Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Will the house please come to order and members kindly take their seats? Will the house please come to order? Good morning. Good morning. Happy Friday. The devotional today will be led by representative Ray Garofano of Essex.

[Representative Golrang "Rey" Garofano (Essex)]: Good morning.

[Speaker 2]: Good

[Representative Golrang "Rey" Garofano (Essex)]: morning. That translates to spring has arrived in Farsi. Today, I offer a reflection inspired by Norus, the Persian New Year, which begins at the moment of the spring equinox which is at 10:46AM today. Nowruz has been celebrated for more than three thousand years across Iran and much of Central And Western Asia. The word the word Nowruz simply means new day. It marks the moment when the earth tilts back toward the sun and the long winter begins to loosen its grip. As Vermonters, we understand the significance of winter giving away to spring. We measure it in small signs, the lengthening of the days, the softening of the ground, and the first stubborn crocus pushing through the snow. In Persian culture, that same turning of the season marks the arrival of Norus, the Persian New Year, and for thousands of years, it has marked not just the passing of time, but the promise that renewal is always possible. Across Persian culture, the arrival of spring has always been tied to poetry. For centuries, poet have used the seasons to remind us that renewal is possible, that even after the harshest winter, life returns again. One lesser known poem written by Norus by the Iranian poet, Mohammed Taqibahar, includes these lines in translation. Spring now, flowers awaken, and joy climbs the green vine. Blossoms open everywhere, though some hearts will wait for their season. Yet the lily whispers on the New Year's wind, do not surrender to darkness. The garden remembers how to bloom. This reminds us that spring arrives whether the world feels ready for it. The earth insists on renewal. For many Iranian families, including those of us, like my family, who came here seeking freedom and opportunity, Nowruz is both a joyful both joyful and bittersweet. It reminds us of the beauty of our heritage, the poetry, the food, the gathering of generations around the table, of symbols of hope and rebirth. But this year, Norils arrives during a time of deep uncertainty for many in Iran. War and conflict have brought fear, loss, and instability to communities across the region. Families who would normally gather freely around the New Year table are instead facing anxiety about the safety of loved ones and the future of their country. And yet even the shadow of conflict, many will still mark the arrival of spring, quietly holding on to ancient belief at the heart of Norus that renewal is possible and that one day peace and freedom may return just as surely as spring returns to earth. Perhaps that is a deeper lesson of Norus, spring is not just a season, it is a responsibility. It asks us to clear away what is stagnant, to plant what is hopeful, and to care for the fragile things that allow communities to flourish. Here in Vermont, we are fortunate to live in a place where differences of backgrounds, culture, and belief can enrich our communities. In a small meaningful way, even recognizing holidays like Norus reminds us that democracy itself is a kind of garden, one that requires patience, humility, and care. So as the Persian New Year approaches, I offer this simple wish that is spoken in homes around the world. May the new day bring renewal, may wisdom guide our work, and may the coming spring remind us that even after the longest winter, hope has a way of returning.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Members we have five house bills for introduction today. The first is house bill nine forty five which is an act relating to hemp products introduced by representative Campbell of St. Johnsbury. Please listen to the first reading of the bill.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: H nine forty five, an act relating to hemp products.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Now the bill has been read the first time and is referred to the committee on agriculture, food resiliency and forestry. House bill nine forty six is an act relating to the advertisement and cost of utilities under a residential rental agreement introduced by representative Logan of Burlington. Please listen to the first reading of the bill.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: H nine forty six, an act relating to the advertisement and costs of utilities under a residential rental agreement.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Now the bill that's been read the first time is referred to the committee on general and housing. House bill nine forty seven is an act relating to the requirement to implement a residential universal design building code introduced by representative Burrows of West Windsor. Please listen to the first reading of the bill.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: H nine forty seven, an act relating to the requirement to implement a residential universal design building code.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Now the bill has been read the first time and is referred to the committee on general and housing. House bill nine forty eight is an act relating to membership of the retired employees committee on insurance introduced by representative of South Burlington. Please listen to the first reading of the bill.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: H nine forty eight, an act relating to membership of the retired employees committee on insurance.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Now the bill has been read the first time and is referred to the committee on government operations and military affairs. Finally house bill nine forty nine is an act relating to homestead property tax yields, the non homestead property tax rate and the technical changes to education finance. Introduced by the committee on ways and means. Please listen to the first reading of the bill.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: H nine forty nine, an act relating to homestead property tax yields, the non homestead property tax rate and technical changes to education finance.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Now the bill has been read the first time and as a committee bill that carries an appropriation is referred to the committee on appropriations pursuant to House Rule 35A. Members we also have three Senate bills for referral today. The first is Senate Bill 189 which is an act relating to establishing a process for reducing or eliminating hospital services introduced by Senator Lyons. Please listen to the first reading of the bill.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: S189, an act relating to establishing process for reducing or eliminating hospital services.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Now the bill has been read the first time and is referred to the committee on healthcare. Senate bill two zero three is an act relating to penalties for second or subsequent violations of operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol or drugs introduced by senator Hashim. Please listen to the first reading of the bill.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: S two zero three, an act relating to penalties for second or subsequent violations of operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Now the bill has been read the first time and is referred to the committee on judiciary. And finally, senate bill three thirteen is an act relating to transforming Vermont's career technical education system. Introduced by senator Ron Hinsdale and others. Please listen to the first reading of the bill.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: S three thirteen, an act relating to transforming Vermont's career technical education system.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Now the bill has been read the first time and is referred to the committee on commerce and economic development. Are there any announcements? Member from Brownington.

[Representative Kenneth "Ken" Wells (Brownington)]: Thank you very much, madam speaker. When all of us in this room of 150 make the voyage to this historic building every day, it's a sacrifice we've all agreed to consider to be part of the job. That sacrifice is also from your family and friends as a week's pile in the months during the busy season. Occasionally over dinner after a long day in the trenches, the conversation with my wife goes over each other's battles. For her at the local bank, she manages, and for me, the 11 man and woman crew of transportation trying to make sure Vermonters can get to and fro on the state's highways, interstates, and byways. Eventually, the discussion all comes down to the critical point. So honey, what did you do today? I generally try to make it a little more exciting than it truly is, but last night I decided I would just tell the truth. So I said, I talk and I talk and I talk all day, and when I get sick and nobody listening to me, I come back to you, baby. She quickly countered. So it's pretty much the same routine you have at home. With that said, madam speaker speaker, could you help me welcome my wife, Laurie, to the house of representatives today? She's sitting in the upper deck.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Will the family member or the member from Burlington please rise and be recognized? Member from Burlington.

[Representative Abbey Duke (Burlington)]: Madam speaker, he was a collegiate athlete running the 100 meter sprint and undergraduate at the University of Cairo, a d one soccer player at Iowa State University. He's a rated chess player and still a competitive player in the game, a third degree black belt, an internationally renowned ballroom dancer teaching the art all over the world for many years and starting the social dance program at the University of Alabama. He has a 123 publications under his name. He's taught consumer economics in five countries, including doing so at my alma mater, the University of Alabama, roll tide, for many decades. He's a Fulbright scholar. He's a proud Egyptian immigrant. And most importantly, he's my dad. Will the body please welcome doctor Mohammed Abdulghani to the people's house he's seated in the gallery?

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Will the family member, the member from Burlington, please rise and be recognized? Member from Burlington.

[Representative Kate Logan (Burlington)]: Madam speaker, you may be wondering, am I rising to highlight and perhaps gloat that with 100 points I sit at the top of the men's bracket. Well, you would be right, but I'm also standing to welcome two employees of the Patrick Leahy Burlington International Airport to the house, Nick Longo and Jeff Bartley. Now the airport, it's easy to underestimate how important the airport is to our economic activity in in the state. All of you got an economic impact assessment report. And if you turn to page 22, you'll see that in 2018, the estimate was the airport contributed under half under half of about $500,000 to the economy. 500, sorry, $500,000,000 to the economy, and now it's just over 1,000,000,000. On March 31, Project Next opens, which is the new terminal at the airport and kinda ushers forth more growth at the airport. And if any of you didn't take advantage of tours of the airport last summer, they assured me that they'll be offering tours to legislators again this summer. So I wanna take a moment to celebrate the airport and also our guests in the people's house.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Will the guests and the member from Burlington please rise and be recognized? Member from Burlington.

[Representative Barbara Rachelson (Burlington)]: Thank you. Jada Gleason is a senior at UVM. She is going to be rolling into the sustainable MBA program in August. She has also been volunteering for the climate advocacy group, Run On Climate, and she will be interning with me here in the building until the end of the session. Please join me in welcoming Jada to the people's house.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Will the guest and the member from Burlington please rise and be recognized? Member from South Burlington.

