House advances H880 to fund court backlog; tax and fee changes approved to back investments in courts and public-safety services

The House on voice and roll-call votes advanced H880, an act seeking to speed case disposition across Vermont’s judicial system and provide funding for courts, prosecutors, defenders, Department of Corrections services and victim-support programs.

The bill, presented by the member from South Burlington for the House Judiciary Committee, frames the problem as a backlog in criminal and civil dockets and says faster, certain consequences are essential to deterrence and public safety. The committee’s package includes appropriations for limited-service positions in the judiciary, the Department of State’s Attorneys and Sheriffs, and the defender general’s office, plus grants for community justice centers and funding for the Vermont Access to Justice Coalition.

To fund those investments, the Ways and Means amendment modifies how the $47 judicial bureau surcharge is allocated under 13 VSA 7282 and adds revenue changes. The amendment restores pre-Act 78 allocations for older offenses, adjusts the allocation for offenses after June 30, 2024, and increases revenue shares to the victims’ compensation special fund and the domestic and sexual/domestic violence special fund. The amendment also contains corporate tax changes — adding back certain federally deductible foreign-income items (GILTI/FDII) and raising the top corporate rate — and increases some securities registration fees. Joint Fiscal Office estimates cited during debate projected revenue impacts that the committee said would support the bill’s appropriations.

Members debated the revenue measures at length. The member from Northfield argued the corporate tax increase risks driving businesses away and emphasized that ‘‘only people pay taxes,’’ urging fiscal caution. Supporters, including the member from Brattleboro and the member from West Rutland, said the investments address a public-safety crisis and that the state must pay to reduce the backlog so cases do not wait years for resolution. The member from Chittenden noted the amendment would make Vermont’s top marginal corporate rate comparatively high, a point that drew both opposition and defense from colleagues who cited other states’ rates and the policy aim to ask large C corporations (not pass-through entities) to contribute more.

The House divided the revenue-related portion of the amendment. On the roll-call for sections 3–5 (the corporate- and fee-related changes), the clerk recorded the result and the body adopted those sections. The House then approved section 6 (the appropriations and positions to address backlogs) by voice vote. A subsequent technical amendment to align effective dates was adopted, and third reading was ordered.

Key appropriations described in debate include $2,261,500 (partial-year funding) for judiciary positions and technology needs, $1,701,000 (partial-year) for additional positions in the Department of State’s Attorneys and Sheriffs, and $1,344,700 (partial-year) for the defender general’s office; other one-time and partial-year amounts also appear in the committee report. The bill’s proponents told members the revenue changes would begin to flow in 2025 and that some funded positions may require annualization and additional appropriations in the next biennium.

The House debate included multiple procedural points, a roll-call vote on the revenue sections and a request from members for recorded explanations of their votes. The bill returned to the calendar for additional consideration and third reading procedures as ordered by the chamber.

Quotes from the floor included: the member from South Burlington’s characterization that ‘‘when justice is delayed, we all suffer’’ and the member from Northfield’s warning that ‘‘you tax a corporation, it flows to people’’ — both comments were part of extended exchanges on the link between revenue and public-safety investments.

What happens next: The House ordered third reading for H880 after adopting the committee amendments; the bill may return for final passage and then would proceed to any further legislative steps or the governor depending on the final House and Senate actions.