The expensive program
continues to be a flashpoint between the governor, who wants to kill it, and a legislature that is hesitant to evict vulnerable people onto the streets.“After nearly five years of experience, we know this approach is far too expensive and fails our constituents, communities and taxpayers,” Scott wrote.
It’s the first time Scott has used his veto powers since the November election, when Democrats lost their supermajority. That’s erased the party’s ability to push legislation into law over Scott’s objection.
Every year, the legislature passes a bill called the budget adjustment act to move money around in response to unexpected events, from major disasters to modest changes in tax revenues. In recent years, however, debate over the bill has become heated as Democratic lawmakers and Scott use it to re-litigate ongoing budget and policy battles.
The current bill, H.141, was sent to the governor this week after a six-member panel hashed out differences between the House and the Senate.
But Scott said he could not accept the final changes for two reasons. Given growing uncertainly with federal funding, there is the potential for “significant funding cuts to critical programs” looming, he wrote.
In addition, he cited the proposed motel program extension. Under current rules, come April 1, as many as 600 adults and 160 children risk losing their shelter in the program, according to the Department for Children and Families.
Lawmakers want less restrictive winter program guidelines to remain in effect through June 30. The price tag for the extension is $1.8 million.
Scott has long argued that the state can’t afford the broader program, which once used mostly federal funds and cost more than $50 million per year to house around 3,000 people. The program is much smaller now, housing around 2,200 people and costing $18.3 million under the proposed changes.
The governor has also argued that the program is “warehousing” people because it lacks the kinds of services that could help them improve their situations.
Instead of extending the program for another $1.8 million, Scott, proposed $2.1 million in “flexible grants” to help communities prepare for the influx of unhoused people in April, May and June. He argued his proposal “protects the most vulnerable, develops emergency shelter capacity, adheres to the agreement from the last session, and limits unnecessary appropriations while we monitor federal action.”
But Democratic lawmakers weren’t buying it, and said two weeks notice was not enough time for cities and towns to prepare. The result of such an abrupt change would be “children, military veterans, and medically vulnerable Vermonters” being “forced onto the street,” House Speaker Jill Krowinski (D-Burlington) wrote in a statement on Wednesday afternoon.
In an unusual move, Krowinski also urged people to call the governor’s office to express their concerns.
“If this bill is not enacted, children will be uprooted from their schools, veterans will not have access to the care they deserve, and nursing homes could be forced to close their doors,” she wrote.
It’s not clear how lawmakers will respond to the veto, which Democrats no longer have the votes to override alone.