[Representative Bridget Burkhardt (South Burlington)]: Madam speaker, I'd like to introduce you in this body to some real VIPs. Two of my uncles, two aunts, two cousins, and three voters to be. Which means good morning in Portuguese. Visiting all the way from Brazil is my uncle Robert and his wife, Maria Lordies Dutra. My uncle is a man committed to improving the world around him and has incredible stories from his life's adventures. My uncle Eddie and his wife Jane are no strangers to this body as they have been frequent visitors and my biggest supporters. They have always been my second parents and I love them dearly. My uncles may look familiar to those of you who have been here for a while. They are my dad's brothers. My dad was the middle child of five with my uncle Robert immediately older and my uncle Eddie, the next one after my dad. I'm excited to also have two of my cousins and their kids here today. My cousin, Matt, is a lifelong Charlotte resident and is the current chair of the town's planning commission. My cousin, Julia, is an early childhood educator and the driving force behind an accessible for all playground in Burlington. With them, their future voters and three of the smartest kids I know, Bowden, Caleb, and Micah. Please join me in welcoming them here today.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Will the family of the member from South Burlington please rise and be recognized? Member from Fairfax.

[Representative Ashley Bartley (Fairfax)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I would like to invite the body to the caucus for Vermont's economy meeting today. We are having two guests from the climate office of the agency of natural resources. They'll be here to talk to the caucus about economic development implications to our resilience plan. And on another note, I am currently tied for first place in the women's bracket. And if you haven't set your brackets yet, you have an hour, thirty one minutes, and fifty seconds to do so.

[Representative Lori Houghton (Essex)]: Is there an introduction?

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: One member member from Waterbury.

[Representative Thomas Stevens (Waterbury)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I would hope that the body and everyone here would join me in wishing the member from Northfield a very happy birthday today.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Happy birthday, member. Member from Shelburne.

[Representative Shawn Sweeney (Shelburne)]: Madam speaker, I am happy to have a young constituent here today, Thomas Sharam, who is a freshman at CVU, and I would love for us to welcome him to the people's house.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Will the guest of the member from Shelburne please rise and be recognized? Member from Barrie City.

[Representative Michael Boutin (Barre City)]: Madam speaker, I just want you to know that I did a bunch of data searches today and scrubbed the Internet and used many data brokers to find out a member's birthday today. And I do want to ask the body to wish the member from Bradford a happy birthday.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Happy birthday, member. Member for Milton.

[Representative Chris Taylor (Milton)]: Madam Speaker, it's my honor to welcome Girl Scout troop six zero three three six and a little brownie that also help with a special project making raised beds in Milton. Under the leadership of their co leaders, Victoria Herman, Willow Lango, and Jamie Lynn Fletcher, they demonstrated a strong sense of teamwork and a commitment for helping others. As you will hear in the resolution that will be read today, they made sure that all Milton community members, including those with a disability, a physical challenge, or or even in a wheelchair, could be part of our Milton community garden. And, no, I didn't know that on the calendar today was gonna be h five thirty seven, the right to grow a vegetable garden. I didn't plan it. Please help me in welcoming these young ladies, their co leaders, and all their family members to the people's house. They are seated in the balcony.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Will the guest of the member for Milton please rise and be recognized? Are there any further announcements? Members before we gavel in, have a house resolution to read. HCR one sixty. One sixty eight is a house concurrent resolution congratulating the members of troop six zero three three six of Milton on earning the Girl Scout bronze award. Please listen to the reading of the resolution.

[House Assistant/Reading Clerk]: Whereas Girl Scout troop six zero three three six of Milton, which is affiliated with the Girl Scouts of the Green and White Mountains, annually applies the proceeds of its Girl Scout cookie program sales towards a worthy community project makes a real difference in the town and demonstrates these girls Girl Scouts leadership, teamwork, and commitment to helping others. And whereas most recently, troop six zero three three six constructed and installed a rain barrel system at the Milton Community Garden to create an easier and more accessible watering process. Whereas the rain barrel is a container that collects rainwater and features a spigot at the bottom, This alternative watering method eliminates the necessity of dragging a heavy hose for a long distance, more accessible option for persons with disabilities. And whereas a critical component of this project is a set of six raised garden beds designed to support gardeners with disabilities or physical challenges, including persons who are wheelchair users. And whereas registered Girl Scout juniors who are enrolled in fourth or fifth grade and complete a junior journey such as troop six zero three three six's community garden project are eligible for the bronze award, the highest honor for this age category of girl scouts. And whereas troop six zero three three six members Corcoran Fletcher, Josephine Herman, Alice Longo, Harper Gabriel, Jillian Thompson, Aria Frank, and Faith Owen are deservedly proud recipients of the Girl Scout Bronze Award in honor of their dedicated effort to develop a rainbath service at the Milton Community Garden. And brownie Vivian Fletcher, although not an award eligible recipient, deserves special recognition for her participation in this worthy endeavor. And whereas troop six zero three three six's coleaders, Victoria Herman, Jamie Lynn Fletcher, and Willow Longo, were essential for the success of this innovative initiative that will broaden the accessibility of the Milton Community Garden. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the general assembly congratulates the members of troop six zero three three six of Milton on earning the Girl Scout Bronze Award. And be it further resolved that the secretary of state be directed to send a copy of this resolution to Girl Scout troop six zero three three six.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Now we will enter orders of the day. Members, we will begin with house bill six forty two, which is an act relating to youthful offender proceedings. Prior to third reading, the member from Barrie City, representative Boutin offers an amendment to the bill that is printed in today's calendar. Member from Barrie City.

[Representative Michael Boutin (Barre City)]: Madam speaker, in 2018, this body passed, raised the age, making Vermont the first state in the country to treat 18 year olds as children in our criminal justice system. Today, 18 year olds are processed through family court. And under current law, that expansion is set to go even further by automatically raising the age up to 20 years old next year. Let's be clear about what this means. It's not accountability. It's lowering the bar for personal responsibility at a time when our communities are already struggling with public safety challenges. Even the Department of for Children and Families warned us in 2022 about this legislation. DCF testified that expanding the system would strain their caseloads and have detrimental impacts at a minimum. They asked for a delay and we did the minimum and kicked the can down the road again and again. This amendment says enough. This does not change how 18 year olds are currently treated. Let me repeat that. This amendment does not change how 18 year olds are currently treated. They will continue to be processed through family court. This does not eliminate the flexibility in the system for them. Right now, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges already have the ability to move 19 through 22 year olds into family court when appropriate. That that discretion remains. What this amendment does is stop the automatic expansion to up to 20 year olds. It ends the looming deadline, it ends the uncertainty, and it restores a system that allows for case by case judgment instead of a blanket policy. We should not be expanding a system that our own agencies have warned us is not ready for and may never be. We should not continue delaying a policy that many of us know is heading in the wrong direction. This is a reasonable and measured step. It preserves what is already in place while stopping an expansion that raises serious concerns for capacity, accountability, and public safety. I do urge that the body would support this amendment to this bill. Thank you.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: And now for the committee on judiciary, member from Brattleboro.

[Representative Ian Goodnow (Brattleboro)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Your house judiciary committee heard from the member on his amendment yesterday, and your, committee on judiciary found the amendment unfavorable on a vote of six five zero. And to the amendment, madam speaker, house judiciary took extensive testimony on raise the age last session. And as part of that, discussion, the house passed h two, which was later became act four and passed into law. As part of act four, section 10 requires that DCF provide, two reports to the legislature on 07/01/2026 and 12/01/2026 as to the steps that they are taking to be ready for the enactment of Race Age on 07/01/2027. We believe that it's would be prudent to get those reports before we make any kind of decision about what to do next with race c h. And so, we ask that the body, vote, against this amendment.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from Barrie City? Member from Barrie City.

[Representative Michael Boutin (Barre City)]: Madam speaker, I I just want to acknowledge my appreciation for the judiciary committee for taking this up even though I disagree with their decision. I, again, want to urge the body to vote yes for this amendment.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from various city? Are you ready for the question? Member from Low? Member from Low request that when the vote is taken, it be taken by rolls. The member sustained. The member is sustained. When the vote is taken, it will be taken by roll. The question is shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from Barre City? Are you ready for the question? Member from Barrie Town.

[Representative Gina Galfetti (Barre Town)]: Madam speaker, I'd like to thank the member from Barrie City for offering this amendment today. I think the people of Vermont sent a clear message when they sent us here when they elected us last election cycle, and they have serious concerns about public safety. And I think it's widely apparent that unfortunately, while the raise the age initiative was well intentioned, Vermont has become the target by outside criminal syndicates to use younger and underaged people to commit crime in Vermont. And by continuing to raise the age, we are setting up younger people from other states for failure and to be sent into Vermont's court system over and over again, and it's time for us to stop.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from Barrie City? Member from South Burlington.

