Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Will the house please come to order and members kindly take their seats. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Members, in lieu of a devotional today, will you please join me in a moment of silence? We have a bill on the notice calendar requiring referral to a money committee pursuant to house rule 35A. Senate bill two fourteen is an act relating to the provision of pre kindergarten education in geographically isolated school districts affecting the revenue of the state, the bill bills referred to the committee on ways and means. Members we have a joint senate resolution to take up at this time. JRS 52 is a joint resolution to weekend adjournment on 05/08/2026. It was offered by Senator Bartholomew was read and adopted on the part of the Senate. Please listen to the reading of the resolution.

[House Clerk]: JRS 52, joint resolution relating to weekend adjournment on 05/08/2026, resolved by the senate and house of representatives that when the two houses adjourn on Friday, 05/08/2026, it be to meet again no later than Tuesday, 05/12/2026.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Now you have heard the reading of the resolution and the question is shall the house adopt the resolution in concurrence? 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 the resolution is adopted in concurrence. Members we have received requests to read three house concurrent resolutions that the house and senate adopted pursuant to the consent calendar. The first is HCR two zero six which is a house concurrent resolution commemorating the one hundred sixtieth anniversary of the Park McCullough historic Governor's Mansion in Bennington. Please listen to the reading of the resolution.

[Reading Clerk]: Whereas the magnificent Victorian era Park McCullough historic Governor's Mansion in Bennington was constructed from 1864 to 1865. It's a French second empire design with romantic revival elements cost $75,000 to build in both Henry Dudley of New York City as its architect. And whereas the superb edifice was built at the direction of prominent Bennington attorney and entrepreneur, Turner William Park, on the two on 200 acre farm as of his father-in-law, Highland Hall, who served as governor of Vermont from 1858 to 1860. And over the decades, the farm expanded to 800 acres. And whereas, Eliza Lizzie Hall Park McCullough, Turner Park's oldest daughter, indirectly inherited the mansion, buying out her sibling shares in the estate after their father's death in 1882. And whereas she and her husband, John Griffith McCullough, who served as governor of Vermont from nineteen o two to nineteen o four and whose last name became permanently associated with the home, renovated the mansion extensively from 1889 to 1890 in in anticipation of president Benjamin Harrison's 1891 visit to dedicate the Bennington Battle Monument. And whereas in 1965, a century of continuous family residency concluded. And in 1968, the descendants of Treinor Park donated the mansion to the newly established Park McCullough House Association Incorporated, and the 800 acres were divided with the majority of the land given to the fund for North Bennington, which has conserved the land for agricultural use and public enjoyment. And whereas the Friends of Highland Hall Gardens oversees the adjacent area, which was part of the original estate that leads to nine plus miles of trails. And whereas the Park McCullough Historic Governor's Mansion, which in 1972 was listed on the National Register of Historic Places, is now a beautifully restored house museum in the Park McCullough House Association sponsors theatrical productions, concerts, summer reading events, outdoor wellness activities, and other programs of community interest. And the mansion and its grounds are available for weddings and other special occasions. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the senate and house of representatives to the general assembly commemorates the one hundred sixtieth anniversary of the Park McCullough Historic Governor's Mansion in Bennington. And be it further resolved that the secretary of state be directed to send a copy of this resolution to Park McCullough House Association Incorporated, the Friends of Highland Hall Gardens, and the Fund for North Bennington Incorporated.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Next is h c r two seventy eight, which is a house concurrent resolution congratulating the Virgin's Fire department on its one hundred fiftieth anniversary. Please listen to the reading of the resolution.

[Reading Clerk]: Whereas the history of firefighting in Virgin's originated with a set of private submunicipal hook and ladder and hose companies dating from at least 1847 when the general assembly approved the charter of Virgin's Hook and Ladder Company. And whereas at the start of 1876, the Virgin's Hook and Ladder Company, along with four other companies, the volunteer hose company number two, the Stevens Hose Company number one, and the Otter Creek Hook and Ladder Company number one, and the Independent Host company maintained five operating locations at City Hall, the Stevens House, two at the Shade Roller Factory, and one one at Quota's factory. And whereas on 01/03/1876, the court of common council for the city of Virgins, the council, began a new era in local firefighting, enacting an ordinance establishing a citywide Virgins fire department, VFD. And whereas this transformational this transformation of firefighting in Virgin's constituted a major institutional and cultural change and marked the city's progress in modernization. Whereas on 04/09/1878, the council reaffirmed its commitment to the VFD adopting an ordinance for the prevention and extinguishment of fires, which set a $6 annual salary for each firefighter. And whereas over the last century and a half, the VFD has continuously updated its equipment, support systems, headquarters and its ex and extinguished historic blazes in 1890, 1929, 1958, and 1869. And whereas, although the private company's firefighting role has long ceased, in 2002, the Stevens Host Company was reestablished as a nonprofit organization with a mission of banding together for the purpose of supporting fire service as voted on by the members of the VFD, and it has financed additional equipment for which the city Of Virgins had not budgeted and currently is in the process of fundraising to restore the 1925 Boyer pumper. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the senate and house of representatives that the general assembly congratulates the Virgins fire department on its a hundred and fiftieth anniversary and be it further resolved that the secretary of state be directed to send a copy of this resolution to Virgin's fire department chief David.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: And finally, HCR two eighty three is a house concurrent resolution recognizing 05/06/2026 as Vermont Golf Day. Please listen to the reading of the resolution.

[Reading Clerk]: Whereas the predecessor of the game of golf may be traceable to ancient Rome, and the sport as structured today was first formalized in fifteenth century Scotland, and Vermont played a distinguished role in American golf history as home to the Dorset Field Club founded in 1886 and recognized as the oldest continuously operating golf course in The United States. And whereas golf promotes physical health and well-being for participants of all ages with 18 holes covering several miles. And whereas the Radius Sports Group, in partnership with the Vermont Golf Alliance, documented that in 2026, Vermont derived great economic benefits from golfing activity, generating a financial output of $671,400,000 and $392,700,000 in direct financial activity. Whereas six 68 golf courses call Vermont home, 83% are open to the public, and 3037% of public facilities offer a round for under $40. And whereas in 2024, 1,100,000 rounds of golf were played in Vermont, and the sport is the source of 5,376 jobs in the state, contributes $212,100,000 in wages, and returns over $68.866800000 dollars in state and local taxes. And whereas Vermont's golf courses attracted more than a 190 golf related trips in 2024, generating a $10,221,900,000 dollars in direct tourism dollars. And whereas Vermont's golf courses provide approximately 10,880 acres of green space and function as green infrastructure, filtering storm water, supporting water quality, and reducing demand for public storm water infrastructure. 85% of courses have implemented two or more energy conservation practices, and nearly half operate lithium battery golf carts. And whereas in 2024, the state's golf facilities hosted more than 700 charitable events, raising an estimated 12 more $4,000,000 for Vermont nonprofits. And whereas on May 2026, golfing officials are gathered in Washington DC to observe National Golf Day, and Vermont should similarly commemorate this great sport. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the senate and house of representatives that the general assembly recognizes 05/06/2026 as Vermont Golf Day, and be it further resolved that the secretary of state be directed to send a copy of this resolution to the Vermont Golf Alliance, the Vermont Golf Association, and the New England section of the PGA of America, the Vermont Golf Course Superintendents Association, and the New England Golf Golf Course Owners Association.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Are there any announcements, member from Bennington?

[Representative Michael Nigro (Bennington)]: Thank you, madam speaker. We just heard the reading of the resolution recognizing the one hundred and sixtieth anniversary of the Park McCullough Mansion in North Bennington. The Park McCullough Mansion is a historically and culturally significant property in our village, serving as a place where our community comes together for festivals, concerts, cookouts. My personal favorite, their hot chocolate and cookies that they do in the winter. I'm still a little kid like that, but we all love it. And there's so many other events that bring folks together. Through though our community's admiration and use of the property is paramount to the mission of the home, it serves as an attraction that brings people from across our nation and the world to see one of the best preserved mansions in New England according to our very own preservation trust of Vermont. That's in large part due to our amazing volunteers and staff that keep the home and its property alive and well throughout all the seasons. I usually like to tell a story as it relates to the place or the people that we're recognizing in this chamber. So I'm gonna stick to my script so I don't go off script too much, but I just wanna highlight one event that happened in the Carriage Barn about two years ago. It was one of our last summer parties in 2024, and I was seated at one of the tables and two of my friends down the road were there. And there was this gentleman who I didn't recognize, but, you know, he seemed like a good guy. And so we started talking, and I asked him where he was from and what brought him to town. And he had said he flew into Albany. His wife was a Bennington College alum, and they were firm out on the West Coast, and they decided to stay in Bennington for a few nights before they headed up to Montpelier for a meeting. So of course, I had to ask, what are you meeting in Montpelier for? I'm thinking, are you with National Life? You know, what's going on? It turns out that he was actually a state senator from Oregon who I think some of us in this room may know who do environmental work, senator Jeff Golden. And the one remark he made was how special our mansion was and how special our town was because it had a landmark as well preserved as it is today. So from right in our own backyard to across the country, people come to see what Park McCullough really looks like because you really do have to see it to believe it. And by the way, just to show you how memorable it was, I saw Jeff at a conference this past August, excuse me, senator. And I went up to him and I said something along the lines of you probably don't remember me when you visited Vermont, but he promptly responded, I do remember you. I met you at the Park McCullough Mansion. So, madam speaker, in order to celebrate this extraordinary milestone

[Representative Michael Hoyt (Hartford)]: in

[Representative Michael Nigro (Bennington)]: the history of the mansion, we are joined by several members of the Park McCullough mansion board, staff, volunteers who have just toured the Vermont History Museum, I believe, today right here in Montpelier, and they're here with us this afternoon. We have David Hart of Shaftsbury, former member of the Vermont House of Representatives, Mike Rice of Dorset, Alyssa Berry of Bennington, Polly Rain of New York State, we'll count you as part of Bennington, don't worry, and Chris Maxey of Bennington as well. Madam speaker, would you please help me welcome them to the welcome them to the State House? They drive a long ways and they're seated in the balcony.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Will the guest member from Bennington please rise and be recognized? Member from Virgins.

