A house in Sutton was severely damaged by floodwaters from the Calendar Brook, as seen on July 11, 2025. File photo by Glenn Russell/VTDigger After President Trump twice said no to Vermont’s request for federal funding to help towns in the Northeast Kingdom fix damage caused by flooding last s ummer, state legislators are weighing a proposal from Gov. Phil Scott’s administration to use state dollars, instead, to help those towns.  Doug Farnham, the state’s chief recovery officer, presented a plan to the House Appropriations Committee this week that would transfer about $1.3 million from a pot of money legislators earmarked last year to an existing state grant program intended for natural disaster recovery. Last year’s earmark, meant to be used to respond to federal funding changes, originally totaled $50 million. Now, there is about $44 million left, after legislators used some $6 million to fund food assistance for tens of thousands of Vermonters in the first half of November as federal funding lapsed during a government shutdown. The lion’s share of the proposed grants would go to the Caledonia County town of Sutton, which took the brunt of the damage from torrential rain and resulting flash flooding last July. It would mostly fund a bridge repair there, as well as fixes to some culverts, Farnham said. Sutton would be awarded $1.1 million; meanwhile, Burke would get $104,300, Sheffield would get $81,900 and Newark would get $53,600. The money would go to the town governments, not individuals; the state’s application for FEMA aid was not for individual assistance, as it was in years past. The state awards would cover half the estimated cost of the damage in each town, Farnham said. FEMA’s aid, had the state received it, would have covered up to 75% of the repair costs. “We’ve tried to dull some of the impact,” he told House Approps during a Wednesday hearing, saying the state wanted to avoid stepping “fully into the shoes” of the federal government. On Friday, the committee’s vice chair, Lyndon Republican Rep. Marty Feltus, said she supported the idea of using state dollars to help those towns, but didn’t think the source that Farnham proposed was the right one. That’s because the earmark should be used for situations that have a statewide impact, Feltus said, rather than have an impact in only a handful of communities. Notably, Feltus’ district includes three of the four towns that would get the money. Instead, Feltus said she expects her committee to look for other sources of the same amount of money as it finishes developing its budget proposal for the upcoming 2027 fiscal year in the coming days, though she wasn’t sure as of early Friday afternoon exactly what those would be. House Approps is slated to hold a final vote on the budget bill Monday, after which the “big bill” would be up for consideration on the floor. — Shaun Robinson On the move The Senate advanced S.326 Friday, the year’s miscellaneous motor vehicle bill.  Among its potpourri of provisions, the bill would increase penalties for drivers who get their trucks stuck in Smuggler’s Notch, a phenomenon known as “stuckages.” If the stuckage “substantially (impedes) the flow of traffic” through the Notch on Route 108, as happens a few times per summer, a driver could be fined $20,000, up from $2,000.  As a commuter who relies on the Notch when I want to take the scenic route to work, I approve.  — Ethan Weinstein The Senate on Friday advanced S.220, legislation that would amend the state’s excess spending threshold on school district budgets beginning in 2028. The legislation, first introduced in January by Senate Pro Tempore Phil Baruth, D/P-Chittenden Central, originally contemplated a hard cap on school district budgets to contain the growing cost of public education in Vermont. But in the Senate Finance Committee, the bill was amended to instead create a “soft” spending cap by lowering the state’s excess spending threshold. That mechanism disincentivizes school district spending by double-taxing any spending increases over a certain amount. S.220 would lower that threshold, from 118% of the state average to 112%. The change in law “would effectively put the same downward pressure on spending as the underlying construct in S.220, but in a way that still gives districts control over the amount they ask of their voters,” Sen. Thomas Chittenden, D-Chittenden Southeast, said on the Senate floor Friday. Notably, an amendment to the legislation would exempt voter-approved debt from the excess spending threshold. School district leaders have lobbied lawmakers for months to remove capital construction debt issued after July 2024 from the penalty, arguing it hinders their ability to pursue desperately needed infrastructure repairs. In Woodstock, a bond vote passed on Town Meeting Day to build a new regional middle and high school in the Mountain Views School District is contingent on the debt being exempt from the excess spending threshold penalty. “If we want to reinvigorate, redefine our school system, we have to be able to fund capital construction,” Sen. Ruth Hardy, D-Addison, said on the floor Friday. “We are going to need new school buildings, and at least this is one small avenue to do it.” Not all senators were in agreement. Sen. Becca White, D-Windsor, voted no because she said her districts would be disproportionally impacted. “The argument that this will reduce property taxes is not accurate to our district, because if they move forward with continuing to spend as we can expect — and they will, due to costs outside of their control, like health care or negotiations for contracts — they will be double taxed,” she said. The Senate approved the bill on second reading and will vote on it once more before moving it on to the House. — Corey McDonald House lawmakers Thursday approved a bill, H.606, that would largely ban machine guns under state law and make it a felony to steal a firearm.  The bill would also ban someone from owning a firearm while they are under a current court order to receive outpatient treatment for a mental illness (which means a court has determined they are a danger to themselves or others).  The bill was approved by the House Judiciary Committee, where it originated, on a 6-5 committee vote. In committee, all representatives who caucus with Democrats voted in favor of the bill while all who caucus with Republicans voted against it. House Speaker Jill Krowinski, D-Burlington, said in a statement Thursday evening that the bill was “a crucial piece of legislation that strengthens the safety of Vermonters by keeping firearms out of the hands of individuals found to be a danger to themselves or others.”  In her statement, Krowinski said the bill carefully balanced Second Amendment rights with the need to keep Vermonters safe.  At Gov. Scott’s weekly press conference Wednesday, when asked if he would sign the bill into law, he said, “We’ll have to see where it goes.”  Scott said the bill’s provision on outpatient treatment gave him “a little bit of pause.” He worried that, although the restriction only applies to those under a current court order to receive treatment, the provision might have harmful optics to the public.  “The average Vermonter is going to hear: If you have a mental health issue, you may lose your weapons,” Scott said.  — Charlotte Oliver In the know Gov. Scott appointed Sandi Hoffman as commissioner of the Vermont Department for Children and Families on Friday. Hoffman had been serving as interim commissioner since last fall.  “Sandi is a dedicated public servant who’s demonstrated a commitment to Vermont throughout her many years in state government,” Scott said in a statement accompanying the announcement.  — Ethan Weinstein Read the story on VTDigger here: Vermont lawmakers consider using state funds for flood recovery after Trump denied request for federal aid. ...read more read less