[Representative Martin LaLonde (South Burlington)]: Yes, madam speaker. We've had, some good experience, with having, juveniles in the juvenile justice system. We've had studies showing,

[Representative Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: that

[Representative Martin LaLonde (South Burlington)]: the recidivism rate for individuals in that system are much lower than in the criminal system. And we feel that the brain science suggests Sorry about that. I don't know what happened with this thing. That part of the reason we did this is for the brain science of individuals that there is impulsive behavior and that a mistake that's made when somebody is a youth, and that would also include a 19 year old, shouldn't harm them for the rest of their lives. But but that's not the main point. We've had debates over whether 19 year olds should go to this into juvenile system. And it's been frankly very frustrating that we've had to postpone this because of the intransigence apparently of the entities that are supposed to be putting this into place. So it's we I would rather not reward the delays that have happened by repealing what is very good policy. Just one more item as well as far as why we should wait. We are gonna look at this again after we see those two reports. We're gonna look at it at the beginning of next session if the good people of South Burlington will have me back. And and this is gonna be an issue that we're gonna be more informed about where we are. We also have a report coming out in October from the crime research group that looks at the recidivism rate for 18 year olds who have been put into the system. So we're gonna have that information as well. So it's really critical that we we look at this deeply and and with the additional information next session. And I urge, the members of the body to vote no on this amendment. Thank you.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from Barrie City, member from Burlington?

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington)]: Madam speaker, I wanna acknowledge the concerns behind the amendment and the very real challenges that we have faced holding people accountable. But I wanna remind members that the behavior that we are trying to hold accountable is happening for a reason. And perhaps instead of focusing on punishing people, we should be focusing on what's causing that behavior to begin with. Thank you.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Member from Barrie City.

[Representative Michael Boutin (Barre City)]: Sorry to rise again. I I appreciate the comments that have been made. I do want to emphasize that currently in the system, 19 and through 22 year olds still will have that opportunity when when the case arises where, you know, the the prosecutor, the defense attorneys, and judge decide to put the child or because they're not children, they're adults into the family court system. And I would agree that we need to address the underlying issues within the the problems that are causing people to get to that state. We'd love to have that conversation at some point. Thank you.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from Barrie City? Are you ready for the question? Member from Barrie Town.

[Representative Gina Galfetti (Barre Town)]: Once again, I'd like to thank the member from Barry City for pointing out that discretionary power within the courts and through the prosecutor's office will remain for offenders up to the age of 22, and I think that's more than adequate per protection given the risks that we are facing. And as far as the the brain science and development argument goes, I find it ironic that oftentimes, the initiative to have

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington)]: excuse me.

[Representative Gina Galfetti (Barre Town)]: I thank the member from Barrytown for that distraction. I find it ironic that so often the argument for 16 year olds to be able to vote is made in this chamber time and time again. Yet when they're committing crime, suddenly their their brains are not fully developed enough to be accountable for those actions. So I urge you to support this amendment. The courts will still have discretionary power on folks up to the age of 19, and we need to start honoring our commitment to public safety to the people of Vermont.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from Barrie City? Are you ready for the question? Member from Essex Junction.

[Representative Patricia McCoy (Poultney)]: Madam speaker, I appreciate the concerns that are being brought up in this amendment and just want to clarify that it is not necessary at this time. There is nothing that is going to change right away. We have until July and we can be making those decisions based on data that we're getting with reports. And so I urge the body to stand with our process of making data driven decisions and vote no on this amendment.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Are you ready for the question? If so, will the clerk please call the roll?

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Arsenault of Williston. Go.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Two minutes. Will the house please come to order and members kindly take their seats? Will the house please come to order? I would like to remind members that we are in the middle of a roll call vote. Members and guests are prohibited from using computers, phones or any type of an electronic device. Please refrain from the passing of notes and conversation during a roll call and when the clerk calls your name please answer in a loud and clear voice so the clerk can accurately record your votes. The question is, shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from Barrie City? Will the clerk please continue to call the roll?

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Austin of Colchester. Bailey of Hyde Park. Bartholomew of Heartland. Bartley of Fairfax. Rebecca of Winooski. Birong of Regents. Bishop of Colchester. Black of Essex. No. Bloomley of Burlington. No. Bosch Westminster. No. Basha Clarendon. Yes. Gutenberg City.

[Representative Ian Goodnow (Brattleboro)]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Boyden of Cambridge. Brady of Williston? No. Birmingham of Georgia? Yes. Branagan of St. Almondstown? No. Brown of Richmond? No. Burditt of West Rutland? Burkhardt at South Burlington. No. Burrows at West Windsor. No. Burditt Cabot. Campbell, St. Johnsbury. No. Canfield for Haven.

[House Reading Clerk]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Carris Duncan at Whitingham. Casey at Montpelier. No. Casey Hubbardton.

[Speaker 2]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Chapin at East Montpelier. No. Charlton at Chester.

[Representative Jed Lipsky (Stowe)]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Christie of Hartford? Gina of Burlington? No. Coffin of Cavendish?

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Cole of Hartford? No.

[Representative Daisy Berbeco (Winooski)]: Conlon of Cornwall? No. Cooper Pownall? No.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Corcoran of Bennington? No. Critchlow of Colchester? No. Damar of Venusburg? Yes. Dickinson of Saint Albans Town? Yes. Doberville of Williamstown? Yes. Dodge of Essex? Dolan of Essex Junction?

[Representative Ela Chapin (East Montpelier)]: No.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Dolgin of Saint Johnsbury?

[Representative Ela Chapin (East Montpelier)]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Donahue of Northfield?

[Representative Bridget Burkhardt (South Burlington)]: No.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Of Burlington? No. Durfee of Shaftsbury? Estes of Guilford? No. Emmons of Springfield? No. Feltus Glendon? Yes. Galfetti of Berrytown? Yes. Garifano of Essex? Goldman of Rockingham? No. Goodnow, Brattleboro? No. Ghostland of Northfield?

[Speaker 2]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Granting of Jericho? No. Greer Bennington?

[Representative Elizabeth Burrows (West Windsor)]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Greg Warrior Fairfield? Hango Briggsier. Yes. Harper of Glover. Yes. Harvey of Castleton. Hedrick of Burlington.

[Speaker 2]: No.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Higley. Holcomer Norwich. No. Cooper Randolph. Poten of Essex Junction. No. Howard or Rutland City.

[Representative Kate Logan (Burlington)]: No.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Holland or Rutland Town.

[Representative Barbara Rachelson (Burlington)]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Point Of Hartford. No. Hunter Manchester. James Manchester. No. Kacenska, Burke. Keyser, Rutland City. No. Kimball Woodstock.

[Speaker 2]: No.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Klepner, Burlington. No. Fort Heiser at Brattleboro? No. Creswell, South Burlington?

[House Assistant/Reading Clerk]: No.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Labour at Morgan? No. Lallie Schauburn? No. Lalona South Burlington? No. Lamonta Morristown? Larussia Franklin? Yes. Lipsky of Stowe? Absolutely. Logan of Burlington? No. Long and Newfane? No. Leaders of Lincoln? No. Luno of Saint Albans City? Yes. McGuire of Rutland City? Malay of Pittsburgh? McBaun of Berrytown? Yes. McGillard Bridport? Yes. Nicholas of Milton?

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Mollie of Calis? No. Minnie of South Burlington? No. Morgan Ela Milton? Yes. Morgan Emma Milton? Morse of Springfield?

[House Reading Clerk]: Yep.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Morse of Bennington? Yes. Morse Weston? No. Nelson, a Derby? Yes. Nelson, a Brandon? Michael Benington. North of Ferrisburg. Mollie S. Wilkhardt. Newgen of South Burlington. O'Brien of Tonbridge. O'Brien of Burlington. Oliver of Sheldon? No. Olson of Starksboro? No. Page in Newport City? Parsons in Newbury? Yes. Pezzo of Colchester? Yes. Pinsonault of Dorset? Houcher Hinesburg? No. Powers of Waterford?

[Representative Daisy Berbeco (Winooski)]: No.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Priestly of Bradford? No. Bridget Burditt Paulette? Yes. Quinby of Linden? Yes. Rachel's in Burlington? Second, it's Randolph. No. Shire Middlebury. No. Sheldon Middlebury. No. Speedy of Dover. No. Southworth Walden. Squirrel of Underhill. Steady in Milton. Stephens Waterbury. Stone Burlington. Sweeney of Shelburne.

