 Welcome back to the Vermont House Appropriations Committee. It is still Monday, January 9th, 2023, little bit after one o'clock we're just had lunch. We're gathering back in the room. We're going to hear right now for a bit from our JFO, our Joint Fiscal Office to walk us through what is the letter of intent that the previous Chair of Appropriations and the Senate Chair of Appropriations in, I think it was June. So yeah, June 30th, this letter is dated that after that said, by the way, could you take a look at this when you come back? And so Sarah is going to walk us through this. Great, thank you. So for the record, Sarah Clark, Joint Fiscal Office. My colleague, Maria Bellovo is here to assist, if needed, if we have questions, so. And so my goal today is to walk everyone through the letter of intent document with an eye towards discussing items that were included in the budget adjustment. Governor recommend language that we received on Friday and that commission regression just briefly walked us through about half of it. So items that were included. And if there are areas where it's not included, make a note of it for all of us so that we can follow up with commission regression and his team. So with that, I think everybody should have a hard copy at your desk. As well as the link, it's actually, it's online. I think Erin will be seeing it on the House Appropriations Committee webpage. In addition, it resides on the Joint Fiscal Office website in the FY23 budget documents. And so one of our orientation items is to do a little walkthrough of our website as well. And so, but it's located in both places. So I think you can flip to the page numbers on the document but on the second page, which should say at the top sections B105 and E105.2, subsection C. And what this indicated in the letter of intent document is that essentially no special fund appropriation from the Technology Modernization Special Fund were included in the FY23 budget. And that's because that was a contingent appropriation, meaning that it wasn't going to be made unless at the close of State Fiscal Year 22 there were general funds available to make that transfer. And so this language is saying essentially that in the FY23 budget adjustment, if those funds are available, an amendment will be needed to establish those appropriations. And so that was included in the language and Commissioner Greschen and his team have discussed that. So great, I had a question from somebody and I just want to make sure that where earlier today that B, I think Representative Brennan had brought it up that the B105.2, is it? I think you were sitting in here. 11. Oh, 11. So 11. Maybe I'm in the wrong place, sorry. 11.01 B on this long sheet and in the explanation sheet it's 11.02, I just wondered if there should be a line. Anyway, I thought it was this one 105 and 105.2. So at some point we'll check that out. Okay, yep. Thank you, Maria. And we're still, you know, we are as an office reviewing all the language and information we received on Friday. And so we, you know, are gonna continue to scrub and make sure everything aligns and is as it should be. But please, as you see things, point them to us. So for the first item, it was addressed in budget adjustment. If there's any further questions at this time about that section. I'm just making a note in BAA already. And it was, it's in BAA and I don't know if you had a chance to take a look at the two. Is it the way, is it in BAA the way that the letter of intent wanted it to be? I wanna reserve the- Exactly. Analyze, I think it does accomplish the goals laid out in this letter of intent, but I think being very thorough to make sure it's exactly what they intended and you know, and that what this committee would support as well. So the next section is sections B-225 and B-225.2 which are appropriations in the agency of agriculture, food and markets. Thought this after it was too late in terms of the session had adjourned, $250,000 was appropriated for the conservation districts appropriated to the wrong appropriation. And so this was indicating it needs to switch from the budget adjustment. And they did do that in the submission that we received. And that's, that looks good. That looks good. The next item in sections B-502 and B-505 has to do with education, special education formula grants and the adjusted education payment. Essentially, there is a true up that should happen in the big bill after the local school bus, local school budgets are passed at town meeting in March. And so the appropriations should have been updated before the budget was passed. They were not last year. And so those technical amendments have been included in the budget adjustment. We are reviewing those updates now, but hope and anticipate that it is as it should be based on last year's information. Excellent. So in BAA, but you're reviewing for the detail. Okay. The next section is section C-102, which was clarifying and you really want to flip to the second, the next page because what this was doing was clarifying that some of the transfers and appropriations that were on the contingent list, essentially meaning if the funds were available at the end of state fiscal year 22, these transfers or appropriations would occur. And the language here in the intent document said, if needed, there will be an adjustment proposed in the FY23 budget adjustment. I believe, and so this is another area we want to make sure that the transfers and appropriations were made as intended. We do know, for example, within the agency of digital services that those amendments, and that's one that's included on this list, that those amendments have been included in budget adjustment. In my quick review, I do believe that we should be all set in this regard with those changes, but we will, we will confirm that. Oh, yeah, Scott. Oh, yep. Please go right ahead, Representative. Do we maintain such a list or contingency list for situations as you just described? And where do you find that? So last year's big bill, I think it should be in section C102, did lay out what those contingent appropriations would be. So that if the general fund closed in a surplus, as was anticipated, that these were the items that would be funded. First. Considered first. Yeah, that's right. So, yeah. Just flipping in this very helpful big budget book we all have now. But yes, that is where it was laid out. Thank you. Yeah. If it's helpful, we have a spreadsheet as well that consolidates it that maybe for ease of