The battle over Act 143 has taken place largely out of the public eye, due in large part to our media’s failure to cover a highly consequential dispute between the Scott administration and the Legislature. But it’s about to boil over in ways that should be unignorable by our Wise Heads in editorial offices.

That’s partly because two different legislative hearings on Act 143 implementation will be held in the next ten days. It’s also because the effects of administration policy are coming into focus, and they are truly disastrous. It is, in the words of a blogpost by the ACLU of Vermont, a “Crisis By Design.”

Or in the words of housing advocate Brenda Siegel, we are on a path toward “catastrophic outcomes like we never have before.” For those in the back thinking to themselves, “But isn’t Brenda Siegel a nagging bitch?” my response is, “Sure, and that’s what makes her so effective as an advocate for an unpopular cause.” She has served, very effectively, as the conscience of Vermont on an issue that Our Political Betters would prefer to ignore.

Siegel also calls the current situation “the worst thing I’ve ever seen,” and she has seen more bad shit in her years as a housing advocate than any of us should have to endure in a lifetime. Her words deserve to be taken seriously by all Vermonters with a soul. Which may or may not include Mr. Phil Scott.

But I need to recap how we got here. Last spring the Legislature passed a bill to reform Vermont’s emergency housing program, colloquially known as the hotel/motel program. It was a carefully considered piece of legislation designed to help the unsheltered in a more systematic way while ensuring that those in need are not simply abandoned. It was designed to build a better system while also passing muster with the governor.

He did, in fact, sign the bill. But afterward, his minions immediately began undercutting the bill, now known as Act 143. They rushed through a new system with extremely little public input. And the system they designed, you’ll be shocked to learn, seemingly has more to do with cost saving than with Scott’s self-proclaimed priority of protecting the most vulnerable.

Because if unsheltered people aren’t among our most vulnerable, I’d like to know who is.

The administration proceeded at a rapid pace despite the fact that Act 143 provided a full year for implementation. If there was a crisis that called for quicker action, it was what the ACLU calls a “crisis by design,” a manufactured urgency aimed at rushing implementation with minimal oversight.

The thing that most caught public attention about the new system is that it ended access to a 24/7 helpline. Instead, the unsheltered can only reach out for help during normal business hours. Because as we all know, emergencies always happen on weekdays before 4:30 p.m.

The unsheltered also face a complicated assessment process that has proven difficult for many to navigate, especially those with disabilities or medical conditions. As the ACLU put it, the process “can take days and serves as a barrier for people in crisis.” The process is touted by administration officials as a way to comprehensively assess the needs of applicants, but its real aim seems to be cutting costs by discouraging applicants with a dense thicket of bureaucracy.

And hey, if some of these people aren’t going to survive their ordeals, we will have achieved the administration’s unspoken goal of decreasing the surplus population.

It all seems contrary to the spirit AND the letter of Act 143. Many in the advocacy community are talking about legal action — and are confident of victory. As Siegel put it, “The Legislature went out of their way to ensure that barriers would be removed” for the unsheltered. Instead, new barriers have been created. People are already being denied shelter, and the winter ahead could be catastrophic. A lawsuit may be coming down the pike, but the first crack at this will be taken by certain legislative bodies.

This Friday October 9, the House Human Services and Senate Health & Welfare Committees will hold a joint hearing on the administration’s implementation of Act 143. Those two committees took the lead role in crafting the Act. The House chair, Rep. Theresa Wood, has already expressed skepticism about the implementation process and outcome. Administration officials can expect some pointed questions, or perhaps even a direct confrontation.

Next Thursday, October 15, the House-Senate Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules will take up Act 143. This committee’s work is generally deep in the bureaucratic weeds, but LCAR must give its stamp of approval to how the executive branch decides to implement new laws. If the chairs of the relevant policy committees openly oppose the administration’s new emergency housing program, LCAR would be under heavy pressure to reject it. Which it has the power to do.

All of this is happening, need i remind you, in the midst of a campaign season. The last thing Phil Scott needs is an outbreak of open warfare with the Legislature. He also doesn’t need to be playing the part of Ebenezer Scrooge before the three spirits came a-calling. Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?

The administration deserves to be taken to task for its treatment of Act 143. I never like to expect bravery from lawmakers, but the administration’s handling of the new law is so egregious that they may not be able to look the other way or settle for cosmetic alterations. I’ll be following the proceedings as best I can. Hopefully there will be other reporters on hand as well. This story merits broad, incisive coverage.