Kate Kanelstein, in the second row at left, testified against imposing a three-year cutoff in the Reach Up program Monday at a Vermont Interactive Television hearing on the state budget. Beside her is Cindy Perron of Barton, who testified on health care. In the foreground at right, George Frisbee, commander of the Jay Peak Post of the American Legion, testifies against a proposed tax on break open tickets. Beside him is Harvey Robitaille, past commander of Legion Post 21 in Newport. Legion members attended the hearings at sites across the state to argue that the tax would cripple the charitable programs the Legion supports in Vermont. Photo by Chris Braithwaite
by Chris Braithwaite
copyright the Chronicle 2-13-13
NEWPORT — Kate Kanelstein of the Vermont Workers Center was a bit apologetic when she sat in front of the camera during a statewide budget hearing Monday afternoon.
She had planned to bring several women who face the loss of their Reach Up benefits under the cutoff proposed by Governor Peter Shumlin.
But none of them could make it, she told the members of the House and Senate Appropriations committees who convened the hearing.
The women had encountered problems with child care, car troubles, sick family members, and one of them was in labor, Ms. Kanelstein said.
She used her few minutes on Vermont Interactive Television to read a statement from Reach Up participant Jess Ray of West Charleston.
But the explanations she offered the committee might serve as a quick summary of the problems that keep Reach Up participants, typically single mothers, out of the labor force.
Ms. Ray, for example, wrote that she is a mother of two, living with a boyfriend. “Combined, we get $770 each month. Our rent is $550 so after paying bills I usually end up with like $20 for everything else. I love to sew and want to be a seamstress, but I would do pretty much anything if I could get a job.”
Ms. Ray went on the say that the arrival of her first child ended her career at a Barton nursing home five years ago. “I went on Reach Up for the first time because I didn’t get any maternity leave with my job.”
They left Reach Up when her boyfriend got a job, but returned in less than a year because the company went bankrupt, she wrote.
“Then we got off again when I got a job at Thibault’s Market in Orleans but our car wasn’t inspectable and we didn’t have the money for the repairs so after about three months I couldn’t get there and lost that job, too. As you can see we live on the edge and it’s really hard to get stable…. Living in West Charleston without transportation makes it incredibly difficult.”
“I also want to understand what you are basing these budget decisions on,” Ms. Ray told the legislators. “Do you look at the real life situations of people in our communities? I think that is where we should start.”
The decision in question is whether the Legislature should follow the Governor’s wishes and, on October 1, cut off all families who have been in the Reach Up program for three years.
According to Chris Curtis, a staff attorney with Vermont Legal Aid, 1,188 families would lose their benefits in October, of a total of about 6,400 families on the program.
Of that total, as of September last year, 315 families with 775 family members are in the Newport district of the Department of Children and Families, which oversees Reach Up. Their benefits that month totaled $147,764, or about $470 a family.
The average Reach Up participant wouldn’t be affected by a three-year cutoff. According to a state report, “the average amount of time that an individual in Reach Up receives case management services is approximately 24 months.”
But people who know the program in Newport are worried about the impact a cutoff would have.
“My biggest fear is the children,” said Mary Hamel, who runs a job site for Reach Up participants as associate director of employment and training for NECKA.
“Reach up is for families,” Ms. Hamel said. “Cutting them off is taking away their rent money — the roof over a child’s head. That concerns me.”
It concerns Mr. Curtis too. People forced out of Reach Up may end up in the state’s emergency shelter program, he said, and that is already “an exploding part of state government. What happens if you add another 1,200 families, just as the winter season arrives?”
Other branches of state government, including the Department of Corrections, may face a “ripple effect” from the Reach Up cuts, Mr. Curtis fears. “Are we really saving any money here?”
His estimate is that the cuts will save Reach Up about $6-million. “That’s huge to the families,” he said, “but to the General Fund it’s a relatively small amount.”
Mr. Curtis argues that the statistics show Reach Up works for most of the people who are forced to use it. “The state of Vermont has invested a lot of resources into making this bridge out of poverty,” he argued. “Why would we blow up that bridge?”
Since she set up a Reach Up work site for NECKA in 2008, Ms. Hamel said, “we have seen many success stories.”
NECKA provides jobs for 15 to 30 Reach Up participants, Ms. Hamel said. Some work at the Parent Child Center in Newport, as a receptionist or a maintenance worker. Others work at the cash register or keeping track of the inventory at NEKCA’s thrift store in Newport.
Reach Up has other partners who provide jobs in schools, municipalities and with nonprofit organizations.
The jobs go to Reach Up participants who can’t find work. They pay nothing (outside of Reach Up benefit payments) but aim to help the participants learn job skills.
Younger Reach Up participants fulfill their job requirement by going to school.
The Governor’s proposal would permit families to take advantage of the full five years of benefits supported by federal block grants. But there would be interruptions. After three years, participants would be on their own for a year. Then they could sign up for another year, be left on their own for a year, and come back to the program for a fifth and final year.
Efforts to reach Paul Dragon, director of the Reach Up program, were unsuccessful. In his budget address to the Legislature, Governor Shumlin said “there is no better social program than a good paying job. We will not allow vulnerable Vermonters, such as those who are disabled, to fall through the cracks, but we will ask those who can work to get the training and support they need and get a job.”
If the cutoff becomes law, Ms. Hamel said, “it will cause more homelessness, more hunger, more stress.
“I just don’t think it’s a great idea. Maybe it’s a good idea to have a conversation about it, but I think it’s a bad thing to take the Governor’s plan seriously.”
contact Chris Braithwaite at [email protected]
For more free articles from the Chronicle like this one, see our Editor’s Picks pages. For all the Chronicle’s stories, pick up a print copy or subscribe, either for print or digital editions.