viewing, you can see all of that laid out. It's page 102 of this. Okay, good. Thank you. C102 on page 102. Ready? Okay. The next item in the letter of intent document is section C112, which is referring to a one-time retirement system appropriation that was actually made in Act 74 of the previous session, which was the big bill FY22 budget bill. This language in the intent document was just providing additional guidance to the Department of Finance and Management on how and when to make the deposit associated with this appropriation for the Vermont State Employee Retirement System. It's not something that needed clarification in the FY23 budget adjustment. So we should be all set there. That we, I'm sorry, can you repeat that? It did not need clarification in the budget adjustment. It was just providing additional guidance to the commissioner of finance and management. So sometimes items in the letter of intent could need further clarity in budget adjustment. And sometimes it's just providing additional guidance to the administration to bring clarity to how they carry out a program. Okay, so guidance, no action required. Correct. Do you know if they carried out that guidance? My understanding is yes, but we will confirm. Yeah. Okay. The next item, section E334, is also providing additional guidance to the administration related to language on a report that will be due to the legislature on February 15th related to home and community based service provider rate study. So no action was needed in the budget adjustment related to this, but it did clarify that part of this study should include an examination of alternative payment methodologies, such as a bundled rate for the adult day services portion of the study. So it was just providing additional guidance to the administration. We should know the report will be due to us in February. So we'll validate that at that point. So last year, there were a lot of bills outside of the budget that had appropriations in it. And so in this letter of intent, you're going to see that the remaining pages actually have to do with other bills that had appropriations where additional intent was needed. And so we'll walk through that. So Act 83. So okay, this first Act 83, which was the budget adjustment for FY 22, section 46 was basically just adding the clarification that if the funds were not expended, this $25 million that went to the agency of human services, that the balance if still needed would carry forward and from 22 into FY 23. Again, no action needed in the budget adjustment, but it was providing clarification that those funds would carry forward. And if they weren't needed, if the agency of human services determined that those funds weren't needed for those purposes, they would be identified for a reversion. And I don't believe there are any of these funds that have been identified for a reversion on the list that we received. And this $25 million was to address emergent exigent circumstances related to the COVID-19 pandemic. It was part of the administration's recommendation on the budget adjustment last year. So no action needed there. And continuing in Act 83, section 48, this actually did require action in the budget adjustment or it was laid out here if an amendment was necessary, it would come forward in the budget adjustment. And so this was included in the budget adjustment materials that we received on Friday, which was basically some technical corrections updating the reversion amounts associated with the legislative IT appropriation and the Sergeant at Arms appropriation. These are areas that the Joint Fiscal Office identified for correction and it has been updated. And updated, okay. Moving right along, is there a questions? Anybody? So Act 114 was the act relating to amending various public pension and other post-employment benefits. The first part here, the language in this first paragraph, at the end of the session, the Department of Human Resources identified some issues that perhaps would require clarification related to the creation of the new group G within our pension program. And there were, I'd say, a few relatively minor technical updates that the administration had expressed wanting to update in the budget adjustment. In my read of the materials we received on Friday, these were not included in the budget adjustment. And so it is an area that we want to follow up with the administration to determine if, you know, if there's a reason for that. Yes, yeah, representing. I'm gonna do them, but it's a little flower. German. I'm assuming that we will learn what G is. Yes, yes. Yeah. And it has to do with the different groups, and I'm not, and perhaps there's a legislator that has some more expertise in this area, but the different groups refer to the different units of state employees in terms of what their pension benefits are. And I just ask a quick follow-up. I'm sorry that just going back to Act 83 and Section 46, that $25 million appropriation, if I remember right, that really was intended to provide a bridge between the VRAP program and, you know, transitioning folks off of emergency housing assistance. These funds are actually not related to the emergency rental assistance program. This $25 million has more to do with, I think, provider stabilization efforts. And you know what I can do is get for you that language from budget adjustment that described what that program was. Okay, thank you very much. You good? Representative Harrison. So, Sarah, I just want to make sure I understand EHR had recommended a change in the contribution rates and the rest of the administration didn't take them up on that. We know it's a oversight miss or whether they disagreed with that recommendation. Yeah, we think, I don't know enough yet to answer that. I think they did, the administration did identify to us some technical things that may need to be updated in the budget adjustment. It's not included in what we received last week, but we need to follow up to understand why and perhaps there's another plan for that. So, we will get more information on that. Why I wanted to go through this number one so that you could hear it. Number two, so that we could identify just this highlighted piece of like, oops, something that may end up on the floor by accident. Okay, great. So, the next section in the pension bill as well, Section 28, laid out some specific intentions around how finance and management would effectuate the deposits associated with the $75 million that was appropriated