[{"_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",6231731,"mediaKeyId","3428906-ab385b5f62d7868cf37779c9973ff032","parentId",3428906,"title","Officials explain 'cash fund' pay‑as‑you‑go approach for capital projects to Appropriations panel","audioSeconds",2735,"startMs",3706000,"endMs",6441000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3428906-ab385b5f62d7868cf37779c9973ff032&start=3706&end=6441","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3428906-ab385b5f62d7868cf37779c9973ff032/thumbnail_3706000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6231731/Vermont/Officials-explain-cash-fund-payasyougo-approach-for-capital-projects-to-Appropriations-panel","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6231731-48bdf0646c3e5e4f79f0569af8e99e1e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771137990&Signature=LTBz-5ru9~PgDXd7GNzynb2N5insZTaG-SvkIQrfb7saBTkov8-Cg~5ZV9bea-GMQDuTm~myYIZdiVPTnPwZ9c0dd2FBNSd-MMq6q~rm5yZHzwJhAh2HxOyJXYQytNbWXfFpkG95b~yuOYF20ITbxgKrOrGhmdLz-LkP-6fKyGyiwDC5Y6dMgU3t4-i5FwwyHFP0uM-E-M1LRsXWUnhJoLHNH9nSBfV~cXYQ6czN9Pz5EH97F7tIytaponMZl~X454YlxZXU92cqGvoRI0KPLI7o0169jUFscOM9LHzCVMoV0y52UptJbU1QXVxK-uPBVbqxrnyCLqy1l8Gx0r2X2w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-05-21T07:25:10Z","article","Emily Byrne of the Joint Fiscal Office and Scott Moore, a finance manager at JFO, briefed the House Appropriations Committee on May 20 about the state's cash fund approach for capital projects — the pay‑as‑you‑go alternative to traditional general obligation bonding.

Byrne said the fund was established in the 2022 appropriations act to provide cash for capital projects rather than issuing bonds and paying long‑term interest. “Cash fund is kind of an interesting name for this,” she said, noting that the statute codifies two subaccounts and that transfers to the cash fund have occurred in recent budgets when the general fund had available one‑time resources.

The Nut Graf: Committee members pressed presenters on the fund’s policy intent and guardrails — whether the cash fund should substitute for bonding on traditional capital needs, how transfers should be scheduled, and what constraints should apply to avoid using the account for ad hoc or politically driven projects.

Byrne summarized the two statutory subaccounts: a capital‑infrastructure subaccount for projects that would otherwise be bond‑funded (tangible assets with anticipated useful lives of 20 years or more) and an “infrastructure/essential investments and reserves” subaccount that the presenters described as broader and more flexible. Byrne said the administration has recommended a transfer method tied to “4% of prior-year general fund appropriations less debt service,” which would scale transfers to the state’s fiscal capacity and outstanding debt burden.

Scott Moore and other staff explained how recent appropriations used the fund. Byrne and Moore said the FY 2026 budget included transfers and appropriations from the cash fund for agency projects, and they noted an FY‑26 debt‑service figure of about $81 million that is subtracted in the 4% transfer calculation. Byrne said the fund has no permanent dedicated revenue stream; transfers are at the discretion of the general assembly and the governor’s budget proposal.

Committee members asked whether cash funding reduces purchasing power (paying cash for one project instead of borrowing to do several) and how pay‑go compares with issuing bonds, especially given changing interest rates and CDAC (Capital Debt Affordability Committee) recommendations on recommended bonding levels. Byrne said the cash‑fund approach was intended to avoid interest costs and to create a reserve for capital work over time; members noted tradeoffs between doing fewer projects with cash now versus leveraging borrowing to do more projects sooner.

Members also sought practical guardrails. Several said the statute’s language about the two subaccounts is not sufficiently explicit and asked for clearer legislative definitions and prioritization criteria so future transfers are transparent and defensible. The Joint Fiscal Office agreed to provide reports and to work with committees on clarifying the policy intent and appropriate uses of each subaccount.

Ending: Committee members asked staff for follow‑up analyses, including the annual finance-and‑management report on the cash fund and modeling of scenarios that compare pay‑go transfers versus borrowing under varying interest‑rate and debt‑service projections. Staff said they would circulate the finance and management report and that continued oversight would be appropriate as the program develops.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Appropriations - 2025-05-20 - 1:30PM","oneSentenceSummary","Joint Fiscal Office and finance staff described the Cash Fund for Capital and Essential Infrastructure Investments, how recent transfers were used, and policy questions about guardrails, bonding capacity and long‑term funding strategy.","taxTitle","Appropriations, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative , Vermont","taxId",30573,"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},6231736,"Vermont DEC details $hundreds of millions in ARPA-funded water and stormwater projects",3495,98000,3593000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3428906-ab385b5f62d7868cf37779c9973ff032&start=98&end=3593","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3428906-ab385b5f62d7868cf37779c9973ff032/thumbnail_98000.jpg","/articles/6231736/Vermont/Vermont-DEC-details-hundreds-of-millions-in-ARPA-funded-water-and-stormwater-projects","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6231736-65e1e5976c84f64ade5882e99d438e21/orig.mp4?Expires=1771137990&Signature=HCSMxvGjTZEqczsH8wbJuYgn1OObaECoIjDpg~PNf~8FkQgor8muVolhNunXHJVhDbd5FJ2BsXWOc9~eSlQxz4vLlN-ypEas5JOTD5ZLtIGnfPA7WlhzjvnCOtpqq~O0pOLBpeNqS4xZT56oe7X2h7ZmyWNgXVd-X2~FSroEeuwvHYDETodP9zEAR0~XeZF58mU~a8~Dsh36~ZPDi-vTXb3tVWQZB6RolUfrwAb0hV5gUotZM0CpAmkd9OkDl0eAHIg-yAcePYwGcQps0a8mbZAl3R5iuqpKEI4~DH9VltzqKDk~s6OD4MdiKcyfdnLmPmAhoPnbCO2ct91sgBcAnw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Deputy Commissioner Neil Cameron of the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation told the House Appropriations Committee on May 20 that the department has structured American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) dollars into six major program areas and several smaller projects to address water and wastewater needs across the state.

