This commentary is by Kelly Stoddard Poor, associate state director of AARP Vermont.
As Vermont lawmakers confront a projected $33 million deficit in the state’s Transportation Fund, the Legislature faces tough decisions about what to cut. But one thing should be off the table: public transit.
Cutting transit funding — especially at a time when reductions to Medicaid are imminent — would put thousands of Vermonters at risk and ultimately cost the state far more than it saves.
Public transportation receives just 3% of all state transportation dollars, despite serving Vermonters who have no other way to get to work, medical appointments, grocery stores or community services.
And the need for transit is only growing. Vermont is now the second-oldest state in the nation, with nearly 30% of residents age 60 or older. Many older Vermonters no longer drive, and thousands rely on public transit every year to maintain independence. In 2025 alone, transit providers delivered nearly 10,000 rides to adult day programs, helping families across the state keep loved ones safe, connected and aging in place.
Public transportation is not a convenience — it is a lifeline.
Proposed Medicaid reductions could limit or eliminate coverage for transportation to medical care. Pair that with additional cuts to transit service, and the result is predictable and dangerous: Vermonters missing essential medical appointments.
Dialysis. Cancer treatments. Physical therapy. Chronic disease management. Mental health care. None of these can happen if patients can’t get there.
According to Health Management Associates (HMA), eligibility-related reductions in the federal reconciliation package — sometimes referred to as the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (OBBBA) — are estimated to reduce total Vermont Medicaid funding (combined federal and non-federal shares) by $55.8 million in 2027, growing to a nearly $200 million reduction in 2030. Rural areas will bear a somewhat higher share of the reductions (70% by 2030).
This is not a hypothetical risk. Transit agencies across the state already report that recent route reductions have made it harder for Vermonters — especially older adults and low-income residents — to reach health care providers. With Green Mountain Transit forecasting a $1 million shortfall in state fiscal year 2027 and up to $3 million in 2028, those gaps will widen without legislative action.
About 66% of Vermonters live in rural areas, where there are few sidewalks, long travel distances and no ride-hailing services. Without public transit, people in these communities simply cannot access jobs, medical appointments, education or community life.
Transit is also a key tool for reducing social isolation — a dangerous and costly public health issue. When older Vermonters lose the ability to get out into their communities, their risk of depression, dementia and other health complications rises sharply. Public transit helps prevent that.
Investing in public transportation pays off. National research shows a 5-to-1 economic return for every dollar spent on transit. Reliable transportation helps employers fill jobs, keeps the health care system functioning, reduces congestion and pollution and strengthens rural economies.
The Vermont Public Transportation Association has outlined several reasonable revenue options — such as modest increases in vehicle registration fees, a retail delivery fee, or updated rental car taxes — that would help stabilize transit funding. These tools are far less costly than the long-term consequences of allowing Vermont’s transit network to erode.
AARP Vermont urges the Legislature to avoid cuts to public transit in fiscal year 2026. In an aging state like Vermont, transit is essential infrastructure for older adults and people with disabilities. Policymakers must focus on long-term, sustainable revenue solutions to maintain and strengthen these critical services.
Public transportation allows older Vermonters to remain independent, supports working families, strengthens local businesses and keeps rural communities connected. Cutting it now — especially in combination with Medicaid reductions — would create a crisis felt in hospitals, workplaces and homes across the state.
Vermont’s budget challenges are real. But balancing the books by isolating older adults, stranding rural residents and denying people access to health care is not fiscal responsibility — it’s a moral failure. Lawmakers must choose solutions that keep Vermonters moving forward, not leave them behind.
