Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Will the House please come to order and members kindly take their seats. Good morning. The devotional today will be led by representative Kathleen James of Manchester.

[Representative Kathleen James (Manchester)]: Good morning. Good morning. This is a poem by Amanda Gorman, the first youth poet laureate of The United States. And I'm reading it today for my daughters and for our dear friend, the artist Pat Musick. Our Purpose in Poetry or Earthrise. On Christmas Eve nineteen sixty eight, astronaut Bill Anders snapped a photo of the Earth as Apollo eight orbited the moon. Those three guys were surprised to see from their eyes our planet looked like an earthrise. A blue orb hovering over the moon's gray horizon with deep oceans and silver skies. It was our world's first glance at itself, our first chance to see a shared reality, a declared stance, and a commonality. A glimpse into our planet's mirror and as threats drew nearer, our own urgency became clearer as we realized that we hold nothing dearer than this floating body we all call home. We've known that we're caught in the throes of climactic changes. Some say we'll just go away while some simply pray to survive another day. For it is the obscure, the oppressed, the poor who when the disaster is declared done still suffer more than anyone. Climate change is the single greatest challenge of our time. Of this, you're certainly aware. It's saddening, but I cannot spare you from knowing an inconvenient fact because it's getting the facts straight that gets us to act and not to wait. So I tell you this not to scare you but to prepare you, to dare you to dream a different reality where despite disparities, we all care to protect this world. This riddled blue marble, this little true marble, to muster the verve and the nerve to see how we can serve our planet. You don't need to be a politician to make it your mission to conserve, to protect, to preserve that one and only home that is ours, to use your unique power to give next generations the planet they deserve. We are demonstrating, creating, advocating. We heed this inconvenient truth because we need to be anything but lenient with the future of our youth. And while this is a training in sustaining the future of our planet, there is no rehearsal. The time is now, now, now. Because the reversal of harm and protection of a future so universal should be anything but controversial. So Earth, pale blue dot, we will fail you not. Just as we chose to go to the moon, we know it's never too soon to choose hope. We choose to do more than hope with climate change. We choose to end it. We refuse to lose. Together we do this and more, not because it's very easy or nice, but because it is necessary. Because with every dawn, we carry the weight of the fate of this celestial body orbiting a star. And as heavy as that weight sounded, it doesn't hold us down, but it keeps us grounded, steady, ready because an environmental movement of this size is simply another form of an earth rise. To see it, close your eyes. Visualize that all of us leaders in this room and outside of these walls or in the halls, all of us change makers are in a spacecraft floating like a silver raft in space, and we see the face of our planet anew. We relish the view. We'd witness its round green and brilliant blue, which inspires us to ask deeply, wholly, what can we do? Open your eyes. Know that the future of this wise planet lies right in sight, right in all of us. Trust this earth uprising. All of us bring light to exciting solutions never tried before. For it is our hope that implores us at our uncompromising core to keep rising up for an earth more than worth fighting for.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Will you please rise as Paige Maeve Walstrom of Boydenham leads us in the pledge of allegiance.

[Paige Maeve Walstrom (Guest, Page)]: I pledge allegiance to the flag of

[House Members (in unison)]: The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty, and justice for all.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Members, we have a bill on the notice calendar requiring referral to a money committee pursuant to house rule 35 a. Senate bill one ninety is an act relating to the Green Mountain Care Board reference based pricing and studying the creation of a public employer employee, excuse me, health benefit authority affecting the revenue of the state. The bill is referred to the committee on ways and means. Are there any announcements? Member from from Putney.

[Representative Michael Mrowicki (Putney)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Today is a special day outside on the lawn, and everyone is invited. Today outside starting at noon, the Vermont Abenaki Arts and Cultural Celebration will be happening. We are all invited to go out, meet some of the four tribes of the Abenaki in Vermont, and experience what they wanna share with us today. That starts at noon, goes till three.

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

[Unidentified Member from Rutland City]: Thank you, madam speaker. I'd like to, introduce an old friend to the chamber again. Paul Clifford is back with us and sits in the gallery over there. Currently, he's the alderman at Rutland City and, of course, a past member of the house. Please help welcome him back to the house that he knows.

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

[Representative Lisa Hango (Berkshire)]: The rural caucus will meet tomorrow at 8AM in Room 10 and on Zoom for a caucus discussion facilitated by the Vermont Council on Rural Development. All are welcome.

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

[Unidentified Member from Burlington]: Friendly reminder that, there's a diaper drive supporting Vermont military families through the Vermont National Guard Family Readiness Program. There's gonna be a box outside of the sergeant at arms office tomorrow. They're looking for a newborn to size four, diaper sizes in particular, and baby wipes. So hope to see you all there tomorrow.

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

[Unidentified Member from Fairfax/Fairfield]: Thank you, madam speaker. The end of the session, stressful time. I can't help you with that, but as always, I have brought in, goodies from the trade show I go to each year. So in the three hallway in the where the copier machine is, help yourself.

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

[Unidentified (diarization mixed Woodstock/Brattleboro)]: Madam speaker, I had always hoped that when the eighth grade class from Woodstock unit middle school comes into the building that I'd have an opportunity to introduce them. They're not in the chamber right now, but they are walking around the building. So if members have an opportunity to say hello to a group of eighth graders walking around, taking in the sights of our capital, please grant them wish them a happy and hearty hello.

