[{"_1":2,"_85":-5,"_86":-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",6323206,"mediaKeyId","2342953-6afdf93ebb4880b00a534dfdd741193a","parentId",2342953,"title","Statewide fair organizers urge continued capital grants as $300,000 proposal faces competing needs","audioSeconds",1546,"startMs",0,"endMs",1546100,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2342953-6afdf93ebb4880b00a534dfdd741193a&start=0&end=1546","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2342953-6afdf93ebb4880b00a534dfdd741193a/thumbnail_0.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6323206/Vermont/Statewide-fair-organizers-urge-continued-capital-grants-as-300000-proposal-faces-competing-needs","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6323206-71457c78343d329afb770143fb5a8675/orig.mp4?Expires=1770436080&Signature=dCVp2ncxdGOeLcCWRcDrKmetgP4dX3oJic2Qo4aSdZEk7n6~AzDKT8PoPDT6onsiojDcagrsEpOl1N12r3~vOZeU3svCOhWPx7nctf98ILpI6gE~evoGm9DjiugdaI6KTNdgPiXfr~G8kQzW0w6EuF5DKe8G-MOUBo7qCWq0VVQa043TlJxCeiSbeh05bIEN9gFQA58Ai8i8zmOsfE15d5-nJb-j-uqXVycJ6-zNM9xQhiuN6J0EmnvihdfZzltbqmQawpSJ0ME6vdbgCfvwt27t4YcdVfNLnOoIOktLWP-qgKKHW73RV7BLMgSxIPKztCEIeD-tzus4jUv9IEuPOw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-02-19T15:11:40Z","article","Representatives of Vermont’s state and county agricultural fairs told the Corrections & Institutions Committee on Feb. 19 that state capital grants pay for aging infrastructure and accessibility upgrades and asked lawmakers to keep the program funded.

The governor proposed $300,000 for agricultural fair capital grants this year and $300,000 for 2027, and the Agency of Agriculture divides the appropriation among eligible fairs, speakers said.

The money is typically used for building repairs, electrical upgrades and sanitary improvements that organizers said keep events operating. “Our grants went to improving our bathrooms in our 4‑H building. They are ADA accessible,” Christie Davis of the Vermont State Fair in Rutland said. She said the fair is also adding showers, improving its water system and making a second‑floor exhibit area accessible.

Why it matters: county fair buildings are often decades old and recurring maintenance needs — roofs, wiring, access upgrades — exceed what many volunteer boards can pay. Organizers told the committee that a predictable state grant helps projects move forward and leverages local and donated labor and materials.

What organizers said
- Christie Davis, Vermont State Fair (Rutland), said her fair used its grant money for ADA bathrooms, showers and water‑system upgrades and plans continued accessibility work for displays on the second floor.
- Tim Chey, Champlain Valley Exposition, said capital grants must support projects with a useful life of 20 years and that his exposition used a $33,000 grant to replace the Blue Ribbon Pavilion roof as part of larger work.
- Jeff Goodwin, Caledonia County Fair, described rebuilding several barns over three years and said a newly named Lawrence Arena will allow safer separation of animals and spectators following an overfull show ring.
- Jason Secart, Orleans County/Owens County Fair (Barton), said three consecutive capital grants funded a new horse barn project that energized volunteer fundraising and enabled additional rodeo and high‑school events.
- Ken Button, Addison County Fair, and Peggy Sherlock, Tunbridge Fair, described electrical upgrades, crushed‑stone road repair after 2023 damage, and a recent $162,000 bathroom project that required multiple years of matching funds.

How the grant is distributed: Agency staff and an agricultural fair board review applications and then divide the available appropriation as equally as possible among applying fairs. Committee members said the program typically yields grants of roughly $25,000–$37,000 per fair when about 10 fairs apply to a $300,000 appropriation; speakers noted that some fairs request less and unclaimed funds are redistributed to larger projects. Organizers said the program requires a minimum local match of 15 percent (cash or in‑kind) and that actual matches commonly exceed that minimum.

Concerns and follow‑up: Committee members pressed agency staff about Franklin County Field Days, which is not holding a fair this year while seeking new land. Committee members said roughly $90,000 of prior appropriations earmarked for Franklin remains unresolved and reported that the Agency of Agriculture has held some funds pending resolution of the site and ownership questions. Committee members directed staff to follow up with the agency to clarify how much committed grant money is being held and whether it should be reallocated.

Context and background: Speakers emphasized that the grants support volunteer boards and long‑lived capital work that private donations alone would not fund. Several speakers described volunteer labor and donated contractor time as common means to meet the local match requirement.

Outlook: Organizers asked lawmakers to maintain the grant program at current levels to keep routine capital maintenance and accessibility work moving. Committee members said they would check with the Agency of Agriculture about the Franklin County funds before making funding decisions.

