Vermont committee reviews H578 changes to civil forfeiture, animal welfare fund
Loading...
Summary
Representative Emily Krasnow and counsel outlined H578 provisions to allow courts to accept security in civil animal‑forfeiture cases, deposit funds in an expanded animal welfare fund, and give the Division of Animal Welfare rulemaking authority to set reimbursement schedules for custodial organizations.
Representative Emily Krasnow introduced H578 to the Government Operations & Military Affairs committee as a measure to strengthen penalties for animal cruelty and reduce the financial burden on humane societies and rescues that care for seized animals. "This proposed bill is important because it addresses both the immediate suffering of animals and the need for lasting change," Krasnow said in opening remarks.
Eric Fitzpatrick of the Office of Budget and Counsel told the panel the bill's forfeiture provisions would require owners who wish to contest a civil forfeiture to post security so custodial organizations are not left covering veterinary and housing costs while a case proceeds. "An animal gets forfeited and there's gonna be a period of time...someone's gonna have to house him and pay for expenses of care," Fitzpatrick said, describing the rationale for the security requirement and the mechanics by which funds would flow.
Under the proposal explained to the committee, posted security would be filed with the court, transmitted to the Division of Animal Welfare, and held in an expanded animal welfare fund. The bill would also add rulemaking authority directing the division's director to adopt rules, including a schedule that accounts for animal type, age and veterinary needs, to guide reimbursements to organizations that incur those costs.
Counsel said the changes would be added to Title 20 and that, where similar provisions appear in separate bills, the Office of Budget and Counsel would reconcile statutory language after passage so provisions remained consistent rather than contradictory. Committee members pressed only minor clarifying questions; Krasnow said the House Judiciary Committee aims to move the broader animal‑cruelty work within about a week but cautioned additional drafts could follow.
The committee conducted a nonbinding straw poll on sections 6 and 7—the rulemaking and fund provisions—and indicated a 'thumbs favorable' response. No formal motion or recorded vote was taken in this session.
Next steps: committee staff and counsel said they will monitor related changes in other bills and the Judiciary Committee's progress. If enacted, the statutory changes would require the Division of Animal Welfare to adopt rules governing the receipt, management and reimbursement of security posted in animal forfeiture proceedings.
