[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6329716,"mediaKeyId","2315665-0ed37ce5ebd54ea3ff5b82e67b8122d6","parentId",2315665,"title","Institutions and Appropriations members agree to consult on cash-fund \"up to 4%\" language","audioSeconds",6200,"startMs",54365,"endMs",6254645,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2315665-0ed37ce5ebd54ea3ff5b82e67b8122d6&start=54&end=6254","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2315665-0ed37ce5ebd54ea3ff5b82e67b8122d6/thumbnail_54365.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6329716/Vermont/Institutions-and-Appropriations-members-agree-to-consult-on-cash-fund-up-to-4-language","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6329716-dbd1b06a501576e5a99ac445f56e6d9c/orig.mp4?Expires=1770454521&Signature=c29qJY-cz2I2azMlQ4oo43y~jUc--io5Lab9jWOItNw4BCgPzYr5qZrmENqFE34WA4zv3H~xhPmrRG42PzruDMdDsTpGUtWkAV0eDiUBdEXL2fK5SNM5lcyPy-RKXlxFSloHTBjSN5c0tdiuLPRwE2jjYTZFVPzqfA7w0k8qyQlT1GbWwIsTCb~X0pW4j066g18oyi839XcdYfx-V3R0WhpwLfKItPP6nCDjEEAwgQYmSKCTtB5U32jjPUmtIeGgCAwIgUQJ6kOG2MOiuHeNj4zixGdvFtfLD3t8V~DcMHsgiAeD3RED0hfqzqwcdoKWtL1Czdk~BtCQA~tqO-INQA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-02-14T15:18:52Z","article","Representative (Chair), Legislative Institutions Committee, told the committee a small group that included members of House Appropriations had met and raised three issues related to the capital cash fund: whether statute should say a flat 4% rather than \"up to 4%\" of the general fund minus debt service; what the proper starting point is for any multi‑year look‑back; and how to treat cash that remains unencumbered after two years.

The discussion matters because the cash fund is the Legislature’s ongoing tool for paying for capital projects without bonding. “I hope we can keep the 4% which is proposed,” said Jim Harrison, a member of the House Appropriations Committee, describing the view from Appropriations that now is not the time to lock a higher or mandatory percentage into statute given fiscal uncertainty.

Why it matters: several members said the difference between a fixed 4% and an \"up to 4%\" transfer affects how much general‑fund capacity remains for operating and programmatic needs, while the treatment of unencumbered balances affects whether previously appropriated but unused dollars can be reallocated. Committee members repeatedly requested clearer timing and a reconciled flow of money before making statutory changes.

Discussion highlights
- Jim Harrison, member of the House Appropriations Committee, summarized the Appropriations view that the committee would prefer keeping the current \"up to 4%\" formulation this year because of uncertainty about federal revenues and other budget pressures. “We’re nervous about making changes this year,” Harrison said.
- Committee members identified three concrete drafting questions: (1) whether to change statutory language from \"up to 4%\" to a flat 4%; (2) what date starts a statutory look‑back for encumbrances; and (3) whether funds unencumbered after two years should automatically revert or instead be the subject of consultation between Institutions and Appropriations.
- The two committees agreed to continue working together: Representatives and Appropriations members said they would craft language that clarifies the starting point (for example, tying it to the effective date of an appropriation) and that any sweep or reallocation of unencumbered funds be handled in consultation between both committees.

What was not decided: no statutory change was adopted at the meeting and no formal motion or vote occurred. Members stressed the decision would need agreement from both committees and ultimately from the full Legislature; Harrison said he personally favored long‑term increases in cash funding but that the present fiscal uncertainty made locking language into statute this year imprudent.

Next steps: Institutions members identified a small working group to continue reconciling spreadsheets and to present a precise proposal for committee consideration. Several members asked staff to produce a clear flow‑of‑funds timeline that maps project milestones to fiscal years so the committees can see when appropriations actually need to be available.

