Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Privatization Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate advances privatization‑contracts bill after debate on scope and workload
Summary
Senators debated S96, a bill that would tighten the definition and oversight of privatization contracts, including raising required projected savings from 10% to 20% and new reporting duties; the Appropriations Committee offered a substitute and the Senate ordered third reading to allow further study.
The Vermont Senate on the floor discussed S96, a measure to tighten oversight of privatization contracts and to require higher demonstrated savings and wage and benefit parity where privatization occurs.
On second reading the reporter from Government Operations (the senator from Chittenden Central) said the bill is “both a labor bill and an accountability bill,” arguing that a loophole currently allows private contractors to perform work similar to state employees without triggering the privatization‑contracts statute. The reporter described key statutory changes: redefining privatization contract language in Title 3 (3 VSA §341–343), striking vague "spirit of the classification plan" language so the attorney general’s certification is tied to the classification plan intent, requiring agencies to prepare a written statement during the 35‑day consideration period that documents services, projected cost savings, wages and benefits, and directing the auditor to review such contracts annually. The measure would raise the required projected savings threshold from 10% to 20%.
The Appropriations Committee offered a substitute and urged caution. The Appropriations reporter (senator from Caledonia) said the amendment would sweep in grants as well as contracts and cited an estimate of roughly 13,000 active grants that would need review, which presents a substantial workload and unanswered fiscal questions. The reporter emphasized the potential impact on community‑based organizations and small businesses that receive state grants and said more analysis was needed before implementing broad new requirements.
Floor colleagues pressed on clarity and scope. Senators asked about whether pension costs are included in comparisons, how prevailing wage and benefits calculations would be gathered, and whether the state could carry out the proposed review process. The Senate amended the Government Operations report as offered by Appropriations and then ordered the bill to third reading to allow further study and technical refinement.
No final passage vote on S96 occurred on the floor during this session.
