Gov. Phil Scott held a momentous press conference today/Wednesday, in which he and a whole bunch of lawmakers unveiled major legislation aimed at tackling Vermont’s housing crisis. (Nobody used the fabled term “omnibus,” but it would have been appropriate.)

It was inspiring, it really was. Scott shared the stage with Democrats and Progressives as well as Republicans, to launch an initiative that’s the end product of what had to be really hard and earnest tripartisan negotiations. It’s the kind of thing that Scott has managed to pull off on occasion when truly engaged. It’s the kind of thing that has earned him his (overblown) reputation for being less interested in politics than in Getting Stuff Done, a reputation that flies in the face of his all-time record for gubernatorial vetoes. Still, this time he rose above partisanship to put this bill together.

And given the truly “all hands on deck” nature of the unveiling, I expect they’re going to pull it off. Which would be remarkable, and a real accomplishment.

(Before I continue, I must explain the illustration at the top of the page. The event featured a whole lot of people sharing the stage with the governor. After the big reveal, Scott asked reporters to stick to the subject at first and hold other questions for later. After the housing questions were exhausted, Scott allowed the assembled guests to depart. Apparently some technician back at the office mistook the ensuing hubbub for the end of the presser, because the feed was cut off at that point. The rest of the Q&A was unavailable on either ORCA Media or WCAX. Oopsie!)

So here’s the place where I point out the turd in the punchbowl.

The event was in stark contrast to the situation with emergency housing for Vermont’s homeless, where the administration is sticking to an inhumane approach that will leave more than a thousand Vermonters, many of them disabled, elderly, or children, without shelter come April 1.

Before the premature cutoff of the presser’s feed, one reporter brought up the emergency housing situation and asked what was being done to provide shelter for those affected by the scheduled end of the motel voucher program. “What is the plan?” the reporter asked. “What do you see going forward to avoid mass unsheltered homelessness?”

The answer was less than edifying. Administration officials simply couldn’t wait to change the subject, and none of the assembled lawmakers — not even that stalwart of Progressivism, Rep. Taylor Small — offered a single word of comment. I guess they were too polite to bogart the governor’s microphone. Those about to be unsheltered would probably wish for a bit less deference.

“Yeah,” Scott began. “We, there are many measures we can take. We’re working on them.” He looked behind him, signaling to the bullpen. “Commissioner Winters?”

Up stepped Chris Winters, Commissioner of the Department of Children and Families and designated crash test dummy for the administration’s terrible plans for after the first of April.

“Thank you, as the governor said, we are taking a number of measures to try to create shelters in the short term,” Winters said. “But I think it’s really important to remember that in the long term, a bill like this is one of the most effective things that we can do to address the problem that we’re facing today. The scope could be much smaller if we had units. DCF is the, is the safety net, and we want to emphasize the importance of this bill, this bill in front of us today, to people experiencing homelessness.”

He continued in that vein for another few sentences, his eyes shifting around as if looking for an exit. Hey, Commissioner, blink twice if you need to be rescued.

Every time I write something about Winters, people tell me what a great guy he is. I don’t doubt it. But he is in the position of implementing and explaining away a heartless policy. He is the face of administration policy on this issue. It’s a terrible position to be in. Almost as bad as being on the edge of Winters’ infamous “cliff” and waiting to feel the push.

I don’t mean to downplay the significance of this joint effort on housing. It was a signal moment on a pressing issue. If only there was a parallel effort to avoid a mass unhousing in less than four months’ time.