VEDA seeks to fold agricultural credit program into VEDA statute to streamline lending

Joan Goldstream, chief executive officer of the Vermont Economic Development Authority (VEDA), presented the committee with the agency’s request to incorporate the Vermont Agricultural Credit Program (VACC) language into the main VEDA statute and remove obsolete administrative references.

"For the record, Joan Gold stream CEO of Vita," Goldstream said, explaining VEDA's mission of providing financing to businesses and agricultural enterprises. She said the change is an administrative consolidation intended to streamline operations — avoiding separate boards, separate payroll and duplicate documents — without changing lending terms or borrower protections.

Goldstream provided FY25 figures: VEDA closed about $61 million in new loans across 173 loans, with roughly $15 million in the agricultural portfolio supporting 286 farms via 553 agricultural loans overall. She said VEDA typically serves as a primary lender for farms and takes subordinate positions on commercial deals, and that its agricultural lending is supported by a CoBank agricultural line of credit.

Members pressed VEDA staff on forestry and market conditions: Representative Lutsky thanked VEDA for including forest operations and raised concerns about market collapses and processing losses from Maine to New York. Goldstream and Andy Wood (director of agricultural lending) said lending decisions weigh historic business performance, collateral and relationships; discounted rates for certain equipment loans were made possible by state funding used as a loan-loss reserve.

Lawmakers also asked about the Jobs Fund references in the statute and the S.16 disaster appropriation. Goldstream said the $2 million appropriation from last year serves as a disaster loan reserve enabling rapid deployment in non–federally declared events, although the special fund referenced in statute remains largely unfunded as an ongoing source.

The committee did not take formal action during the hearing; staff and members indicated they would share the language with commerce/economic development staff for final review and that witnesses could be asked to clarify statutory cross-references in subsequent meetings.