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

[Representative Mark Higley (Lowell)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Madam speaker, I move that the committee on environment be relieved relieved of house bill 70, which is an act relating to the inclusion of use value appraisal land in the conserve land inventory and the same be placed on the calendar for notice pursuant to house rule 51. Madam speaker, the reason for this motion is that age 70 was introduced on January 23 year. Early on in in this biennium, with now over 950 bills introduced. In 2025, age 70 was a high priority for the rural caucus and others, and a letter requesting consideration by the committee of jurisdiction was sent to you by some members of the rural caucus. Other requests were made by myself, and not until the week before crossover of this year did the committee hear testimony. No vote was taken in in the environment committee on on that day. This process by by approving the rule 51 will allow all members to consider and vote on age 70. And madam speaker, when, the, vote is taken, I would request that it be taken by roll.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from will request that when the vote is taken, it be taken by roll. The member is sustained. The member is sustained. When the vote is taken, it will be taken by roll. The question the so the question is shall the committee on environment be relieved of further consideration of house bill 70 and that the same be placed on the calendar for notice pursuant to house rule 51. Are you ready for the question? Member from West Brutland.

[Representative Thomas "Tom" Burditt (West Rutland)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Madam speaker, Woody Guthrie's song, let this land is your land, also says in it, this land is my land. This land was made for you and me.

[Paige Maeve Walstrom (Guest, Page)]: And Point of order, madam speaker.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Member from Burlington, what is your point of order?

[Paige Maeve Walstrom (Guest, Page)]: The debate must be limited to why the committee should be relieved of the bill but may not go into the merits of the bill.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Member from can I see members at the podium, please, the House of Sandy? Will the house please come to order and members kindly take their seats? Member from Burlington, I find your point of order well taken. The motion at hand is only debatable on the process, not about the underlying bill. Member from West Rutland, floor is yours.

[Representative Thomas "Tom" Burditt (West Rutland)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Madam speaker, I received an email recently from a member that was addressed to the entire house chamber regarding act 59 current use. There is no bill on our notice calendar regarding this topic. There is a bill H 70 that has been on the wall in the House Environmental Committee since early last year that does address exactly this topic. Yet without being on the notice calendar, the email I received discussed at length the merits of age 70 bill before it was even called up to the floor. Clearly, there is a there's therefore a desire from members of this chamber to discuss the members, the merits of this bill with all house members. A vote not to call up after this open invitation for debate on this exact topic would be counter to the questions and answers presented in the email. Madam speaker, I urge the body to vote yes to call up this bill for action.

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

[Representative Alice M. Emmons (Springfield)]: Madam speaker, I rise in opposition to this motion, and I will be voting no. In my time here, I have seen this motion less than five times. This is unprecedented. Madam Speaker, our structure here is designed for the committee process. And we all respect this body, and I respect this body, and I respect our committees. I am chair of a committee, and I feel quite strongly that the work begins in the committee. We pride ourselves on the work we do here. If we go down this road of pulling bills out of committee, it is very disheartening to me. And I fear for the future of this general assembly and this institution that we all value and ran for. If we continue to do this in pulling bills out of committee and this becomes the accepted practices and the norm. We will have destroyed this valuable general assembly here in Vermont. Madam speaker, I value the work we do. I value this institution and this general assembly and each and every person here that is an elected official, and I will vote no. And I ask you to join me in voting no.

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

[Representative Gina Galfetti (Barre Town)]: Madam speaker, I wanna thank the member from Springfield. She happens to be my committee chair, and the committee process in my committee is run with an excellent that shows the members forty plus years of service to this building. As you know, earlier in the session, I made a similar motion to call up h 70. And at that time, the argument was made to respect the committee process, and I understand that that that was that was the right thing to do for this building and and in the interest of protecting the the sanctity of this place, which I have a tremendous amount of respect for, I think, as you all know. However, as h seventy evolved in its committee plot process, it became clear to me that the process that it went through in its committee was not the same kind of process that happens in my beloved institutions and corrections committee with my competent and capable chair from Springfield. And there's a reason that we have this rule in our house rules, and that is because sometimes it's been acknowledged that the process has hiccups. It has roadblocks. It has bumps. And today, we have the opportunity to show up in this building as Vermonters first, as representatives, as neighbors, as friends, and to show the Vermonters that are demanding that we take this issue up, that the legislature in its capacity to do this can be reflective of the people's wishes, what they need. This, is a simple thing to do, and it's the right thing to do. And I hope you all can support me in showing up here as Vermonters and showing up for the Vermonters that you represent. Thank you.

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

[Representative R. Scott Campbell (St. Johnsbury)]: Madam speaker, this is a deliberative process. It's a slow process, frustratingly slow many times. I understand that frustration. I have a bill that I wish was being taken up, but looks like it's not going to survive this year. Something I've been working on for my eight years here. But the normal process is, as has been already said, that bills go to committees. They're vetted in committee. Committees take testimony. They vote or not on a bill whether to advance it. And then it comes to the floor. Like everyone here, I think, I've received emails talking about the policy, prescriptions, desires in the in age 70. That's not what we're talking about here, but its relevance to the process is the emails seem to address the policy issues. And then we got another email saying, oh, no. They didn't. But guess what? I'm not on that committee, so I don't know. But that's what the committee is for. We live in a time of disregard for norms at the federal level, which is shocking to me and I think to many people. And I think there probably are reasons why sometimes you would wanna pull a bill out of a committee to vote on it. Some sort of an emergency when there was obviously a policy that had wide consensus and needed to be advanced and there was not time in a committee to do that at the end of the session, something like that. There probably are reasons for having a rule like that, but this isn't one of those situations. So, I guess I should have said earlier at the beginning that I'm I'm going to vote no on this. And I hope the body votes no as well. This is no way to legislate policy. So I ask the body to join me in voting no.

