Commentary

Soulia: Vermont’s “temporary” hotel voucher program

By on • ( 17 Comments )
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

A wake-up call for taxpayers

by Dave Soulia

If you’ve been wondering where your tax dollars are going, look no further than Vermont’s General Assistance Emergency Housing Program—a “temporary” solution that has turned into a multi-million-dollar annual spending habit. Originally designed to provide shelter during severe weather, the program’s cost has skyrocketed from modest pre-pandemic levels to tens of millions of dollars annually. And if you’re not paying attention, you should be—because you’re footing the bill.

The True Cost of “Compassion”

This program has cost Vermont taxpayers $79 million annually over the last three years—a jaw-dropping increase from its pre-pandemic levels of less than $7.1 million per year. For Fiscal Year 2025, the state proposes spending $44 million, with contingency funds potentially pushing that number to $54 million. While this is a reduction from the pandemic peak, it’s still 8-10 times the pre-pandemic spending.

The latest debate focuses on extending the program’s so-called “winter rules,” which provide taxpayer-funded hotel stays, beyond their March 31 expiration date—straight through to June 30. Vermonters know June isn’t “winter,” and the idea of continuing winter housing rules well into summer has raised eyebrows among critics.

How Much More Can Taxpayers Take?

To some, $1.84 million for the extension might seem small in the context of a $50+ million program, but for taxpayers already reeling from last year’s massive property tax increases, it’s an insult. Adding even more to this spending package ignores the real issue: this program isn’t temporary anymore. What started as an emergency measure during Vermont’s harsh winters now seems like an open-ended commitment with no clear exit strategy.

The harsh reality is this: the legislature and the providers will always find reasons to spend more. Without taxpayer pushback, these “temporary” solutions will keep growing in scope and cost, regardless of their effectiveness. It’s time for taxpayers to demand a clear end date to programs that never seem to deliver on their promise of temporary relief.

The Political Divide

This latest extension passed along party lines in a 7-4 straw vote, with the final decision expected on Monday. Some lawmakers argue the program is a necessity to protect vulnerable populations, citing the 400 children currently housed in hotels. Others see it as misguided spending that offers no real solution to homelessness.

Critics also emphasize that the extension of “winter rules” into the summer months undermines the very premise of the program. It’s yet another example of a well-meaning policy that risks turning into a permanent fixture, without clear accountability or a long-term plan.

Take Action: Contact Your Representatives

This isn’t just a budget issue—it’s about the future of responsible governance in Vermont. Contact your representatives today and ask them:

  • Why are “winter rules” being applied in June?
  • How much more will this program cost taxpayers?
  • What’s the long-term plan to address homelessness?
  • When will this program finally end?

The House Appropriations Committee is directly responsible for these budgetary decisions. Below is a list of its current members, along with their party affiliation and town. Find your local representative and make your voice heard.

Vermonters deserve better than endless extensions, vague promises, and never-ending tax increases to fund a program that seems to be on autopilot. Make your voice heard—because if you don’t, your wallet will.

Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Categories: Commentary, Housing, State Government, Taxes

17 replies »

  1. As someone who lives at one of these motels, though on my own dime ($1200-1800 a month), I can say that the number of out-of-state people using this program, which only Vermonters are paying into, is much higher than many realize. Also, the State makes it hard to kick out people, even when the owners of the motels tell them of active drug dealing.

    It is one thing to care about your fellow human beings, and another VERY distinct thing to force tax-laden Vermonters to have to solitarily foot the bill for housing the NATION. If the nation wants to pay, great, but otherwise, we need to think on a Vermont-focused scale.

    • United States Code, 21 U.S.C. § 856(a)

      …maintaining, managing or owning any place used to manufacture, distribute or use drugs to include temporary or permanent uses of the premises.

      It’s illegal to allow crack houses. I’m not a lawyer but “I believe” the owner can use any force necessary to remove them, and doesn’t need to ask for permission. If anything, not removing them would mean they are a felon subject to 250k fine.

  2. You dont “solve” the homelessness problem by creating an incentive program that draws deadbeats from afar to take advantage. As much as the advocates for this spending howl and moan that the simplicity and austerity of a hotel room is an insult to the needy, they fail to realize that just a one or two night stay in a motel for recreational reasons is an unaffordable luxury to the average Vermont taxpayer. Many of the motels on the voucher program have become crime magnets that have affected the broader neighborhood. The privacy afforded by a motel room as opposed to a communal shelter with some level of supervision has been a contributing factor for overdose deaths as well. We can accept the notion that “shelter” is a human right, but months-long stays in a motel is way over the top of what most taxpayers think is appropriate to provide to someone claiming to not have any place to go. The program runs on the honor system. You can’t really prove that you are “homeless” or dont have any other alternatives than the privacy and luxury of a motel room, even if it is in one of the identifiable flophouse motels with the barbecue grill and the half a bicycle chained to the post outside the rooms.

