Lawmakers hear extensive testimony on zoning, housing, dam safety, tax credits, broadband and health programs in multiple committee hearings
Lawmakers across several House and Senate committees on Jan. 29 heard testimony on a range of bills and budget items that would affect zoning and land-use rulemaking, dam safety emergency planning, housing incentives, tax credit programs, broadband funding and a state prescription drug discount program. Witnesses described grant and appropriation amounts, rulemaking deadlines, new task forces, and program design elements tied to bills including S.14, S.33, H.7, S.25 and H.577.
Natural Resources & Energy (S.14)
The Natural Resources & Energy Committee received testimony addressing S.14 and related proposals on finance models for climate mitigation, conservation and community resilience. Jennifer Byrne, district manager of the White River Natural Resources Conservation District, urged the committee to consider public banking as a complement to green bank models to support long-term sustainability and local control. Testimony also detailed a draft to create a Residential Opportunity Overlay Districts Task Force to develop model municipal zoning bylaws; those codes would be optional for municipalities and would allow certain residential development to be approved administratively without public hearings, with grants proposed to support adoption.
Multiple presenters described resilience hub work and pilot grants. A resilience hub grant fund was noted as open for a first round of pilot grants; witnesses said resilience hubs are a lower-cost way to multiply community impacts and to connect frontline organizers and disadvantaged Vermonters with state resources. Committee discussion referenced grant reporting requirements tied to who would receive and administer grants.
Budget figures were cited in committee testimony: one witness said an appropriation of about $3,000,000 had been appropriated and that a current FY‑26 budget uses a large portion of that money, with a projected FY budget of $3,500,000.
Environment (S.33)
The House Environment Committee considered S.33, a bill that would amend emergency planning and dam safety provisions. Testimony described the Dam Safety Fund’s structure as a bifurcated program with emergency and non-emergency accounts, operated as a revolving fund offering loans and interest. Witnesses said the bill directs the Division of Emergency Management, in coordination with DEC, to complete or fund completion of emergency operation plans for high-hazard dams; the language includes "shall" requirements and contemplates prioritizing dams where failure could threaten large numbers of lives. The bill was described as creating a pilot for two state-owned dams with over a thousand lives at risk and directing a report back to the Legislature by mid‑2028.
Witnesses discussed existing DEC inventories and classifications (high, significant, low) and noted program elements including a revolving loan fund and capital bill components aimed at repairs. Testimony also addressed interactions with federal regulators such as FERC and legal/regulatory oversight of various dam types.
Environment (H.7; Act 181)
In a separate Environment session, committee members reviewed H.7 and changes tied to Act 181, including numerous proposed amendments to tier three rulemaking for Act 250 location-based jurisdiction. Testimony explained proposed extensions to rulemaking deadlines and additional rule elements the Land Use Review Board (LURB) would be required to include.
Key points included pushing a rule deadline for certain criteria and road-rule effective dates from 2026 into 2027, and a $20,000 appropriation to the Land Use Review Board to support location-based jurisdiction notice requirements for tier three. The draft would require the Land Use Review Board and ANR to adopt rules on a new criterion intended to encourage conscious development of wildlife habitat while maintaining historic homesteading and agrarian values, and to establish standards for avoiding or minimizing fragmentation of forest blocks and habitat connectors. Language in the draft also would require written notice to property owners before public hearings on proposed tier three rules.
Additional provisions discussed in testimony would require assessing officials to account for Act 250 development requirements when appraising parcels, and would direct the Department of Taxes to publish guidance by Oct. 1, 2027 on implementing that appraisal requirement. Witnesses discussed municipal authority, the transfer of existing Act 250 permit conditions, and the complexity of municipal enforcement in areas designated tier one or tier three.