[Representative Matthew Birong (Vergennes)]: Thank you, member madam speaker. Thank you, members. You just heard the reading of a resolution celebrating the hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the Virgin's Fire Department and its various incarnations over the decades. The first responders and members of these departments and institutions are dedicated community servants who have served with pride, conviction, and heroism. They are the ones who run into the fire while most are fleeing. It's with great pride that we are able to honor the generations of valiant service. We're joined by members of the Virgin's Fire Department in the Lower Gallery. Please join me in welcoming Virgin's fire chief, David DeBiase, and other members to the people's house. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Will the guest and the member from Virgin's please rise and be recognized? Member from Barrytown.

[Representative Gina Galfetti (Barre Town)]: Thank you, madam speaker. The resolution today quantifies the total golf or economic impact, golf has in the state of Vermont. You heard it's $671,000,000, over 5,000 jobs. It generates more economic impact than maple syrup or syrup. I understand there's two ways to pronounce that. And it creates $66,000,000 in local taxes. But golf is much more than economic impact or jobs created. You heard charitable giving. Over $12,000,000 was donated to charities through the, events that are held at golf courses every year. It promotes health and wellness. Walking 18 holes covers nearly 18 miles. I was also pleased to hear that if you ride 18 holes, it's also good for two miles walking. A lot of golf properties are open year round recreation for cross country skiing, snowshoeing, ice skating, and probably the most popular of all when golf courses closed, dog walking. The when I one of the golf courses I ran, everyone couldn't wait for the golf course to close. So on the last day of the year, I had Golf with Your Dog Day. And it was very popular and, we just had to pick up in the spring. Golf doesn't discriminate against any player. The ball doesn't care whether you're a dishwasher or you own the restaurant. Age doesn't matter. You don't have to be a great athlete. You don't have to be in great shape. You must, however, be willing to be humiliated. Golf cannot be mastered. Even the pros on TV hit horrible golf shot. Golf is 90% mental and 10% physical. The most renowned golf psychologist in the world is Bob Rotella, a native of Rutland, Vermont. He was the very first and the most famous. Now, nearly every tour player has a mental coach. Rottella wrote a book, Golf is Not a Game of Perfect. And what that means is you don't need to hit perfect golf shots. You just need to hit good ones and then figure out how to hit the next one. I say that to be a good golfer, you need to be an optimist. Doesn't matter the shot you just hit or the shot that you're gonna hit after this one, you need to focus on the shot there. Golf is also a game of honor. It's one of the few sports where a player calls penalties on themselves. I once heard a quote that said, golf has the soul of a nineteen fifties Rotarian. With us today are some of the leaders of golf in Vermont. We have Kevin Comer and Mark Finch from the Superintendent's Association, Joe Chastony from the Golf Course Owners Association, and David Jankowski who is the president of the Vermont chapter of the PGA. Madam speaker, please help me welcome these golf leaders to the house.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Will the guest member from Barrytown please rise and be recognized? Are there any further announcements? Member from, Derby.

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Thank you, madam speaker. One of the great traditions we have here in the people's house is the access that our constituents have to it. And when they have an idea or a cause or a concern, they can come to our various committees and take part in the committee discussion. I realize you can do it over Zoom, but some people feel like myself that it's so much more impactful if you're there in person. And today, I have not only two constituents, but two friends that have ventured down from real close to the Canadian border in the Northeast Kingdom, and they even arrive color coordinated. So if you would help me, welcome to the people's house, Chet Greenwood, Terry Lucas, and not color coordinated out in the hallway, Lynn Ruebly. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Please rise and be recognized. Member from Milton.

[Unidentified Milton Representative]: Not sure if this is appropriate, but when I walked through these doors, it was magical for me. And to be here and learn about its history is so impressing to me. Last night, I had the honor of watching the unveiling of Louvina Bright's portrait, and it was so moving. I had to be somewhere at 04:30. I couldn't leave this seat. And our representatives that spoke, our house speaker, her family, I know me as a white person. I walked in here feeling, oh my god. This I'm Dorothy on the Wizard of Oz. I can't imagine somebody making history, and I can just see your face. And just to let you know, I had those same glasses that were in the nineteen eighties portrait. I had the same glasses. So when you see the portrait, think of me wearing those glasses. And thank you. Thank you, everybody, representatives, everybody for giving me this opportunity to learn a piece of more of our history, and I would have loved to met this lady.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Are there any future oh, thank you, member. It was a beautiful ceremony. Member from Brattleboro. Thank you, madam speaker. I just want to announce that we will, the climate solutions caucus will not be meeting tomorrow as usual, but we are hoping to meet next week with some presentations about and resources for affordable energy measures. So I hope you can join us then. I'll announce it next week. Thank you. Are there any further announcements? Members, we have one further resolution to read. That is HCR two sixty six which is a house concurrent resolution congratulating Linda Alvarez on being named the 2026 Vermont teacher of the year and commending the two distinguished finalists. Please listen to the reading of the resolution.

[Reading Clerk]: Whereas every year since 1964, the Vermont Agency of Education and its predecessor, the Department of Education, has honored one of the outstanding public school teacher in the state in the state as the teacher of the year who is recognized as at the University of Vermont's outstanding teacher day and represents Vermont at the National Teacher of the Year program in Washington DC. And whereas in 2026, the deserving recipient of this commendation is Linda Alvarez and instructor for four years in business and entrepreneurship at the Wyndham Regional Center Career Center in Bravarboro. And she is especially delighted to be the first Vermont career technical education teacher to receive this award. And whereas Linda Alvarez graduated with a history major and an education minor from the University of Florida, holds an MBA in in management, marketing, and communications from Fitchburg State University in Massachusetts and is completing a certificate in school management and leadership at Harvard University. And whereas secretary of education, Zoe Sonders, has described Linda Alvarez as a teacher with commitment to equity, innovation, and excellence who prepares students not only for careers and college for but for meaningful lives beyond the classroom. And whereas Wyndham Regional Career Center director Nancy Wise described Linda Alvarez as a visionary who equips students not only with skills but also with confidence and purpose to face the future. And whereas Linda Alvarez provides her students with hands on real world experience that benefits them whether they attend college or proceed directly from high school graduation into the workforce. And whereas, beyond her classroom duties, Linda Alvarez advises her school's future business leaders of America chapter, serves on the Wyndham Southeast Supervisory Union Special Education Parent Advisory Council, and is an adjunct professor at the Community College of Vermont. And whereas special recognition is extended to this year's two distinguished finalists, Jason Raymond from the Burlington Technical Center and Erin Randall of South Burlington High School. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the senate and house of representatives that the general assembly congratulates Linda Alvarez on being named the twenty twenty six Vermont teacher of the year and commends the two distinguished finalists. And be it further resolved that the secretary of state be directed to send a copy of this resolution to Linda Alvarez, Jason Raymond, and Erin Randall.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Are there any further announcements? Member from Montpelier.

[Representative Conor Casey (Montpelier)]: Madam speaker, we just heard a resolution to recognize the twenty twenty six state teacher of the year and finalists. Each year, states, US extra state territories, the District Of Columbia, and the Department of Defense Education Activity select outstanding educators to serve as state teachers of the year. Since 1964, the Vermont Agency of Education has recognized outstanding teachers through the Vermont Teacher of the Year award. One exceptionally skilled and dedicated teacher has chosen to serve as an ambassador for all the excellent teachers in our state. This morning, we have with us in the chamber our twenty twenty six Vermont Teacher of the Year, Linda Alvarez of Wyndham Regional Career Center, twenty twenty six finalist, Erin Randall of South Burlington High School. Linda is accompanied by her husband and son, and Erin's husband, son, and mother are here as well. In the chamber, we also have the 2025 teacher of the year, Caitlin McLeod Blouver of Winooski High School, 2016 teacher of the year, Susan Coke, and 2007 teacher of the year, Katie Sullivan, as well as the secretary of education. Please help me welcome these outstanding public school teachers to the People's House.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Will the guest member from Montpelier please rise and be recognized? Are there any further announcements? Seeing none, orders of the day. Members, we will begin with senate bill two zero two which is an act relating to portable solar energy generation devices. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[House Clerk]: S two zero two, an act relating to portable solar energy generation devices.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Question is shall the bill pass in concurrence with proposal of amendment? 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 in concurrence with proposal of amendment. Next up is senate bill two twenty three which is an act relating to water quality of the waters of Vermont prior to third reading. The member from Hartford, representative Hoyt offers an amendment that is printed in today's calendar. Member from Hartford.