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

[Representative Thomas "Tom" Charlton (Chester)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I will be voting yes. I find myself in the awkward position of having to choose between what is evidently an in house faux pas and having to reply to rural constituents as to why we didn't discuss it at all. I will be voting yes. Thank you.

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

[Representative Jed Lipsky (Stowe)]: Madam speaker, I'm I'm rising to talk about the process, And the process really began four years ago. And I was somewhat alarmed when this the bill was, being discussed as to why of the 15,700 and some, owners of almost 19,000 current use enrollees.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Member from Heartland, what is your point of order?

[Representative John L. Bartholomew (Hartland)]: Again, the member is getting into the details of the bill rather than the question for the body.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Yep. Member from Heartland, I find your point of order well taken. Member from Stowe, just a reminder, your comments need to be very much focused on the process and not the underlying bill.

[Representative Jed Lipsky (Stowe)]: Thank thank you, madam speaker. Thank you, member. Yeah. So the the process excluded 99.9% of the current use enrollees. And I think in a democracy, it's disingenuous and disrespect to exclude the very people who

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Member from Heartland, what is your point of order?

[Representative John L. Bartholomew (Hartland)]: He still seems to be discussing the merits of the bill rather than the question before the body.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Can I see the members at the podium? The house of stand at e Will the house please come to order and members kindly take their seats? Member from Heartland, I find your point of order well taken. Member from Stowe, I caution the member again to keep it very focused on the the process and not the underlying bill. The floor is yours. Member from Stowe.

[Representative Jed Lipsky (Stowe)]: Thank you madam speaker. Thank you, member from Heartland. Vermonters, that have stewarded the land, and there are tens of thousands as we know, 80% of Vermont.

[Paige Maeve Walstrom (Guest, Page)]: Point of order, madam speaker. I'm sorry. But

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Oh.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Remember, this is getting to

[Paige Maeve Walstrom (Guest, Page)]: substance of the bill rather than the process. If we talk about the substance of the bill whenever a motion like this is made, then we would be open our opening the the full body to to to discussion about whatever that motion, whatever the substance the subject matter the motion is. And that is against the Mason's rules.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Can I please see members at the podium? The house will stand at ease for a moment. Will the house please come to order and members kindly take their seats. Member from Burlington, I find your point of order well taken. Member from Stowe, I know you are trying hard to keep it focused. Again, please keep your your debate your comments to the question at hand. Member from Stowe.

[Representative Jed Lipsky (Stowe)]: Madam speaker, I believe that when we make policy, we should consult and listen to those who will be most impacted by our policies. This process failed to happen, and I believe it is necessary that we begin by taking this step of bringing h 70 to light and start the process that is inclusive of all Vermonters that are impacted. Thank you, madam speaker. I will be voting yes.

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

[Unidentified (used for Colchester/Wolcott remarks)]: Madam speaker, the motion before us asked this house to take an extraordinary step of pulling h 70 to the floor. Action that I see is premature, unwarranted, and I urge members to vote no. As we've heard, relieving a committee of a bill should be a rare measure reserved for circumstances that demand urgency. The conditions simply don't demand that action here. Proponents of this motion have not demonstrated to me why the normal course of order should not play out. What has changed since this motion was brought to the body and failed 48 to 86. I'm not aware of any new circumstances that justifies revisiting what this house has already decided. Bringing the identical motion again without changed circumstances and attempt to relitigate settled question. There's also a timing concerns concern that bears directly on the legislative process. It seemed to me, it seems only appropriate that we wait for the work that the committee is expecting and for that to mature before deciding on what action is next. That is not inaction. That is deliberate, fact based, and responsible legislating. I see no emergency that warrants today's motion. I see no committee failure. I see no circumstances since the motion last failed. What I do see is the bill in the hands of the committee best positioned to evaluate evaluate it and at a moment when patience is warranted. Vote no on this motion is how I'll be voting today.

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

[Unidentified Member from Milton]: Madam speaker, this is about the process. Bill h 70 was first read and assigned to the house committee on environment last year on 01/23/2025 in the at the beginning of this biennium. There's been ample time for testimony and discussion of this bill. In fact, it has been available for testimony and debate for nearly the entire nearly the entire biennium. Last year on March 26, just ten minutes was offered to the bill sponsor to present it to the committee. Multiple requests were made and witnesses offered for additional testimony, but none was allowed. Having languished for over a year, an attempt to call up this important bill was made on 02/05/2026 this year. Taking the house by surprise, that motion was defeated. Finally, after significant wrangling on February 27, the Friday before town meeting break, just a week before this year's crossover date, six witnesses were given the opportunity to offer detailed and convincing testimony. Good questions were asked and answered yet no cogent reason was offered for not approving what this bill proposes. However, no vote was taken. Madam speaker, since that time, there's been an uprising of interest in the concept put forth by this bill from Vermonters all over this state. I think we've all seen it in our inboxes. The lack of attention to this important topic by the assigned committee should not be the reason why this bill fails to move forward. I urge the body to vote yes to call up this bill for action.

