Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Clean Water topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Agency seeks $875,000 clean‑water match pot and final $25,000 stormwater incentive payment
Summary
The Agency of Administration proposed a secretary's office clean‑water appropriation that includes a final $25,000 municipal stormwater utility incentive payment to St. Albans Town and an $850,000 increase (for $875,000 total) to seed matching funds for competitive federal clean‑water grants.
Agency of Administration staff told the House Appropriations Committee on Feb. 11 that the secretary’s office FY2026 request includes two clean‑water items: a statutory municipal stormwater utility incentive payment and an $850,000 increase to create a state match pot for competitive federal clean‑water grants.
Nick Bramer, chief operations officer, said a small portion of the Clean Water Board recommendation historically lands in the secretary’s office because the board’s recommendations and the codified process are designed to be developed with public input and may cross agency lines. Bramer described a longstanding statutory incentive that provides payments to municipalities that establish municipal stormwater utilities; the budget includes $25,000 for the final payment to St. Albans Town.
Bramer said the FY2026 request also adds $850,000 — bringing the secretary’s office clean‑water pot to $875,000 — to be used as matching funds for federal grant opportunities. He told the committee that recent federal funding opportunities (for example under IIJA and the Inflation Reduction Act) have sometimes arrived outside the regular state budget calendar; a small, flexible state match would allow Vermont to apply quickly for competitive grants when they are announced.
Why it matters: matching funds can make state applications more competitive for federal infrastructure grants that support wastewater, stormwater, and drinking‑water projects. The Clean Water Board process also involves public meetings and cross‑agency coordination, meaning these dollars are intended to leverage other programs and federal funding.
Bramer emphasized that most of the Clean Water Board’s allocation work is separate from the secretary’s office and that this request represents a small, targeted pool for competitive matching rather than a large programmatic shift. The committee did not take formal action; Bramer noted the Clean Water Board historically presents recommendations to the governor and that the legislature has not typically amended the board’s proposed clean water budget in recent years.
