Committee reviews bill to fund Vermonters Feeding Vermonters through Agency of Agriculture

A legislative committee heard testimony on a bill to establish a Vermonters Feeding Vermonters grant program at the Vermont Agency of Agriculture that would provide ongoing state funding to the Vermont Food Bank’s local‑food purchasing work.

The bill would add a subchapter to Title 6 to create a grant program to "purchase local food directly from Vermont farms," include subgrants for local partners, require annual reporting by the agriculture secretary and, in the bill as drafted, include an appropriation to start the program with an effective date of July 1, 2025. No formal committee vote or final action was recorded during the hearing.

Why it matters: Committee members and the food bank said the program channels state dollars to Vermont farms while supplying fresh produce, culturally preferred foods and emergency food boxes to low‑income Vermonters. Legislative counsel warned the bill’s narrowly written statutory definition of "local" — which refers to the existing Title 9 consumer‑protection definition — could raise federal constitutional concerns if the state program is seen to discriminate against out‑of‑state commerce.

Michael Grady, legislative counsel, summarized the bill’s legal and drafting issues and flagged the definition of "local" in Title 9. He told the committee, "It is specific and limited only to Vermont food. So that means it doesn't include any out of state food, which means it discriminates against out of state food." Grady explained there are exceptions (the state as market participant and subsidies limited to in‑state recipients), but said the bill as written blends procurement and distribution in a way that may not fit a simple subsidy or market‑participant defense.

John Sales, chief executive officer of the Vermont Food Bank, described how the bank currently runs the Vermonters Feeding Vermonters effort and why the grant would be used. Sales said the food bank is the statewide distributor with three distribution centers and a network of roughly 300 partner food shelves, meal sites and other local partners. He said the program has allowed the bank to buy from hundreds of Vermont farms and to distribute fresh produce, and that purchased food is an increasing share of the bank’s supply.

Michelle Wallace, director of community health programs at the Vermont Food Bank, said the program has three arms: large wholesale pallet purchases, mini grants to local partners that buy from small farms or farm stands, and culturally responsive CSA shares and boxes. Wallace said the program has expanded the variety of fresh, locally grown crops reaching food‑insecure Vermonters and provided contract stability to many farms.

Committee members and food bank staff discussed program scale and funding. Grady cited an historical figure in the draft findings — that the food bank’s program had put about $9.5 million into the agricultural economy and purchased multiple million pounds of local food — and noted the bill’s appropriation language. Sales and Wallace described this year’s and recent years’ purchasing levels and the food bank’s broader FY26 request: the bank is seeking a total of $5 million in FY26 for emergency readiness and purchasing/distribution (Sales described $1.75 million for responsive readiness and $3.25 million for purchase and distribution). Wallace said the food bank’s 2025 budget for food purchases is about $2.3 million and warned the program would likely shrink without a state appropriation.

The committee asked specific drafting questions: whether the grantee must be the Vermont Food Bank or could be open to other organizations, how "smaller local farms" are defined in the bill’s subgrant language, and whether the "local" definition should be broadened (for example to regional purchases or to a farm‑viability framing) to avoid constitutional issues. Grady suggested several drafting approaches, including using broader language that emphasizes farm viability or regional purchase options rather than a strict in‑state exclusion.

Food bank staff described operational details: the bank pays market prices and seeks to pay farmers fairly; it buys a range of products (large palletized fresh produce for warehouses and smaller purchases via mini grants for local partners); it pays for transportation when needed; and it runs programs such as the Veggie Van and CSFP/TFAP federal passthroughs. Wallace said the program also supports culturally preferred foods for BIPOC and immigrant communities and helps small partners buy from local farm stands and CSAs.

Legal and policy tradeoffs were emphasized repeatedly: the bill’s current text relies on the Title 9 "local" definition discussed by legislative counsel, which is narrow and could be read to exclude out‑of‑state goods. Grady recommended either allowing the agency or grantee discretion to define "local," explicitly including regional purchases, or reframing the program as a farm‑viability subsidy to reduce dormant Commerce Clause exposure.

The hearing ended with staff and committee members agreeing to revisit drafting and to solicit additional technical input. As Wallace told the committee near the close of testimony, the food bank is proud of the program and ‘‘it’s about getting the resources to the very, very small communities throughout Vermont, and basically getting out of the way so that those relationships can be built, strengthened, and that food can be distributed to people in need, our neighbors right there, close to where the farms are.’’

Next steps: committee members said they would review the bill language, consult with the food bank and legal advisers on definitions and constitutional risk, and may call the food bank back for additional testimony. No committee vote or formal adoption of bill text was recorded during this hearing.