Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pretrial Supervision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Legislators press for clarity on pretrial supervision funding and encumbrances
Summary
Members asked why line‑item spreadsheets showing what is encumbered versus unspent for pretrial supervision were not available to the committee; testimony noted $660,000 was added previously, giving $1.3 million over two years, and the administration proposed $200,000 more but staffing deployment details were requested before further action.
Montpelier — During the Feb. 20 House Corrections & Institutions Committee meeting, legislators pressed staff and agency liaisons for clearer accounting of pretrial supervision funds and how new staffing would be deployed across the state.
Committee members said they knew "there was a cost" when pretrial supervision was first discussed and that previous action put $660,000 in the base budget; combined with the prior year’s allocation, members said the program currently has about $1,300,000 over two years. One member asked whether the administration’s proposed additional $200,000 would be added to the base or be a one‑time supplement.
"That is the detail we're missing," a committee staffer said, urging that the committee receive a spreadsheet showing what has been spent, encumbered or remains available. Staff and liaisons told members the detailed reports exist but were not in the committee packet and pledged to provide them; the committee also requested clarifying information from the Department of Corrections on how many staff are envisioned, where they would be positioned statewide and whether those staff would serve accountability dockets or general pretrial supervision.
Committee leadership said they will follow up with appropriations liaisons and DOC staff and scheduled additional briefings early next week and during the post‑town‑meeting period so members can see the budget flows before final decisions.
The committee did not take a formal vote on the pretrial supervision funding during the session; members emphasized they needed the additional accounting before making a recommendation.
