Legislative Update 2/6/25

The past couple of weeks have been dominated by federal policy actions from the Trump Administration causing significant disruptions to nonprofit funding and operations. Common Good Vermont has been busy gathering information about the impact of executive orders and potential funding freeze on Vermont nonprofits in collaboration with our partners at the National Council of Nonprofits. We have used the stories and information shared by nonprofits to advocate for the sector in these uncertain times.

While our attention has been on federal policies, we remain engaged at the State House. Common Good was in the House Commerce and Economic Development Committee last Friday for introductions, and elevated the urgency around support for our sector and strengthening State-nonprofit partnerships. We’ve also been building awareness around our much anticipated State Grant Reform bill that is still stuck in drafting where bills are backed up.

We invite Common Good Vermont members to join us on 2/19 for our Member Advocacy Roundtable at 2 pm.

Read on for details and more updates!

Federal Policy Actions Impacting Nonprofits

Common Good Vermont Presentation to Treasurer’s Taskforce on the Federal Transition

On Wednesday, Common Good Vermont presented a report on the Impacts of Federal Transition on Vermont’s Nonprofit Organizations to the Treasurer’s Taskforce on the Federal Transition. This report aggregated the stories of more than 50 Vermont nonprofits who generously responded to our requests for information. Thank you to all who took the time to share your experiences!

You can read our memo to the taskforce here:

If your nonprofit organization is impacted by changes in federal funding and policy, we would like to hear from you. Please report not only on direct impacts (i.e., we cannot log into a portal to request disbursement of a grant), but also opportunity costs (we are postponing filling a new position given an uncertain environment). You can email us your update to [email protected] or submit through the National Council of Nonprofits portal – we would like to hear from you!

Status Update

Where Things Stand (in this current moment): Recognizing that what is true today may be different tomorrow, here is a brief update on the current status of federal policy and funding changes. Updates and more resources/information can be found HERE.

  • Two federal judges have issued Temporary Restraining Orders (TRO) blocking the Trump Administration from freezing federal funding, including for the suit filed by Democracy Forward on behalf of the National Council of Nonprofits, the American Public Health Association, Main Street Alliance, and SAGE. The ruling for the National Council of Nonprofits suit extends the TRO for 14 days (which can be extended again), and as next steps, orders that by 2/7 both parties must jointly propose a briefing schedule for the court to consider a preliminary injunction.
  • This has provided temporarily relief for some nonprofits, though it does appear that the Administration has been abiding by these orders in full as demonstrated by the shutdown of USAID. There have also been reports of Head Start funding portals not being accessible and other funding streams potentially still being frozen, including Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act programs.
  • Uncertainty around federal funding and the impact of executive orders (many of which are being challenges in court) puts organizations in a difficult position. With little information, it is difficult to make informed decisions including around planning, staffing, and advancing our missions.
  • The Treasurer’s office, in partnership with the Vermont Chamber of Commerce and Vermont Businesses for Social Responsibility, held a webinar on 2/6 on Immigration & ICE: Rights, Obligations, & Support for Businesses and Nonprofits. You can watch the recording here.

Events & Action Items

Common Good Vermont House Commerce Testimony

On Friday, 1/31/25, Common Good Vermont testified in House Commerce to introduce the Committee to our work and priorities for Vermont’s nonprofit sector. We focused our comments on the nonprofit workforce, emphasizing the need for housing, affordable health insurance, and fair funding to adequately compensate employees. We advocated for support for workforce development, particularly for nonprofit jobs on the list of Vermont’s most promising jobs (including fundraisers!). Our testimony also previewed the soon-to-be released State Grant Reform bill as it relates to the nonprofit workforce, and spoke to the impact of community safety concerns on our sector and those we serve. Finally, we underscored the need for sector support given recent federal actions.

You can watch our testimony here.

Analysis: Governor’s Public Safety Proposal

By Jemma Hoko, Common Good Vermont Policy Intern

On Tuesday, January 28th the Senate Committee on Judiciary heard testimonies regarding the Governor’s omnibus public safety bill. The following are key components of the new public safety proposal, research-based considerations, alternatives, and potential impact on nonprofits when applicable:

Bail Revocation 

Overview 

This proposal calls for a reform of current laws regarding bail revocation. Under this proposal, the right to bail may be revoked entirely if the judicial officer finds the accused has:

  1. Intimidated or harassed a victim, potential witness, juror, or judicial officer in violation of a condition of release
  2. Repeatedly violated conditions of release in a manner that impedes disrupts the prosecution of the accused
  3. Violated a condition or conditions of release that constitute a threat to the integrity of the judicial system
  4. Without just cause, failed to appear at a specified time and place ordered by a judicial officer
  5. In violation of a condition of release, been charged with a felony or a crime against a person or an offense similar to the underlying charge, for which, after hearing, probable cause is found

Considerations 

  • Monetary bail disadvantages the lower class, with ⅔ of federal defendants jailed before trial due to inability to afford bail (Charged, Emily Bazelon 2019). 
  • Research shows pretrial detention contributes to worse personal and legal outcomes for people compared to similarly situated people able to secure pretrial release (Vera Institute).
  • Bail-dependent pretrial confinement does not prevent further crime, as intended. (Bazelon 2019).
  • A study of crime rates in 33 cities across the country found no statistically significant relationship between bail reforms and trends in crime (neither crime as a whole nor violent crime specifically) (Brennan Center For Justice). 
  • “Just cause”: Whether a person’s failure to appear is excused or not is ultimately left up to judge discretion and when coupled with a range of severe and counterproductive consequences (such as fines and imprisonment), responses may actually make our communities less safe (Prison Policy Initiative).
  • People who miss court largely do not threaten public safety. A study from the Bureau of Justice Statistics showed of people who were missing court: 87% were facing property, drug, or public order charges, while 13% were facing charges for violent offenses (Bureau of Justice Statistics). 

