Lawmakers weigh property tax, mandates and budget shifts across multiple committee hearings — Feb. 19, 2026
House and Senate committees on Thursday discussed proposed tax changes for second homes, school funding pressures, new health insurance mandates, dam- and hunting-related emergency planning, and budget requests tied to greenhouse gas reporting and pandemic-era rental assistance. Testimony and staff briefings across Ways & Means, Environment, Human Services, Health Care, Energy & Digital Infrastructure, Finance and Appropriations addressed how those measures would affect revenues, municipal budgets and agency spending.
Ways & Means — second homes, Act 73 and property-tax math
The House Ways & Means Committee heard analysis tied to S.16 and implementation questions under Act 73 about classifying non-homestead residential property and setting multiplier rates. Staff used examples comparing a $200,000 homestead with a 90% exemption to a $200,000 non‑homestead second home and reported a $240 homestead tax versus a $3,920 non‑homestead tax using a multiplier labeled CET1B. Witnesses said that under those assumptions the second‑home tax burden could be about 16 times greater than the homestead case, and they warned of behavioral responses — reduced discretionary spending and deferred maintenance — and the potential for property values and tax bases to decline over time.
Department and stakeholder testimony also focused on defining employee housing and excluding commercial apartments from the initial non‑homestead residential base. Staff flagged questions about how land value would be apportioned under the proposed classification changes. Committee discussion referenced Act 73’s homestead exemption scale and the department’s charge to recommend multiplier sets so new revenue from a non‑homestead classification would cover education fund costs created by the homestead exemption.
Committee testimony also included a request related to the volunteer income tax assistance program: officials said the treasurer’s base budget includes $400,000 for the program and noted an earlier one‑time increase; the current paragraph contemplates increasing base funding by $150,000.
Environment — constitutional hunting right, posting and enforcement language
The House Environment Committee reviewed language addressing the interaction between a constitutional right to hunt and private property rights. Staff briefed members on a range of provisions used in other states, including paint‑mark posting and distances between marks, and on the tension between statewide constitutional language and municipally enforced trespass law.
Discussion centered on statutory definitions of "enclosed" land and draft exceptions for accidental or unintentional deviations from posting requirements. Witnesses described reasonableness standards for enforcement, potential discretion by game wardens, and the possibility of differing enforcement outcomes leading to court challenges. Committee members and counsel noted the legislature’s authority to define terms and suggested options to narrow exception language or adopt de minimis or reasonableness standards.
The committee also reviewed a dam emergency operations planning provision that would require the Division of Emergency Management to develop emergency operation plans (EOPs) for two state‑owned high‑hazard dams as pilot projects, with municipal EOPs for each inundation‑zone municipality, summaries of costs, and coordination expectations with municipal officials and facility owners.
Human Services — prevention cuts, reallocation and program funding
The House Human Services briefing documented proposed net changes across public health and prevention budgets. Staff reported a roughly $3 million savings proposed overall by the Department of Health, with about $6 million in decreases in one section and modest increases in others. Specific items noted included a 50% reduction to a child abuse prevention program and cuts affecting post‑adoption and long‑term guardianship permanency programs. Staff stated those prevention cuts were the “biggest concern” and contrasted them with continued funding for very high‑end out‑of‑state psychiatric and residential treatment, citing daily bed rates for certain facilities (for example, a daily rate cited at $2,825).
Other Human Services items discussed included a $100,000 cut from child care capacity grants leaving $900,000 budgeted; an identified $123,000 reduction in emergency financial relief due to underutilization; reclassification of a childcare special fund amount into the general fund; and proposals to expand supervised visitation programs statewide with supplemental staffing and start‑up funding to prevent program closures and add two new programs.
Health Care — prosthetic/orthotic coverage, copay proposals and reinsurance language
The House Health Care Committee reviewed H.432, which staff said would amend health insurance law to add orthotic devices to a prosthetic‑coverage parity provision and expand definitional language to list braces and artificial limbs and eyes. Counsel noted the bill had been introduced in 2025 and that statutory citations and dates would need updating.
Committee materials and staff memos addressed potential fiscal implications of coverage expansions. Witnesses and insurers discussed three components of proposed coverage: medically necessary devices (covered under current claims review), access to devices for physical activity beyond strictly medical necessity, and high‑cost activity‑specific devices with cited price ranges (witnesses referenced device costs ranging from about $11,250 for some activity‑specific devices to $40,000–$110,000 for devices with advanced technology). Staff and counsel flagged the state’s obligation under federal law: for benefit mandates added after 2012, the state may be required to pay additional premium amounts for qualified health plans attributable to a new state benefit mandate. Committee staff also recorded discussion of prescription drug copay increases proposed in one section of the budget documents and reinsurance authorization language moved to budget language to seek a state innovation waiver.