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

[Representative Jana Brown (Richmond)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I urge the members to join me in voting no on this motion here today. We've already heard clear rational reasons from the longest serving member of this body about why this is an inappropriate use of the legislative process. This motion shortcuts a deliberate, transparent, and thoughtful committee process. It is simply not good practice, and it's not how we craft good policy.

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

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I'm gonna support relieving a house environment of age 70 to bring to the floor. I appreciate the words from the member from Springfield and the member from Saint Johnsbury, And I understand that this is a process not to be taken lightly. Many of us have heard from our constituents the urgency to take this bill up. As the member from Colchester stated, he feels it not to be an emergency, but what he feels to be an emergency or not an emergency is different to somebody else. So in respect for my constituents and other constituents of rural Vermont, I urge that we take this bill up. My mentor, the senator from Orleans, Bobby Starr, always told me, don't forget where you're from, and don't forget who your constituents are. Thank you, madam speaker.

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

[Representative Elizabeth Burrows (West Windsor)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I have so many bills that I have fought for for six years. I'm not tired of fighting for them, but I would never think about asking people to just take them up because I feel strongly about them even because I have constituents and and have pressure from all over the state. The committee process allows the rest of us the time to be able to ask our own constituents what they think about the matter that's before the committee. For example, as I have said to many of my own constituents who have reached out to me about this, I fairly faithfully ask our farmers in in my district what they think about agriculture bills when they come up. I ask, other people in different professions or of of, varying ideas. What they I vet bills as I see them coming forward. Circumventing the the committee process cuts that out. It forces us to engage in a strictly political process. And I have also explained to my constituents that I I don't like being placed in a, in the position of voting based on politics and not on policy. I furthermore wonder whether if this was to go through, if this was voted out unanimously, then what? It gets to the senate. Is it taken up? Is there time to do the committee process in the senate, or are we just gonna skip that whole process in the senate too? What are we doing? Thank you, madam speaker.

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

[Unidentified Member from Cabot]: Thank you, madam speaker. I haven't counted the days, but I think it's two days two legislative days ago, we voted unanimously to override not only a committee process but an entire legislative process that went through every facet of our legislature and even was brought to a veto session and overrode the governor's veto. We we voted unanimously two days ago, unanimously two days ago, two legislative days ago to undo the process that was supposed to happen on that particular bill. H 70 and the motion that we have before us and the process that we're talking about addresses the build that was the platform to create the build that we unanimously decided to undo the process on. We verified unanimously that the process didn't work and we did it because we listened to Vermonters. I'm a yes vote.

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

[Unidentified (diarization mixed Woodstock/Brattleboro)]: Madam speaker, I'm gonna vote no on this for the dangerous precedent it would establish.

[Unidentified Member from Bennington]: Thank you.

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

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Madam speaker, while I understand the process, after listening to my constituents all weekend, I believe that the process failed our Vermonters, and I will be voting yes.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: You ready for the question? Member from Fairfax.

[Representative Ashley Bartley (Fairfax)]: Thank you, madam speaker. As an HR professional, I have read a lot of, employee handbooks. And almost in every employee handbook, there's, like, this one policy that makes you kinda go, where did this come from? Why is it why is it a policy? What happened to put that there? So going back to School of Rock, I went to congress. And how is a bill made? What is the process? The process is very clearly the rule to relieve a committee is very clearly to disallow a small minority as in a committee to have total control of an issue. If a bill is stalled, this this rule and Mason's rule is there for an avenue forward. That said, today, I am the one voice of a 150, but my one voice is a whole lot more because I have the emails, the calls, the coffees with my constituents. They're asking me to vote yes, So you best believe my vote will be yes.

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

[Representative Michael Mrowicki (Putney)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I'll be voting no on this. I respect the committee process. I don't always agree because I too have been one of those people who've had bills standing on a wall that didn't get off. But that process is important to me. I'm also listening to my constituents. Overwhelmingly, what I'm hearing from my constituents is about the price of gas at $4.60 a gallon and how the heck are we gonna heat our homes.

[Unidentified (used for Colchester/Wolcott remarks)]: Morning, Warner. Morning, Warner.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Member from West Rutland, what is your point of order?

[Representative Thomas "Tom" Burditt (West Rutland)]: I think he's off topic.

[Unidentified (used for Colchester/Wolcott remarks)]: That's okay.

[Representative Thomas "Tom" Burditt (West Rutland)]: Yeah. I think he's off topic. The member's off topic a little bit by mentioning the price of gas.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Member from West Rutland, I find your point of order well taken. Member from Putney, please again keep your comments, to the question at hand.

[Representative Michael Mrowicki (Putney)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I want to support the process of the committee, support what I'm hearing from my constituents, and I'll be voting no on this.

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

[Representative Patricia A. McCoy (Poultney)]: Adam Speaker, early on the member from Springfield talked about the process and this is an unusual situation. And I think many of us here in this chamber probably feel that this is an unusual situation by the amount of emails that we've received in the last several days. We suspend rules here all the time. Rule 51, which is being called on today, is there for a reason. I believe real rule 51 is there for exact this exact purpose that a bill that has squandered on the wall for the better part of two years doesn't see the light of day. And I believe that rule 51 protects the minorities here in this body of which you have two and then the independents as well. It it protects us from being allowed to call it up here because our right voice is not being heard in the the small committees as the member from Fairfax said. So I will be voting yes for all those constituents that have reached out to me and want my voice to project to everyone here that they would like debate and vote on this bill.