[Representative Shawn Sweeney (Shelburne)]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Taylor Milton? Thomas Tomlinson? Thomas Tomlinson? Walker of Swanton? Waters Evans of Charlotte? Wells of Brownington? White or Whitefield? White or Bethel? No. Of Ludlow? Yes. Wood of Waterbury? No. Yakavoni, Morristown? No. Bailey of High Park. Rebecca Winooski? Carris Duncan of Whitingham, Christie of Hartford, Dodge of Essex, Harvey of Castleton, Cooper of Randolph, Hoyda Hartford, Morgan Emma Milton, Oliver of Sheldon, page in Newport City, Rachel's in Burlington, Sylvia Dover, study in Milton.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: For purpose of explanation, member from Northfield.

[Representative Anne B. Donahue (Northfield)]: Madam speaker, I believe there's an urgent need to revamp our convoluted systems for youth justice from raise the age to youthful offender to a single clear system of addressing the needs both of accountability and with recognition of the impact of age. Clarity about what will happen for a given crime is essential to an effective criminal justice system. However, the piece piecemeal impact of this amendment does not help to achieve this.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Member from Barrie City.

[Representative Jonathan Williams (Barre City)]: Madam speaker, our criminal justice system in America is deeply broken. While public safety is a paramount responsibility of government, we shouldn't use our youngest offenders as scapegoats when poverty and desperation are the true offenders.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Member from Dover.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Madam speaker, May I vote?

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: You may.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Sibilia of Dover.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Member from Barrytown.

[Representative Gina Galfetti (Barre Town)]: Madam speaker, may I explain my vote?

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: You may.

[Representative Gina Galfetti (Barre Town)]: Raising the age is a loophole used to facilitate criminal activity with impunity. While perhaps well meaning in its intent, it is clear that criminal elements are now actively targeting and recruiting younger people, and that is disturbing. And this loophole must be closed.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Members, please listen to the results of your vote. Those voting yes, 53. Those voting no, 83. The nays have it and you have declined to amend the bill. Now prior to third reading, the member from Rutland City, representative McGuire offers an amendment to the bill that is printed in today's calendar. Member from Rutland City. Will the house please come to order?

[Representative Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: Everybody's phones off? Just kidding. Madam speaker, I wanna I want to begin by acknowledging and appreciating the thoughtful and diligent work that has gone into h six '42 by your house judiciary committee. This bill represents meaningful progress in strengthening our youthful offender system, particularly through improvements to the revocation process in 5285 and by elevating the role of victims more clearly and consistently under 5288. The judiciary committee has invested significant effort in addressing long standing procedural gaps, and the result is a sincere and commendable update to an important part of our justice system. The amendment before you builds on that foundation. Its purpose is not to redirect the work of h six forty two, but to support and reinforce it. The amendment language is simple. The content of sections two through nine of age seven twenty one. And by incorporating it into age six forty two, we ensure the reforms in this bill operate with a clear, modernized statutory structure, one that better reflects the realities and needs of youthful offender cases today. At present, the system struggles to effectively respond to certain serious offenses committed by youth. Offenses that require levels of supervision and procedural clarity that the family court framework and DCF caseworkers are not designed or resourced to provide. The amendment helps address these challenges by aligning h six forty two's improvements with updated jurisdictional standards, clear public safety criteria, and more consistent timelines. Without these updates, the strong work done in h six forty two risks operating within definitions and processes that no longer match the complexity of many of these cases. H six forty two appropriately approves revocation standards. This amendment complements our work by ensuring the courts have clearer guidance on public safety considerations and a more complete understanding of use prior's compliance. Together, these amendments make the underlining reforms more effective and more workable in practice. While age six forty two strengthens the voice of victims in youthful offending proceedings, the amendment helps ensure that those rights function consistently within an updated hearing structure. One that clarifies confidentiality rules, access standards, and case transfer protocols. These refinements reduce confusion and support a more transparent and predictable process for all parties involved. The amendment also addresses the challenges of extended timelines, which too often lead to cases stretching beyond the use eligibility or losing momentum. By integrating clearer transition points and timelines, we reinforce the goal of connecting timely supports and expectations to youthful behavior. One of the most important elements of a rehabilitative system. The intent to this in of this amendment is not to increase incarceration, rather is it to ensure a balanced effective structure, pairing appropriate services with reasonable accountability, improving public safety, and encouraging constructive engagement through a process. It enhances the work already done in age six forty two by ensuring that its reforms are supported by statutory framework capable of carrying them out. Colleagues, I ask, H six forty two moves the system forward. It truly does. It moves the system forward in an important way. This amendment complements and strengthens that efforts by helping create a more consistent, modernized, youthful offender process. I respectfully ask for your support. And, madam speaker, when the vote is taken, I ask that it is taken by role. Thank you.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The member from Rutland City request that when the vote is taken, it'd be taken by roll. Is the member sustained? The member is sustained. When the vote is taken, it will be taken by roll. Member from Brattleboro.

[Representative Ian Goodnow (Brattleboro)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Your house judiciary committee, heard from the member on his amendment yesterday, and we thank the member for his amendment and what he's trying to do with it. The committee found the amendment unfavorable at on a vote of six four one. And on on the amendment, madam speaker, the youthful offender laws in Vermont are complex. H six forty two and the work done by the committee reflects extensive time taken to work within those laws and try to close some of the gaps that we've heard about over the years. And we believe that it accomplishes that. The amendment that's before the body would make some fundamental structural changes to youthful to the youthful offender laws in Vermont that we haven't heard testimony on. It would take discretion away from prosecutors in certain instances. It would push court timelines in a way that we don't know how it would affect the judiciary, and it would structurally shift much more of the burden onto the criminal court. And for all those reasons, we would need to hear more from all of the different parties that are involved. But even more critically than that, madam speaker, the proposed amendment before the body would reinstitute a conditional plea structure into the youthful offender statute, which we've heard from a number of parties that that used to be in the in the law in Vermont. And that conditional plea had a very chilling effect on the youthful offender use in in Vermont. Now that that is not in the law anymore, youthful offender is used much more readily, and it is and we get good outcomes for our Vermont youth. And so we don't think putting the conditional plea back in is the is the right step for youthful offender youthful offender statute. And so we ask that the body vote no against this amendment.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from Rutland City? Are you ready for the question? If so, will the clerk please call the roll?

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Arsenault of Williston. Two

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: minutes. Will the house please come Will the house please come to to order order? And members kindly take their seats? I would like to remind members that we are in the middle of a roll call vote. Members and guests are prohibited from using computers, phones or any type of an electronic device. Please refrain from the passing of notes in conversation during a roll call. When the clerk calls your name, answer in a loud and clear voice so the clerk can accurately record your votes. The question is, shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from Rutland City? Will the clerk please continue to call the roll?

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Austin of Colchester. Bailey of High Park. Bartholomew of Heartland. Bartley of Fairfax, Rebecca of Winooski, Byron of Regents, Bishop of Colchester, Black of Essex, Bloomley of Burlington, Bos in Westminster. Bosch at Clarendon. Bootenberry City. Boyden of Cambridge. Brady of Williston. Ranigan of Georgia. Brigham And St. Albans Town. Brown of Richmond. No. Burditt, West Rutland. No. Burkhardt of South Burlington. Burrows in West Windsor? No. Burt at Cabot? Yes. Campbell St. Johnsbury? No. Canfield of Fairhaven? Yes. Carris Duncan and Whitingham? Casey Montpelier? Yep. Casey Hubbardton? Chapin East Montpelier. Charleston Chester. Christie of Hartford. Gina Galfetti. Yes. Cole of Hartford?

[Representative Daisy Berbeco (Winooski)]: No. Colin of Cornwall? No. Cooper Ponnell? No.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Corcoran or Bennington? No. Critchlow, Colchester? No. Demar of Venusburg? Dickinson of St. Albans Town? Yes. Dobrovich at Williamstown? Yes. Dodge of Essex? Dolan of Essex Junction? No. Talking to St. Johnsbury? Yes. Donahue of Northfield? Duke of Burlington?

[Representative Ian Goodnow (Brattleboro)]: No.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Durfee of Shasbury? No. Eastes with Guilford? No. Emma Springfield? No. Feltus of Linden? Yes. Galfetti, Barrytown? Yes. Garifano of Essex? No. Goldman in Rockingham? No. Good now, Brad Burrow? No. Ghostland in Northfield?

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Granny of Jericho? Greg Burditt? Yes. Greg Burrows?

[Representative Charles Kimbell (Woodstock)]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Barbara Glover? No. Harvey of Castleton? Hendrick of Burlington? Higley Abloh. Yes. Holcomer Norwich. No. Cooper Randolph. Houghton of Essex Junction. No. Howderland City. Yes. Holland or Rutland Town. Yes. Hoiter Hartford. Hunter Manchester. James Manchester. No. Kasenska. Burke. Keyser. Rutland City. Kimball. Burlington. No. Corcoranizer. Brattleboro. No. South Burlington. Labour and Morgan. Yeah. Lallie of Shelburne. No. Malone to South Burlington. No. Lamon to Morristown. La Russia Franklin, Lipsky of Stowe, Logan of Burlington, Longe and Eufein, leaders of Lincoln, Luno, St. Albans City, Mcguire of Portland City? Mallet of Pittsburgh?