Ways & Means (S.25 — Downtown and Village Center Tax Credit Program)
The House Ways & Means Committee heard on the Downtown & Village Center Tax Credit program and S.25. Presenters described the program as part of the Community Investment Program, administered with dedicated staff and funding. Testimony summarized program mechanics and eligibility: projects must be at least 30 years old and located within a designated downtown or village center to qualify, and awarded projects generally have three years to complete work.
Witnesses noted an annual cap on credits currently described as $3,000,000 and reviewed credit categories available to support rehabilitation, façade work, sprinkler installation and other code compliance costs. Testimony outlined examples of projects using stacked federal and state credits to offset project costs and to bring housing and ground-floor commercial space back into productive use.
Finance (broad fiscal testimony: ESAs, broadband, chloride program; bills S.10, S.20, S.29, S.2)
The Senate Finance Committee received multiple presentations tied to bills and program proposals.
🍁 Make a One-Time Contribution — Stand Up for Accountability in Vermont 🍁
Testimony on S.10 addressed educational service agencies (ESAs), describing their role providing shared regional services to school districts to reduce duplication and support specialized staffing and grant acquisition.
On broadband and community broadband districts (CUDs), witnesses described public‑private funding interactions, federal and state grants, and local subsidy efforts such as grandfathering households into a $30 monthly subsidy after federal funding ended. Witnesses said CUDs have pursued Affordable Long Drop grants to cover household connection costs where road access or buried service increases costs, and they credited ARPA and Act 71 funding with accelerating fiber deployment.
S.29-related testimony described a proposed Chloride Limitation and Commercial Salt Applicator program intended to regulate de-icing materials. Witnesses discussed creating a Chloride Contamination Reduction Program with requirements for master commercial salt applicators, training, and applicability to transportation infrastructure projects. Testimony included an implementation cost estimate in earlier iterations of the bill of roughly $350,000: a one-time contractual service cost of $200,000 and $150,000 for a permanent staff position if funded.
Committee testimony also referenced a variety of funding considerations and the interaction of program design with state appropriations.
Health Care (H.577, H.202)
The House Health Care Committee considered H.577, establishing a Vermont Prescription Drug Discount Card program. Testimony described drafting that clarifies how amounts paid under the discount card should be attributed toward an insured individual’s deductible and out‑of‑pocket responsibilities, specifying alignment with existing statutory sections for application to individuals covered by health insurance.
Committee members discussed form availability and potential insurer mechanisms for implementation, including downloadable and electronic options to allow covered individuals to apply discount amounts to cost-sharing.
Human Services (H.594, H.94; General Assistance and housing)
The Human Services Committee heard extensive testimony on housing, general assistance (GA) emergency housing, and H.594. Witnesses, including municipal officials and advocacy groups, raised concerns about state shelter capacity, GA motel use and the need for services and long‑term housing options.
The ACLU testified that it opposes H.594 as drafted, while supporting investment in permanently affordable housing, shelter and services that preserve dignity and equitable access. Testimony highlighted the scale of housing need presented with data: a cited American Community Survey figure showed a 34% increase in median rental price from 2019 to 2024, and speakers described deficits in shelter and services that leave many without housing. Witnesses urged investment in community-based shelter capacity, rental subsidies and prevention measures, and noted that reductions to GA funding would leave large numbers of people unsheltered.
Panelists described program elements such as master leasing, rental subsidies, and the need for case management and services funding for people housed through GA. Several speakers stressed the life‑safety role of emergency shelter funding and urged preserving capacity for medically vulnerable populations.
Conclusion
These articles summarize testimony recorded in multiple Jan. 29 committee hearings across the Legislature. Committees covered in this report include Natural Resources & Energy, Environment, Ways & Means, Finance, Health Care and Human Services. Testimony addressed proposed bills and policy changes on zoning and Act 250 implementation, dam safety and emergency planning, downtown tax credits and housing incentives, broadband deployment, chloride regulation, a state prescription drug discount card program, and general assistance and shelter funding.
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!
Subscribe to RSS
Leave a Reply