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

[Representative Lori Houghton (Essex Junction)]: Madam speaker, I rise in opposition and urge the body to vote no. On March 11 at 10:05AM, the committee of jurisdiction took testimony on h 70, hearing from witnesses with various viewpoints with committee discussion after and with an offer from the chair to take a vote. No vote was moved. As this body knows, the committee of jurisdiction then moved to taking several weeks hearing testimony on another policy, very important to many Vermonters and to all of us in this building to ensure that that policy could move forward. We are in this building for a short period of time and we must prioritize all the issues. And we know that work is still happening related to this policy we are discussing now. I urge the body 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?

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Arsenault, Williston. Go.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Two minutes. Will the house please come to order and members kindly take their seats. Will the house please come to order? I would like to remind members that we are in the middle of a roll call vote. Members and guests are prohibited from using computers, phones or any type of an electronic device. Please refrain from the passing of notes and conversation during a roll call. And when the clerk calls your name, answer in a loud and clear voice so the clerk can accurately record your votes. The question is, shall the committee on environment be relieved of further consideration of house bill 70 which is an act relating to the inclusion of use value appraisal land and the conserved land inventory and that the same be placed on the notice calendar pursuant to house rule 51. Will the clerk please continue to call the roll?

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Austin of Colchester, Bailey of Hyde Park, Bartholomew of Heartland, Bartley of Fairfax, Berbeco of Winooski, Birong of Regents, Bishop of Colchester. No. Black of Essex. No. Bloomley of Burlington. No. Boston of Westminster. No. Bosch of Clarendon. Boyden of Cambridge. Brady of Williston. Yes. Branagan of Georgia. Yes. Brigham of Saint Albans Town. Yes. Brown and Richmond. Burditt at West Rutland. Yes. Burke of Brattleboro.

[Representative Mollie S. Burke (Brattleboro)]: No.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Burrows of West Windsor. No. Burditt Cabot. Campbell of Saint Johnsbury.

[Representative R. Scott Campbell (St. Johnsbury)]: Yep.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Canfield for Haven.

[Representative Michael Mrowicki (Putney)]: Yes.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Carris Duncan of Whitingham. No. Casey Montpelier. No. Casey Hubbardton.

[Unidentified Member from Fairfax/Fairfield]: Yes.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Chapin East Montpelier? No. Charlton and Chester?

[Representative Thomas "Tom" Charlton (Chester)]: Yes. That explanation.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Christie of Hartford? Gina Galfetti Cavendish?

[Representative Thomas "Tom" Burditt (West Rutland)]: Yes.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Cole of Hartford? No. Colin of Cornwall? No. Cooper Pendle? No. Corcoran of Bennington? No. Critchlow of Colchester? Tamara of Venusburg? Yes. Dickinson of Saint Albans Town? Yes. Dobrovich of Williamstown? Yes. Dodge of Essex? No. Dolan of Essex Junction? Dolgin of St. Johnsbury? Yes. Donahue of Northfield, Duke of Burlington, Durfee of Shaftsbury?

[House Members (in unison)]: No.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Eastes Of Guilford, Emmons of Springfield. No. Feltus of Linden. Yes. Galfetti of Barrytown. Yes. Carris Duncan of Essex. No. Goldman of Rockingham. Goodnight. Redeburrow? Yes. Ghostland in Northfield? Yes. Granting of Jericho? No. Gary Bennington? No. McGuire Fairfield?

[Representative R. Scott Campbell (St. Johnsbury)]: Yes.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Mango Brickshear? Yes. Harpaul Glover? Yes. Harvey Castleton? Yes. Hadrick of Burlington? No. Higley of Lowell? Yes. Holcomb of Norwich? Cooper Randolph? Yes. Houghton of Essex Junction? No. Howard of Rutland City?

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

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Holland of Rutland Town? Yes. Hoyda Hartford? Hunter Manchester? No. James in Manchester? No. Gisenska, Burke? Yes. Keyser, Rutland City? Yes. Campbell Woodstock? Klepner, Burlington? No. Fernheiser, Brattleboro? No. Cresno, South Burlington? No. Lieber Morgan?

[Representative Thomas "Tom" Burditt (West Rutland)]: Yes.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Mollie Schauburn? Alona, South Burlington. Nope. Lamont of Morristown.

[Representative Saudia LaMont (Morristown)]: Yes with explanation.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Lerusha Franklin. Yes. Ipsky of Stowe.

[Representative Jed Lipsky (Stowe)]: Yes.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Logan of Burlington? No. Long and Miltan?

[Representative R. Scott Campbell (St. Johnsbury)]: Yes.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Leaders of Lincoln?

[House Members (in unison)]: No.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Luno of St. Albans City? Maguire, Rutland City. Yes. Malay of Pittsburgh. Yes. Marquette of Coventry. No. Madison at Thatford. No. McKenna Montpelier. No. McCoy Pulteney.

[Representative Patricia A. McCoy (Poultney)]: Yes.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: McGillard Burtt. No. Nicholas of Milton. Yes. Mollie of Callis. Meniere of South Burlington. Morgan Ela Milton? Yes. Morgan Emma Milton? Yes. Morris Springfield?

