The current debate about the emergency shelter program has very narrow parameters. The Senate Appropriations Committee is pondering the House’s addition of $21 million to the Budget Adjustment Act, that would extend the motel program from March 31 to June 30. The Scott administration, staring down the barrel of a losing battle which would (rightly) paint Governor Nice Guy as a heartless Scrooge, has proposed $11 million to shelter some people during those three months.

$21 million versus $11 million. That’s the debate.

Well, it shouldn’t be.

This week, to absolutely no notice from Our Political Press, a coalition of housing advocacy groups presented a plan that would actually provide a bridge for the unhoused instead of a cliff. It is, in fact, called “Bridges to Housing.” The plan isn’t meant as gospel; the groups decided to lay out one idea of what a solid plan would look like, just to show that it can be done.

Because, you know, the current debate still involves a cliff. It’s a matter of when we let recipients fall off the edge — March 31, June 30, or a mish-mosh in between.

This plan ought to spark some serious discussion, not to mention soul-searching, in the corridors of power. Will it? The fact that it got zero press attention would suggest that it will not.

If nothing else, the plan ought to be a Rohrschach Test or our seriousness about addressing Vermont’s status as the second-worst state in the nation for per capita homelessness. That’s a fact that ought to make us all ashamed and embarrassed. It ought to trigger serious action. Maybe we could at least aim to get out of the bottom 10 instead of deliberately exacerbating the problem by allowing the motel program to expire.

Granted, as everyone will agree, the program has to go away sometime because it’s been fueled by federal Covid relief funds, and those are running out. But Bridges to Housing shows that there are alternatives to simply sunsetting the thing and taking away shelter from thousands of, in the governor’s words, Our Most Vulnerable.

Okay, so how much would Bridges to Housing cost? The short, misleading answer is about $368 million. The “misleading” part is that this isn’t all new money. Some of these proposals are on the table or already included in the budget. Still, it’s a lot higher than $21 million. But the alternative — allowing our fellow Vermonters to become totally unhoused — ought to be even more unpalatable.

The big-ticket items: $175 million for capital spending on a range of housing development, $72 million to further extend the motel program until better options are created, $40 million for improvements and expansions of existing shelters, and $20 million in additional funds for the state program that provides support and services for emergency housing clients. (This program is very successful despite being under-resourced.)

It’s a lot. But the total budget is what, $8 billion? There’s room to do more for the housing crisis. One of my truisms about the lawmaking process is that when leaders want something to happen they always find the money, and when they aren’t serious about something they turn their pockets inside out and shrug.

Besides, as always, multiplier effect. This money would boost the construction sector and create employment, not to mention turn the unhoused into productive members of society. These are investments, not giveaways.

The advocacy groups stepped forward right now because there are still some federal funds to invest, and that won’t be true for very long.

I mean, I’m all in favor of universal broadband. I support infrastructure improvements. The governor’s plan and the House’s alternative are full of great ideas.

We appear destined to squander this opportunity and watch the sheltered become unhoused. The debate is limited to whether or not we can “afford” $21 million. Really, if we’re half as progressive as we’d like to think, we ought to be making a real effort at building a bridge — if only to mitigate our sense of shame. And legislative Democrats shouldn’t confine themselves to finding a number small enough for the governor to accept; they ought to be acting on their alleged principles.

But I’m not holding my breath.

The plan in full: