FYIVT Golden Dome: Evening Roundup

FYIVT Golden Dome: Evening Roundup

Lawmakers weigh school construction exclusion, budget transfers, renewables definition and health coverage changes across committees

Education

Members of the House Education Committee considered H.750, a bill introduced by Rep. Charlie Kimble to exclude capital construction costs from the statutory definition of education spending used to calculate excess spending. Committee discussion cited the bill’s two core purposes: removing bond payments from excess spending calculations and deeming "good cause" to commence construction before final approval under the State Aid for School Construction program tied to Act 73, Act 68 and Act 60. Testimony detailed local construction proposals, including a $111,000,000 project and prior bond votes, and presented illustrative per‑property penalty calculations under current excess‑spending rules when bond payments are included and excluded.



Officials and counsel explained the bill’s limited drafting approach aimed at addressing current disincentives while acknowledging uncertainties about future program administration under the state aid framework scheduled to take effect July 1, 2026.

Ways & Means

House Ways & Means members reviewed budget and tax materials, including proposals and statutory language tied to S.2, S.600 and S.13 and to Act 73. Staff presented a general fund revenue overview showing a top‑line of 2,533,000,000 and noted an $8.5 million downgrade by the Economic Board for FY27. Committee discussion described use of prior‑year reserves and contingent appropriations: $30,000,000 being unreserved and $74,900,000 carried forward from the FY26 budget adjustment, with those sums directed to the education fund for property tax relief. Members also discussed an approximately $115,000,000 total transfer to the education fund resulting from several adjustments, including removal of motor vehicle purchase and use tax receipts from the education fund to transportation.

The committee reviewed implementation steps from a December 15 tax department report required under Act 73 and discussed placeholder statutory language for classification changes, including definitions of homestead and long‑term rental and mixed‑use parcel treatment. Officials flagged policy questions about data collection, municipal roles, and funding for classification work.

Staff described a statutory transfer to the Computer Modernization Fund under 32 VSA as an annual mechanism tied to a percentage of prior‑year revenue; the FY27 appropriation request for the fund was presented as $6,397,000 with a proposed transfer of about $6,200,000.

Appropriations

House Appropriations presentations outlined a governor’s recommended budget totaling $9,343,823, representing a 5.7% increase over the prior year. Agency briefs described budget drivers, personnel and program changes, and targeted one‑time and ongoing requests. The department highlighted internal service fund activity tied to a new financial management (vision) fund and VTHR payroll system, noting a roughly $14 million internal service fund and associated allocation formulas.

Appropriations staff discussed several program‑level items for committee consideration, including a proposed $50,000 one‑time general fund request in H.577 to support outreach and marketing for a pharmacy discount card program and a $75,000 request for actuarial services related to a pension task force. Officials described pension funding and amortization concerns tied to statutory timelines for fully funding liabilities.

The department also briefed the committee on implementation and reporting changes connected to new budget and financial systems, and on internal service fund allocations and anticipated impacts to agency operating expenses.

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

Energy & Digital Infrastructure

The Energy & Digital Infrastructure Committee reviewed H.710, which would amend the statutory definition of "plant" used across renewable energy programs and cited the Public Utility Commission’s report and prior S.50 work. Counsel and stakeholders described longstanding disputes about whether adjacent facilities constitute a single plant for program caps and incentives, and discussed implications for co‑location, standard offer and net metering projects. The committee heard that the bill carries mandate and penalty elements and that the PUC recommended changes to definitions and to decommissioning processes; opponents and industry groups said work continues to refine decommissioning language.

Utility testimony addressed resilience and grid investments, including assets and storage, as well as estimates tying incremental savings or costs to rate impacts.

Health Care

The House Health Care Committee heard multiple stakeholder presentations on association health plans and other health insurance reforms referenced in S.12 and S.15. Witnesses described association health plans as a potential tool to expand employer coverage options and provide cost relief for some small employers and nonprofits, and urged guardrails and consumer protections. Testimony highlighted how shifts in small‑group participation and availability of premium tax credits interact with market dynamics and individual affordability. Officials noted broader market volatility and urged consideration of multiple policy tools.

General & Housing

The General & Housing Committee examined zoning and grant issues affecting mobile home parks and limited equity cooperatives. Testimony outlined program eligibility and tax filing consequences for cooperatives that receive grants, including income‑test thresholds and potential impacts on tax filing status under IRS forms. Witnesses discussed municipal zoning processes, statutory requirements for planning and grant competition, and concerns about project timelines and municipal capacity for plan adoption.

Environment

The Environment Committee reviewed provisions expanding agency discretion and rulemaking authority. Agency testimony described proposed additions to authorizations for the Secretary of ANR to require CAFO permits under residual designation authority and a requested change to emergency rulemaking authority with a sunset of July 1, 2028. Members discussed river corridor mapping deadlines and related permit and outreach requirements, and wetlands rule items including a state net‑gain mitigation policy and revised thresholds for disturbance. Stakeholders flagged workload, implementation timing and costs tied to staffing for rule development.

Judiciary, Commerce, Corrections and other panels

Judiciary committee sessions addressed revisions to statutes on voyeurism, sexual extortion and interference with voters and election officials, with drafters proposing new sections, definitional changes and enhanced penalties in some circumstances; committee counsel and prosecutors discussed mens rea elements and penalty structures. Commerce & Economic Development reviewed bills including H.205 on noncompete agreements and H.211 and S.25 on data privacy and data broker registration, with debates over registration timelines, deletion mechanisms, enforcement and potential business impacts. Corrections & Institutions discussed dam classification and related capital and assessment projects and cost estimates.

Conclusion

This article summarizes committee sessions and testimony recorded on January 28, 2026, across House committees including Education, Ways & Means, Appropriations, Energy & Digital Infrastructure, Health Care, General & Housing, Environment, Judiciary, Commerce & Economic Development, and Corrections & Institutions. Topics covered included H.750 on school construction and excess‑spending treatment, budget transfers and tax classification work tied to Act 73, appropriations and internal service fund changes, renewable energy facility definitions in H.710, association health plan discussions, zoning and grant tax consequences for mobile home cooperatives, and environmental rulemaking authority and permitting.

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

FYIVTBOT | FYIVT

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

#fyivt #vtleg #goldendome #vermontpolitics

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!

FYIBOT Avatar

4 responses to “FYIVT Golden Dome: Evening Roundup”

  1. Nancy Trudo Avatar
    Nancy Trudo

    I appreciate you. So, I am hoping that maybe you will hear my voice. I have called emailed and been a general thorn in the governor’s office concerning the “Current Use Program”. I have not checked the figures this year but for a few other years this program is a drag on the Education Department. Over 100,000.000 is taken out of this budget to pay for property taxes for non residents, residents and farmers. Originally for farmers to help them. Now it has become a rich man’s way to get others to pay for their taxes. I have 2 millionaires that live near me and both are enrolled in the program. One such neighbor remarked “If Vermonters are stupid enough to have such a program why wouldn’t I take advantage of it “.
    If you would write about this just maybe people would understand and maybe change would come. I don’t mind helping farmers, we are loosing them all too fast.

    1. H. Jay Eshelman Avatar
      H. Jay Eshelman

      Re: “…this program (Current Use) is a drag on the Education Department.”

      Everything is relative, of course.

      Yes, the Current Use Program lowers the property tax burden for specific agriculture and forest landowners in exchange for their following prescribed land and forestry management practices, including the obligation to not develop the land beyond its current use.

      But the tail of your perspective is wagging the dog.

      If anything is a drag, it’s a drag on property owners. Not the education system. The drag is the funding of our dystopian education system, that has one of the highest costs per student in the world (yes, in the world) – well over $30,000 per student in my school district at last count. And it’s a system in which fewer than half of its graduates meet minimum grade level proficiencies in reading, writing, math and science – never mind the social and political deficiencies.

      Current Use is a complex deferral program. Not a give-away. And your assessment of the Current Use program cost is overstated. In 2024, $76.2 million in savings (i.e., foregone tax revenue) was realized by landowners. Compare that to the $2.56 billion Education Fund that educates fewer than 73,000 K-12 students. Current Use costs account for less than 3% of Vermont’s public education budget.

      Now consider that for every student that has the opportunity to choose an independent school through Vermont’s School Choice Tuitioning program there is a more than 30% cost saving …. per student.

      Yes, the Current Use Program lowers the property tax burden for specific agriculture and forest landowners. But the return on that investment exceeds, by far, the return on investment in our current public school system.

  2. H. Jay Eshelman Avatar
    H. Jay Eshelman

    Re: Education – excluding capital construction costs from the statutory definition of education spending used to calculate excess spending.

    The underlying point being made here isn’t the detailed description of Montpelier’s ongoing shell game. Reading about the variations is becoming a tedious process. We’ve watched it many times over.

    What is important is my comment in this regard. It’s a prediction (a challenge, if you will) that I’ve been making here and in other publications for decades. Unless and until Vermont’s School Choice Tuitioning governance is provided to all Vermont families and their children, costs per student will continue to increase, and student outcomes will continue to decline. This truism has never failed.

    And unless and until Vermont voters realize this truism and elect politicians to represent their best interests, not the interests of the institutions they regulate, we will see a continuation of our education dystopia – until it literally bankrupts us.

    How close are we to bankruptcy?

    We’re already there. We’ve been in a Chapter 11 mode for the last six years or so… since Covid. ‘Reorganization’ is ongoing. Debt is being redistributed and termed out in an attempt to stabilize annual debt payments – e.g., property tax, various fees and other taxes. And we’ll stay in this mode until no one can afford to live here. After all, Vermont’s student enrollments have already declined more than 30% over the last 25 years. And, without subsidies to pay for the replacement students (i.e., llegal/undocumented/irregular immigrant kids), declining enrollments will continue.

    Chapter 13 bankruptcy is the next phase. Voter and other State assets will be liquidated by a ‘trustee’ (the fox guarding the chicken coop) to pay off as much of the debt as possible. And because there isn’t enough asset basis to cover all of the debt, creditors (primarily the banks and union employee pensioners) will take a hit too.

    That’s my prediction. That’s been my prediction. And we’re all watching it play out before our very eyes. This latest permutation of putting school construction costs under a different shell is just more of the same. Mark my words… under the current governance, the cost per student is going to increase and student outcomes will continue to decline. Period!

  3. H. Jay Eshelman Avatar
    H. Jay Eshelman

    Re: “And we’ll stay in this mode until no one can afford to live here. After all, Vermont’s student enrollments have already declined more than 30% over the last 25 years. And, without subsidies to pay for the replacement students (i.e., illegal/undocumented/irregular immigrant kids), declining enrollments will continue.”

    Read the [Nation’s fastest-shrinking state: Vermont loses 0.3% of population amid aging crisis and housing stagnation] – just published on Vermont Daily Chronicle today.

    The writing is, and has been, on the wall for anyone with open eyes.

Leave a Reply

By signing up, you agree to the our terms and our Privacy Policy agreement.

RSS icon Subscribe to RSS