[Representative Michael Hoyt (Hartford)]: Madam Speaker, thank you very much. The amendment that I offered can be found on page two three nine five. And the intent and the intent of it was to make a small change to the remit of the water quality late classification and anti degradation study group by having it study how to address emerging chemicals of concern that lack water quality standards as part of the anti degradation policy. So this was trying to get at PFAS, one of the 15,000 or so forever chemicals that have been identified as wreaking havoc on human health, fish stocks, and basically any other living creature. The amendment refers to these PFAS as emerging chemicals of concern because there are new chemicals being identified regularly and we need to use a term that encompasses them all. Thus emerging chemicals of concern which is broad enough to do this and spares me from trying to pronounce perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl. But upon further reflection and input from the agency of natural resources, there was a real concern that this amendment would broaden the scope of the working group unacceptably. They only meet eight times. This is a huge issue. And that the focus of the study should remain on water classification and the anti degradation rules that are now eighteen years overdue. So in the spirit of that, and alas, this is my 1st Floor amendment, but it's ill fated. Madam speaker, I ask leave of the house to withdraw my amendment.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Absent objection, leave is granted. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[House Clerk]: S two twenty three, an act relating to water quality of the waters of Vermont.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The question is shall the bill pass in concurrence with proposal of amendment? 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 in concurrence with proposal of amendment. Next is senate bill two thirty two which is an act relating to public libraries and the department of libraries. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[House Clerk]: S two thirty two, an act relating to public libraries and the Department of Libraries.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The question is shall the bill pass in concurrence? 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 the bill is passed in concurrence. Now we'll turn to Senate Bill three twenty five which is an act relating to regional planning and act two fifty tier jurisdiction. The bill was referred to the committee on environment which recommends that the house propose to the senate to amend the bill as printed in today's calendar. The member from Middlebury, representative Sheldon 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 in concurrence with the proposal of amendment recommended by the committee on environment. The member from Fairhaven, representative Canfield will speak for that committee and then carrying an appropriation, the bill was referred to the committee on appropriations which also recommends that the bill ought to pass in concurrence with the proposal of amendment recommended by the committee on environment. The member from Underhill, representative squirrel will speak for that committee. Please listen to the second reading of the bill.

[House Clerk]: S three twenty five, an act relating to regional planning and acts two fifty tier jurisdiction.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Member from Middlebury.

[Representative Amy Sheldon (Middlebury)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Madam speaker, in 2024, the Vermont legislature passed act one eighty one. The act did many things to increase both human and natural community resilience in the face of climate change and biodiversity loss, including modernizing act two fifty governance and administration by standing up a professional board, updating regional planning for consistency across the state, updating state designation program into the community investment program, expanding eligible areas eligible for temporary housing exemptions from act two fifty to see if exempting these areas would increase the production of needed housing in our community centers, and adding jurisdictional triggers to address forest fragmentation and the loss of irreplaceable natural resources, as well as a new criterion eight c that will include forest blocks and habitat connectors in the review of larger developments. As three twenty five came over from the senate, focused on extending deadlines for the implementation of the road rule and tier three, as well as dates for the housing exemptions. It also included technical changes to the future land use map and regional planning sections of act one eighty one, as well as changes to the community investment program. Many of these changes remain in the bill before you with the exception of the road rule and the tier three date extensions. After taking testimony from dozens of witnesses, we learned that the road rule and tier three were not being rolled out as envisioned in statute, but further were alienating rural landowners and were not the right tool for the job. Though many share our commitment to the goals of reducing fragmentation of working lands irreplaceable natural areas, the approach was off on those two aspects of the bill. It became apparent that it was time to step back and reconsider how to engage Vermonters in addressing the impacts of incremental fragmentation of our forests and farmlands and in the protection of our most critical resources through a deep community engagement process that is proposed to be developed in if s three twenty five passes. S three twenty five has passed the house or the environment committee, I shall say, this, repeals the road rule and tier three entirely. It lines up the dates for the housing exemptions with the full implementation of the future land use maps. It makes technical corrections to the regional planning and community investment program. It includes the development of a plan to engage Vermonters to identify tools to address incremental losses of working lands in irreplaceable natural areas. It sets up a legislative oversight committee to improve communications between the legislature, the land use review board, and the agency of natural resources. It requires reporting on the changes to the community investment program and a report on if and how the housing exemptions have resulted in increasing housing for working Vermonters. Now I will walk through the sections of the bill. Section one repeals, act 21 act one eighty one, section 19, the road jurisdictional trigger. Section two repeals act one eighty one. Thank you. Section 21, the the section that created tier two and tier three. Section three amends act one eighty one, section one fourteen, the effective date section of act one eighty one. It strikes out the effective dates of the sections being repealed and changes the effective date for sections twelve and thirteen, which are the sections on the new criterion eight c, forest blocks and habitat connectors from December 31 to 2026 to 01/01/2028. Section four repeals act one eighty one, section 22, the tier three rule making section. Section five repeals act one eighty one, section 34, the section requiring the tier two area report. Section six amends 10 VSA sixty eighty one, the exemption section of act two fifty. It amends the interim housing exemptions, to extend them for from either January 1 or 07/01/2027 until 01/01/2028 in order to line them up with the adoption of the future land use maps and give towns time to apply for one a or one b status. Just a reminder, the exemptions are 75 or fewer units in new town centers, growth centers, and neighborhood development areas in the areas with permanent zoning and subdivision bylaws and sewer, water, or appropriate soils. 50 or fewer units on 10 acres or less within a quarter mile around village centers with zoning and subdivision bylaws and sewer, water, or appropriate soils or in an urbanized area along a transit route. For this exemption, the bill also adds that to qualify the housing project including any land incidental to the use of the housing project such as lawns, parking lots, driveways, leach fields, and accessory buildings shall be on 10 contiguous acres or less. All housing within oh, and and exempts all housing within downtowns with permanent zoning and subdivision bylaws in sewer, water, or appropriate soils. Section seven amends 24 VSA forty four sixty g. It adds language clarifying that when a municipal permit is being amended, it needs to add relevant permit conditions from an existing act two fifty permit on the site so the conditions may be enforced as part of the municipal permit. This is in response to, this is a change from the original act one eighty one that required towns to take on act two fifty permits, all of them at once in their area. This will make that happen only one project at a time. So it it it strikes the requirement that towns with tier one a status must enforce preexisting act two fifty permits in the area. Section eight amends act one eighty one, section 14, criterion eight c, the rulemaking provision. It delays the date the rules due to the legislative committee on administrative rules until 06/15/2027 in order to give the time time for the land use review board, to implement it. Section nine is a session law section on the public engagement plan. It directs the State Natural Resource Conservation Council with the Vermont Council on Rural Development and the Vermont Association of Conservation Districts in consultation with the Land Use Review Board and the Land Access and Opportunity Board to develop a report outlining recommendations for a public engagement plan for issues related to working lands and critical natural resources. The plan is due 01/15/2027. There's an appropriation of $30,000 from the general fund to the state natural resource conservation council for the plan. Section 10 creates two VSA chapter thirty two, the joint legislative environmental oversight committee that would ensure strong communication and coordination regarding the implementation of act one eighty one, review how permitting and the land use review board structure are working, as well as meet with agency of natural resources to learn about agency efforts to improve and better coordinate permitting processes. It would have three members from the house of representatives and two members from the senate and be able to meet up to six times per year outside of session. The committee would cease to exist on 07/01/2029. Having an environmental oversight committee during the off session will improve communication and transparency between the legislature and the executive branch and potential potentially avoid some of the challenges we faced with the implementation of act one eighty one and address problems as they arise. Section 11 is a session law section requiring the land use review board to deliver multiple reports focused on collecting data and analyzing it. The first review the the first report is on act two fifty jurisdiction over commercial farm activities and whether and how it should be revised, and it is due on 11/15/2026. The next report would look at the effect of mitigation of primary ag soils through act two fifty review, and it's due on 07/01/2027. The third report is on the effectiveness of jurisdictional triggers and criterion nine l on the development of retail and service businesses outside village centers in addressing sprawl and strip development, and it would be due in 11/15/2027. All three reports require the engagement of relevant stakeholders. Sections 12 through 19 are at the request of the regional planning commissions and the Department of Housing Community Development for house for clarity and consistency. Section 12 amends 24 VSA forty three forty eight, the statute that establishes the procedures for adopting and amending regional plans. It adds that the land use review board shall coordinate with the community investment board in addition to state agencies in the review of plans. It then strikes out references to plan amendment and creates a separate procedure for plan amendments. Plan amendments may include nonminor changes to regional plan maps and tier one b areas. Minor changes are defined in statute as any change less than 10 acres. Plan amendments shall have one public hearing as opposed to two required now. The regional planning commissions shall provide notice to require entities at least fifteen days in advance. After adoption by the region, the RPC shall submit the amendment to the land use review board for approval. The land use review board shall hold at least one hearing on the amendment and issue its decision within thirty days. It also adds that if an if a regional planning commission is seeking an enhanced energy determination, it shall include that as part of the land use review board process. This is the same language that's in h nine forty. Section 13 amends 24 VSA forty three forty eight a, the statute that establishes the elements of our regional plans, including the land use categories for the future land use maps. It adds a reference to the smart growth principles. It amends the downtown or village centers category by stating that the centers are traditional or historic areas instead of both traditional and historic. It also adds that municipalities may have more than one center, including plan new or emerging centers that anchor planned growth or village areas. It amends the planned growth area category to strike out references to designated areas and strike out the reference to the smart growth principles because it is referenced above. It also requires the area to have the opportunity for development, infill development, and redevelopment that is needed to meet the regional and municipal housing targets. It amends the village area category to strike out that these areas will include existing designated village centers because we're merging the future land use map and designation categories. It also changes the requirement for municipal to public water or wastewater and adds language that requires the area to support the development of housing to meet the regional and municipal housing targets. It amends the rural conservation category to strike out the reference to the conservation goals of 10 VSA chapter 89 and the requirement that tier three areas be mapped in the in these areas because conservation areas are not intended to meet the goals of chapter 89, and tier three is being repealed. Section 14 amends 24 VSA forty three zero three, the definition section of chapter one seventeen, the planning and zoning chapter. It adds the definition of smart growth principles, which is identical language that already exist in 24 VSA chapter 76 a. Sections 15 is a session law provision that extends any regional or municipal plan that is expiring this year or in 2027 to 12/31/2027. Section 16 is a session law provision that repeals 24 VSA forty four seventy six, formal review of regional planning commission decisions. Section 17 amends 24 VSA fifty eight zero one, the definition section of chapter one thirty nine, the chapter that establishes the community investment program, the successor program to the state designation program. It amends multiple definitions. It changes the definition of planned growth area to cite the definition in 24 VSA forty three forty eight a. It amends the definition of sprawl repair to cite the smart growth principles. It amends the definition of designated downtown and village center to clarify that it refers to a center approved by the land use review board. It amends the definition of state designated neighborhood to say that it is a village area or a planned growth area as approved by the LERB. It also amends the definition of village area to site 24 VSA forty three forty eight a. Section 18 amends 24 VSA fifty eight zero three, the statute that establishes the process for designating downtown centers and village centers. It strikes out language that requires the regional plan maps to identify downtowns and village centers eligible for designation. It also adds that the development of housing and community development and community investment board shall provide comments on the eligible areas as part of the regional plan review by the land use review board and by the regional planning commissions. It strikes out language that is redundant with language in 24 VSA forty three forty eight a about include the inclusion of preexisting or nonconforming designated areas. Section 19 amends 32 VSA fifty nine thirty b b. The eligibility criteria for the downtown and village center tax program. It adds language clarifying the guidance for the tax credits to make clear that only those areas where a portion of the designated center is listed or are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places shall be considered. Section 20 creates 24 VSA fifty eight zero eight, which is part of the Community Investment Program chapter. It adds a requirement for the Community Investment Board to submit an annual report to the general assembly. It shall include a summary of the board's activity for the prior year. Section 21 is a session law provision that directs the Department of Housing and Community Development to meet with stakeholders and recommend mechanisms for limiting appeals of municipal permits while still allowing for review and a report on the impacts of discretionary review of residential development. The report shall also include a status update on the eight zero two homes pilot program and data on the housing built under the interim act 50 exemptions. The report is due on 01/15/2027. Section 22 amends three VSA chapter 72, the environmental justice chapter. It pushes back some of the required deadlines for the state environmental justice work. For the implementation of the agency annual spending reports, it delays it one year until 01/15/2029. Next, ANR's environmental justice rules are delayed a year and a half until 01/01/2029, and the rules for other agencies are delayed two years until 01/01/2030. It also delays the environmental justice mapping to a one year until 01/01/2028. These changes were made at the request of the agency of natural resources. Section 23 is the effective date, which is 07/01/2026. Madam speaker, your house environment committee heard from the executive director of Chinden County Regional Planning Commission, the sponsor of a senate amendment, the zoning administrator of the town of Williston, the retired director of the Vermont Council on Rural Development, the director of policy and planning at the agency of natural resources, the principal of Common Land Solutions, legislative council, office of legislative council, executive director Northwest Regional Planning Commission, board member at the Land Use Review Board, president of the Preservation Trust of Vermont, the commissioner of the department of housing and community development, the vice president of the Vermont National Audubon Society, the vice president of Sterling Homes, sustainable puke programs, sustainable communities program director of the Vermont Natural Resources Council, executive director of the Land Use Review Board, the executive director of Two Rivers Ottoquichi Regional Commission, the policy and water program director at Vermont Natural Resources Council, another board member from the Land Use Review Board, the director of program development at the Land Access and Opportunity Board, the director of intergovernmental affairs with the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, a farmer at fat sheep farm and cabins, the chair of the vice of land use review board. Sorry if that's repeated. I don't know if it is. The president of Lincoln Farm Timber Harvesting, the deputy secretary of Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, the director of advocacy and community engagement of the Land Access and Opportunity Board, senator of, amendment sponsor, the executive director of the Vermont Association of Conservation Districts, the director of environmental justice and civil rights at the Agency of Natural Resources, general counsel for the land use review board, a third generation farmer from Corinth, the executive director of the Addison Housing Works, municipal policy and advocacy specialist at the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, a Theftford select board member, the director of Housing and Homeless Alliance of Vermont, the executive director of the Mollie Council on Rural Development, the former Act two fifty district coordinator, the vice president of government affairs at the Vermont Chamber of Commerce, a board member from the Land Use Review Board, cofounder of GW Tatrov Construction, former chair of the district three environmental commission, advocacy and public policy director from the Vermont Realtors Association, executive chairperson, Let's Build Homes, board member of the another board member of the Land Use Review Board, and a resident of Montpelier. And, Adam Speaker, act one eighty one made significant changes to Vermont's land use planning and regulatory framework. It's only fitting that two years later, we need to make necessary changes and adapt to lessons learned. As 03/25 makes those necessary changes, tack one eighty one of twenty twenty four that will continue to bring Vermonters together to balance human and natural community needs and ensure that we leave our grandchildren an intact functioning landscape that's resilient in the face of a changing climate. The vote out of your house environment committee was eleven zero, and we asked the body for their support.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: And now speaking for the committee on ways and means, member from Fair Haven.

