Representatives Eric Maguire (R – Rutland-5) and Teresa Wood (D – Washington-Chittenden) introduced H.594, a 30-page bill establishing the Temporary Emergency Housing and Accountability Program for fiscal years 2027 and 2028. On February 3, the House Human Services Committee heard testimony indicating most of its provisions will be replaced by a committee bill that hasn’t been written yet.

What H.594 Proposes

The bill creates a five-tier continuum of care ranging from high-barrier shelters with mandatory case management to permanent supportive housing, including repurposed hotels and motels.

Eligibility requires physical presence in Vermont, verified by a state-issued ID, utility bill, or documentation from a Vermont provider. The bill prioritizes individuals with verified disabilities, those over 60, pregnant individuals, parents with minor children, and domestic violence survivors.

🍁 Make a One-Time Contribution — Stand Up for Accountability in Vermont 🍁

Time limits are defined: 60 days for emergency shelter tiers, 180 days for transitional housing, with hardship extensions requiring written findings. Case management ratios are capped at 1:25 in high-barrier shelters and 1:35 elsewhere. Hotel and motel use is capped at 400 rooms in FY27 with a mandate to reduce further in FY28.

Fraud prevention provisions allow benefit termination and repayment recovery for knowingly false claims. A Return Home Program offers voluntary relocation assistance for non-resident individuals, with written consent and a 72-hour cooling-off period.

The bill appropriates $30 million for FY27 and $25 million for FY28. Reporting requirements include cost-per-household data, transition outcomes, fraud enforcement metrics, and corrective action triggers.

What Happened in Committee

Chair Wood opened the hearing by announcing the committee will not mark up H.594. She and Vice Chair Goffano have been negotiating directly with the Agency of Human Services, advocacy groups, and legislative counsel to draft a replacement. Wood described ideas that have “honestly only existed in my head so far.”

Wood identified two H.594 provisions as “non-starters.” First, the residency verification requirements — legislative counsel advised they could constitute unconstitutional “durational residency.” Wood acknowledged there is no data on out-of-state individuals accessing Vermont’s emergency housing. “We have anecdotes,” she said. “We don’t have data on what those numbers are.” Second, the Agency’s intent to return to pre-pandemic night-by-night adverse weather hotel authorizations.

An advocacy coalition — Champlain Valley Office of Economic Opportunity — CVOEO, the Housing and Homelessness Alliance, the ACLU of Vermont, and others — presented a counter-proposal: no caps on hotel rooms or time limits, eligibility determined solely by being homeless, all services voluntary, rooms available every day of the year. When pressed on how to prioritize with finite resources, the coalition pointed to HUD’s coordinated entry system. Testimony revealed that system is incomplete, relies on voluntary self-reporting, and operates as two separate systems with state agencies participating in neither.

The Residency Question Deserves a Closer Look

Chair Wood declared residency verification a constitutional “non-starter.” The claim deserves scrutiny.

Federal case law — Shapiro v. Thompson (1969), Memorial Hospital v. Maricopa County (1974), and Saenz v. Roe (1999) — prohibits states from imposing durational residency requirements on benefits involving basic necessities, regardless of whether the funding is federal or state. A state cannot say “you must have lived here for X months before you qualify.”

But every one of those cases explicitly preserved bona fide residency requirements. The Supreme Court in Shapiro stated that the residence requirement and the waiting-period requirement are “distinct and independent prerequisites” — striking down only the latter. A state can require that a person is currently present and intends to remain.

Vermont’s own Constitution reflects this framework. Chapter II, Section 38 provides that a person who comes to settle in the state becomes “a free denizen thereof” after one year’s residence. Section 42 delegates to the General Assembly the authority to set residency periods for voter qualifications. The framers treated residency as something established, not simply declared.

H.594’s documentation requirements — a Vermont ID, utility bill, or provider certification — verify current residency, not duration. Legislative counsel’s concern that these documents “take time to acquire” stretches the doctrine beyond its established application. A signed declaration of intent to remain, under penalty of perjury, would almost certainly survive challenge. So would participation in a service plan — which Wood and Maguire discussed with counsel.

Instead of directing counsel to draft a defensible standard, Wood used a hedged legal opinion to scrap H.594’s entire framework. The replacement will be written by two of eleven committee members in consultation with advocacy groups whose counter-proposal asks for no caps, no time limits, and eligibility determined solely by being homeless.

The Cost Reality

Burlington’s chief of staff testified the city spent $8 million in 2024 addressing unsheltered homelessness — matching its budget gap. VHCB reported 305 units completing in FY26, 310 in FY27, with 36% of turnover units going to people exiting homelessness. But new shelter beds cost $130,000-plus each, and unlike rental housing, shelters cannot leverage tax credits or federal funds. VHCB has spent nearly $50 million on shelter infrastructure over five years.

What Comes Next

H.594 exists as introduced legislation with specific provisions, defined appropriations, and measurable accountability standards. Its replacement hasn’t been drafted. Chair Wood hopes to hold a vote after Town Meeting recess, ahead of crossover.

Vermont went from the second-lowest homelessness rate in 2017 to among the highest in 2025. The constitutional question around residency is real. The answer the committee is reaching for is not the only one available.

If you found this information valuable and want to support independent journalism in Vermont, become a supporter for just $5/month today!

Dave Soulia | FYIVT

You can find FYIVT on YouTube | X(Twitter) | Facebook | Instagram

#fyivt #VermontPolitics #H594 #homelessness

Support Us for as Little as $5 – Get In The Fight!!

Make a Big Impact with $25/month—Become a Premium Supporter!

Join the Top Tier of Supporters with $50/month—Become a SUPER Supporter!