Health committee adopts S.63 amendment that removes 'contested case' label for hospital budget enforcement; Rutland Regional urges keeping VAPA protections

The House Health Care Committee voted to approve S.63 as amended, adopting language that says the Green Mountain Care Board's review, establishment and enforcement of hospital budgets "shall not be construed to be a contested case" under the Vermont Administrative Procedures Act (VAPA), and that appeals of final board actions would proceed under the board's existing appeal statute.

The amendment drew sharp testimony from hospital counsel who said removing contested‑case procedures would undermine due process and risk more litigation. Supporters of the amendment and board counsel said the change clarifies appellate pathways and reflects staffing and operational limits at the board.

Mitchell Baruti, Vice President and Chief Legal Officer at Rutland Regional Medical Center, told the committee he and his hospital had participated in the board's process but argued participation alone does not supply "procedural due process that also results in fairness under the law." He said: "When a state agency takes retrospective…