Vermont Center for Crime Victim Services asks committee for $102,729 in general-fund support

House Judiciary Committee · February 20, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Jennifer Pullman told the House Judiciary Committee the Vermont Center for Crime Victim Services seeks $102,729 in general-fund support for administration, a request the center says is separate from a larger $450,000 network appropriation and would not reduce pass-through grants to service providers.

Jennifer Pullman, representing the Vermont Center for Crime Victim Services, told the House Judiciary Committee the center is asking for $102,729 in general-fund support to cover administrative costs and grant management.

"Weare a state agency that's doing mandated work for free, and we cannot continue to do that," Pullman said, explaining the center's general-fund request is distinct from a network request the committee has also considered. Pullman said the center does not take administrative fees from general-fund dollars that go directly to community providers.

Members pressed for clarity on how last year's $450,000 appropriation was allocated. Pullman said the center recommended holding the full $450,000 in the special fund to rebuild reserves because special funds are declining; instead, a portion was dispersed to the network and this increased the fund's ongoing obligations. She described the centeras recommending a more conservative approach to avoid increased long-term obligations on a shrinking revenue base.

Committee members and Pullman acknowledged overlapping asks in which the network's request appears to include an administrative component intended for the center; Pullman said the center's preference is a separate general-fund line for its administrative role while the network request addresses program funding and member disbursements.

Pullman also explained the center's broader fiduciary role over special and federal funds, the constraints created by declines in those revenue streams, and why the center recommended reserving funds rather than increasing obligations in the special fund.

The committee asked staff to clarify materials and correct the documents showing the separations of the requests; no appropriation was adopted in this session. The panel scheduled follow-up work to reconcile the center and network budget requests.