[Representative Lori Houghton (Essex)]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Madison of Thetford? No. McCoy of Pulte? McFawn of Berrytown? Yes. Mac McGillop Report? No. Nicholas and Milton?

[Speaker 2]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Mollie Callis? Minnie or South Burlington? Morgan Ela Milton? Morgan Ela Ela Milton?

[Representative Kenneth "Ken" Wells (Brownington)]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Morris of Springfield? No. Morris of Bennington? Yes. Mora Weston? No. Roeke or Putney? No. Nelson at Derby? Yes. Nelson at Brandon?

[Speaker 2]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Michael Benington? No. Martha Fairsburg? Yes. Mollie S. New to South Burlington? O'Brien of Tonbridge, O'Dee Burlington, Oliver of Sheldon, Olson of Stirksboro, Page of Newport City, Parsons of Newberry, Pezzo of Colchester? No. Pintinall Dorset? Yes. Doctor. Heinzberg? No. Powers Waterford? No. Bridget No. Bridget Burditt?

[Speaker 2]: Yes.

[House Clerk BetsyAnn Wrask]: Richardson of Burlington? Psychowitz of Randolph? No. Shia Middlebury? No. Sheldon of Middlebury? No. Sebeli of Dover? No. Southworth of Walden? Yes. Squirrel of Underhill? Steady Milton. Stevens of Waterbury. No. Stone of Burlington. No. Sweeney of Shelburne. No. Tyler B. Corcoran. Yes. Taylor Milton. Yes. Taylor Munden. Tom Charlton. Wells Of Brownington? White or Wightfield? No. Winter at Ludlow? No. Wood at Waterbury? No. Jacobonia, Morristown? Bailey Pypark. Carris Duncan of Whitingham. Christie Hartford. Dodge of Essex. Harvey Castleton. Cooper Randolph. Wood Hartford, Cresno South Burlington, Oliver of Sheldon, page in Newport City, Rachel's in Burlington, Steady Mill 10.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Member from Williston? You may.

[Representative Angela Arsenault (Williston)]: Madam speaker, we must not confuse punishment with accountability. Youthful offender status aligns with Vermont's statutory requirement to provide young people with rehabilitative services and improves public safety as evidenced by the remarkably low recidivism rates. We must also avoid making decisions rooted in the misguided assumption that our criminal justice system works. It does not.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Members please listen to the results of your vote. Those voting yes 52. Those voting no 85. The nays have it and you have declined to amend the bill. Members, please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[House Reading Clerk]: Page six forty two, an act relating to youthful offender proceedings.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is shall the bill pass? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have passed the bill. Up next is house bill nine thirty which is an act relating to addressing and preventing chronic absenteeism. Prior to third reading, the member from East Montpelier, representative Chapin will offers an amendment to the bill that is printed in today's calendar. Member from East Montpelier.

[Representative Ela Chapin (East Montpelier)]: Madam speaker, my amendment stems from personal experience with students with developmental disabilities and how efforts to prevent chronic absenteeism can actually negatively affect certain students with disabilities, reducing their access to education even when everyone has the best of intentions. I shared my personal experience with your Committee on Education yesterday and explained my concern that a model policy related to chronic absenteeism may not adequately address how to approach truancy issues and prevent chronic absenteeism for students with disabilities because our current truancy policies do not seem to provide options to address chronic absenteeism in a way that works for all students with disabilities in any clear way as far as I can tell. I offer this amendment to ensure that the model policy that would be developed by the agency of education under this bill will address this issue. The amendment would change subsection eleven twenty four subsection a that starts with the agency of education in consultation with a number of entities that I'm not gonna read shall develop and review at least annually a model policy on the prevention of chronic absenteeism and truancy. And the amendment would add after that sentence, which shall include specific provisions for how to address the absence of a child with a disability as that term is defined in subdivision twenty nine forty two subsection one of this title in accordance with applicable state and federal law. Madam speaker, students with developmental disabilities along with students from other historically marginalized groups, neurodivergent students and their families and their support teams already have an uphill battle to stay in school and access their education. I greatly appreciate your committee on education taking the time to hear this amendment and give it some time and thought working to ensure students all have the support they need to access a public education. I'm hopeful that this is viewed as a friendly amendment to further support and improve our truancy process and efforts to reduce chronic absenteeism, and I ask for the body's support.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Member from Manchester.

[Representative Kathleen James (Manchester)]: The committee thanks, the member for the input as well as, sharing her lived experience. On a straw poll, we voted eleven zero in favor of this amendment and we wish for your continued support.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from East Montpelier? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have amended the bill. Now prior to third reading the member from West Windsor, representative Burrows and the member from Morristown, representative Lamont will offer an amendment to the bill that is printed in today's calendar. But first members, I want to give you a heads up now that the amendment offered by the member from East East Montpelier was agreed to, the third instance of amendment offered by the member from West Windsor and the member from Morristown would amend the same provision of the bill. But the clerk has advised that she has conferred with legislative council and that the third instance of amendment will not conflict with the one already agreed to and that we would interpret their third instance of amendment as beginning with and proceeding with which shall include. So with that, member from West Windsor. Member from Morristown.

[Representative Saudia LaMont (Morristown)]: Madam speaker, I would like to start by thanking the committee for their work on h nine thirty. It is a brilliant attempt at reducing truancy and focusing on chronic absenteeism. However, in the list of suggested reasons for allowable absence, some things were missed. I also thank the member for the previous amendment that we just that that just came forward. We heard yesterday in this chamber that our students are struggling with mental health. We heard that suicide is the second leading cause of death for ten to fourteen year olds, and that one in four high school students admit to self harm, That one in fifteen students admit to attempting suicide at some point in the past year. There's an African proverb that says, how are the children? The response should be, the children are well. Our children are not well. There are insinuating circumstances outside of medical health that can lead to the cause of absenteeism, specifically as addressed in our amendment, hazing, harassing, and bullying, to which the symptoms are detrimental to our students and affect not only their mental health, but their physical health, safety, and well-being. In my district alone, since my time in this body, there have been multiple suicide attempts in school, including a death. This impacts not just the students who we lost and who are harmed, but as well as their peers. Self harm happens as a result of the impact of the things that some of the behaviors in our school that occur that are not addressed, making it unsafe for our students to be there. The wounds heal, the scars remain. Some of us don't have the privilege to look away. This amendment focuses on the emphasis of the importance of tailored responses to all students struggling with safety and emotional issues and the unique aspects of each case, including the practices for safe reentry into the educational spaces. I thank the committee for hearing this amendment, not just for my children, but for all of Vermont's youth. And I hope that in the model policy to come, we see strong measures that provide a safe, inclusive, accessible learning environment for all of our youth so our students can be safe. Students should be more than just bodies in a chair. They are humans. And I would rather us have safe living children at home than harmed or deceased children in schools. I will yield to the member from Windsor.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The member from Morristown yields to the member from West Windsor.

[Representative Elizabeth Burrows (West Windsor)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I just wanna follow-up with, the fact that I mentioned the other day, which is that, in 2023, this body or members of this body tried to address the structures in our systems through which we deal with hazing, harassment, and bullying. And one of the legislature's responses to that was added on to s one thirty eight, and it was a working group, the working group on student protections from harassment and discriminations in schools, which was charged with exploring and and making recommendations for three things. One was the elimination it the elimination of the severe and pervasive standard for harassment, discriminate and discrimination for students in educational institutions. One was the resources required for schools to develop harassment prevention initiatives as well as supports for students who have experienced harassment. And the third one was compulsory educational attendance requirements for students who have been victims of harassment. I attended every single one of the meetings of this working group and to say that several of the meetings were extremely contentious is an understatement. I I attended the meetings as a watcher, not as a participant. But of the three questions that were addressed in that working group, the one that was easiest for this group was actually discussing compulsory attendance. And many of the witnesses that were brought into the education committee in in developing and discussing h nine thirty were actually members of this working group. Of the report that was published in January 2024 from that working group, The recommendation included it is recommended that due consideration be given to cases where students may face may be facing mental disabilities that impact their ability to attend school. It is important to emphasize that the intention is not to penalize victims of harassment or discrimination by compelling their attendance when they are not emotionally prepared. Likewise, there was a discussion about being cautious not to create a situation where students are inadvertently missing out on educational opportunities and activities due to unaddressed issues. Striking a balance that supports the well-being of students while ensuring their access to education remains a priority. And then it goes on to say, a one size fits all strategy is insufficient. Instead, the working group recommends the advocate for attendance, requirements that consider individual circumstances ensuring a more effective response to diverse attendance challenges. So, essentially, I asked for the, recommendation from this report to be drafted into the amendment before you now. Hazing, harassment, and bullying is a pernicious problem in our school system in both public and independent private schools that has gone unchecked and continues to fester. The longer the longer we give it tac tacit permission to run rampant, the more severely the safety the more severe the safety concerns for students. This amendment does not address hazing, harassment, and bullying, but to acknowledge that it impacts every aspect of a student's life, which includes mental health and safety. That makes this amendment a small, but meaningful possibility. Thank you for your support.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Member from Manchester.

