Share Email 1K Shares

Vermont is losing residents at an unsustainable rate, Gov. Phil Scott told lawmakers at his budget address Thursday. His solution: a plan to pay out-of-staters $5,000 to take a job in Vermont, any job.

Vermont made international news last summer when it announced its remote worker program, which will reimburse out-of-staters up to $10,000 for their costs if they move to work remotely from Vermont.

Get all of VTDigger's daily news. You'll never miss a story with our daily headlines in your inbox.

Scott’s latest proposal, included in his annual budget address, includes $1 million to pay outsiders to move to the state for Vermont jobs. The incentive would be available for workers of all types, said Joan Goldstein, commissioner of the Vermont Department of Economic Development.

On Friday, officials from the Vermont Agency of Commerce and Community Development started selling the idea to the Senate Economic Development, Housing and General Affairs Committee.

Mike Schirling, secretary of the Vermont Agency of Commerce and Community Development, told the committee Friday that the agency wants to expand funding for recruiting out-of-staters to $1 million for Fiscal Year 2020, and a million in Fiscal Year 2021.

“We envision it as an ongoing program,” Schirling told the committee.

Joan Goldstein, commissioner of the Department of Economic Development, said when the department launched the remote worker program, many Vermont employers were dismayed that the state was spending money on a program that wouldn’t help them find employees, a top priority for many.

“They said, ‘Great, you’re helping out-of-state companies,’” Goldstein said. “So we thought, ‘Imagine the level of interest if we expanded it.’”

VTDigger is underwritten by:

Sen. Michael Sirotkin, D-Chittenden, asked how the department would ensure it wasn’t paying moving expenses that would otherwise have been covered by the person’s employer.

“A lot of businesses will pay for moving expenses,” he said. “Why are we subsidizing a business?”

“If they’re reimbursed by their employer, they’re not going to get money from the state,” Goldstein said. “We’ll have the employer verify it.”

Scott’s latest proposal, included in his annual budget address, includes $1 million to pay outsiders to move to the state for Vermont jobs. The incentive would be available for workers of all types, said Goldstein.

“We have not decided to put a limit on what they are supposed to make, because we don’t want this to be perceived as being only for high-paid people,” Goldstein said. “We need entry-level people, people all across the spectrum, people in hospitality.”

In all, Scott proposed $2.5 million “to identify those most likely to consider moving to Vermont, tell them our story and make it easier for them to get here.” That includes more targeted marketing and recruiting. Half a million dollars would go toward what Schirling called “relocation agents” at the state Department of Labor who would help out-of-staters find jobs, housing and amenities.

“There are regional components to both of those things,” Schirling said after the governor’s speech.

The decline of Vermont’s working-age population is a pressing concern for the administration. According to Scott’s office, there are 23,000 fewer people in Vermont under age 20 now than there were in 2000, and nearly 30,000 more Vermonters who are over 65 than there were in 2000. The unemployment rate was 2.8 percent in December. Economists have said the shortage is suppressing economic growth.

“We simply need more people helping to pay the bills,” Scott said in his budget address.

The $5,000 incentive is designed as an expansion of the remote worker program, news of which traveled around the world after Scott signed it into law last summer. The news prompted people from all over the world and the U.S. to contact the state Agency of Commerce and Community Development about moving. Many who learned they weren’t eligible for the remote worker program participated in another of the state’s programs, called Stay to Stay, where they visited Vermont on their own dime and met with community leaders, business leaders and local officials to talk about finding work and housing in Vermont.

The department said those Stay to Stay weekends did bring in some new residents at almost no cost to the state, and the program will be expanded this year.

The newly proposed program would be open to remote workers, not just workers moving for Vermont jobs.

“But it would also help existing Vermont firms recruit for their vacant positions,” Schirling said. He noted that the $10,000 remote worker incentive announced last year – paid for with a one-time $500,000 appropriation that must be spread out over a few years – will probably be spoken for quickly. An application form that became available Jan. 1 has been downloaded 2,500 times, Schirling said and 20 people have applied.

“It’s pretty much encumbered; we just don’t exactly know by who,” he said.

Schirling emphasized that the idea for the original remote worker program started with lawmakers, and he expects lawmakers to help craft the details of the latest proposal. The Senate committee got down to business on that right away on Friday. Sen. Alison Clarkson, D-Windsor, said she’dlike to see detailed data showing the results of the agency’s efforts to attract workers last year, and asked how they would target their marketing to people who seemed most likely to move to the state. Clarkson noted that the committee wanted to see the agency expand its efforts to help Vermonters develop the skills they need to get jobs.

“It’s wonderful we have gotten a lot of attention on the remote worker program, and I agree we have a major demographic issue,” Clarkson said. “But we have a major issue in this state on growing our workforce skills.”

She added that the state might need more time to evaluate the new remote worker program before supplementing it.

“We haven’t seen how remote worker plays out yet,” Clarkson said. “I know the sexiness of all the attention we got was great, but with new programs I think we should see how they work out before we reinvest in something different.”

Ed. Note — This story was updated with comments from legislators at a Friday morning hearing.

Share Email 1K Shares