[Representative William Canfield (Fair Haven)]: Madam speaker, your committee on ways and means considered and reviewed s two thirty five, an act relating to planning and act two fifty tier jurisdiction. The full fiscal note history is available on the fiscal tab of the bill page on the General Assembly website and can be pulled up through a bill number search on the JFO webpage as well as the Ways and Means webpage. Activities that require Act two fifty jurisdiction must receive a permit and pay associated fees, which depend on the size and scope of the project. These fees are deposited in the ANR permit fund. Construction projects also pay a fee to ANR to account for their review of the applications. The Act two fifty permit fund supports permitting and regulatory activities of the Land Use Review Board and ANR related to the Act two fifty process. S-two 35 would maintain extended interim act two fifty exemptions through 01/01/2028 and delay or repeal implementation of policy changes in act one eighty one of 2024 that would have expanded Act two fifty jurisdiction. On that, these changes would reduce the Act two fifty permit revenue flowing into the Act two fifty permit fund compared with current law, Though it is not possible to estimate the exact difference. However, the extension of the interim exemptions would mean that it is likely the approximate current value levels of Act two fifty permit revenues, which totaled 2,500,000 in fiscal year twenty twenty five, would be maintained at least through fiscal year twenty twenty seven. Section nine of the bill would appropriate $30,000 from the general fund to the state natural resources council to hire a contractor for the public engagement plan design. And section 10 is created the joint legislative environmental oversight committee, which would provide oversight to the Land Use Review Board and permitting processes at the Agency of Natural Resources. This committee's cost would be approximately $8,000 per year and would come from the budget of the general assembly. Section 12 would require non minor future land use map amendments to be filed as a regional plan amendment. Non minor land use map amendments would incur a $295 fee created in Act 181 in 2025. These would be paid to the Land Use Review Board and deposited into the Act two fifty Permit Fund. The number of additional amendments that would be generated through this provision is unknown. Ways and means heard from legislative counsel and joint fiscal office. Your committee on ways and means found S three twenty five favorable as presented on a committee vote of ten zero one and recommends this bill ought to pass.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: And now speaking for the committee on appropriations, member from Underhill.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Underhill)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Your house appropriations committee reviewed s three twenty five with legislative council of the joint fiscal office and the reporter of his bill. There is an appropriation of $30,000 in section nine to public engagement plan. This appropriation supports the development of recommendations for our public engagement plan. Funding will go to the state natural resources conservation council. Currently, there is an appropriation in support of the funding request in the as passed senate version of the FY '27 budget. Also in section 10, joint legislative environmental oversight committee, the cost for the per diem and expense cost for committee members is estimated to be around $8,000 per year and would come from the general assembly budget. Your house committee on appropriations favorably recommends s three twenty five as passed the senate amended by house environment on a vote of ten zero one and we ask for the body's support. Thank you.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: And now the member from West Rutland, Representative Burditt offers an amendment to the report of the committee on environment that is printed in today's calendar. Member from West Rutland.