[Representative Kathleen James (Manchester)]: Once again, the House Committee on Education is truly grateful for the members' heartfelt testimony, powerful testimony. On a straw poll, we approve this eleven zero and again ask for your support.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from West Windsor and the member from Morristown. Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have amended the bill. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[House Reading Clerk]: H nine three zero, an act relating to addressing and preventing chronic absenteeism.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill pass? Are you ready for the question? Member from Durfee.

[Representative David Durfee (Shaftsbury)]: Thank you, madam speaker. And thank you to the members for your amendments that made a truly good bill, a better bill. After serving, I'm think I'm in my sixteenth year on the school board. And to say we truly have empathy for these issues that pose a chance to harm our students is an understatement. So thank you for your amendments and thank you to House Education for their hard work on this bill.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill pass? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have passed the bill. Now we'll turn to House Bill two ninety four which is an act relating to commissionary and telecommunication prices in state correctional facilities and fair compensation for incarcerated labor. Prior to third reading, the member from Burlington, representative Gina and the member from Northfield, representative Donahue offer an amendment to the bill that is printed in today's calendar. Member from Burlington.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington)]: Madam speaker, the amendment before you would add language to the list of stakeholders that the Department of Corrections is directed to consult with in the creation of a report. The exact language that would be added is incarcerated Vermonters, formerly incarcerated Vermonters, and organizations representing incarcerated or formerly incarcerated individuals. Madam Speaker, this amendment would would enhance the intent of the bill. The intent of the bill states that it is the intent of the general assembly to create conditions of incarceration that encourage the development and maintenance of the personal supports necessary for rehabilitation. First, this amendment would support that intent by creating a mechanism to gather qualitative data that would improve the report because the perspective of individuals that are directly impacted is an important one that can provide data that could not come from any other perspective. Furthermore, this amendment would support the intent of the bill because inclusion is an important social driver of health and crime and criminal behavior. So if we want to create conditions of incarceration that encourage the development and maintenance of the personal supports necessary for rehabilitation, promoting inclusion would further support that intent. Thank you.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Member from Montpelier.

[Representative Conor Casey (Montpelier)]: Madam speaker, we thank the members for their visiting committee today and we agree, having these live voices at the table will only strengthen the study committee. As such, your committee on corrections and institutions found this amendment favorable on a straw vote of ten zero one and we urge your support.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from Burlington and the member from Northfield? Are you ready for the question? Member from Northfield.

[Representative Anne B. Donahue (Northfield)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I want to add a brief note. When the member from Burlington raised this issue yesterday, it struck a very immediate chord for me as a member of a of a disenfranchised minority group that sometimes dealt with with discrimination. I think it's incredibly important to hear the voices of those directly impacted. The disability community has a slogan, nothing about us without us. So I think this amendment really underscores that we want that as a key principle in any legislation we bring forward to include those voices. There's another slogan that says if you're not at the table, you're on the menu. And I don't think that's true in this case. These voices would not the contrary, it's intended to be helpful. But I think the principle is important and I thank the committee for its support and the body.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from Burlington and the member from Northfield? Are you ready for the question? Member from Rutland City.

[Representative Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: Thank you, madam speaker. May I interrogate the member from Burlington, please?

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The member from Burlington is interrogated.

[Representative Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: Madam speaker, I I greatly appreciate the amendment that's been placed in. I just wanted to ask whether or not there was any conversation about adding a voice at the table in regards from any of our victim services agencies within the state.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington)]: Any conversation where?

[Representative Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: Oh, in regards to any thought in that you might have about in a voice from a victim agency within our state.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington)]: I had thoughts about it, but not any conversations with the committee.

[Representative Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: Thank you. I do support this amendment, but going forward, I I do believe equity in the in the voices. And when when it comes to adjustments made within our DOC or any type of reports, it's it's it's vitally important that we also have agencies that can also share the sides of the victims. Thank you.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill be amended as offered by the member from Burlington and the member from Northfield? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have amended the bill. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[House Reading Clerk]: H two ninety four, an act relating to commissary and telecommunications prices in state correctional facilities and fair compensation for incarcerated labor.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is shall the bill pass? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have passed the bill. Up next is House Bill four ten which is an act relating to the calculation of recidivism and other related criminology measures. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[House Reading Clerk]: Page four ten, an act relating to the calculation of recidivism and other related criminology measures.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is shall the bill pass? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have passed the bill. Next is House Bill five thirty seven which is an act relating to the right to grow vegetable gardens. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[House Reading Clerk]: H five thirty seven, an act relating to the right to grow vegetable gardens.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is shall the bill pass? Are you ready for the question? So, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have passed the bill. Now we'll turn to House Bill five eighty three which is an act relating to healthcare financial transactions and clinical decision making. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[House Reading Clerk]: Page five eighty three, an act relating to healthcare financial transactions and clinical decision making.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is shall the bill pass? Member from Essex.

[Representative Lori Houghton (Essex)]: Thank you, madam speaker. The member from Castleton had asked several questions on the floor yesterday, and I had agreed to try to find answers before third reading and got to spend my evening learning all about corporate structures last night that I never thought I would. And I would be remiss if I did not thank my partner who I forgot is an attorney with thirty years experience in mergers and acquisitions. I promise I will practice more active listening when you talk about your day from here on out. So several questions were asked. First question was, beyond the definitions in the bill, can you distinguish between hedge funds and private equity firms based on how they deploy capital? So hedge funds generally deploy capital into liquid markets and focus on trading strategies and short term positioning. Private equity firms invest in ownership stakes in companies and active involvement in operations. In this bill, both are included because either structure could create incentives that risk influence over clinical decision making. It's really important for the body to focus on the fact that this bill is focused on preventing harmful behaviors and the control of medical providers. These behaviors are important to regulate, and it does not discriminate based on the many hundreds that I had to hear about of types of corporate structures, the vehicles, and ownership types. The kid committee did not believe it was valuable or practical to define every single one of these terms for this reason, And the definitions of this bill pertain only to this chapter. We are not creating definitions for the Oxford Dictionary. It does not matter how capital is deployed. What matters in this bill is clinical decision making that is protected for providers and patients. The goal of this bill is not to regulate investment structures, but it's here to ensure clinical judgment remains with licensed providers. The goal is to prohibit corporations, however they may be structured, from controlling the practice of medicine. The corporate practice of medicine doctrine exists already in almost every other state, but not Vermont. The next question was, would family office firms be encompassed by this legislation as well? The bill does not regulate based on labels like family offices. It focuses on preventing corporations from influencing or controlling how medical care is delivered. If a family office led by non con clinicians has that level of control, it may fall within the scope. The focus is on protecting clinical decision making regardless of the investor type. Another question, would venture capital firms be encompassed by this legislation as well? The bill is neutral on to as to the investor type. Our focus, again, is on what level of control that the investor or corporation has on medical decision making. Passive investors are not restricted, and the intent is to allow investment while ensuring that clinical decision making is independent and can follow best practice. Do we really want to delineate all of the definitions? Because there are many, many types of different corporate structure, vehicles, or company structures. I think the last question was, who does this affect? Spent a long time thinking about what we heard in testimony, trying to get names. We know about the long term care space because there is a federal regulation that long term care facilities need to report their corporate ownership. So we know some of those. I mentioned one on the floor yesterday, Genesis. We heard in testimony with substance use treatment, and thank you to the member from Burlington. I'm not sure if he googled that or not, so we were able to find that one. And as I'm going through, we heard about dermatology because we had a witness who disclosed that their practice was owned by private equity. We had testimony from Ovation Healthcare who works as a, oh my gosh, known management service organization, MSO. Sorry. Forgot the acronym. Who does work consulting with many of our hospitals within the state of Vermont. And as I was sitting here listening or listing all these, I was thinking to myself, who's really affected by this bill? Other than a reporting requirement by any of the organizations that I have named and the other ones that we don't know about because there is no reporting requirement, mainly what this bill does is it affects providers. This bill ensures that licensed providers are free to practice medicine, and when their rights to do that are infringed or curtailed by nonlicensed corporate structures regardless of how that corporation is structured, then they will have recourse under the law with this bill. And I urge the body to please support five eighty three to help ensure that we are supporting our health care workforce in the state of Vermont. The

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: question is, shall the bill pass? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have passed the bill. Next is house bill six sixty which is an act relating to the 2027 opioid abatement special fund appropriations. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[House Reading Clerk]: H six sixty, an act an act relating to fiscal year twenty twenty seven opioid abatement special fund appropriations.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill pass? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have passed the bill. Next is house bill seven thirty nine which is an act relating to prohibiting the use and sale of the herbicide paraquat. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[House Reading Clerk]: Age seven thirty nine, an act relating to prohibiting the use and sale of the herbicide Paraquat.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill pass? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it, The ayes do have it and you have passed the bill. Now we'll turn to house bill eight seventeen which is an act relating to mental health support and substance use disorder prevention in schools. Member from Winooski.

