Senate panel debates requiring school cardiac emergency response plans and AEDs

The Senate Education Committee heard several hours of testimony May 7 on proposed language that would require schools to adopt cardiac emergency response plans and athletic emergency action plans and whether that requirement should be part of the state'mandated emergency operations plans (EOPs).

Agency of Education staff told the committee the state already requires comprehensive emergency operations plans under Act 29 of 2023 and a living statewide template that school districts and independent schools must follow. An Agency representative said, "School emergency operation plans reflect a number of life saving emergency protocols, which include but are not limited to cardiac and related events." The agency urged embedding any cardiac-specific language into the existing EOP template rather than creating a separate, potentially duplicative statutory requirement.

That position met pushback from advocates and some committee members who said a statutory requirement is necessary to ensure consistent planning, AED placement and routine training. Tina Zuk, described in the hearing as a government relations director for an association submitting testimony, told the committee the group's outreach found widespread support for a statutory requirement: "We don't want any life to fall through the cracks." Zuk cited a survey the group conducted that found only about 87 responding schools had cardiac emergency response plans, even though state Department of Health registration data showed roughly 215 schools had reported owning AEDs.

Agency staff described their concerns about unintended consequences and cost. The representative told the committee that Act 29 "does not currently include any provisions around the requirement for AEDs in schools" and noted that the proposed miscellaneous-education bill (H.480) did not include funding to buy or maintain AEDs. The agency estimated a device price range of about $600 to $2,500 per unit and warned that AEDs have finite service life and pad-replacement needs that would require ongoing budgeting.

Members of the committee and witnesses discussed practical issues beyond device purchase, including placement, locked access after hours, training time and cost, maintenance and who would be responsible for assurances. Jay Nichols, identified in the record as an executive director in the hospital/principals community, said: "I think we should have AEDs in our building. I think we should have people trained on them, but they are gonna cost money." Principals and the Vermont School Safety Center staff told senators they favor a single consolidated emergency plan with annexes for specific hazards so schools avoid duplicate documents and administrative burden.

Committee members discussed timing and funding. Several senators suggested delaying the effective date of any new cardiac plan requirement by one year to allow schools time to apply for grants and implement plans; Agency staff agreed that a July 1, 2025 implementation date would be too soon and recommended additional time. The committee also discussed possible appropriation options and whether the executive or legislative branch should identify funding in the next fiscal cycle; members mentioned available grant sources including safety grants from the Vermont School Boards Insurance Trust and national programs, but witnesses said grant availability is not guaranteed and does not cover ongoing maintenance costs.

No final vote was taken on the statutory language. Committee members asked legislative counsel to draft options: (1) add cardiac and athletic annex requirements into the existing EOP statutory section and (2) move the implementation date for that section to the 2026'27 school year to allow time for schools to obtain equipment, training and to register AEDs with the Department of Health.

The discussion underscored two open questions for follow-up: who will have capacity to perform annual technical review and assurance of school cardiac annexes (Agency and Vermont Emergency Management staff said current capacity is limited), and how the state would finance device purchases and recurring maintenance if a statutory requirement is adopted.

The committee scheduled further work and indicated the cardiac language would be revised to integrate with the Act 29 emergency operations plan requirements and to allow more implementation time before becoming effective.