[Representative Thomas Burditt (West Rutland)]: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Anybody who wants to follow along for a minute, at the top of page 2,413 is where the amendment is in today's calendar. It's a real short amendment. Mean, to obtain a tier 1A area status under this section, a municipality shall demonstrate to the board that it has each of the following. And municipal I'm gonna read as as as the law is today. It says you have to have municipal staff adequate to support coordinated comprehensive and capital planning development review and zoning administration in tier 1A. So if a town is

[Representative Matthew Birong (Vergennes)]: in

[Representative Thomas Burditt (West Rutland)]: the middle of a project or a plan and they don't have adequate staff to, you know, to finish a project, they have to hire a full time person. And what this amendment does, it adds regional planning commission staff or other contracted capacity. So again, a town doesn't have to go through the the expense of a, you know, of a full time employee, and and a lot of our smaller towns certainly can't afford that. But a little background, the requirements to achieve tier one a are burdensome, but one provision relating to staffing capacity will make it unlikely for mid sized or smaller municipalities to obtain tier one a even if they meet all other requirements. The municipality in order to have an approved tier 1A area is required to demonstrate they have sufficient staff but they are not allowed to obtain capacity through contracted contracted people. This is what the amendment does. It allows municipalities who meet all other requirements of tier one a except for the staffing requirements to obtain the necessary capacity by contracting with their regional planning commission or other entity. This matters because some municipalities are able to meet all the criteria of tier one a, but cannot feasibly increase permanent staff. If municipality does all the work to obtain tier one a and is willing to contract with another entity to support the necessary capacity, the staffing requirement will arbitrarily prevent otherwise development ready communities from receiving this Act two fifty relief. This will enable more community communities to achieve tier one a areas thus will allow more development to move forward in our areas with infrastructure, pro development zoning, and bylaws. Madam speaker, this amendment makes it easier for Vermonters in every corner of the state, including our rural towns and counties to responsibly grow their community, build more homes, support economic development, and keep and attract working families, all while finally treating housing like the crisis it is. And for that reason, I ask when the vote is taken, it be taken by role.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from West Rutland request that when the vote is taken, it be taken by role. Is the member sustained? The member is sustained. When the vote is taken, it will be taken by role. Member from Middlebury.

[Representative Amy Sheldon (Middlebury)]: Thank you. Thank you, madam speaker. We appreciate the amendment from the representative from West Rutland. I will I will say, however, that, I guess I would I would start by saying that, the tier one a areas are really intended to be for communities that are already invested in quite quite heavily in, development review and planning. Those are our larger communities. The tier one b areas, were stood up in response, to exactly what I believe the representative is referring to, to assist our smaller communities who, may not, be at the level of of the larger communities in terms of their planning staff and investment in those, programs. Just to refresh folks, for tier one b, we already allow municipal, staff, municipal officials, or contracted capacity to meet the requirement for doing the development review, and that and that covers the housing projects that were mentioned in the representative's remarks. For that reason, your house environment committee voted seven four zero against this amendment, and we ask that you vote no with us.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The question is, shall the report of the committee on environment be amended as offered by the member from West Rutland. Are you ready for the question? If so, will the clerk please call the roll?

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Arsenault of Williston.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Go. Two minutes. Will the house please come to order? Will the house please come to 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 and conversations 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 report on the committee on environment be amended as offered by the member from West Rutland. Will the clerk please continue to call the roll?

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Austin of Colchester. Bailey of Hyde Park. Yes. Bartholomew of Heartland. No. Bartley of Fairfax. Rebecca Vonusky. No. Byron of Vergens. No. Bishop of Colchester. No. Black of Essex. No. Bloomley of Burlington. No. Boston at Westminster. No. Basha Clarendon. Putnamary City. Yes. Boyden of Cambridge. Yes. Brady of Williston. No. Rennigan of Georgia. Yes. Brigham of Saint Albans Town. Yes. Brown and Richmond. Burditt at West Brutland. Yes. Brick or Brattleboro?

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: No.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Burkhardt of South Burlington? No. Burrows of West Windsor? No. Burditt Cabot? Kimball, Saint Johnsbury? Canfield of Fairhaven. Yes. Carris Duncan of Whitingham. Yes. Casey Montpelier. No. Casey Hubbardton. Yes. Chapin at East Montpelier. Charlton and Chester. Christie of Hartford? Gina of Burlington? No. Coffin and Cavendish? Yes. Cole of Hartford? No. Colin and Cornwall? Cooper Ponnel?

[Representative Gregory "Greg" Burtt (Cabot)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Corcoran of Bennington? No. Critchlow of Colchester? No. Demar of Venusburg? Yes. Dickinson of St. Evanstown? Yes. Dover, Vich, Williamstown? Dodge of Essex? Yes. Dolan of Essex Junction? Yes. Dolgin at St. Johnsbury? Yes. Donahue of Northfield? Duke of Burlington? No. Murphy of Shaftsbury? Eastes of Guilford. No. Emmons of Springfield. No. Feltus of Linden. Yes. Galfetti of Barrytown. Yes. Garifano of Essex. No. Goldman of Rockingham. Good now. Branabro. No. Ghostman and Northfield. Yes. Branning of Jericho. Yes. Gregory Bennington. Greg Burkhardt Fairfield. Hango Brickshear? Yes. Harper of Glover? No. Harvey of Kesselton? Yes. Frederick of Burlington? No. Higley of Lowell? Yes. Holcomb of Norwich? No. Cooper Randolph? Potenavessic Junction. Yeah. Howard or Rutland City. Yeah. Holland or Rutland Town. Yes. Hoyde Hartford. No. Hunter Manchester. Yes. James of Manchester. No. Kasenska Burke. Yes. Keyser, Rutland City. Yes. Kimball Woodstock. Klepner, Burlington. Corcoranizer, Bratibaro. Crestmont, South Burlington. No. Labour Morgan. Yeah. Lilia Shelburn. No. Alone to South Burlington. No. Lamont Morristown. LaRussia Franklin? Yes. Lipsky of Stowe? Yes. Logan of Burlington? No. Long and Newfane? No. Long and Milton? Yes. Leaders of Lincoln? No. Uno of Saint Albans City? Yes. Maguire of Rutland City? Yes. Malay Pittsburgh? Yes. Mark out of Coventry? Madison and Fetford. No. McKenna Montpelier. No. McCoy Pultney. Yes. Miguel of Burditt. No. Nicholas of Milton. Yes. Mahalia Callis. No. Meniere of South Burlington. Morgan Ela Milton? Yes. Morgan Emma Milton?

[Representative Matthew Birong (Vergennes)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Or Springfield? Nope. Or see Bennington? Or a Weston? Or would you put me? No. Nelson at Derby? Yes. Nielsen of Brandon. Yes. My girl Bennington. No. Martha Feltusburg. Yes. Mollie S. No. Nugent of South Burlington. Yes. O'Brien of Tonbridge. Yes. O'Dee Burlington. Oliver Sheldon? Yes. Olson of Starksboro? Yes. Page in Newport City? Yes. Parsons in Newbury? Pezza of Colchester? No. Pentinel Dorset? No. Howards of Waterford? Yes. Bridget Yes. Yes. Bridget Yes. Burlington? Sec. What's Randolph? No. Shine Middlebury? No. Scalia Burlington? No. Sheldon in Middlebury? No. Sibilia Dover? Yes. Susie, a Barry town?

[Representative Gina Galfetti (Barre Town)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Southworth Walden. Yes. Square Of Underhill. No. Steady Milton. Yes. Stevens Waterbury. No. Stone Of Burlington. Sweeney Michelle Burn. No. Peggy Lovia Carrith. Yes. Taylor Mendon. Hamilton and Minusky. No. Torrey Mortown. No. Walker Of Swanton. Was it Zacchaeberry City? No. Waters Evans of Charlotte? No. Wells Of Brownington? Yes. What do Weitzfield? No. What do Bethel? Yes. Winter Of Ludlow? Wood Of Waterbury? No. Nicaragua, Morristown? No. Burtick Abbott. Christine Hartford, Gina Burlington, Donahue Northfield, Kimball Woodstock, Klepner Burlington, Parsons in Newberry. Taylor Mendon.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Members please listen to the results of your vote. Those voting yes, 63. Those voting no, 80. The nays have it and you have declined to amend the report of the committee on environment. Now the member from Cabot, Representative Burt offers an amendment to the report of the committee on environment that is printed in today's calendar. Member from Cabot.

[Representative Gregory "Greg" Burtt (Cabot)]: Thank you, madam speaker. The amendment I have here is in the house calendar on just below the Burditt amendment, is, excuse me, what page? Twenty four thirteen. There it is. Thank you. Twenty four thirteen. And it's really just a small change to one part of the definition of smart growth principles that was put into s three twenty five. Part e serves to strengthen agricultural and forest industries, including homesteading small scale agriculture and forestry and supporting housing while minimizing conflicts of development with these industries. So the my amendment is simply that middle line that says home setting small scale agriculture and forestry and supporting housing. And I think that's extremely important that we embed that definition into statute. This definition is used by municipalities and regional planners in decisions that they make about development going forward across our state. And there isn't a definition of agriculture and forest industries in statute nor is there one of homesteading and I'd love to see that definition be put in soon just because of the nature of the amount of homesteading that happens in our state and the value that we put on it. And given that we don't have a proper definition of agricultural and forest industries, think it's very important that we at least include homesteading in small scale agriculture and forestry and particularly the supporting housing. My wife and I own a orchard and Cabot and it's really important to us that we live right there on the farm. For a time we didn't live there. My parents own the farm and we lived about two miles away and I feel like I spent a lot of time not at home with my wife and our toddlers because of it working dawn to dusk practically. So it's nice to be able to pop in and out and participate more in the family routine and be able to partner more with my wife in those things. And I know just the complex nature of farming, think almost any farmer will tell you that it's better to live on the farm than off. And so I think it's important that that be embedded in the definition because those nuances aren't necessarily gonna be recognized by a regional planner and given the fabric of our state is full of small farms. I would love the support of this body in this amendment and I'd ask that when the vote is taken that it'd be taken by role. Madam speaker.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Cabot request that when the vote is taken, it'd be taken by role. Is member sustained? The member is sustained. When the vote is taken, it will be taken by role. Member from Middlebury.