[Representative Daisy Berbeco (Winooski)]: Madam speaker, I move that we

[Representative Angela Arsenault (Williston)]: postpone action one legislative day on h eight one seven.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The member from Winooski moves that we postpone action on house bill eight seventeen for one legislative day. Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have postponed action on house bill eight seventeen for one legislative day. Next is house bill nine forty which is an act relating to miscellaneous public utility subjects. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[House Reading Clerk]: Page nine forty, an act relating relating to miscellaneous public utility subjects.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is shall the bill pass? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it. And you have passed the bill. Now we'll turn to house bill nine forty two which is an act relating to miscellaneous agricultural subjects. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[House Reading Clerk]: Page nine forty two. An act relating to miscellaneous agricultural subjects.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill pass? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have passed the bill. Now we'll take up house bill nine twenty eight which is an act relating to technical corrections to fish and wildlife statutes. The bill was introduced by the committee on environment. The member from Pollitt, representative Pritchard will speak for the committee. Affecting the revenue of the state, the bill was then referred to the committee on ways and means which recommends that the bill be amended as printed in today's calendar. The member from Woodstock, representative Kimball will speak for that committee and note members that representative Kimball and others from the committee on ways and means will move to substitute an amendment for the report of the committee. The substitute amendment is printed in today's calendar. Please listen to the second reading of the bill.

[House Reading Clerk]: H nine twenty eight. Enact relating to technical corrections to fish and wildlife statutes.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Member from Pollock.

[Speaker 2]: Thank you, madam speaker. H nine twenty eight is a technical corrections to the fish and wildlife statutes. Here's a quick overview. This bill proposes to make technical changes to the Uniform Point System Statute for Fish and Wildlife violations. This bill would grant the Commissioner of Fish and Wildlife discretion to determine whether annual hunting and fishing licenses expire on December 31 of the year for which they were issued or three sixty five days after the date they were issued. The bill also would grant the Department of Fish and Wildlife the ability to assess a fee for additional tags or permits that are not otherwise identified in statute. Finally, the bill would repeal session law from 1999 requiring the department to review and update the management plan for the West Mountain Wildlife Management Area every ten years. Members will find H928 listed in today's calendar on page twelve eighty six. I will now take you through the changes in the four sections starting with section one. Section one. Section one of the bill proposes changes to 10 VSI 4,502. 10 VSI 4,502 assigns points to the licenses of individuals convicted of fish and wildlife violation. Points are assigned based on the seriousness of the violation and may accumulate resulting in the suspension of hunting and fishing licenses. Conviction of a fish and wildlife violation automatically results in the assessment of five points unless section 4,502 expressly assesses 10 or 20 points. The proposed changes in this bill are intended to update the assessment of points for certain statute and rule violations to either increase or decrease the penalty appropriately based on the seriousness of the offense. For example, baiting, failure to return to the kill site of a big game animal, and shooting from a motorized vehicle are all becoming 20 violations based on the seriousness of the fences and associated public risks. The proposed language would also correct some outdated cross references to the rules. For example, when the rules are updated occasionally, the section numbering in the rule changes resulting in inaccurate cross references in the statutory language of Section 4,502. Section two. Section two of the bill proposes change to 10 VSA four thousand two and sixty three, expiration and non transferability of licenses. The proposed language change would give the Commissioner Fish and Wildlife the ability to issue an annual hunting or fishing license for three sixty five days. Currently, all annual licenses expire on December 31 of the year in which they are issued. This change would likely be used for fishing licenses to encourage anglers purchasing licenses late in the season to purchase annual license and to encourage annual license renewal. Section three. Section three of the bill proposes to change 10 VSA 4255 license fees. The proposed change would allow the department to assess fees for newly created big game tags and permits without seeking a legislative amendment of 10 VSA 04/1955. New fees could not exceed the prevailing rate for the existing big game tags. You are going to hear a further amendment that modifies this section. And finally, section four. Section four, the bill proposes a repeal of the section of nineteen ninety nine acts and resolves acts number one, section 87A. The proposed repeal would strike language from the 1999 session law that requires the department to update the comprehensive plan for the West Mountain Wildlife Management Area every ten years. The department intends to update the long range management plan for this WMA on a twenty year cycle consistent with the management planning process for other state lands. And all of the department's long range management planning processes involve public engagement through a public notice and comment process. The committee took testimony from the following witnesses. The commissioner of Department of Fish and Wildlife, the executive director of Vermont Traditions Coalition, chief of operations, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Legislative Counsel, Office of Legislative Counsel and the General Counsel for the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Chief Warden of the Warden Service Division of the Department of Fish and Wildlife. Madam Speaker, your committee on environment found h nine twenty eight favorable, and the bill was passed out of our committee on a ten zero one vote, and we respectfully ask for the body's support.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: And now speaking for the committee on ways and means, member from Woodstock.

[Representative Charles Kimbell (Woodstock)]: Madam speaker, the committee on ways and means did offer an amendment, which we are also offering a substitute amendment from members of the committee, myself, representatives Kornheiser, and Canfield. So I would like to present the substitute amendment and not the original amendment.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is? The question is shall the house substitute the amended offer the amended offer amendment offered by the member from Woodstock and others for the report of the committee on ways and means. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have substituted the amendment offered by the member from Woodstock and others for the report on the committee on ways and means. Member from Woodstock.

[Representative Charles Kimbell (Woodstock)]: Thank you madam speaker. We thank the committee on environment for sending us the bill. When we got it, we had review of the bill because it does affect the fees that are charged for hunting licenses. When we got it, we had a particular interest in making sure that we weren't delegating all of our authority as a legislative body to the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and you'll see in us in another bill for later consideration, not today, September in which we are further addressing that. But our concern was that whatever provisional fees were approved by the department then were reviewed by the legislature within a certain period of time. So that was our intent, is to make sure that those provisional fees then were brought back to the legislature for approval. And bringing our amendment to the House Committee on Environment, we realized that the intent of the committee was different from what we presented as our amendment. And so we offered an amendment to basically say that the department may issue such tags and permits and may assess a provisional fee for such tags and permits at an amount equal to or similar to the fee for the same big game. The reason for that is the way that it originally came to us is that at the prevailing rate, we found that to be somewhat obscured, and that it wasn't clear if it was the $100 moose ticket or the $23 ticket for wild turkey or turkey, sorry, not wild turkey, turkey, or deer. And there was also a fee for $5 for a bear tag. And so our wording would make any provisional fee only $5 and that was not the intent of the committee, but to make it the same for either the similar or equal animal. So that is the intent of the bill. It is on house calendar on page twelve eighty seven. When we presented this committee this bill this amendment to the bill before the committee on House Ways and Means, the vote was eight zero three in favor of it.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Burke, member from Pollock.

[Speaker 2]: Committee thanks the member and the entire Ways and Means Committee for your work on H928. Our committee took a straw poll, which was eleven-zero-zero and the committee supports this further amendment. Thank you.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: So the question is shall the report of the committee on environment be amended as recommended by the committee on ways and means as substituted. Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor please say aye. Aye. All those opposed please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have amended the report of the committee on environment. Now the question is shall the bill be amended as recommended by the committee on environment as amended. Member from Derby.

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Thank you, madam speaker. People in the state of Vermont cherish their right to hunt and fish, and I'm thankful that we don't have to go back to the so called deer wars of twenty years ago here in the chamber. May I interrogate the member from Pollitt on a couple provisions of this bill?

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The member from Pollitt is interrogated.

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Madam speaker, I understand or I think I understand that if I was to purchase my combination license in July July 1 year, it'd be now valid or after the end this act takes place, would be valid to June 30 of the following year?

[Speaker 2]: Madam speaker, that that provision is in this bill. It would be the discretion of the commissioner to either do a yearly January 1 to December 31 or base the three sixty five days on the day the license was purchased.

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Thank you, member. Madam Speaker, I heard him, you know, refer to it as fishing. Does that apply will that apply to hunting as well?

[Speaker 2]: It will.

