Long‑term recovery groups ask Legislature to fund LTRGs, create data system and codify handoff in H.397

Montpelier — Leaders of Vermont long‑term recovery groups (LTRGs) urged the Senate Committee on Government Operations on April 23 to amend H.397 so the state fills persistent gaps in individual and household recovery after floods.

Paige Hartsell, director of Curve Kingdom United Resilience and Recovery Effort, and Sarah Anshaw (coordinator for the Long Term Recovery Group in Lamoille County) told the committee that LTRGs are the primary on‑the‑ground organizers for household recovery and that the state should fund and formally integrate them into the recovery framework. “Without LTRGs, over 6,000 of our neighbors and fellow Vermonters would still be stuck in their recovery journeys,” Hartsell said.

The witnesses made five principal recommendations for H.397: require a statewide needs assessment of the individual/household recovery system to inform a formal individual assistance recovery policy; provide sustained operational funding and small annual grants for LTRGs (witnesses suggested $25,000 per LTRG as an example); adopt a single, state‑chosen data system and a policy for how post‑disaster damage and case data are used; create a cabinet‑level position or clearer state leadership for recovery information and messaging; and incorporate river‑corridor and floodplain strategies into buyout program design.

Hartsell said that LTRGs already manage construction and repairs in heavily affected areas and that in the Northeast Kingdom roughly 100 houses still need varying degrees of rebuilding. She and Anshaw told senators that the Vermont Community Foundation’s philanthropic support has been critical but is not a stable, long‑term funding source; they said the state should assume primary fiscal responsibility for mitigation, response and recovery.

Senators and committee members pressed witnesses on the balance between specifying LTRG roles in statute and keeping flexibility for local approaches. Hartsell and Anshaw argued that more specificity about who is responsible for individual household support would speed and stabilize recovery work; they recommended embedding LTRG roles in emergency management plans and creating a small grants program to sustain staffing and volunteer coordination in non‑disaster (“blue sky”) times.

The state’s chief recovery officer (testifying later) said the administration views LTRGs as critical but cautioned against codifying positions that may not be permanent; the officer said the administration will update an individual/family needs plan using recent FEMA grant funding and state staff hires. The chief recovery officer also described a state‑level “bridge case management” team that provided interim support where LTRGs had not yet formed and said aligning LTRG boundaries with regional planning commission (RPC) boundaries could improve coordination.

Other committee discussion touched on funding and pilot‑fund allocations in the bill. Samantha Sheehan of the Vermont League of Cities and Towns cited the most recent special fund report and said the pilot fund had about $10.3 million at the end of FY24 and that projections could bring the fund toward $14 million in the current fiscal year; senators discussed whether a change in the pilot distribution percentage (from 70% to 75% in the current draft) should be adjusted and whether some pilot funds should support municipal technical assistance.

What happens next: witnesses agreed to submit written recommendations to the committee; senators asked administration witnesses and LTRG representatives to provide draft statutory language that would (1) define LTRG roles and handoff protocols between response and recovery and (2) outline possible small‑grant funding mechanisms for sustainability.