[Representative Amy Sheldon (Middlebury)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Your house environment committee, we had a great conversation with the representative from Cabot, and I think it's fair to say that despite the results of our vote that you'll hear in in just a minute, we all find his points very well taken. And because of the aspirational nature of the smart growth, they're really kind of planning planning principles. We We did I I will say we found it very compelling that that the sort of scale and direction that Vermont agriculture and seems to be heading be included in the definition here. I think for those of us who who voted no, it had to do with a little confusion around the supporting housing piece of this, and some of it, potential for confusion. But overall, your committee on environment found this amendment favorable on a vote of six to five, and we ask your support on this amendment.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The question is shall the report on the committee on environment be amended as offered by the member from Cabot? Are you ready for the question? If so, will the clerk please call the roll?

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Arsenault of Williston. Yes.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Two minutes. Will the house please come to order? Will the house please come to 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. 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 report of the committee on environment be amended as offered by the member from Cabot? Will the clerk please continue to call the roll?

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Austin of Colchester. Bailey of Hyde Park. Bartholomew Portland.

[Representative Gregory "Greg" Burtt (Cabot)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Bartley of Fairfax. Yes. Rebecca Winooski. Yes. Byron Riverdens. No. Bishop of Colchester. Yes. Black of Essex. Bloomley of Burlington? Yes. Boston and Westminster?

[Reading Clerk]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Basha Clarendon? Yes. Boonton Bay City? Yes. Boyden of Cambridge? Yes. Brady Williston? We're gonna get a Georgia. Yes. Bring him a Saint Rollinstown. Yes. Rhonda Richmond. Yes. Burditt, West Brutland. Yes. Burkhardt, Burlington. Yes. Burrows Of West Windsor. Yes. Burditt Cabot. Kimball Saint Johnsbury. Yes. Canfield of Fair Haven. Yes. Carris Duncan and Whitingham. Yes. Casey Montpelier.

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Casey Hubbardton. No. Chapin East Montpelier. Yes. Charlton Chester. Christie of Hartford. Gina Burlington. Coffin and Cavendish? Yes. Cliff Hartford? Yes. Conlon and Cornwall? Yes. Cooper Panel? Yes. Corcoran of Bennington? Colchester. Yes. Demar of Venusburg. Yes. Dickinson of San Clementstown. Yes. Deborah Mitchell Williamstown. Yes. Dolan Mesic Junction. Yes. Dolgin of St. Johnsbury. Yes. Donahue of Northfield? Dick Burlington? Yes. Durfee of Shasbury?

[House Clerk]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Eastes of Guilford? Yes. And missus Springfield? Yes. Feltus London? Yes. Galfetti, Barrytown? Yes. Gary Font of Essex? Yes. Goldman of Rockingham? Yes. Goodnight, Brutabro? Yes. Ghostland of Northfield? Yes. No. Ghostland of Northfield? Yes. Grenning of Jericho?

[Representative Michael Nigro (Bennington)]: Yes. Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Greg Yes. Hango Briggsier. Yes. Harbrough Glover. Yes. Harvey Castleton. Yes. Hedrick of Burlington. Yes. Higley of Lowell. Yes. Holcomb Norwich. Cooper Randolph? Yes. Hope Domestic Junction? Yes. Howard or Rutland City? Yes. Holland or Rutland Town? Yes. Wood Hartford? Yes. Hunter Manchester? James Manchester? Yes. Cassandra Burke? Yes. Keyser of Rutland City? Yes. Kimball Woodstock? Yes. Klepner Burlington? Cornhiser Battleboro? Yes. Fresno South Burlington? Yes. Labour Morgan? Lally of Shelburne? Yes. Lonona South Burlington? Yes. Lamont of Morristown? Yes. Larussia Franklin? Yes. Lipsky of Stowe? Yes. Logan of Burlington? No. Long and Newfane?

[Representative Michael Nigro (Bennington)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Long and Milton? Yes. Leaders of Lincoln? Yes. Uno of Saint Albans City? Yes. McGuire of Rutland City? Yes. Malay Pittsburgh? Yes. Marco of Coventry? Yes. As in a Thetberg? Yes. McKenna Montpelier. Yes. McCoy Pultney. Yes. McGilliber Port. Yes. Nicholas and Milton. Yes. Mahalia Callis. Yes. Minnie or South Burlington. Yes. Morgan Ela Milton. Yes. Morgan Emma Milton?

[Representative Gregory "Greg" Burtt (Cabot)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Morris Springfield?

[Representative Matthew Birong (Vergennes)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Morris Bennyton? Yes. Mora Weston? Yes. Roeke and Penny?

[Representative Michael Nigro (Bennington)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Nelson to Derby? Yes. Nielsen to Brandon? Boutin of Bennington? Yes. North Of Ferrisburg? Yes. Mollie Savoke? Yes. Newton of South Burlington? Yes. O'Brien of Pembridge? Yes. Boutin of Burlington? Oliver of Sheldon? Yes. Wilson of Starksboro? Page in Newport City? Yes. Parsons of Newbury? Yes. Has that with Colchester? Yes. Vincent Aldo Dorset? Yes. Hutcher Hinesburg?

[Representative Michael Nigro (Bennington)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Powers Waterford? Presea Bradford. Yes. Bridget Burt. Yes. Quinby of London. Yes. Rachel Linda Burlington. Yes. Sec. What's Randolph. Yes. Shyam Middlebury. Yes. Scully Burlington. Yes. Sheldon Middlebury? Yes. Sebeli Abdober? Yes. Susie, Barrytown? Yes. Southworth Of Walden? Yes. Squirrel Of Underhill? Yes. Steady Milton? Yes. Stevens Waterbury? Yes. Stone Burlington? Yes. Sweeney of Chauburn?

[Representative Larry Satcowitz (Randolph)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Taylor Munden? Thomas Tomlinson? Torrey Marktown. Yes. Walker Swanton. Yes. Watts of Zacobrovich City. Yes. Waters Evans of Charlotte. Yes. Wells of Bradenton. Yes. White Watesfield. Yes. What about Bethel? Christie of Hartford, Gina Burlington, Donahue Northfield, Klepner Burlington, and Taylor Mendon.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Member from Virginia.

[Representative Matthew Birong (Vergennes)]: Madam Speaker, I'd like to change my vote.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: You may.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: By wrong of her gents.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Members please listen to the results of your vote. Those voting yes, 142. Those voting no, two. The ayes have it and you have amended the report of the committee on environment. Now the member from Cabot, Representative Burtt offers an amendment to the report of the committee on environment that the first assistant clerk emailed to members at 09:35 a. M. This amendment is also posted on the house overview webpage and paper copies are available at the main table. Member from Cabot.

[Representative Gregory "Greg" Burtt (Cabot)]: Thank you Madam Speaker. This amendment amends the accessory on farm business section in the bill that we have before us today has three twenty five. And yes, it's by email. It's not in the house calendar. I'll just read it aloud. It amends 10 VSA six zero eight one part t. No permit or permit amendment is required for the construction of improvements for an accessory on farm business for the storage or sale of qualifying products or the other eligible enumerated products as defined in 24 VSA four four one two eleven a I one. No permit or permit amendment is required for the construction of improvements for an accessory on farm business for the preparation or processing of qualifying products as defined in 24 VSA four four one two eleven AI one provided that more than 50 of the total annual sales of the prepare to process qualifying products come from products produced on the farm where the business is located. The amendment strikes out language in the next sentence and then adds the following. No permit or permit amendment is required for the construction of improvements for an accessory on farm business for educational, recreational, or social events that feature agricultural practices or qualifying products or both as defined in '24 VSA four four one two eleven a I two. So basically the amendment would make it so that accessory on farm business would not need a act two fifty permit to be able to post educational, recreational or social events that feature agricultural practices or qualifying products or both. This would allow municipalities to still regulate these things and it also is creating exemption only for farms. So you have to qualify as a farm which would be qualifying for the required agricultural practices. And if you don't, then you can't then you would have to go through a different process which is not in this statute for accessory on farm businesses. An example of this would be if I were to decide at my own farm to construct a a stage and have sound systems and whatnot for event concerts at our farm that in our current statute would require an act two fifty permit. This would make it so that I would not need to get an act two fifty permit in order to be able to do that. So I I I'm I'm in favor of this mainly because it if you look at the direction that a lot of farms are heading, our farm, we were primarily a dairy farm and then also maple. In pure production, we did almost we really didn't do retail at all. Then we planted an apple orchard. Now we have pick your own and a farm stand and have a lot of actually, it's the best it generates more income for our farm than anything else now. And a big part of that is due to the fact that it creates an experience for people to come out with their families and their friends and experience real a real farm. And those experiences are gonna become more and more important to our farms. And so I think it's important. Obviously, we need to regulate this properly but I also wanna make sure that we are having the intention in the legislature of fostering fostering economic growth in that sector. And so I think it's this is one spot where we can show that we're doing our part to make it easier for farms to to offer these experiences for folks. And I was saying in ways and means, madam speaker, that, you know, I've had because people come to our farm to pick your own, they're also asking about coming back for a wedding. They find it a special place for their families and it's become a tradition. And honestly for, you know, as most of our citizens are not farmers anymore, having that connection to a farm is really important. So I think this allows a culture of fostering that relationship more and I think that's great for everyone, for farmers, for citizens to connect with their local farm and have these cherished experiences. So I'm again asking for the body's support on this amendment and madam speaker, this amendment makes it easier for Vermonters in every corner of the state including our rural towns and counties to responsibly grow their community, support economic development and keep and attract working families all while finally all while finally treating our economy like, you know, the what it needs to be in order to increase economic growth. And for that reason I ask when the vote is taken it will be taken by role.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Cabot request that when the vote is taken it will taken by role. Is the member sustained? The member is sustained. When the vote is taken it will be taken by role. Member from Middlebury.

