Committee weighs pilot to fund outside counsel, expands parole‑board training and budget review

The House Corrections & Institutions Committee spent the first part of its Feb. 18 meeting focused on outstanding parole board issues, chiefly how the board gets legal advice and how its budget is routed.

Mary Jane Ainsworth, director of the Vermont Parole Board, told the committee that "there is currently a $25,000 appropriation for legal services for the board in the current FY26 budget" but that the funding "has been removed for the FY27 budget." She said the intent is to use those funds for a pilot year to hire external legal counsel to provide training and legal advice to the board.

Committee members pressed on whether outside counsel would attend revocation hearings. Ainsworth said she "doesn't think it's necessary for the board to have legal counsel at the revocation hearings" and argued that "if the board is properly trained...the legal counsel would be there to provide the training, the legal assistance after the fact, or any litigation if any were to arise." She added that if immediate legal advice is needed a hearing can be postponed to obtain counsel.

Todd Dalos, Assistant Attorney General, described recent practice: AGO attorneys previously provided episodic support for hearings and board support, but DOC recently asked AGO to stop representing PMT for the board; AGO now continues to represent DOC on litigation and other matters. Dalos also said that "if they are sued, the Attorney General's Office represents them," referring to the AG's civil division handling state entity litigation.

Members questioned whether the $25,000 pilot is sufficient. Multiple committee members recommended an evaluative component — tracking hours used, number of cases requiring counsel, and the role AGO still played — and suggested the pilot may need $50,000 to attract bids and produce a usable training product. The chair and several members emphasized continuity concerns as long‑serving board members retire, noting the weight of decisions board members make about individuals' liberty.

On procurement, Ainsworth said the Attorney General's Office would help with a simplified bid process and that the state already has similar contracts “in support of other similarly sized boards.” Members noted an earlier RFP for $25,000 produced no bids.

On budgeting, Ainsworth said she has participated in quarterly budget meetings with DOC accounting and that the Agency of Human Services will be involved. The committee discussed inserting temporary session‑law language to lay out a two‑year process for how the parole board submits budget needs, followed by a legislative report recommending whether the board should have a separate line item or remain within DOC.

The committee directed staff to prepare a revised draft (draft 1.1) that incorporates the pilot project, training structure and reporting requirements. The committee also asked that the pilot include a report back that measures product and cost and informs whether additional funding or structural change is needed.

Next steps: staff will draft language to reflect the pilot legal representation, training and budget process; the committee will meet again to continue a line‑by‑line review of draft 1.1 and consider whether to increase the pilot appropriation to improve procurement outcomes.