Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the District 8 Garage Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Transportation probes AOT funding and authority to advance District 8 garage office
Summary
Committee members pressed the Agency of Transportation on its decision to advance construction of the District 8 garage office using maintenance and carry‑forward funds, and asked legal counsel whether the agency had statutory authority to reallocate those appropriations without legislative approval.
Get email alerts on the District 8 Garage Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At a Wednesday meeting of the Senate Transportation committee, Damian Leonard, legislative counsel for the Vermont General Assembly, told members that the Agency of Transportation (AOT) moved ahead with construction of the office portion of the District 8 garage after receiving a lower contractor quote and that the legal authority for doing so without prior legislative approval was unclear.
Leonard said the legislature has the authority to appropriate state funds and that the statute most relevant to the transportation program — 19 V.S.A. § 10(h) — allows the transportation secretary to advance other projects in the adopted transportation program when capital projects are delayed because of permitting, right‑of‑way, construction, local concerns or funding shortfalls, or to address emergencies. He said those statutory categories do not clearly authorize advancing a later phase of a scheduled project solely to capture contractor cost savings. "My legal opinion is yes. I don't see anything in the statute that authorizes that based on the facts that I have," Leonard said, referring to whether the agency needed legislative approval to reallocate funds now rather than in a later Budget Adjustment Act.
Jana Morris, AOT director of administration and finance, told the committee the agency funded the project from a mix of sources that included carry‑forward balances from district maintenance operations, funds appropriated in the transportation buildings line, and a one‑time $3,500,000 general fund appropriation from the prior year's bill. Morris said AOT signed a change order in October reducing the office building cost to about $1,897,000 from an earlier projection of $2.5 million. She described the agency's rationale as a combination of cost savings and continuity for the contractor and their crew: the contractor told AOT advancing phase 2 immediately would avoid remobilization costs and potential layoffs for more than 25 local workers through the winter.
Committee members pressed for documentary clarity. The chair asked AOT to provide a one‑page summary of the funding sources and the agency's accounting for the project; several senators said they wanted the committee to consider whether a Budget Adjustment Act (BAA) change was appropriate to "bless" the transfer or reallocation after the fact. Leonard noted that statutory mechanisms such as the emergency board or the joint fiscal committee can make narrowly constrained transfers but that broad delegation of appropriation authority to the executive is legally risky.
Committee members also sought precise figures. Morris said the approved transportation program authorized $2,000,000 for construction of a 10‑bay District 8 garage and an additional $825,000 in the transportation buildings account for statewide maintenance projects such as heating replacement. The transportation program later projected another $2.5 million for the District 8 office in FY26 before the contractor's lower October quote. Morris said the total District 8 project package is $12,615,954, funded from a mix of the appropriations and carry‑forward balances.
Senators and staff raised process questions: whether the agency regarded the office work as a maintenance‑category expense that could be covered from the district maintenance operations appropriation, or whether advancing the office required an appropriation reallocation that should have been approved by the legislature. AOT maintained it had planned to fund the building from both the transportation buildings appropriation and district maintenance operations, supplemented by the prior year's one‑time general fund appropriation and carry forward from earlier years.
The committee did not make a formal legislative decision during the meeting. Members asked for a written summary and indicated they may pursue a BAA adjustment or further oversight in a subsequent meeting. AOT said construction is underway and staff occupancy is anticipated in late spring 2025 (the agency cited an expected May 2025 occupancy).

