Despite governor’s opposition, Vermont House to consider bill to establish overdose prevention sites
A bill held over from last year focuses on setting up a pilot program of overdose prevention sites in the state. Gov. Phil Scott is concerned with the approach.
December 28, 2023 | By Patrick Crowley | VTDigger.org
Rep. Theresa Wood, D-Waterbury, listens as a House and Senate budget conference committee discusses the budget at the Statehouse in Montpelier on May 9. Photo by Glenn Russell/VTDigger
Among the first orders of business in the Vermont House this session is likely to be a bill that would provide the legal framework and funding to launch overdose prevention sites in the state, Rep. Diane Lanpher, D-Vergennes, chair of the House Appropriations Committee, told members of her committee on Tuesday.
The legislation could set up a showdown with Gov. Phil Scott, who reinforced on Wednesday that he is opposed to the concept. Lanpher said she had the bill scheduled for the appropriations committee to take up on Jan. 3.
During a pre-session meeting, Rep. Theresa Wood, D-Waterbury, chair of the House Human Services Committee and a sponsor of the bill, said that while the current language of the bill, H.72 —- which was significantly amended after its introduction —- would fund a single site with $1 million, she hopes lawmakers will amend it to fund two sites at a cost of around $2 million.
“One of the things that is really propelling us forward on this is to try to prevent additional deaths in the state of Vermont due to overdoses,” Wood said. “And we firmly believe — and the data does support this — that this is another tool in our toolbox.”
Wood said her committee has already heard “significant interest” from communities wanting to host the overdose prevention sites, which would allow for a supervised location where pre-obtained substances can be injected using clean needles and supplies. Staff on site would be prepared to reverse an overdose if needed.
“The City of Burlington is ready, willing and anxious to host a site,” Wood said. “We would also like to establish one in southern Vermont.”
Wood also said she thought that based on recent conversations, Health Commissioner Mark Levine had “softened” his stance on the sites. In 2022, Gov. Phil Scott vetoed a bill that would have led to a study of how harm prevention sites might operate in Vermont.
Asked about his administration’s current stance on harm reduction sites during a press conference on Wednesday, Scott said, “there’s no softening from my standpoint.”
Jason Maulucci, a spokesperson for Scott, said in an email on Wednesday afternoon that the governor “continues to believe the unproven sites would divert resources away from more impactful and proven harm reduction, treatment and prevention strategies. They also remain federally illegal which is not contemplated in the bill.”
Scott said during the press conference that he hadn’t read the most recent version of the bill. Maulucci said the governor was concerned about language in the bill as introduced, portions of which had a stated goal of “reducing the criminalization of personal drug use,” according to the original language.
The bill as amended would only provide immunity from drug possession charges for someone using or working at an overdose prevention site, as well as a site’s property owner. Maulucci said the governor was concerned that the decriminalization language from the original version could still be reintroduced before passage.
H.72 was introduced last year primarily focused on immunity for “safer drug consumption” programs, but it did not fund any prevention sites specifically. The bill was amended in early May by the House Ways & Means Committee, but did not return to the floor.
To pay for the sites, the revised bill proposes drawing from the “manufacturer fee” fund, which charges pharmaceutical companies that participate in state-run health insurance programs an annual fee based on total prescription drug spending. Under the bill, that fee would increase to 2.25% from 1.75%.
Wood said that fund was chosen over the opioid settlement funds due to the manufacturer fee being available “in perpetuity” rather than the settlement, which is time-limited.
Rep. Taylor Small, P/D-Winooski, one of the bill’s sponsors and a member of the human services committee, said the committee heard testimony from researchers working in British Columbia, Canada, and Rhode Island that changed the overdose prevention site concept from being something “theoretical” to something “tangible.” But she also said it wouldn’t be a “silver bullet.”
“This is not going to solve all the problems when it comes to overdoses in our communities,” Small said on Tuesday. “But it’s necessary in order to get folks into treatment.”
Wood told members of the appropriations committee that just a few years ago, she would not have supported overdose prevention sites, but after record overdoses in the state she was now an enthusiastic supporter and hoped other House members would see that it’s the “right next step.”
“I stand here today in front of your committee saying that it is absolutely the thing that we need to do,” she said, before adding, “one of the things that we need to do.”
This story was originally published on VTDigger.org.