Vermont Criminal Justice Council seeks $300K to finish curriculum overhaul, flags training, canine and space costs

Christopher Burkell, executive director of the Vermont Criminal Justice Council, told the House Appropriations Committee on Feb. 25 that the council’s FY2026 budget is largely personnel and space costs and that the council is asking the Legislature to consider a $300,000 addition to complete a multi‑year curriculum overhaul.

Burkell said the Legislature previously appropriated $1.2 million for a three‑year curriculum rewrite; the council’s contractors estimate the full cost at $1.5 million, leaving a $300,000 gap. “We have been in the hole while we’re not at the end of that yet,” Burkell said. He said curriculum work will require ongoing maintenance and likely more staff time than a single position can provide.

The nut of the council’s budget, Burkell told the committee, is that 45% of its costs are salaries and benefits, 23% is a fee‑for‑space charge and the remainder is split among targeted funds and required training costs. Burkell said the council’s board shows a $386,000 (about 10%) increase in the FY2026 request, of which roughly 3.92% is for salaries and benefits and $47,000 represents an increase in the impaired‑driving education fund transfer.

Burkell and the council’s staff described three operational challenges the committee pressed on: finishing the curriculum overhaul; addressing recruit injuries and wellness; and maintaining canine training statewide.

On recruit safety, the council described contracting with O2X, a human‑performance company, to provide an on‑site athletic‑trainer‑style role for recent classes after the academy began receiving recruits who presented with rhabdomyolysis, a serious muscle breakdown that can lead to kidney failure. Burkell said the contract provides onsite care and programs addressing sleep and nutrition and has reduced injuries. The council did not provide a full multi‑year budget for continuing that service after the current class.

For the canine program, the council said the long‑serving head trainer retired and advertising for a combined training‑coordinator/head‑trainer position produced candidates who described the work as two separate jobs. The council said it is contracting for this year’s training (patrol, tracking/trailing and detection as needed). Burkell said a single full‑time head trainer position was estimated at about $114,000 annually; contracting to run a single class late last year cost about $75,000 and a full year for the three certification types is estimated at about $150,000.

Burkell also described facility and space constraints at the academy, a historic building that limits electrical upgrades and thus the ability to add air conditioning for larger summer recruit groups. Committee members asked about a more than 20% increase in the council’s fee‑for‑space line; the council’s finance staff said the line totals $1,119,574 this year compared with roughly $900,000 the prior year, and attributed the rise to fee allocations and a newly included West Cottage building in the billing (about 7,000 square feet) that the fire academy primarily uses but which the criminal justice council can occasionally access.

Committee members asked about class size and throughput. The council said full‑time basic (Level 3) runs two 17‑week classes per year, typically capped at about 38–40 recruits; current class enrollment is 34. The most recent large class enrolled 55 recruits and produced 42 graduates (76% graduation rate). Burkell and staff said reasons for non‑completion vary from medical or training readiness to agency‑level decisions.

Burkell emphasized that many instructors are volunteers from law enforcement statewide and that remediation for recruits who struggle is time consuming for a small paid staff. He said adding staff or contracting services could reduce injuries and long‑term workers’‑comp claims but would increase recurring costs.

The council requested the committee consider (1) closing the $300,000 curriculum funding gap; (2) funding or a plan for ongoing recruit wellness/training‑support services; and (3) a sustainable approach to canine training, either via a funded position or longer‑term contracting. The council did not present a formal motion or vote; committee members followed with technical questions and thanked the panel for the briefing.