Ending: Committee staff thanked the fair representatives and said the committee would follow up with the Agency of Agriculture on held grant money and on whether language or administrative changes are needed to protect committed funds while keeping the grant program available to the rest of the state.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","HCI-2025-02-19-10:10 AM","oneSentenceSummary","Representatives of Vermont’s state and county agricultural fairs told the Corrections & Institutions Committee on Feb. 19 that state capital grants pay for aging infrastructure and accessibility upgrades and asked lawmakers to keep the program funded.","taxTitle","Corrections & Institutions, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative , Vermont","taxId",30574,"location","Vermont","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":44,"_43":78,"_45":78,"_47":79,"_49":80,"_51":81,"_53":82,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":83,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":84,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6323201,"Legislative counsel gives checklist as Corrections & Institutions committee reexamines MOUD policy in H.32",1549360,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2342953-6afdf93ebb4880b00a534dfdd741193a&start=1549&end=1549","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2342953-6afdf93ebb4880b00a534dfdd741193a/thumbnail_1549360.jpg","/articles/6323201/Vermont/Legislative-counsel-gives-checklist-as-Corrections-Institutions-committee-reexamines-MOUD-policy-in-H32","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6323201-dc2369dbd209af7839c0d90f9ecad2e3/orig.mp4?Expires=1770436080&Signature=Q3Dx7QB~qVJj9LeBHu4ZuZfufR8~C1ItnXyueiVWWS8wygCpRwaRRkJ~8aY0IBwVZTwsEmkKM5bsFK4geNakUj7YlxQTYj3Wdu3GJ35~o-Z1~oM54ZohWRCcqnrElr5tlTGnflJCj0tLqhro6N6RFyNKlM5YiQ7P712jLKWeYtwwbqoKji-ZtUwkg2t5tujL~MNRBrmahwJE~HwBnzN2d1soKkVwhyoqusi4tMoX2MS~rU10KgIoKh3jb3jvYL9eaJf3B--FSWy0BrSU7mR9SUu~yfVws4AcimsCQWSuYYh4CaV~l-U0og6yNDuhzJr~4z9f6syak8n2PzefU2fjMQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Corrections & Institutions Committee turned to H.32 on Feb. 19, working through a policy checklist from legislative counsel designed to clarify choices the legislature must make about providing medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in correctional facilities.

Legislative context and checklist
Katie, Legislative Counsel with the Office of Legislative Counsel, told the committee the session would focus on policy choices rather than drafting precise bill text at first. She reviewed separation‑of‑powers principles and said courts allow overlap among branches so long as one branch does not “so completely encroach” on another’s constitutional functions. \"What is the problem we're trying to solve?\" Katie asked the committee, and she offered a checklist of issues including who should deliver MOUD, when people should be screened, which medications to provide, reentry planning, staff training, data collection and funding.

Parity and current practice
Representative Troy (committee sponsor) and other members said parity with community care is a principal concern: the committee wants to ensure incarcerated people receive an equivalent standard of MOUD as community patients. Tony Fallin of the Vermont Department of Health, Division of Substance Use, said the program’s guiding principle has been “no more, no less” than community care: therapy and counseling are available but not mandatory, and nursing and care‑management supports were built into the correctional MOUD program to mirror the hub‑and‑spoke community system. “We make it available but it's never required,” Tony said of counseling tied to MOUD, explaining the policy avoids removing life‑saving medication when someone declines counseling.

What’s already in statute and practice: the committee reviewed existing statutory language that requires continuation of prescribed MOUD when a person enters a facility and allows an inmate who screens positive to elect to begin buprenorphine if medically necessary. Committee members recalled a change last year that clarified release supplies for non‑MOUD medications while noting the committee clearly intended a shorter transitional supply for MOUD so people can get to a hub appointment.

Reentry, data and the 1115 waiver
Committee members pressed for better measurement of postrelease continuity of care. Several lawmakers asked state agencies to report aggregated data on whether formerly incarcerated people are filling MOUD prescriptions after release. Tony and other agency speakers said the data exist but are labor‑intensive to assemble; officials said a planned Section 1115 Medicaid waiver and a unique identifier in the MMIS claims system could make such reporting easier in the near term. The committee asked legislative counsel to draft a reporting requirement that could take effect when the 1115 waiver is implemented.

Diversion and operations
Members discussed diversion (unauthorized transfer of medication) and operational burdens, including early morning med lines and staffing implications for supervising doses. DOC and contractor staff said diversion is monitored and handled through medical and disciplinary policies; one speaker said statewide diversion incidents are a small share of the doses dispensed but vary by facility, with some facilities showing higher incident rates. Committee members asked DOC and Wellpath (the current contractor named in discussion) to provide existing diversion‑management policies and said statute could formalize reporting or standards if the committee chooses.

Provider responsibility and continuity
The checklist asked whether medical decisions should be made by in‑house DOC clinicians, a contracted healthcare provider, or by outside community hubs via memoranda of understanding (MOUs). Committee members and agency witnesses discussed practical limits: facilities are not typically licensed opioid treatment programs (OTPs) and licensing an OTP inside every correctional facility would require significant investment and infrastructure. The bill as drafted requires DOC to execute MOUs with the closest OTPs to ensure continuity of care for methadone patients and to expand access to the full range of MOUD options where feasible.

Next steps and committee direction
The committee made no final decision but gave several directions: legislative counsel will draft language reflecting the policy checklist, including (1) a reporting requirement asking the relevant agencies to provide aggregated postrelease MOUD prescription‑filling data (timed to the 1115 waiver implementation), (2) a framework or contractual standards to preserve continuity of MOUD when vendor contracts change, and (3) follow‑up to obtain DOC diversion‑response policy documents for review. Members indicated interest in limiting prescriptive clinical mandates while ensuring minimum standards and transition planning are codified so care does not vary with contractor turnover.

Ending: The committee paused the discussion for lunch and agreed to reconvene with legislative counsel and agency staff to continue drafting H.32 language based on the policy checklist.","The committee began line‑by‑line work on H.32, a bill about medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in correctional facilities. Legislative counsel framed separation‑of‑powers limits, and officials from the Department of Health and Department of Corrections described existing parity goals, reentry practices and data gaps the committee asked to ","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Statewide fair organizers urge continued capital grants as $300,000 proposal faces competing needs

Legislative counsel gives checklist as Corrections & Institutions committee reexamines MOUD policy in H.32