[Representative Amy Sheldon (Middlebury)]: Thank you, madam speaker. We appreciate the sentiment that the representative from Cabot brought to us with this. This accessory on farm business is for excuse me. Those of you who have been in the body know that this is an an ever evolving conversation and that we have, actually gotten we've gone to a place I think that's that's reflects a lot of the of the concerns of both, the farm community, which is which is changing and relying more heavily on diversification, but at the same time, we need to balance, the needs of other other residents adjacent to venues that that could be, quite large and and disruptive like concerts that were mentioned and weddings. We do have a study coming back from the land use review board that that we've moved up the date to November of of this year. They're already at work on that to refine this and look more closely at the impacts and find an equitable way that does help promote on farm businesses, but also balances the needs of neighbors. I think it's important to remember that over a 100 towns in Vermont are still one acre towns, meaning they depend on act two fifty for, development review, particularly commercial development review. So exempting making these changes at this time, the majority of the committee found, this not to be the right time to make these changes given that we're about to receive a report back. But additionally, that we did not take testimony on this at all this session. So with with that in mind, your committee on environment voted seven four zero against this amendment, and we ask you to vote no.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Member from Fair Haven.

[Representative William Canfield (Fair Haven)]: Madam speaker, representative Burtt provided good information especially on agritourism. However, fiscal analysis was not available to us as we learned of this amendment. Ways and means found this amendment unfavorable on a straw poll of nine two zero.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The question is, shall the report of the committee on environment be amended as offered by the member from Cabot, member from Derby?

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Madam speaker, there's many small enterprise and agricultural activities going on in the state now. And we hear all the time through our work in the house agriculture, food resiliency, and forestry committee of their how hard they work and their struggles for income. And, you know, we we do Crop Cash and Crop Cash Plus, and we fund the food bank, and we fund the food shelves all with design and getting this money back to our Vermont farmers. Many of these farms have structures that are not in use in the summertime. They're used in the wintertime to store livestock equipment or forge for their livestock or their vegetable crops to allow them to permit them to have a place where they could do an on farm program to tie it into their agricultural roots, to share with their community what they do on that farm, and maybe have a chance to generate some revenue, to me, is a is a great, great thing. So I'd urge the body to support this amendment. Thank you.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Are you ready for the question? Member from East Montpelier.

[Representative Ela Chapin (East Montpelier)]: Madam speaker, I wanna just share that I think work on accessory on farm businesses and the exemptions to act two fifty for these kinds of businesses is really important to do. And it's going to be complex, and it has been really complex, which which is why we've been working on statutory work related to accessory on farm businesses for what feels like at least ten or fifteen years. A lot of that result a lot of that work resulted in the exemptions that we're that we're looking at today that are being that are being proposed to be amended, that were put in exemptions for active 50 for accessory on farm businesses that were put into act one eighty one two years ago and went into effect less than two years ago. We are about to get more information on how that's working and where it's where it's having impact later in 2026. And the committee has multiple times considered this a little bit without taking much testimony on that excess rate on farm businesses. It's come up a couple times in our committee, and I know there are bills that have been on the wall in house agriculture and possibly in our committee as well on this topic. And what we have routinely come to the conclusion as a committee is that this is gonna take a lot of testimony. It's gonna take important work, and we wanna do that work, but it we're not ready to have that conversation. We need to get the information from this last two years worth of of what's been happening with the existing exemptions that were put in in act one eighty one. And so it is expected that we will take this up next session. And this kind of I just wanna say I personally am very supportive of act two fifty not applying to really small projects like a really small space built for for events or for the occasional music at a farm stand. I mean, but you have to remember that this exemption would also include humongous concert and wedding venues that were used every single night of the year that could, you know, could really damage farm fields. We've seen in the past. We've seen examples of huge concerts that are damaging agricultural soils. So just there's this is so broad that it's really not appropriate for a floor amendment. We just there's so much to take into consider consideration here. And so personally, I feel like it's really important to take this up next session. Thank you.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Are you ready for the question? Member from Montpelier.

[Representative Conor Casey (Montpelier)]: Madam speaker, as climate changes, farms need to adapt to grow and thrive in Vermont. I stand in strong support of this amendment and I urge the body to vote yes.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The question is, shall the report of the committee on environment be amended as offered by the member from Cabot member from Randolph?

[Representative Larry Satcowitz (Randolph)]: Yes. Madam speaker, I would just like to echo some of the previous concerns that we heard that that this amendment is actually trying to do something that involves some rather complex policy. There's a lot of interest out there to continue that work and that it's not really appropriate to be taking it up at this time that we we wanna give this issue the the focus that it really deserves.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Are you ready for the question? Member from Newberry.

[Representative Joseph Parsons (Newbury)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Can I interrogate the presenter of the amendment, please?

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Cabot is interrogated.

[Representative Joseph Parsons (Newbury)]: Apologies if I didn't hear this thoroughly. This would be an exemption for purely the an act two fifty permit and not local zoning requirements. Is that correct?

[Representative Gregory "Greg" Burtt (Cabot)]: Madam speaker, to my knowledge, that is correct.

[Representative Joseph Parsons (Newbury)]: Okay. So even if this were to pass the my local zoning, well, they'd have to get any permit required by the town still. Correct?

[Representative Gregory "Greg" Burtt (Cabot)]: Well, towns would still if they have zoning,

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Underhill)]: would

[Representative Gregory "Greg" Burtt (Cabot)]: be able to regulate these events in this exemption if they chose to.

[Representative Joseph Parsons (Newbury)]: K. Thank you, member. Madam speaker, farm viability takes many forms. Think the farmers in this building would tell you some of that is sun up to sun down seven nights a week. Today for our body, farm viability can come in this amendment. So I'll be supporting it. Thank you.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The question is, shall the report of the committee on environment and on environment be amended as offered by the member from Cabot? Are you ready for the question? Member from Berkshire.

[Representative Lisa Hango (Berkshire)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I had a moment of indecision here where I was going to ask the presenter of the amendment a question, but I think I'm just gonna make a statement. What is true in Franklin County? We have so many sugar makers in Franklin County, and many of them open their doors to school groups as well as dairy farms. And they open their doors to school groups and summer camps. And I'm envisioning a structure that could safely contain those children who are coming in onto the farm to learn as an educational place, an educational venue. With this amendment, I'm imagining that that farm would not need an act two fifty permit to build such a structure. So removing us from the concert scenario, which I think was maybe not the best example here, but bringing us into the realm of letting our neighbors into our farms so they know what we're doing, and they can be more educated on agricultural practices, and what we have to offer. So I think, I will support this amendment, and I hope the rest of you will as well. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Are you ready for the question? Member from Burlington.

[Unidentified Burlington Representative]: Madam speaker, I agree with the sentiment that many of my fellow members have expressed in support of allowing act two fifty exemptions for some kinds of events on in accessory on farm businesses. And yet, and and agree that with an exemption municipalities with zoning would be able to regulate an event but we do have a 100 municipalities in the state with no zoning or bylaws, one or the other. And in in those communities, we would be allowing any any kind of event with no restrictions on traffic or noise or lights or anything. So for that reason, until this gets fully vetted and the language made more specific, I will vote no.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Member from Saint Albinstown.

[Unidentified St. Albans Town Representative]: Madam speaker, as a farmer who just retired from milking cows, farmer has been in my family for two hundred and twenty five years. We're looking for other activities to be able to keep going in my adult children, five generation five families living on the farm. We allow visitors at our sugar house. We got some small livestock. We get a number of visitors there. And as a thirteen year member District six Environmental Commission, otherwise known as act two fifty, we've permitted three accessory wedding venues in my time, and we were checked for noise levels and traffic and all that. And all three of them we approved, and there've been no no difficulties. So I would recommend we support this.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The question is, shall the report of the committee on environment be amended as offered by the member from Cabot member from Cavendish.

[Representative VL Coffin IV (Cavendish)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Reading this amendment and the changes to the language, I think we're focusing on the wrong parts.