    • Nailed it! Many of these”homeless” come from other states because they hear about the benefits they will get for free in Vermont including housing. Living in a motel in Vt is better than living in a tent in South Carolina or Georgia or Florida or Arkansas, I could go on and on.

  3. WOW WOW 1200.00 to 1800.00 a month for a motel room???? Was the motel getting 50,000.00 dollars a year for each room for the homeless paid for by the taxpayer????? When these people were living free, what plans did they make to better themselves in the future????

    • The state kicks people off the voucher for so much as a part-time gig. It’s become a hinderance to people who want to start putting their lives together, but know that they will be penalized by the state for it. I myself went through that during COVID. It’s no wonder that these people feel stuck and (many) give up: they ARE stuck.

    • Also, the State pays much MORE than I do: they pay the much higher Nightly Rate. I pay weekly/bi-weekly rate. The State doesn’t use its massive buying power to negotiate down the rates. They also don’t want to commit to a long-term rent structure, which is cheaper.

    • I think the people with children need to be given housing vouchers where they pay 30% of their income for rent. They will get their lives together.
      The state needs to assess the drug abuse and daily crimes. If an addict has multiple arrests and gets released over snd over they must go to rehab or jail. Right there the motel program will save millions.

  4. During Covid I explored the homeless housing scenario with thoughts of a much more affordable homeless housing consideration. The hotel costs to We the People/Taxpayers were extravagant and I knew it. I heard of the Conestoga units in Oregon, a place with a 7+ year history of working with a simple basic floor plan – not a lot of room, but lockable, a place for a bed and clothing and someone could have a stable safe enough space. One was built in Vermont and it was found to be winter worthy here – it cost under 2K to build and it cost only $50/month to heat and it was 68 degrees inside on a day when it was -20 degrees. vthope.net/microd.html The place has endured 5 Vermont winters now.

    In Eugene Oregon at Community Supported Shelters they had 3 encampments of about 20-30 Conestoga units. One for Veterans, one for disabled, and one for drug rehab. The community service personnel undertook working with them and setting goals of getting them on their feet and into more spacious accommodations within a year. There was also Dignity Village nearby where the people all lived in their own micro dwellings in a clustered community setting and under their own governing rules. There were 50-60 units in the village.

    Vermont’s regulations made these units challenging to replicate in this state.

    What if there were some state parks with winterized plumbing that had some of these units available? What if some of our closed down commercial buildings were to be opened and converted into sheltered units for 20-30 people? What if some community group parking lots were to become spaces for a couple of units with access to their bathrooms? Public transportation within a mile is a must. Pod units work, but the cost is in the supervising personnel.

    • The way to find out how much public support this concept would garner is to propose putting them in the “community group parking lots” that we have so many of…our public schools…

    • Definitely need something like this. Closer to areas where walking to a job, on bus route, would be best.

    • I was being sarcastic…no sane person would really want a homeless shelter adjacent to a school.

  5. It didn’t just “happen”, it’s their plan all along, and the VT.GOP is going along with it, they are co-conspirators.

    Don’t be fooled.

    • So, as a tourism revenue-dependent state, we have to balance our accommodating of paying visitors looking for a nice place to stay versus providing free shelter for those otherwise-homeless. I have heard from real people that they dont want to come visit Vermont any more because they just dont know which motels are on the voucher program. I know of two people who had their cars broken into in hotel parking lots while thy slept, and we can likely assume it was their fellow guests of the non-paying variety. Our legislators must realize that this program is jeopardizing Vermont’s tourism reputation and hence it’s tourism revenue.
      If some organization wanted to build a homeless shelter somewhere, they would likely hear howls of protest from neighbors, but if you want to build a motel, you can do that a lot easier, and then just “convert” it into a homeless shelter.

    • The entire VT GOP isn’t going along with this. I certainly am not! There are limits to what can be done in the State House if you are in the minority party, because the game is about power and control, not representing the best interests of the people. Yes, there are plenty of RINOs.

    • Renee, I’ve met some very knowledgeable people in the Vt gop, truly, truly. Many people know what is going on. The trick is, can one speak common sense without triggering a Marxist. It can be done.

      They know how to trigger a red meat republican to pigeon hole them into being a racist, or what nom du jour they are using. The rinos, know how to play this too.

      You can go into the most liberal of towns, talk common sense, without offending and give up no, zero values of conservatism, or our constitutional values.

      Yet, leadership doesn’t allow anything outside the rino sphere to come into play.

      Call them out, there are some things you can ONLY do as a minority, we need to use that.

      For example, the lie of equal pay. Call them out, demand equal pay for equal work. Now you are defending women, and they can’t object. You’ve brought harmony into the political sphere, solved something and exposed their lies at the same time.

      This can be played over and over on most any extremely divisive topic, because they thrive on lies and division. Peace is their kryptonite.

  6. The author uses the term “representative” as if it means something to Democrats and Progressives, who are in office t fulfill their Marxist agenda by any means necessary. What’s more dangerous than a communist? A communist who does not know they are a communist.