as part of the plan for the Vermont State employees. And then this continues on to the next page. It talks about the same language with the state teacher's retirement system as well as with the health and medical benefits language. This language is calling for what would the figures in the big bill itself are slightly different than what was there last year. And so, this was saying it would basically be trued up in the budget adjustment and that language has been included in the materials that we received last week. Okay. I'm just writing in BAA, details under review, right? Yeah. But I believe we are all set there and we confirm with the analysts that works on pensions. Great. So, the next act that has some intention language is Act 138, which is an act relating to tax reductions and other aid for Vermonters. In that bill, there was an appropriation to the Aid to Age Blind and Disabled Program, AABD, which was calling for a supplemental payment for beneficiaries who are not living in nursing care facilities. The budget itself addressed the personal needs allowance for these individuals in nursing care facilities, but it allowed for either a January of 2023 or January of 2024 implementation to increase the personal needs allowance depending on capacity to administer within the Agency of Human Services. If necessary, there would be a clarifying amendment in the budget adjustment. There is no language in the budget adjustment. And so, I think I could make assumptions but what would be my next step is to follow up. Well, Agency of Human Services will likely be in here this week and this will be one we'll want to follow up with them to understand what their timeline is for implementing. What that's about, okay. That's a highlighted one then. Yeah. Not here, so that could be okay, but we wanna... Why? Yeah. Was it by choice? Was it by thought? Was it by accident? Yeah. And there's someone in the room that I know that's taking really, really good notes from the administration that I'm sure will be there. That will be very helpful in making sure that they at least have an idea of what we're thinking. Okay. The next one is in Act 158 which was an act relating to regulating licensed small cannabis cultivation as farming. And so, this language basically indicated that two positions were supposed to be transferred from the Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets to the Cannabis Control Board. There was not language included in the budget adjustment that we received on Friday that called out this transfer of positions. However, there is a mechanism where the administration is able to transfer positions amongst agencies and departments outside of legislation. And so, this is on my follow-up list to understand if those positions have been transferred. So not in BAA, but may have occurred regardless, right? Correct. No, Jay, here I ask- Oh, sorry. Quick question here. Are those existing positions, are the responsibilities for those existing positions related to this cannabis cultivation at farms? Or are they just generic existing? I think that they were specifically created for those purposes and they were just moving them with the purpose that they were intended to the Cannabis Control Board. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. The NEST is Act 172 which is an act relating to the Municipal Energy Resilience Initiatives. So, this act created positions. I think it did not specify the type of positions they were. And so, when Commissioner Gresham was in earlier, I think him or his deputy referenced like the ways in which you create new positions and you need to be very specific. And so, this is just stating that these positions should be classified limited service positions. There is not language included in the budget adjustments that clarifies this, but it's an area for us to follow up with the administration to understand how they created those positions and to confirm it was as classified limited service. So, that is on our list. Okay. Who is that? I believe those are at buildings and general services. That's okay. All right, I'm gonna look right at. Okay, then the next item, turning the page is Act 182 which is an act relating to expanding access to safe and affordable housing. The first section has to do with the manufactured home improvement and replacement program. And this language was indicating we needed to be more specific about the source of federal funds. And so, the intent document was stating, it should say from the American Rescue Plan Act recovery funds consistent with how we handled similar appropriations in other areas. This language has been included in the budget adjustment. Yes, perfect. Senator Harrison. You have to learn to do your writing, but also look at. I know, I need like eyes. Well, you also will eventually have your right hand back. And so, I'm gonna look at. That's true. All right, Sarah, can I assume this relates to an exchange of emails that some of us got this summer from the chair? And so I can check this off. I guess. Super. Well, I remember that email house. Yes. Is that to me? All of self-interest. I have this as follow-up and I keep. Okay. Okay. I'm gonna put down your Jim interest. Not because it's a conflict, but because I know who to go to if I've got deeper questions, right? I know him too. Anybody else? Questions? Okay. So the next item in this bill, section 28, also was request for further clarification that this appropriation for the municipal bylaw modernization grants that the language be changed. So it indicated the allocation was up to $650. Excuse me, $650,000. And that was also included in the language we received on Friday. So we should be all set in these two areas. Okay. Moving on to act 183. Which was the act relating to economic and workforce development. The first in section 16. This is related to CTE construction and rehabilitation program. And some appropriations, one time appropriations that were made with education fund dollars. We needed to clarify that we needed to add the notwithstanding the existing law in relation to the education fund appropriation wasn't included in the act at the time in the bill at the time. So that has been included in the language that the administration sent over on Friday. So NDAA and CTE is Center for Technical Education? Yes, sorry, I should have cut out. Okay. Go ahead. Is that the section related to the Mount Housing Conservation Board? No, I don't believe that it is. Okay. Section 47 has to do with the Vermont