Advocates urge House committee to keep appeal rights and strengthen rental bridge in H.938

Vermont advocates and housing providers urged the House Health & Welfare committee on April 15 to preserve administrative appeal protections and expand a proposed state-funded bridge rental assistance program in H.938, a bill to create a coordinated statewide homelessness response.

Diana Hartog, a poverty law fellow with Vermont Legal Aid, said the bill as written would be a step forward but warned that removing section 22.15 — the statute’s appeals provision — would strip due-process protections. "If the household is terminated improperly, they end up back on the street before the appeal is resolved," Hartog said, urging the committee to keep language that allows households to remain housed while appeals proceed.

Elizabeth Bateman, managing director of housing program administration at the state housing agency, laid out how a state Bridge rental-assistance program would operate: participants would pay roughly 30–40% of income and the program would cover the remainder up to a payment standard, using existing voucher-administration systems and inspections. Bateman said the agency envisions no strict time limit because federal funding for vouchers is uncertain and landlords need assurance. "With a $3,000,000 investment, we can provide [bridge] rental assistance for up to 200 households," she said, adding that actual costs would vary by target population.

Policy advocates and disability-rights groups pressed the committee to tighten civil-rights safeguards. "The language, as written, appears to force or coerce individuals into treatment if we don't think it was the intent of the bill," Alex Brimley, a policy advocate with the ACLU of Vermont, told the committee. He warned that a tiered shelter system could create segregated settings for people with disabilities and risk violating the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Housing and provider groups generally supported the bill’s goal of creating a statewide continuum but urged simplification and more funding. Chad Simmons, executive director of the Housing and Homelessness Alliance, said the bill identifies key functions — prevention and diversion, case management and navigation, and a diversity of shelter types — but that complexity, tight caps and short timelines could hamper implementation. "We do not have enough housing at the level people can afford," Simmons said, calling for clearer definitions, longer rulemaking timelines and higher funding caps tied to need.

Several presenters urged the committee to preserve a clear administrative appeals path so disputes with community providers can be resolved at the agency or human services board level rather than through costly civil litigation. Advocates noted practical barriers to quick disability verification and said the statute should explicitly protect disability-related accommodations and access to integrated, non-segregated services.

Committee members asked detailed questions about a proposed 24-month limit on Bridge assistance and whether it would create perverse incentives or force people back onto long federal waiting lists. Bateman and other presenters recommended multiyear funding and strong case management to improve transitions to permanent federal vouchers and to reassure landlords.

The committee did not take votes on H.938 during the session and deferred some questions for follow-up, asking presenters for written materials and cost estimates. Members said they planned additional hearings and technical revisions before marking up the bill.