Energy & Digital Infrastructure — H.740 appropriation and IT spending oversight
The House Energy & Digital Infrastructure Committee discussed H.740, a greenhouse gas bill that would authorize the Agency of Natural Resources to adopt rules to create a comprehensive greenhouse gas emissions reporting program. The committee added a heads‑up for appropriators that the agency may request funding tied to H.740 and summarized an appropriation figure for deliberation: a $500,000 request to support work in the bill was identified as the amount colleagues on Appropriations would see if the bill advances.
🍁 Make a One-Time Contribution — Stand Up for Accountability in Vermont 🍁
Separately the committee debated oversight and transparency for Agency of Digital Services IT spending. Joint Fiscal Office staff recapped ADS budget requests and the committee considered a straw poll on structural changes and a $14 million aggregate general fund increment identified in ADS FY 2027 proposals, including a $9 million direct appropriation and roughly $5 million in build‑back authority. Members discussed the scale of multi‑year IT project spending, how appropriations are tracked across fiscal years, and options for improved legislative visibility such as tagging accounts or creating reporting dashboards.
Senate Finance — education fund growth, delinquent property taxes and a possible wealth/proceeds tax
Senate Finance staff presented analysis of education fund growth and said they used an illustrative 5% assumed growth rate in education fund uses for forward projections. Staff outlined how one‑time state actions to buy down property taxes in a single year can create upward pressure on property taxes in the following year because subsequent budgets must make up both the prior‑year buy‑down and the current year forecast.
The committee also heard from the Vermont League of Cities and Towns and Joint Fiscal Office staff about municipal concerns over delinquent state education taxes. VLCT said no one is aggregating a statewide number of delinquent property taxes; municipalities report delinquency figures locally through annual delinquent tax reports and audits. VLCT representatives and JFO staff highlighted instances of municipal strain, noting Granville as an example with a municipal budget around $400,000 and current delinquency in excess of $100,000. Finance staff described how delinquent collections can create municipal cash‑flow pressures and require short‑term borrowing.
Finance also took testimony on a proposed state tax on certain high‑income investment and net investment income concepts; staff presented multiple modeling approaches with thresholds tied in some scenarios to federal NIIT thresholds or to a $500,000 income threshold and produced illustrative revenue estimates for options under discussion.
Appropriations — ERAP closeout, higher education trust fund and other spending requests
House and Senate Appropriations discussions covered multiple budget items. Finance and management staff briefed members on a potential $6.9 million federal closeout issue: about $6.9 million of ERAP (Emergency Rental Assistance Program) funds administered by the Vermont State Housing Authority were spent in ways that the federal program has determined were disallowed, and the administration said it did not want to remit $6.9 million back to the federal government. Staff outlined options and described the closeout and remediation process.
Appropriations members also debated using an anomalous estate‑tax windfall and whether to direct a one‑time appropriation tied to the Higher Education Trust Fund toward a specific university project. Staff described proposals to redirect exceptional estate tax surpluses above a 125% consensus forecast away from the higher ed fund into a newly created school construction aid fund established under Act 73, and discussed how significant one‑time transfers could affect disbursements under the trust fund formula.
The committee heard a public defender office budget presentation emphasizing contract and caseload changes and a request for base increases for assigned counsel and other programmatic needs. Appropriations staff described various fiscal levers, including pay‑act appropriations and carryforward management, that can be used during the year to respond to unanticipated payroll or vacancy‑savings shortfalls.
Education — public testimony on antisemitism and calls for mandated Holocaust and antisemitism education
The Senate Education Committee convened a series of public witnesses and advocacy representatives who urged a statewide mandate for Holocaust and contemporary antisemitism education across K–12. Witnesses and organizational representatives cited survey findings and testimony asserting gaps in student Holocaust knowledge and local reports of antisemitic incidents. Testimony included personal accounts from students and community leaders describing harassment, swastikas and other conduct students and advocates characterized as antisemitic, and speakers recommended curricular and policy responses.
Education staff and witnesses also discussed the broader context of school finance and the foundation formula, noting that any curriculum or programmatic initiatives would sit within the state’s ongoing school funding framework and budget constraints.
Conclusion
This article summarizes material testimony and staff briefings from February 19 committee meetings in the Vermont Legislature. Committees covered include Ways & Means, Environment, Human Services, Health Care, Energy & Digital Infrastructure, Finance, Appropriations and Education. Subjects discussed ranged from proposed property‑tax classification changes and multiplier calculations under Act 73, to mandates for health coverage and education, to agency budget requests and pandemic‑era funding closeouts. The hearings included technical presentations, stakeholder testimony and fiscal analyses on revenue, spending and implementation questions.
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