Committee questions $15M proposal from Higher Education Trust Fund to finish UVM project

Deputy Commissioner Hardy Merrill explained to the House Appropriations Committee that the University of Vermont's multipurpose center — a project started in 2020 with about $76 million already spent and roughly $40 million in committed private donations — needs an estimated $100 million to finish. The administration is proposing a one-time $15,000,000 appropriation from the Higher Education Trust Fund to help leverage further private donations and finish construction.

Merrill described the mechanics and the rationale: the fund recently received an unexpected estate-tax inflow of about $26,000,000 in one year, and his napkin math suggested that directing $15,000,000 to the UVM-related purpose could still leave the trust beneficiaries with larger disbursements than in historical years. "It's a sports related facility and also... provide sort of health, wellness and recreational facilities for the student body as well," Merrill said, describing the multipurpose center's uses.

Committee members pressed legal and policy questions. Members noted statutory constraints — typically only investment income and up to 5% of allowable income can be used for distributions and 2% may be used to add to an existing endowment — and observed that a $15,000,000 appropriation would require 'notwithstanding' language to authorize an otherwise disallowed use of corpus. Several members questioned whether using trust corpus for a facility that has a strong athletics component is consistent with donor intent and the fund's statutory purpose, and whether other uses (student aid, tuition relief, or directing surpluses to the new school construction aid fund) would better serve the fund's original goals.

Members asked whether the administration had consulted UVM, Vermont State University or VSAC; Merrill said DFM had not led those conversations and offered to follow up and request UVM and other stakeholders to make the case to the committee. Several members said they would be skeptical of using corpus for a capital project that primarily benefits one institution and suggested alternatives such as loans, tighter conditions, or requiring UVM to return and present a detailed sales case.

The committee concluded this topic by asking for additional stakeholder outreach and said House Education and other committees may need to weigh in on policy implications.