Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Restraint And Seclusion Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves bill tightening restraint and seclusion rules for youth, delays some out-of-state requirements
Summary
A legislative committee approved version 8.1 of House Bill 657, which tightens documentation, reporting and limits on restraint and seclusion for children, requires contractors to adhere to the rules when contracting with out-of-state residential programs, and delays some out-of-state-specific provisions to allow contracting lead time.
Get email alerts on the Restraint And Seclusion Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The committee approved version 8.1 of House Bill 657 on a roll call vote after finalizing edits to definitions, reporting requirements and effective dates.
Katie, a staff member presenting the draft, told the committee that the bill now states that "the department shall not impose an asset limit for the purpose of initial and continuing eligibility for the Reach Up program." She walked members through multiple wording fixes, including changes to the transportation-of-children section and replacing the term "minors" with "children" in the annual report language.
The draft tightens the definition of seclusion and limits how long a child may be held: committee members agreed that a child "shall not be held for more than one hour in restraint or seclusion," and they resolved phrasing inconsistencies so that provisions apply when either restraint or seclusion is used. The bill also adds documentation and reporting requirements: programs or staff using seclusion or restraint must document each use and provide copies of any audio or visual recordings to the commissioner through secure transmission, with blurring to protect the identity of any other children "upon request" rather than automatically.
The committee added a requirement that when contracting with out-of-state residential programs the department "shall include a requirement that the program adhere to the provisions of this section." Members agreed, however, to delay some of the new, operational pieces that require training and contractual negotiation so providers and the department have lead time: one committee member proposed a Jan. 1, 2027 start date for provisions that require training and rewrites, and the committee settled on a two-year lead time for the out-of-state-specific elements to enable contract renegotiation.
The draft retains a narrowly defined allowance for momentary mechanical restraint in secure residential programs: the bill permits a momentary initial hold using mechanical restraints solely to enable relocation to a less-restrictive intervention if needed to prevent serious and immediate harm, and it bars garments or devices that restrict movement or mobility.
The bill creates or amends work-group provisions, including appointing a young adult with lived experience to the work group (appointed by the Office of the Child, Youth and Family Advocate) and authorizing modest payments and reimbursement for nonprofessional work-group members for up to five meetings, to be paid from monies appropriated to the advocate's office. Matthew, identified in the transcript as a director in the advocate's office, asked staff to confirm that the stipend language applied only to nonprofessional members and that the payments would be covered by the advocate's appropriations; staff confirmed that intent.
A committee member spoke in strong support, saying the changes "strike me we're preventing trauma and harm to youth in our state," and thanked colleagues and staff for the work. Another member raised concerns about parental rights and fiscal impact, saying they could not support the bill without knowing the taxpayer cost and warning of potential housing and affordability consequences if costs rise.
The chair called for a motion to approve version 8.1 of House Bill 657; the motion was made and seconded. The clerk called the roll: Representative Bishop (yes); Representative Pole (yes); Representative Donahghue (yes); Representative East (yes); Representative Garfano (yes); Representative Magcguire (yes); Representative McIll (yes); Representative Nielsen (yes); Representative Noise (yes); Representative Steady (no); Representative Wood (yes). The motion passed.
Members thanked staff for the drafting work, assigned a main reporter and section reporters to prepare the bill for the next step, and recessed until 2:30 p.m. to review comments from the Agency of Human Services and the Vermont network.
Next steps: the committee will finalize effective dates and cross-check numbering and will take Agency of Human Services comments when it reconvenes.