Ending: Committee leadership said they would schedule follow‑up meetings between Institutions and Appropriations staff to refine draft language and the schedule for review before any bill is filed.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","HCI-2025-02-14-10:20 AM","oneSentenceSummary","Representative (Chair), Legislative Institutions Committee, told the committee a small group that included members of House Appropriations had met and raised three issues related to the capital cash fund: whether statute should say a flat 4% rather than \"up to 4%\" of the general fund minus debt service; what the proper starting point is for any multi‑year look‑back; and how to treat cash that remains unencumbered after two years.","taxTitle","Corrections & Institutions, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative , Vermont","taxId",30574,"location","Vermont","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6329712,"Vermont dam‑safety officials outline staffing increase, project priorities and financing risk for Waterbury and other state dams",2681,604565,3286320,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2315665-0ed37ce5ebd54ea3ff5b82e67b8122d6&start=604&end=3286","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2315665-0ed37ce5ebd54ea3ff5b82e67b8122d6/thumbnail_604565.jpg","/articles/6329712/Vermont/Vermont-damsafety-officials-outline-staffing-increase-project-priorities-and-financing-risk-for-Waterbury-and-other-state-dams","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6329712-dd0181946c4ab4b2056e9972204e5b2d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770454521&Signature=TPXamw3IrnLweua~CGgTooNdumZWkGQHhqyRBNVyu0h8vgd-7xCPJnYCKRncc4jsoWpoEZDgdJGwiVWU~KetVzwLfTAllo-1w-CjPuJ~y1JJmwZKwEv60NCcQvdYEWox2BBGzHrBiY69YbA-Nb0juMAWBZUEOzA43oliwAYhyiZng5inOOOabmn~~zAN~mt2o57JuBmBjiELOK~kmf79-V1w86eM1JaXBFM8~HYpavCdxIK9pvdOHWeZl5v3QUSBDsuTvkwE3P4ciIcAIx7H33GC9d0aCZE8ImwXghQSw0Wp7w0KY~~03jse8xHA4-1ifXCzdhIeeeBSubSI2wFtvQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Ben Vereen, section chief of the Dam Safety Program at the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, told the Legislative Institutions Committee the program now regulates roughly 1,000 nonfederal dams and directly owns 14 state dams, and that a recent staffing increase will expand the agency’s capacity to manage assessments, design and construction.

The committee heard detailed updates on the Waterbury Dam project, which officials said is the largest state‑owned dam and currently has $60 million in federal appropriations attached but a project estimate that has risen into the $80–$99 million range. Vereen said the state’s negotiated share for the federal allocation is about 7% of the $60 million (roughly $4.5 million). If the project ultimately costs about $90 million, the state would be responsible for the balance above the current combined allocation — officials said that could be on the order of $25 million more than the amounts currently in hand.

Why it matters: Waterbury and Wrightsville are flood‑control dams whose performance affects downstream communities. Committee members pressed agency staff on risks tied to rising cost estimates and on the program’s ability to convert appropriations into completed projects.

Program scope and staffing
- Vereen said the Dam Safety Program is in the water‑investment division within DEC and has primary responsibility for regulating nonhydropower, nonfederal dams and for owning and maintaining 14 state‑owned dams. He said the program currently has two licensed engineers, two staff engineers and a program administrative analyst and that, through FY21 appropriations, four new positions were approved — including a newly hired project manager to improve contracting and budget oversight and two additional engineers and a technician planned to start soon.

Waterbury Dam: funding, schedule and risks
- Officials said the federal contribution currently identified for Waterbury is about $60 million; the agency’s most recent working project estimate ranges from $80 million to $99 million and includes sizable contingencies. Vereen said the state negotiated a 7% state match on the $60 million federal allocation; that 7% was described as consistent with the amount the state paid when the dam was originally constructed in the 1930s.
- DEC staff said design work is scheduled to begin in 2025, with design completion expected in late 2026 and construction tentatively planned for calendar years 2027–2029, subject to funding being available at bid time. “We are really at the mercy of the federal government,” one committee member said; Vereen replied the project is moving through Army Corps of Engineers modification and environmental review steps and that the Corps‑led review was near public notice.
- On the question of whether federal appropriations were at risk, Vereen said he had not heard anything to indicate the current $60 million was frozen and that his team maintains regular contact with federal partners.

Other projects and prioritization
- The presentation listed a six‑dam comprehensive assessment contract out to bid (Kent Pond, Lowell Lake, two Knappbrook sites, Crystal Lake, Fulton Pond) and identified projects that have emerged as higher priority because of recent flood damage, including Gale Meadows (Fish & Wildlife) and Noyes Pond (DEC), where temporary repairs were funded following 2023 flood impacts.
- DEC staff described a program strategy of completing comprehensive assessments, moving projects into final design, and then into construction to maintain a pipeline of projects at different phases. Members asked for reconciled project spreadsheets linking earlier appropriations to present work schedules; the committee asked that a small group of members and staff work through the flow of dollars and encumbrances to clarify which projects are ready for design and which remain in assessment.

Hazard classifications and operations
- Vereen summarized hazard potential categories (high, significant, low, minimal) and said the program generally prioritizes high and significant hazard potential dams because of public‑safety implications. Committee members asked about operational changes, particularly at Wrightsville Reservoir after the July 2023 flood; staff described an Army Corps cost‑share study of operational flexibility and noted gaps in original construction records that are being addressed through geotechnical assessments.

Ending: Committee members thanked DEC for the briefing and asked for follow‑up material — reconciled project lists, a clearer mapping of appropriations to milestone schedules, and a short briefing on the Waterbury project timetable for committee members.","Ben Vereen, section chief of the Dam Safety Program at the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, told the Legislative Institutions Committee the program now regulates roughly 1,000 nonfederal dams and directly owns 14 state dams, and that a recent staffing increase will expand the agency’s capacity to manage assessments, design and construction.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Institutions and Appropriations members agree to consult on cash-fund "up to 4%" language

Vermont dam‑safety officials outline staffing increase, project priorities and financing risk for Waterbury and other state dams