[Representative Thomas "Tom" Burditt (West Rutland)]: No.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Morrissey Bennington? Yes. Laura Weston? Roecky a Putney, Nelson a Derby, Nielsen a Brandon, Nigrovich, Bennington, Martha Fierceberg, Mollie S. Wilkhardt. No. Newton of South Burlington. Yeah. O'Brien of Tunbridge. O'Dea Burlington. No. Oliver Sheldon. Yeah. Olson of Starksboro.

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: No expectations.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Paige of Newport City? Yes. Parsons of Newbury?

[Representative R. Scott Campbell (St. Johnsbury)]: Yes.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Pezzo of Colchester? Yes. Pinsonal Dorset? Yes. Pasha Hindsburg? Powers of Waterford? Yes. Bridget Yes. Bridget Burditt.

[House Members (in unison)]: Yes.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Bridget Yes. No. Sekowitz or Randolph? Shia Middlebury? No. Scalia Burlington? No. Sheldon of Middlebury? No. Sebeli Dover? Sousse, a Barry town?

[Unidentified Member from Fairfax/Fairfield]: Yes.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Southworth Of Walden. Yes. Squirrel Of Underhill. No. Steady Milton. Yes. Stevens of Waterbury. No. Stone of Burlington. Sweeney of Shelburne? No. Taglavia Carrith? Yes. Taylor Mendon? Yes. Thomas Tomlinson Winooski? No. Torrey Martown? No. Walker Swanton? Wads of Zacchaeberry City? Waters, Emmons, or Charlotte? No. Wells Of Brownington?

[Representative Thomas "Tom" Burditt (West Rutland)]: Yes.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: White and Wadsfield? No. What about Bethel? No. Winter or Bloodlow? Woodwater Berry? No. Jacobonia, Morristown? No. Boyden of Cambridge? Christie of Hartford? Gina Burlington, Donahue of Northfield, Duke of Burlington, Eastes of Guildford, Mora of Weston, Nielsen of Brandon, O'Brien of Tonbridge, Subia of Dover, and Wasza Zakavari Sudi.

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

[Representative Richard Bailey (Hyde Park)]: Madam speaker, rural Vermonters have been caring for this land for generations, and our farmers understand better than anyone that conservation and working lands go together. Moving h 70 forward helps us protect Vermont while also supporting one of the most important parts of our economy.

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

[Unidentified Member from Barre City]: Madam speaker, respect the committee process. Easy to say when you control the entire process, a process where you can kill any bill with ease. Imagine if the tables were turned, would the same folks say respect the process?

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

[Unidentified Member from St. Albans Town]: Madam speaker, too often, we treat conservation and agriculture like they're separate conversations. But in Vermont, they're deeply connected. The people maintaining the fields, myself included, the forest and waterways are helping to preserve the character of the state. Bringing eight seventy to the floor acknowledges that that partnership helps move us closer to these long term goals.

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

[Unidentified Member from Cabot]: Madam speaker, Vermont's landscape did not stay this way by accident. It has been cared for by generations of farmers and rural landowners who take pride in protecting the land while making a living from it. Eight seventy supports that tradition and helps us move more quickly toward the conservation goals we all share.

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

[Representative Thomas "Tom" Charlton (Chester)]: Madam speaker, rural communities play an enormous role in Vermont's economic environmental health, and we are already conserving and making a living on the lands under consideration. Age seventy recognizes that stewardship matters and conservation works best when communities local communities are part of the solution. I've been receiving input on this for the entire length of the session, and I'm convinced that the full house should be allowed to weigh in on this important and unanswered question.

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

[Representative Thomas "Tom" Burditt (West Rutland)]: Madam speaker, I vote yes because this bill reflects something for Monters already know. Our lands are part of our environmental future. Age 70 supports conservation goals while recognizing the economic reality of rural Vermont. This yes vote was not just my vote, but the yes vote for the many thousands of Vermonters that have asked for their voices to be heard in this chamber. We talk often about local control. Nothing is closer to local control than trusting those that work their land to be the greatest stewards of the land they, not this body own.

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

[Representative Saudia LaMont (Morristown)]: Madam speaker, I believe in democracy. Although this process is unorthodox and not the norm, it is allowed. I would hate to see this abused in the future or used in nefarious ways. And although this is not imminent danger, I had hoped that this would be the opportunity to clear the air and state the facts in a way that could calm the false narratives that Vermonters are hearing.

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

[Unidentified (used for Ferrisburgh/Fairfax actions)]: Thank you, madam speaker. When we talk about conservation in Vermont, we have to recognize the people that are already doing the work every single day. Farmers, foresters, and rural communities are on the front lines of land stewardship. Releasing h 70 would have given this chamber the chance to move those efforts forward in a practical and productive way for Vermonters, for any political party.

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

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Madam speaker, I'm informed that the entity and the agency charged with implementing act 59 intend to include land enrolled in the use value appraisal program into the conserved land inventory and the conversation and the conservation plan. My constituents and many other Vermonters will understandably hold the entity and the agency accountable for those processes.

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

[Representative Theresa Wood (Waterbury)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I vote no to support legislative process rather than parliamentary anarchy. The underlying issue is still being considered in a process determined three years ago, including a final vote on any proposal. Forcing a deliberation already put aside in the body breaks the already established process and disrespects the work we do on behalf of our constituents.

