Lawmakers Hear Plan for at Least 600 Supportive Housing Units for People with Developmental Disabilities

Susan Aronoff, senior planner and policy analyst for the state Developmental Disabilities Council, told a legislative committee Wednesday that section 6 of S.1 would direct a work group to produce an "actionable plan" for at least 600 additional units of service‑supported housing for people served through the developmental disability services waiver.

The plan, Aronoff said, builds on Act 186 and pilot planning grants the Legislature funded earlier; the council’s housing report assessed a need of 604 units and the bill language aims to move from one‑off projects toward a statewide, actionable strategy. "We're not gonna get there with these one‑offs and one at a time. We need a plan," Aronoff said.

Why it matters: committee members pressed on where units would be located and who would shape the plan. Aronoff warned that the geographic distribution of need is not readily available in a single public dataset and said the work group may need data from the Department of Disabilities, Aging and Independent Living (DAIL) and from Vermont Care Partners to match units to need across the state. She said the bill’s drafters set an aggressive timetable so the plan would be ready for consideration next session.

Most important facts: Aronoff described three linked issues driving the draft language. First, Act 186 established pilot planning grants and produced a housing needs report that estimated about 604 units targeted to people receiving developmental disability waiver services. Second, the bill calls for a small, functional work group composed mainly of state actors plus selected stakeholders — Aronoff named Green Mountain Self Advocates and the Developmental Disabilities Council among members — intended to draft an actionable plan by the committee’s deadline. Third, she warned of a concurrent federal funding risk: a leaked memo affecting programs overseen by the Administration for Community Living could change how federal disability funding is distributed nationally and possibly constrain programs tied to diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility priorities.

Committee members asked about representation and whether people with lived experience would have sufficient voice on the work group. Aronoff said the group was intentionally kept small for functionality but includes Green Mountain Self Advocates and that the Developmental Disabilities Council’s board is statutorily required to be at least 60 percent people with disabilities and family members. She offered that the committee could consider adding additional appointed members if lawmakers felt the group was missing voices.

Aronoff and members also discussed implementation obstacles that have arisen in earlier pilot projects. She described attempts by families in Middlebury to secure units through larger developments that ran into financing rules and lease restrictions; and she said Vermont Housing & Conservation Board (VHCB) officials told the committee that two pilot projects funded under Act 186 were unusually costly because of rules intended to limit larger institutional group homes (the transcript referenced a "two‑person rule" and licensing requirements for three or more residents).

Aronoff recommended the work group specifically identify and propose fixes for financing and programmatic obstacles — including master lease constraints and funding allocation practices — so developers and service providers can use mainstream housing projects to meet service‑supported housing needs. She said other states have used governors' funds and bonds as part of a financing mix.

The committee signaled general support for the section and did not propose amendments during the hearing. Members additionally asked staff to ensure draft language clarifies whether the plan should include preferences or analysis by urban versus rural settings and how the work group should incorporate people with lived experience and universal design standards.

Details and numbers referenced during testimony: the housing report assessed 604 units of need; the bill calls for at least 600 additional units; legislators earlier placed $2,800,000 in the budget to advance one of the pilot projects; the Developmental Disabilities Council operates with federal funding and receives in‑kind state support rather than regular state operating dollars.

The committee did not take a vote on the section; testimony was recorded and staff will return the section for further drafting. Aronoff closed by urging lawmakers to monitor federal funding signals that could affect state partners and advocates.