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Alright. And one more question. Madam Speaker, we have four big game species in the state of Vermont. Moose, deer, bear, and turkey. Although, we may wanna look into clarifying that to wild turkey because I don't think anyone enjoys somebody going up and sluicing their domestic turkey in the barnyard. But anyway, this doesn't give the commissioner the power to create new big game, member?

[Speaker 2]: It does not. It and the amendment is specific to the four big game species.

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Thank you, member. I I support this bill.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill be amended as recommended by the committee on environment as amended? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor please say aye. Aye. All those opposed please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have amended the bill. Now the question is shall the bill be read a third time? Are you ready for that question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and third reading is ordered. Next is house bill nine thirty two which is an act relating to the regulation of forestry under act two fifty. The bill was introduced by the committee on agriculture, food resiliency and forestry. The member from STOW representative Lipsky will speak for the committee and affecting the revenue of the state, the bill was referred to the committee on ways and means, which recommends that the bill ought to pass. The member from Woodstock, representative Kimball, will speak for that committee. Please listen to the second reading of the bill.

[House Reading Clerk]: Page nine thirty two. An act relating to the regulation of forestry under acts two fifty.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Member from Stowe.

[Representative Jed Lipsky (Stowe)]: Madam speaker, when the legislature passed act one eighty one in 2024, one of the first deadlines embedded in the legislation was for the Land Use Review Board to produce a report that would help wood products manufacturers navigate act two fifty and other permitting processes. The Land Use Review Board was directed in consultation with the Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation to convene a stakeholder group to examine how the Act two fifty permitting process could better support wood products manufacturers and their role in the forest economy. Stakeholder group was tasked with looking at how act two fifty permitting processes have been working, whether there are shortcomings or challenges, and whether efficiencies could be recommended across the full permitting landscape, including agency and natural resource permits, municipal permits, and act two fifty. Two stakeholder meetings and the receipt of con and consideration of public comments throughout the process, the Land Use Review Board issued a report with 10 final recommendations. Many of the recommendations involve Act two fifty rule changes, internal Land Use Review Board processes, and education, training, and outreach for existing and future act two fifty permittees. I spell that out to say that this bill does not address any of those recommendations. Since the wood products manufacturers report was issued, the land use review board has either implemented some of the recommendations or has committed to continuing work on how best to implement the others in the coming months and years. Our committee understands that these are ongoing conversations. In the interest of moving forward on aspects of the report where there was not only agreement among the stakeholders, but where there was legislature where the legislature is also required to act because of Recommendation changes in involve updating statute. Our committee put together what you see before you of h nine thirty two, an act relating to the regulation of forestry under act two fifty. Pursuant to act one eighty one of two twenty four, the Land Use Review Board issued a report on recommendations for how to support wood product manufacturers and the forestry industry. This bill adopts two of

[Representative Eric Maguire (Rutland City)]: the

[Representative Jed Lipsky (Stowe)]: recommendations from that report. In parts of section one and section two seem to work together to accomplish the one of the recommendations, which is to ensure forestry has the same exemption languages in statute as farming. Farming, like logging and forestry, is not subject to act two fifty jurisdiction below elevation of 2,500 feet. These amendments extend benefits already available for farming to logging and forestry. Section one amends 10 VSA section six zero zero one, the definition section of act two fifty in multiple ways. The first two changes put into statute existing practice related to the existing exemption for logging and forestry. Subdivision six clarifies that forestry, which is exempt from act two fifty below 2,500 feet, does not include the conversion of land to a use that would not be exempt from act two fifty. For example, harvesting timber is exempt, but cutting down trees solely for the purpose of preparing a site for commercial construction is not exempt from act two fifty and likely would need a permit. Subdivision f is for when a parcel does not have an act two fifty permit. If that parcel is devoted to logging or forestry and a portion of that parcel is proposed to be used for activity that would require an act two fifty permit, the act two fifty jurisdiction shall be limited to the area needed for the nonexempt activity. The rest of the parcel remains exempt. The permit shall not impose conditions on the rest of the parcel nor shall the conditions conflict with the acceptable management practices for maintaining water quality on logging jobs in Vermont, aka MPs. Subdivision e, which you cannot see in this bill because it is existing law, has nearly identical language for farming. Subdivision 44 amends the definition of wood products manufacture to strike log and pulp concentration yards, which is the second recommendation from the report. Prior to the creation of this definition in 2022, they were considered part of logging and forestry, so they were exempt. Removing them from the definition restores their prior prior status as exempt from act two fifty. Section two amends 10 VSA section six zero eight one, the exemption section of act two fifty. It adds language that is nearly identical to language that already exists for farming, and that is and that is existing practice. For parcels that already have an act two fifty permit, no permit amendment is needed for logging and forestry below the elevation of 2,500 feet. So long as it does not violate any condition of a permit. For an example an example would be an example of that would be, if the permit requires a standard of trees to act as a buffer, cutting them down is not exempt or allowed. It also adds that permits must include a statement that logging and forestry activities below the elevation of 2,500 feet are exempt from amendment jurisdiction. So that is clear to the property owner. And, madam speaker, finally in section three, the effective date is 07/01/2026. Madam speaker, your committee heard from the following witnesses, a forester from the Department of Forest Parks and Recreation, the state forester and director of Forest Division, Department of Forest Parks and Recreation, general counsel, Land Use Review Board, board member Land Use Review Board, board member Land Use Review Board, executive director of the Land Use Review Board, chair of the land of the land use review board, lobbyist from the Vermont Forest Products Association, forest economy program manager, Department of Forest Parks and Recreation, executive director, professional logging contractors of the Northeast, president Lincoln Farm Timber Harvesting, vice president Vermont Audubon Society backslash Audubon Vermont, legislative council, office of legislative council, and finally, the director of policy and planning from the agency of natural resources. Your on a vote, madam speaker, of seven zero one, your committee voted in support of nine thirty two, and we respectfully ask for the body's support.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: And now speaking for the committee on ways and means, member from Woodstock.

[Representative Charles Kimbell (Woodstock)]: Madam speaker, the committee on ways and means, reviewed this bill because of the application fees that are contained therein and it could affect the revenue of the state. However, we found that in the case of the Act two fifty requirement for forestry operating below 2,500 feet. It already was in practice, so it would not result in any change in the number of applications. We met with the legislative council and the office of legislative council and the legislative financial manager and the joint fiscal office and finding that there was no financial impact of this bill on the revenues of the state. We voted, by ten zero one to find it favorable, and we ask for your support.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: The question is, shall the bill be read a third time member from Middlebury?

[Representative Amy Sheldon (Middlebury)]: Thank you, madam speaker. While your house environment committee did not formally take possession of this bill, we appreciated the opportunity to look at it, and we appreciate the work of your agriculture and food food resiliency and forestry committee. And on a vote of eleven zero, we support this bill.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Question is the question is, shall the bill be read a third time? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it. And third reading is ordered. Members, that completes the orders of the day. Are there any announcements? Member from Charlton.

[Representative Chea Waters Evans (Charlotte)]: Madam speaker, my older two sons are in college and my best friend's daughter is also in college. And my youngest son has a day off from school today. And I was like, you guys should go to Cancun. And they said, no. We wanna come to Montpelier and visit you at work. And they are seated in the balcony and I would appreciate you helping me welcome them here today.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Will the family of the member from Charlotte please rise and be recognized? Are there any further announcements? Member from Williston.

[Representative Angela Arsenault (Williston)]: Just wanted to put an event on members' calendars or consciousness. Next Wednesday, March 25, the women's caucus will be hosting a screening of the film Gone Guys, which is a Vermont made documentary. It's about forty five minutes long. And it's telling the story of the challenges facing particularly facing young boys young men and boys in in today's society. And the women's caucus is interested in examining this question in relation to how those challenges are impacting young women and girls. So we'll have a panel discussion with a a teacher from Montpelier High School who teaches a class on modern masculinity, and he's gonna bring a couple of students with him as well as the filmmaker will be there as and and I'll be speaking as as part of the member women's caucus. So we hope folks will join us in Room 11 at 05:00 next Wednesday, the twenty fifth. Thank you.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Are there any further announcements? Member from Cambridge.

[Representative Lucy Boyden (Cambridge)]: Madam speaker, the Royal Caucus will be hosting a listening session to hear directly from Royal Vermonters. Also next Wednesday, March 25 from 05:30 to 7PM in Room 10 and on Zoom, all are welcome.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: Are there any further announcements? Seeing none, member from Pulte knee, can you please offer us a motion to adjourn until Tuesday, March 24 at 10AM?

[Representative Patricia McCoy (Poultney)]: Madam speaker, I make a motion this body stand in adjournment until Tuesday, 03/24/2026 at 10AM.

[Speaker Jill Krowinski]: You have heard the motion. Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The