Cameron said the department grouped multiple ARPA debt IDs into program areas “to help for monitors,” and described the largest program areas as village drinking water and wastewater; a three-acre stormwater program; combined sewer overflow (CSO) projects; Clean Water Fund awards; wastewater pretreatment grants; and Healthy Homes work that includes on-site septic/well assistance and manufactured housing community projects. “We have 6 major programs that we are implementing,” he said.

The Nut Graf: The presentation laid out how the state is using ARPA to pay for projects that are hard to fund through traditional state revolving loan funds, provide engineering and permit-payment assistance, and accelerate construction-ready projects — while also flagging timing, capacity and flood-related risks that could affect the ability to obligate and spend federal dollars by federal deadlines.

Cameron walked committee members through specific project types and examples. He said village water and wastewater awards have supported planning and construction in communities including Highgate, Grafton, Londonderry, Montgomery, Moretown, Burke and Killington; some earlier planning grants did not advance, and one town, Westford, relinquished a grant after local voters declined a full-scale project. “Westford was an example there where after many years of planning … the town decided that it wasn't in their interest to advance the project,” Cameron said.

On CSOs, Cameron described multi‑municipality work and singled out Rutland, where the department awarded roughly $7.7 million to allow the city to advance projects that were “on our state revolving loan fund list ready to go.” He said ARPA “won’t complete the CSO picture, but it'll get us probably a third of the way there.” Cameron said municipalities stack ARPA with other funding (SRF loans, USDA, bonds) and that many grants have been executed; the remaining balances reflect projects under way that have not yet billed the state.

For the three-acre stormwater program, Cameron described a permanent permit-obtainment assistance component that provides up to $30,000 for engineering and $20,000 for permit fees to eligible non‑large businesses. He said all obligation letters for that beneficiary-payment program have been issued and that engineering work is underway; construction payments are contingent on engineering completion and permit filings.

Healthy Homes funding has included an expanded on-site loan program for low- and moderate-income Vermonters and grants for manufactured housing communities (MHCs). Cameron said the department issued 624 beneficiary awards of $50,000 each for individual drinking water or wastewater systems and that it has supported 81 distinct MHC projects, including needs assessments and construction grants. “We received hundreds of applications from low income Vermonters,” Cameron said, describing demand that exceeded earlier estimates.

Cameron addressed capacity and timing concerns from committee members. He said DEC created limited-service positions to administer ARPA and that most positions were filled; he added that engineering firms and contractors face high demand across multiple federal and state programs (ARPA, IIJA/bipartisan infrastructure law, broadband), but that many ARPA projects were already engineered and are further along in design and construction queues. “These projects … are operating. They’re in the queue. They’re engineered,” Cameron said.

Committee members pressed Cameron on weather and flood impacts to wastewater facilities. He said FEMA and other federal programs are part of recovery work in places such as Hardwick, Ludlow, Johnson and Plainfield, and that elevation or relocation of facilities is being considered in conjunction with FEMA damage determinations. Cameron explained the FEMA distinction between “damaged” and “substantially damaged” facilities (the latter generally defined as over 50% of value destroyed) and noted that elevation is often the practical approach. He also noted recent federal changes to flood-elevation guidance that can affect mitigation decisions.

Cameron emphasized the department’s governance and tracking approach for ARPA funds, including collaboration with the administration, Agency of Commerce and Community Development, emergency management and others. He said the department recommended “curing” higher-risk projects to allow additional construction seasons and to reduce the risk of funds having to be returned. “When agency of administration approached DEC about the curing, we were very careful to look at projects that we viewed as more risky,” he said.

The presentation listed other ARPA-supported activities including bond‑bank loans and a small-system capacity and resiliency program run with the Vermont Bond Bank, pretreatment grants that help businesses reduce high‑strength waste before it reaches municipal plants, PFAS monitoring at all wastewater plants, and targeted projects such as a Rockingham industrial-park erosion fix supported by mixed ARPA, NRCS and private funding.

Committee members asked whether the ARPA obligation and expenditure timeline (federal deadlines through 2026) could be met. Cameron said most grants are executed and he is “as confident as anybody can be” that the dollars will be allocated by the federal encumbrance deadline, but he acknowledged the risk that recipients may not bill or complete projects on schedule and said DEC continues to monitor and support recipients.

Ending: Committee members thanked Cameron for the briefing and asked for follow-up materials; several members suggested a return update in January to review progress and remaining risks. The department provided spreadsheets and said it would share additional documentation on awards, obligations and project status.","Deputy Commissioner Neil Cameron briefed the House Appropriations Committee on how the Department of Environmental Conservation is spending American Rescue Plan Act grants across six major water programs, describing awards, timelines and risks to meeting federal spending deadlines.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Officials explain 'cash fund' pay‑as‑you‑go approach for capital projects to Appropriations panel

Vermont DEC details $hundreds of millions in ARPA-funded water and stormwater projects