Committee asks for studies on Act 250 permitting gaps, asset use and to examine transit service cuts and medical-transport risk
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Members asked staff to develop more detail for studies on the permitting gap from Act 250, VITRANS's role, and fair compensation for state land assets; they also requested information from GMT and from health agencies about possible Medicaid coverage losses and the effect on medical transport.
Senators asked for follow-up studies and agency testimony to fill knowledge gaps identified in opening remarks.
Senator A (unnamed) flagged a transportation-support study tied to changes in Act 250 and said VITRANS currently lacks a formal role when towns permit new development, producing a gap that the study is intended to address. "That gap is in, again, not just funding, but it's also in how the system works," she said.
Senator A also urged more detail on state land assets used by businesses and said the state should require fair payment when assets are used commercially.
Separately, Senator D (unnamed) reported constituent complaints about GMT cuts to an O&D program affecting Colchester riders and suggested GMT or the agency present to the committee.
The chair warned about a parallel health risk: "By this time next year, 45,000 people could be losing their Medicaid coverage," he said, and urged coordination with Health & Welfare to understand impacts on rural medical transport.
Next steps: committee staff will request detailed studies on Act 250 permitting roles, asset-management scenarios, invite GMT to explain service cuts, and seek Health & Welfare input on medical-transport demand tied to Medicaid coverage changes.