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

[Representative Dara Torre (Waitsfield)]: Madam speaker, may I explain my vote?

[Representative Ashley Bartley (Fairfax)]: You may.

[Representative Dara Torre (Waitsfield)]: The house committee on environment just spent last month carefully updating a land use policy that addressed the concerns of rural Vermonters. They worked diligently and addressed all committee members concerns to deliver a bill unanimously supported by their committee. Proposal to proposals to Vermont's conservation policy require the same thoughtful consideration. A floor amendment defeats this process. Thus, I voted no.

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

[Representative Zachary Harvey (Castleton)]: Madam speaker, may I explain my vote?

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

[Representative Zachary Harvey (Castleton)]: I was proud to vote yes today and look forward to doing so every time this bill is called up in the future. We must listen to Vermonters.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Member from Berkshire?

[Representative Lisa Hango (Berkshire)]: Madam speaker, I voted yes to take up this bill because using convert served land in the calculation for current use makes sense. It encourages conservation in a responsible way by allowing Vermonters to make their living in the agriculture and forestry sectors while being good stewards of the land, taking advantage of all the successful conservation programs that our state offers. If we disallow these activities to count towards current use, we risk letting that acreage go fallow to grow up into brush and forcing rural Vermonters to migrate to other states where the regulatory climate is less restrictive. Think about what Vermont would look like without the careful, thoughtful land management practices being used every day. We've built our economy on tourism, and without working farms and sugar bushes, our landscape would not be the marketing tool that we take for granted. I voted yes to keep our working lands in use for generations to come and to keep our beautiful state attractive to tourists and the young families who wish to work it. After hearing from those voices, age 70 deserved consideration by the full legislature. And member from Waterbury.

[Representative Theresa Wood (Waterbury)]: Madam speaker, may I explain my vote?

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

[Representative Theresa Wood (Waterbury)]: H 70 does not respect the rights of landowners, and I refuse to cast a vote based on a campaign of misinformation. I vote no.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Members oh, member from Saint Johnsburg.

[Representative R. Scott Campbell (St. Johnsbury)]: Madam speaker, may I explain my vote?

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

[Representative R. Scott Campbell (St. Johnsbury)]: I vote no. Taking a bill out of committee without a vote of that committee should only be done in the most extraordinary of circumstances. That standard is not met here. The policy questions in h 70 should be addressed in the normal process. Short circuiting the process destroys it.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Members, please listen to the results of your vote. Those voting yes, 58. Those voting no, 80. The nays have it, and you have declined to relieve the committee on environment of House Bill 70. Are there any further announcements? Seeing none. Orders of the day. Will the house please come to order? Members, we will begin with senate bill two zero eight, which is an act relating to standards for law enforcement identification. Member from Essex Junction.

[Representative Lori Houghton (Essex Junction)]: Madam speaker, I move that we postpone action on s two zero eight two legislative days.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Essex Junction moves that we postpone action on senate bill two zero eight for two legislative days. Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. Aye. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have postponed action on senate bill two zero eight until Thursday. Next is senate bill 189 which is an act relating to establishing a process for reducing or eliminating hospital services. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[Unidentified (diarization mixed Woodstock/Brattleboro)]: S one eighty nine, an act relating to establishing a process for reducing or eliminating hospital services.

[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, we'll take up senate bill two twelve which is an act relating to potable water supply and wastewater system connections. Member from Fairfax.

[Unidentified (used for Ferrisburgh/Fairfax actions)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I move that we delay action on s two twelve by one legislative day.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Fairfax moves that we postpone action on senate bill two twelve for one legislative day. Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you would postpone action on senate bill two twelve for one legislative day. Up next is senate bill two forty three which is an act relating to distributing funds to the Vermont language justice project member from Essex.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: Madam speaker, I move that we postpone action on s two forty three one legislative day.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Essex moves that we postpone action on senate bill two forty three for one legislative day. Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have postponed action on senate bill two forty three until tomorrow. Now we'll turn to house bill five twelve which is an act relating to the regulation of the event ticketing market. The bill passed the senate in concurrence with a proposal of amendment that is printed in today's calendar. Member from Whitingham.

