is hiring a mental health professional licensed in Vermont to review that type of output before it goes to the user. I don't know how that would be implemented per se, but there would have to be that review before a client sees it.

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: Got it. Should we go over

[Katie (Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel)]: it tomorrow with the language in front of us?

[Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: Yes, yeah we'll do that. We don't have it yet. Yeah. We'll do that when Katie is in here with us. We'll have time to do that and it'll be before we go up on the floor so we'll go and don't know where this is taken. Well, it's to be frank, but I'm not sure if that will. Yeah. Hard to do it. I don't know. Know it's just a heads up for you that there will be an amendment and I think judiciary is very interested in it as well. So we'll make sure that we're it corresponds to the work you've been doing. Okay. Thank you all.