[Representative Gregory "Greg" Burtt (Cabot)]: No permit

[Representative VL Coffin IV (Cavendish)]: or permit amendment is required for, that's the new language, the construction of improvements, striking out some language, for an accessory on farm businesses, for educational, recreational, or social events that feature agricultural practices or qualifying products or both. Nothing in this is talking about wild concerts. This is farm education. This is helping a farm have some more business, attract more business, educate children, and being able to build the structure minus the permitting. This only helps to improve our farms. It does not restrict the town from saying, hey. You can't violate our noise ordinances. It says, farmers, help improve your here, improve your land, Attract more business. Keep your farms running. Keep Vermont Vermont. That's what it says. It says nothing about partying. If a wedding happens to be there, they can get a permit for a wedding. But it says strictly for featuring agricultural practices or qualifying products or both. I don't believe a wedding is an agricultural product. For that, I suggest I would implore this body to support this amendment. Thank you.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The question is, shall the report of the committee on environment be amended as offered by the member from Cabot, member from East Montpelier?

[Representative Ela Chapin (East Montpelier)]: I'd just like to read the at the end of the section that's being amended, it says as defined so it defy there is a definition for educational recreational or social events that feature agricultural practices or qualifying products. As defined in '24 VSA sub section forty four twelve, subsection 11, subsection a, I don't even know how to say this, I two. So I'm just gonna read that definition for you all. Educational, recreational, or social events that feature agricultural practices or qualifying products or both. Such events may include tours of the farm, farm stays, tastings, and meals featuring qualifying products and classes or exhibits in the preparation processing or harvesting of qualified products. As used in this subdivision too, farm stay means paid overnight guest accommodation on a farm for the purpose of participating in educational, recreational, or social activities on the farm that feature agricultural practices or qualifying products for both. A farm stay includes the option for guests to participate in such activities. So it is fairly broad, and that is specifically what that subsection is referring to.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Are you ready for the question? Member from Woodstock.

[Representative Charles Kimbell (Woodstock)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Having been involved with the Rural Economic Development Working Group years ago, we focused on the importance of agritourism, and how that was really, a one way that our rural economy could remain vibrant. And I still support though that view. And as the member from East Montpelier just referenced, there is already a lot of provisions within our existing statute around accessory on farm businesses. This amendment really takes it out of context a little bit because it doesn't recognize what's already permissible. There is already a good study that's coming online that's gonna be available that we can really use to take this up in our next session. And and I would say we had an example of wedding venues get getting easily permitted and that's a good reason for them to continue to look for those because if it's an easy permit to get then it should not be jettisoned because there are many concerns around activities that happen in rural areas that are against the interest of the neighbors. So it's it's important to recognize that this is not just one particular exit strategy for the viability of farms and rural areas in Vermont. So it's a little more complicated than that, and so I am going to vote no on this amendment.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Member for Middlebury.

[Representative Amy Sheldon (Middlebury)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I think this actually, this debate demonstrates why this is a more complicated issue than, than a floor amendment is, it it's worthy of more than a quick decision on the floor. We already have made accommodations for those businesses, that are related to farming. And I guess I would just remind the body that your environment committee voted against this amendment, and we're asking you to vote no.

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

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Arsenault, well, it's then. Go.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Two minutes. Will the house please come to order? Will the house please come to 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 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 report of the committee on environment be amended as offered by the member from Cabot? Will the clerk please continue to call the roll?

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Austin of Colchester. Bailey of Hyde Park. Yes. Bartholomew of Heartland. No. Bartley of Fairfax. Yeah. Rebecca Venueski. No. Byrong of Vergens. No. Bishop of Colchester. Black of Essex? No. Bloomley of Burlington? No. Bosland of Westminster?

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

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Washer Clarendon? Yes. Boonton of Cambridge? Brady of Williston. No. Branagan, Georgia. Yes. Branagan, St. Ovenstown. Yeah. Brown in Richmond. Burditt at West Rutland. Burkhardt or Burlington. No. Burrows in West Windsor.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Burditt

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Cabot. Campbell Saint Johnsbury. Yep. Camp Fitter Fairhaven. Carris Duncan of Whitingham? Casey Montpelier?

[Unidentified St. Albans Town Representative]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Casey Hubbardton? Yes. Chief in East Montpelier? Yes. Charlton Chester? Yes. Of Hartford? Gina of Burlington? Coffin and Cavendish? Yes. Cole of Hartford? Colin and Cornwall? No. Cooper Poundell? No. Corcoran Abdington? Yes. Pritchlow, Colchester? Demar, Vinesburg. Yes. Dickinson in Saint Albans Town. Yes. Dobrovich at Williamstown. Yes. Dodge of Essex. Dolan of Essex Junction. No. Dolgin of Saint Johnsbury. Yes. Donahue of Northfield, Duke of Burlington? Durfee of Chefsbury? No. Eastes Of Guilford? No. And missus Frankfield? Feltus Linden? Yes. Galfetti, Barrytown? Yes. Garifano, Essex? No. Goldman and Rockingham? No. Goodnight, Brattleboro? No. Ghostland on Northfield? Granny of Jericho? Yes. Gregory Bennington? Yes. Gregoire Fairfield? Yes. Hango Brickshear? Yes. Harpold Glover? Yes. Harvey of Castleton? Yes. Hedrick of Burlington?

[House Clerk]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Higley of Lowell? Yes. Holcomb of Norwich? Cooper Randolph? Put in a mess ex junction? Yes. Howard in city? Holland or Rutland Town? Yes. Boyden Hartford? No. Hunter Manchester? James of Manchester? No. Kasenska Burke. Yes. Keyser, Rutland City. Yes. Campbell of Woodstock. No. Kleppner, Burlington. Corcoran, sir, Brattleboro. Crestmont, South Burlington. No. Labor Morgan. No. Ellie Shelburn. No. Alona, South Burlington. No. La Motte Morristown. Arusha Franklin. Yes. Lipsky Stowe.

[Representative Joseph Parsons (Newbury)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Logan of Burlington. No. Long and Newfane. No. Long and Milton.

[House Clerk]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Leaders of Lincoln. Uno of Saint Albans City. Yes. McGuire of Rutland City. Yes. Malay Pittsburgh. Yes. Marquette of Coventry.

[Representative Joseph Parsons (Newbury)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Maslin of Fetford. McKenna. McCoy Pulte. Yes. McGillibrary Port. Nicholas of Milton. Yes. Mollie Palace. Meniere of South Burlington. Morgan Ela Milton? Yes. Morgan Emma Milton? Yes. Morris of Springfield? No. Morris of Bennington? Yes. Oro Westin? Yes. Roeke and Putney? Nelson of Derby. Yeah. Nielsen of Brandon.

[Representative Gina Galfetti (Barre Town)]: Yeah.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: My girl Bennington. No. Martha Frysburg. Yes. Mollie S. Volkhardt. Yes. Nugent of South Burlington. O'Brien of Tunbridge. Yes. O'Dea Burlington. Oliver of Sheldon. Yes. Olson of Starksboro. Yes. Page of Newport City? Yes. Parsons of Newbury? Yes. Heza of Colchester? No. Pinsonall of Dorset? Yes. Howcher Hinesburg? Richarda Burditt? Pollock? Yes.

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

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Rachelson of Burlington? Zach Whitsrandolph? Shy Middlebury? No. Scully of Burlington? Yes. Sheldon of Middlebury? No. Sibilia of Dover? Yes. Susie of Barrytown? Yes. Southworth of Walden? Squirrel of Underhill. Yes. Steady of Milton. Yes. Stevens of Waterbury. No. Stone of Burlington. No. Sweeney of Showburn. No. Tigua V. Corcoran.

[Representative Joseph Parsons (Newbury)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Taylor Mendon? Tomlinson? No. Victoria Mortown? No. Walker Swanton? Yes. Wasses, Zacchae Berry City? No. Waters Evans to Charlotte? No. Wells of Brownington?

[Representative Joseph Parsons (Newbury)]: Yes.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: White of Watesfield? No. White of Bethel? Winter Ludlow? Yes. Wood of Waterbury? No. Nicoboni, Morristown? Carris Duncan Whitingham. Christie of Hartford. Gina Burlington. Dodge of Essex. Donahue of Northfield, Duke of Burlington.

[Unidentified Burlington Representative]: Cooper

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: of Randolph. Kuttner of Burlington. McGill report. Taylor Mendon.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: For purpose of explanation, member from West Windsor.

[Representative Elizabeth Burrows (West Windsor)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I hope you don't mind if I remain seated. I vote I voted no on this amendment, but like many in this body, I fully support pursuing the development of policy that addresses its feed feasibility but balancing that with full testimony from a plethora of Vermonters themselves who would be fully affected by it. It's my hope that this would be addressed early in the next legislative session. Thank you.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Member from Whiteingham.

[Reading Clerk]: Madam speaker, may I record my vote?

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: You may.

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: Yes. Carris Duncan and Whiteingham.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Members please listen to the results of your vote. Those voting yes, 77. Those voting no, 66. The ayes have it and you have amended the report of the committee on environment. Members at this time the committee has another amendment to hear and so we are going to take a recess so the committee can meet. So committee members, please, on the environment committee, head to your committee room. And so with that, member from Waterbury.

[Unidentified Burlington Representative]: Madam speaker. Oh, I can't make an announcement. Sorry.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: And with that members, the house will stand in recess until the fall

[House Clerk (Roll Call)]: of

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: the gavel.