Economic Development Authority, VEDA, short-term forgivable loans. This language, it was included in the budget adjustment. So let me say that. So it has been addressed in the language we received from the administration. I think the language that is proposed here, if you look down at the bottom, I can't really tell it's to be the bold language is what the eight requests to be included. And that has been included in the language that we received, which is basically I think allowing for more broad appropriate basis of comparison to determine eligibility. Okay, I'm getting through it. So the next item, if you flip to the next page is still in the same act 183, it's section 53. Which it was this language was included in the budget adjustment that we received on Friday. It's basically updating when the bill passed last year, we thought there was 25.5 million dollars that could be reallocated for a different purpose. And that's one of the ways that they funded some of the activities in that act. But in reality, there was only $25,042,000 available. And so they are updating that amount available for reallocation. And they have done that in the budget adjustment. Okay. Sometimes the agencies and departments are spending, it can spend more than we are aware of. So we have to catch it up. The last act is act 186, which is an act relating to the system of care for individuals with developmental disabilities. Section four is language that was included in what we received on Friday. And again, it's language that is expressing the intention that this position, a residential program developer is intended to be a classified limited service. And that the funds for this position are going to come out of the global commitment, federal medical assistance percentage, home and community based services plan funding. And so that is another topic for orientation in the committee. But essentially the home and community based services enhanced FMAP was an opportunity that the federal centers for Medicaid and Medicare services made available to states that has allowed Vermont to have another avenue of funding to make some investments in our home and community based services system. And so I think that that would be a good item for future understand what that is and how the state of Vermont is using those funds. Cause it was a couple hundred million dollars that was made available and that the agency of human services is in the process of carrying out that program and plan. That be normal? You know, it may be one that we wanna actually have the team at the agency of human services because it is pretty detailed. It can be relatively complicated and they I know they've been preparing some briefing materials for other committees. So Nolan will have a high level, yeah. So I'm gonna do this like pivot call my friend over here and make a note of that that we can, that we'll, you know, to get a whole of, to see the next week of the FMAP. Okay. She gets this little side list of things that we think of. And at a weight page. How many different funds or services are under the global commitment whole lot? Yeah. So, I mean, so the global commitment is one fund and it is unique in state government and that it's actually a blend of state and federal dollars in the global commitment fund. So it pays for a variety of programs within Vermont's Medicaid program, which in Vermont, the way we administer our global commitment waiver or Medicaid program, it pays for services from healthcare services to supports for children in custody, mental health supports, a wide variety of items. Nolan is actually, Nolan Langwell, my colleague will actually be here tomorrow and provide some more information in this area, a good foundation for everyone to understand that. And this program that's referenced here is a very specific kind of offshoot. You good? Okay. Sometimes I have a tendency to jump a little quick. So I, and the person may be still in the middle of questioning and I don't want to cut you off. Oh, sure. All right, we're doing this at record pace. Record pace. Great, so the last item here is at the Department of Disabilities, Aging and Independent Living, DALE. And it has to do with the development of a housing and residential service pilot planning grants. This language was included in the budget adjustment, so it has been addressed. And basically the clarification that was needed was just indicating that this program is being funded by this Enhanced Federal Medical Assistance Percentage Home and Community Based Services Funding Plan. There's a lot of acronyms associated with what I just said out loud, but I'm trying to be good at saying all of the words and then we'll get to acronym level pretty soon. All right, so that gets us through the letter of intent. Just ask a question. And when I hear like the funding, should be allocated to the global, it's a part of that FNAP. That's not just the bump, but that's the actual FNAP, right? So it's not like, oh, it's our intent that when the bump goes away, this would go away. No, no, this is like, it's all related to this unique funding opportunity that CMS, the Center for Medicare Services, provided to states that allowed states to kind of draw down a 10%. So to confuse things further, it's a different enhanced FMAP amount. It's 10% as opposed to 6.2%, but it was only to be drawn down on home and community-based services. You reinvested in related expenditures. AHS has a very detailed plan that was discussed with the legislature last year in terms of how they're gonna spend those dollars. And that's where we want to have them come in and provide an update to you in terms of where they're spending and how it's going. And this was clarifying that this particular program would come from that fund source. It needed, I think it wasn't as clear in the original language that was drafted. Nice. All right, so we've gone through that. Lickety split, because we've got 20 minutes to spare. I know. Wow. So, I know, let's go play basketball, sir. Thank you. So, I did have a break built in at like 2.15. The question I have, and if you don't mind my asking live is because like we were gonna go now from this to some more orientation pieces. And to tell you the truth, we had a whole list of opportunities. So I don't even actually know what order it's all gonna come in this afternoon. Are people ready for that, or should we take a minute? Why don't we take a minute and we can, and we have a plan, but let's take a minute to talk about it, and then come back.