Senate panel reviews proposal to extend adverse‑weather emergency housing through June 30; $1.8M in BAA proposed

The Senate Committee on Health & Welfare heard Feb. 13 testimony on a House Budget Adjustment Act provision that would extend Vermonts adverse‑weather emergency housing period through June 30 and remove the post‑April room cap, enabling continued use of motels when no shelter spaces exist.

Lorraine Grama, deputy commissioner of the Economic Services Division at the Department for Children and Families (DCF), explained that extending the cold‑weather period would pause accrual toward the 80‑day motel limit used this fiscal year and likely allow households currently in motels to remain housed through June 30 if shelter space is unavailable. Committee counsel and fiscal staff said the proposal in the Budget Adjustment Act is estimated to cost about $1.8 million for the remainder of the current fiscal year, with a potential fiscal 2026 impact of roughly $600,000 to $1.9 million depending on usage.

Grama told the committee the proposal would likely keep many current motel placements in place but would not guarantee access for all. "What this also means is that 700 households who have not been able to access the GA program right now, we continue more than likely to not have access to a hotel or motel room," she said, adding that extending the cold‑weather period could produce a later surge in eligible days next year.

Kayelyn Glenn of the legislative counsels office explained how the current emergency housing approach is negotiated annually as part of the budget, and that the House proposal removes a previously enacted cap of 1,100 rooms for specified periods and extends the cold‑weather hold so that nights during the extended period do not count toward the 80‑day motel maximum.

Brenda Siegel, executive director of End Homelessness Vermont, described harms when people were unsheltered under stricter limits last year, including deaths and assaults. "We had 7 clients die in a single week, 4 of them in this district," Siegel said, and she urged caution about shifting costs to nonprofit providers and communities.

Committee members asked about shelter availability, seasonal closures, staffing challenges and reasonable‑accommodation authority for individuals with disabilities. Testimony noted that shelters remain the first placement if space is available in a households AHS district and that the existing rules include a de facto variance and ADA‑related accommodations (cited as rule 26 52 01) to address needs for people who cannot safely use congregate shelters.

No formal committee vote was taken. Committee leaders said they expect to request a decision from members on whether to support the $1.8 million appropriation in the Budget Adjustment Act at a future meeting and to continue oversight as the House human services committee develops longer‑term general‑assistance language.