[Representative Emily Carris Duncan (Whitingham)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Madam speaker, h five twelve, an act relating to the regulation of event ticketing the event ticketing market was voted out of this body on March 12. The bill was referred to the senate committee on economic development, housing, and general affairs. And as you may remember, the bill proposes bans on speculative ticket sales. It the bill introduce institutes a 10% ticket, 10% price cap on the resale biz business and secondary ticket ticket exchanges unless the venue has a written contract, for resale services. The bill also proposes clear and transparent disclosure requirements for secondary ticket exchanges. It bans deceptive URLs and improper use of intellectual property. It defines the price of a ticket as the total price paid or to be paid for the ticket including taxes, fees, and surcharges. This does not include actual shipping costs. And finally, violations under these provisions would be enforceable under Vermont's existing consumer protection statutes. The senate committee respectfully verse reports that it has considered the same and recommends the house recommends that the the following instances of of amendment to the house, which can be found in today's calendar on twenty six forty on page twenty six forty. The first, proposal of amendment first instance of amendment is the definition of independent venues. This means a an event space that derives the majority of its revenues excluding charitable donations from ticketed events and is not the and and is and it is not majority owned by a publicly traded company. And this venue, may not does not operate more than than than 10 does not operate venues in more than 10 states. This definition captures and covers all venues in Vermont. The second instance of amendment is the change the definition of reseller to mean a business entity engaged in the resale in the sale or resale of tickets. A reseller does not include an individual selling a ticket that is purchased that was purchased for personal use. This aligns with Maine's definition of reseller, and if an individual is reselling a ticket as a business, they would be covered under this definition. The, definition of ticket. That means that any form of physical, electronic, or or other evidence that grants the processor or the possessor the evidence license to enter a place for enter of entertainment within the state for one or more events at a specified date and time. Adding the words in this date ensures that this bill only pertains to Vermont based venues. The ticket disclosure requirements. A ticket a ticket issuer shall include the face on the face of the ticket a clear and conspic in in a con clear and conspicuous manner. The total price of the original ticket exclude not including the shipping the shipping costs. Finally, subdivision c, the ticket cap applicability. A ticket's reseller shall not shall not sell a ticket or offer a ticket for sale for a price greater than 100 per 10% of the price of the original ticket. The secondary a second secondary ticket exchange shall not authorize the resale on the exchange of a ticket for greater than for a price greater than 110% of the of the face price of the original ticket. With the change in definition of resellers, subsections subdivision c does not apply to individuals unless they are reselling a ticket as a business. Finally, the price cap applies to event spaces with seating with a seating capacity of 3,000 individuals or fewer. The event is to be held at a nonprofit venue that hosts agricultural affairs, exhibitions, multi day community events in addition to live performances, or the event is primarily used for a collegiate or amateur sports. This ensures that the price cap applies to all venues in Vermont. The ban on speculative tickets changes the the word individual to person to ensure that we capture businesses as well as individuals. And finally, the bill, places a sunset of 07/01/2028. Madam speaker, your committee on commerce and economic development took a straw poll and to concur with the senate proposal of amendment, And that vote was eleven zero zero, and we asked for the body to vote yes on this amendment.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: So the question is, shall the house concur in the senate 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 concurred in the senate proposal of amendment. Up next is house bill five thirty six, which is an act relating to toxic heavy metals and baby food products, member from Derby.

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I move that we, postpone five 36 one legislative day.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Derby moves that we postpone action on house bill five thirty six for one legislative day. Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have postponed action on house bill five thirty six until tomorrow. Next is house bill five fifty nine which is an act relating to the parole board. The bill passed the senate in concurrence with a proposal of amendment that is printed in today's calendar. Member from Bennington.

[Unidentified Member from Bennington]: Thank you, madam speaker. Your house committee on corrections and institutions received a strike all amendment from the senate on h five fifty nine, an act relating to the parole board. I will review the instances of amendments as they differ from the original passage of h 50 five fifty nine in March. One thing I did learn from the member from Springfield, like I think we all do, is that I do not need to go through all the very minor changes throughout sections one through seven. If anyone has any questions, happy to go through that. Very minor language change. But I just wanna review all the instances of amendment that the senate made that are quite substantial. So turning to sections eight in the calendar, let me double check the page for you all. On page 2,649 of today's house calendar, you can follow along starting on section eight. Section eight amends title 13, section 5,305 to make victim notification through the Department of Corrections and opt out policy rather than current statute's opt in directive. Moving on to section nine. Section nine aligns title 28, section five zero two a with title 13 to give victims the right to opt out of any notification from the Department of Corrections and the parole board. Section 10 further down on page twenty six fifty further gives victims the right under title 28, section five zero seven to testify or submit written testimony to the Parole Board. It requires the Department of Corrections to notify victims of the Parole Board's decision as well as conditions for lease attached to the eligible parolees case. Madam speaker, your committee on house corrections and institutions found the senate strike all amendment favorable on a straw poll of ten zero one, and we ask the body support. And I think that was a pretty short floor speech for me.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: So the question is, shall the house concur in the senate 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 concurred in the senate proposal of amendment. Next is house bill nine forty one, which is an act relating to municipal regulation of agriculture. Member from Shaftsbury.

[Representative David Durfee (Shaftsbury)]: Madam speaker, I move that we delay action on h nine forty one for two legislative days.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Shaftsbury moves that we postpone action on House Bill nine forty one for two legislative days. Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor please say aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have postponed action on house bill nine forty one until Thursday. Members that completes the orders of the day. Are there any announcements? Member from Wolcott.

[Unidentified (used for Colchester/Wolcott remarks)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I just noticed that the former member from South Burlington is here. If you could join me in welcoming him.

[Representative Kathleen James (Manchester)]: Thank you.

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

[Representative Lori Houghton (Essex Junction)]: Madam speaker, house democrats will caucus for a short period of time. I promise you will get lunch in Room 11 ten minutes after the floor.

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

[Representative Patricia A. McCoy (Poultney)]: Apologies, madam speaker, but I'm going to say that house republicans will not be caucusing.

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

[Representative Ashley Bartley (Fairfax)]: Madam speaker, house progressives will be caucusing in Room 44 at noon.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Are there any further announcements? Seeing none, member from Pulte, can you please offer us a motion to adjourn until Wednesday, May 13 at 1PM?

[Representative Patricia A. McCoy (Poultney)]: Madam speaker, I make a motion this body stand and adjournment until Wednesday, 05/13/2026 at 1PM.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: You have heard the motion. Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it. And this body stands in adjournment until tomorrow at 1PM.