Alternatives: 

A New York bail reform law consisting of limiting the use of monetary bail, mandating pretrial release for the majority of non-violent crimes, and requiring judge’s take into consideration a person’s ability to pay bail, has shown relative success (Vera Institute). Post-reform analysis demonstrated a significant decrease in jail incarceration, largely due to fewer pretrial admissions for low-level and nonviolent charges. Statewide jail population decreased more than 30% after implementation of bail reform and another 17% after the onset of COVID. However, despite limited use, judges and prosecutors continued to rely on money bail when permitted, rarely considered ability to pay, and existing racial disparities persisted. 

Impact on Nonprofits: 

With bail revocation comes a heavier reliance on advocacy and support from nonprofit organizations. For instance, when people are met with support, they do show to their court dates: figures from The Bail Project’s 2022 annual report demonstrate that people they supported had a 92% court appearance rate (The Bail Project). Further, nonprofits providing support with court transportation, housing, food access, healthcare, language support, and special help hotlines will play an important role in supporting various people in their journey through the criminal justice system (Prison Policy Initiative). 

Limiting Ability to Reduce Sentencing 

Overview: 

This proposal calls to limit the court’s ability to reduce the sentence of violent offenders and would require a written document explaining how reducing the sentence will serve justice and public safety for each case. It additionally calls for restricting the courts’ authority to suspend criminal sentences for repeat violent offenses. 

Considerations: 

  • Long, or otherwise severe, prison sentences do little to deter future crime (Prison Policy Initiative). While it may temporarily incapacitate people, it actually increases the risk of reoffending after release (Roodman).  
  • People convicted of violent offenses have among the lowest rates of recidivism, and studies show people generally “age out” of violence, so lengthy sentences are unnecessary for public safety and may do more harm than good (Prison Policy Initiative). 
  • The U.S. sentencing system generally overestimates who is a current danger to the community and when incarceration is necessary for public safety (Vera Institute). 
  • Higher incarceration rates are not associated with lower violent crime rates (Vera Institute).  

Alternatives: 

  • Rather than spending heavily on sending people to and keeping people in jails and prisons, we could invest in less expensive, more effective ways to prevent crime and foster public safety (Vera Institute).
  • To combat mass incarceration, prison sentences should be capped at 20 years for most serious crimes and 15 years for young people up to age 25 (Vera Institute).  
  • Turning to community based sentencing and restorative justice programs, centered around repairing harm and restoring social relationships, increases public safety (even for violent offenses) (Vera Institute).
    • An analysis of 35 restorative justice programs in the US found that participants were 41.5% less likely to be arrested compared to people prosecuted and sentenced in the traditional legal system (Vera Institute). 
    • Common Justice in New York City and Impact Justice’s youth-based interventions throughout California serve as examples. 

Impact on Nonprofits: 

Limitations to reducing sentencing may result in greater reliance on and increased demand for nonprofits aiding re-entry and reintegration support including rehabilitation, housing, employment assistance, advocacy, and more. 

Repeal of “Raise the Age”

Overview

This proposal calls to repeal the last stage of “Raise the Age”, which extends the age at which individuals committing minor and nonviolent (most) crimes are treated as adults (VTDigger). This previously allowed 19 year olds who committed non-felony offenses to be sent to the juvenile justice system rather than adult court. The repeal involves the court’s consideration of whether or not public safety will be protected by treating the youth as a youthful offender on the basis of various factors.  

Considerations: 

  • May disproportionately affect or harm LGBTQ+ youth, as queer youth face a greater risk of homelessness and incarceration (Prison Policy Initiative).
    • A study found that though LGBTQ youth in the US population is only around 5-7%, they make up 20% of the incarcerated youth population (Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law). 
    • This disparity is higher, at 40%, for incarcerated girls who identify as LGBTQ
    • Queer youth of color are over-represented even further in carceral systems, as 85-90% of incarcerated LGBTQ youth are from ethnic or racial minority background (Addressing the Mental Health Needs of LGBTQ Youth in the Juvenile Justice System). 
    • These disparities may be driven by higher homelessness rates, and the cyclical relationship between homelessness and incarceration. 

Impact on Nonprofits: 

This proposal may impact nonprofits that support LGBTQ+ youth, youth of color, and those at risk or currently facing homelessness. Nonprofits may see increased demand for services such as housing assistance, mental health support, and legal advocacy for queer and other youth, particularly those involved in the justice system. Homeless or minority status is taken into consideration regarding threat to public safety within this proposal, but ultimately that will be left up to judge discretion. 

Sealing of Criminal Records 

Overview: 

This proposal regards instituting a system of universal sealing, rather than expungement, of criminal records. This proposal is similar to S.12, a bill discussed previously by the Senate Committee on Judiciary, regarding the sealing and expungement of criminal records. However, key differences include:

  1. Deletion of “super sealing”
  2. Removal of a petition for sealing if one faces a new criminal charge
  3. Denial of sealing for violent offenses against other persons 

Further information about sealing and expungement of criminal records can be found here:

Justia – Expungement and Sealing of Criminal Records

What’s the Difference Between Expunged vs. Sealed Records?