House Human Services Committee hears AHS concerns about legalese ban and secretary review of fair hearings

The House Human Services Committee heard from Ashley Johns, Agency of Human Services staff attorney, about proposed changes to Human Services Board fair-hearing procedures and limits on the secretary’s ability to reverse board decisions.

Johns told the committee that a straightforward prohibition on legalese in written hearing decisions could cause legal problems. “Some of the hearings decisions from the Human Services Board go directly to Superior Court if they're appealed. So there is a level of legal terminology that has to be used in the hearing and written into those decisions to make sure that things like objections from those attorneys representing the agency are noted appropriately,” she said. Johns recommended that any drafting preserve necessary legal formalisms so a court can review the record.

The committee’s discussion focused on when the secretary of the Agency of Human Services may reverse or modify a Human Services Board decision. Johns said the secretary’s review power applies only in four program categories that carry federal funding: temporary assistance for needy families (TANF), child support, Medicaid, and the Vermont Health Benefit Exchange. She said the secretary may reverse or modify a decision only in two specific circumstances: “if it either misinterprets or misapplies state or federal policy or rule, or the finding of facts lack any support in the record.” Johns linked those limits to the need to protect federal funding streams.

Committee members pressed for more detail about how cases reach the secretary’s office and how often reversals occur. Johns said departments flag decisions for possible secretary review; legal counsel in the secretary’s office and agency attorneys then consider whether the two statutory criteria are met. She said the statute requires a quick turnaround: the agency has 15 days to review flagged decisions and issue any action. Johns also told the committee that reversals are rare, saying there have been only two reversals in the recent past.

Members raised the idea of a stronger feedback loop so departments can learn from recurring hearing outcomes. A committee member suggested using the state’s chief performance officer resources to map processes, identify recurring issues and training needs, and reduce repetitive appeals. Johns said she would take questions and the committee’s suggestions back to agency leadership and return with written testimony and possible drafting language at the next meeting.

No formal votes or motions were taken on the bill during the session. Committee staff indicated markup is planned next week and asked witnesses to be prepared to return midweek.