Vermont attorney general asks Appropriations Committee for $85,000 to make home‑improvement specialist permanent, flags personnel costs and litigation work

Charity Clark, Vermont’s attorney general, told the House Appropriations Committee on Feb. 3 that she supports the governor’s recommended budget but is asking the committee to add $85,000 to convert a home‑improvement specialist position — created by the 2022 home‑improvement law — from one‑time to permanent funding.

Clark said the Attorney General’s Office is the largest law office in the state and that personnel costs (pay act increases, retirement and health insurance) account for most of this year’s proposed increases. She described the office’s funding mix as general fund, a special consumer‑settlement fund, a tobacco settlement fund, federal revenue (including the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force and the Medicaid fraud unit), and interdepartmental transfers from client agencies.

The home‑improvement specialist is housed in the consumer assistance program (CAP). Clark credited the specialist with mediating cases that she said have returned money to Vermonters; the office’s materials cited recoveries associated with home‑improvement work and showed both a $1,220,000 figure and broader recovery figures elsewhere in the presentation. She characterized the specialist’s role as a cost‑effective way to resolve repair and contractor disputes without resorting to criminal prosecution in many cases.

Clark also asked the committee to convert, without additional funding, an assistant director for diversion position (created by a 2023 restorative justice law) from limited‑service to permanent status so the program can be administered consistently statewide.

On enforcement and litigation, Clark highlighted ongoing multi‑state actions and suits the office has pursued — including cases involving fossil fuel companies, PFAS, opioids, social‑media harms to children, PCB contamination, and pharmacy‑benefit managers. She said the office has pursued litigation that restored funds to the state and that some settlement proceeds are handled by a separate committee that decides spending.

Clark acknowledged several budget‑line, one‑time adjustments in the materials, including a request to transfer consumer recovery funds to the Medicaid fraud unit to meet federal match requirements after a recent settlement strained the unit’s self‑funded model. The office said it will return next year with recommendations on MFRAU funding going forward.

The presentation also flagged a needed replacement of the office’s long‑running case management system (Law Manager) and noted base reductions such as discontinuing an underused case‑mapping tool and modest travel reductions.

The committee did not take a vote during the presentation; members asked for follow‑up on spreadsheets and counts cited in the slides, and Clark’s office agreed to supply additional detail through staff.