Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Will the house please come to order and members kindly take their seats? Members for our 1PM session, we are going to be taking two bills. Those two bills are Senate Bill three twenty three, an act relating to miscellaneous agricultural subjects. And House Bill nine thirty seven, an act relating to miscellaneous judiciary procedures. We have received 10, bills that have been messaged from the senate. So the plan would be to recess after these two bills, come back at 3PM to take up any of those bills that are ready that have come over from the senate including s one ninety that's on our notice calendar and then, we will adjourn until Tuesday. So with that, member from Hultney. On our notice calendar is senate bill three twenty three which is an act relating to miscellaneous agricultural subjects. Can you please offer us a motion to suspend our rules to take up senate bill three twenty three off the notice calendar for immediate consideration?

[Representative Patricia McCoy (Poultney)]: Madam speaker, I make a motion to suspend rules in order to take up off the notice calendar for immediate consideration s three two three.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Pulte moves that we suspend our rules to take up senate bill three twenty three off the notice calendar for immediate consideration. 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 suspended rules to take up senate bill three twenty three for immediate consideration. Senate bill three twenty three is an act relating to miscellaneous agricultural subjects. The bill was referred to the committee on agriculture, food resiliency and forestry which recommends that the house proposed to the senate to amend the bill as printed in today's calendar. A member from Derby, representative Nelson, will speak for the committee. And affecting the revenue of the state, the bill was then referred to the committee on ways and means, which recommends that the report of the committee on agriculture, food resiliency, and forestry be amended as printed in today's calendar. The member from Woodstock, representative Kimball, will speak for that committee. And then carrying an appropriation, the bill was then referred to the committee on appropriations which recommends that the bill ought to pass in concurrence with the proposal of amendment recommended by the committee on agriculture, food resiliency and forestry and when amended as recommended by the committee on ways and means. And then when further amended as printed in today's calendar, The member from Waterbury, representative Stevens will speak for that committee. Please listen to the second reading of the bill.

[Unidentified Representative from Cabot]: S three twenty three, an act relating to miscellaneous agricultural subjects.

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

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Thank you, madam speaker. S three twenty three was a really bushy Christmas tree that came over from Senate Agriculture, and I'd like to thank that body for doing the good work on it. Your house agriculture, food resiliency, and forestry committee then tore into it and refined it and strengthened it, in our opinion. Anyway, to make this briefer, s three twenty three touches upon milk markets, farm to schools, pest control compact, pesticide licenses, Seed Law changes according to ASSA, which is the American American Seed Trade Association, Vermont Agricultural Credit Program that's within Vida, Hemp Natural Resource Conservation Council, and CAFO Permit Working Groups. And to that, I will yield to the member from Tunbridge.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Derby yields the member from Tunbridge.

[Representative John O’Brien (Tunbridge)]: Thank you, member from Derby. Section one and section two of s three two three could be seen as clerical fixes to title six, which is the agricultural green book. They could be seen as clerical fixes or as we know in law, just a couple words make a big difference. So, these changes could be seen as making a big difference or at least help out in the agricultural world. Section one, amending the title six section 3,752 deals with there was a mistake in an old paragraph about milk producers and handlers. So to give you an example of how it reads right now, it would if I can give you a theoretical example of say the member from Saint Albans Town and his fine Jersey herd, if Horizon who used to pick up his milk all of a sudden in bad faith said we're not going to pick up your milk anymore, the member from Saint Albans Town could request a hearing from the secretary of agriculture and in the currently in the title it said that only Horizon in this case could have asked for a hearing which doesn't make any sense, right, if If it was the farmer who had had the grievance. So this changes handler to producer to clarify there. So it's actually the farmer who gets to request a hearing. Section two changes, expands on the Rosa McGoughlin Farm to School description that when the agency awards grants to say a supervisory union or a school food authority to get some of our local produce into schools for example. It formally just said they award grants and now we're changing that because occasionally or more than occasionally, it's not an award, it's a contract that gets facilitated. So the new language says the agency helps to provide grants or contracts. So those are the simple changes but they make a difference. With that, I would like to yield to the former Jersey dairy farmer and member from Saint Albans Town and a little bit of Saint Albans City.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Tunbridge yields to the member from Saint Albans Town.

[Representative Casey Toof (St. Albans Town)]: Thank you. Madam speaker, I'm gonna go over section three, repealing six VSA chapter 83, pest control compact. This section repeals interstate pest control compact that's been defunct since around 02/2014. The compact coordinated efforts among the states to control the interstate travel of pests, including the creation of an insurance fund meant to offset costs of controlling pests. The compact became defunct due to a change in the compact status with the IRS. With that, I turn it back over to the member from Derby.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Saint Albans Town yields the member from Derby.

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I'll report on section four, which is amendment six VSA state statute eleven twelve licenses of pest applicators. This section would remove the limit for the number of times an individual can retake the exam to receive a pesticide dealer application certificate. The limit is currently three retakes. This will leave it open ended. I believe the cost is $25 per test, which is applicable to the first test now, whereas the first test used to be free. The reason they put the fee on the first test, people would schedule taking the exam and then forget to show up. So we're gonna collect their money and encourage them to show up. This section also removes the $30 license fee for state government, municipal, and public education institution applicators. With that, I will turn over sections five through seven to the member from Cabot.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Derby Yields to the member from Cabot.

[Unidentified Representative from Cabot]: Thank you, madam speaker. I'm on page three six four five in today's calendar. Section five amends six VSA six four one. This section amends the definition of flower seed to include wildflowers and has conforming language to modern drafting standards. Section six amends six VSA six forty four, which are labeled requirements for agricultural flower and vegetable seeds. This would require bulk displays of seed to be labeled with the same information required to be on individual containers of seed. Let's see. And then section seven, six VSA six forty seven as conforming changes to modern drafting standards and technical correction to wording for fees for clarity. And I will yield to the member from Stowe.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Cabot yields to the member from Stowe.

[Representative Jed Lipsky (Stowe)]: Madam speaker, I will report be reporting on sections eight through 14, and these sections concern the consolidation of VACP with VITA. Section eight, transfer of Vermont Agricultural Credit Program 10 VSA chapter 10 a Vermont Agricultural Credit Programs is repealed for the purpose of redesignation as 10 VSA chapter 12 subsection 16. I got some reading glasses. This redesignation follows other VITA program redesignations to chapter 12 from 2025. Section nine, adding 10 VSA chapter 12 subsection 16, Vermont Credit Program, page seven through 14. Section two eight zero h h definitions. This section redesignates 10 VSA three seven four b without change except for adding the definition for authority. Means that Vermont Economic Development Authority established under section two one three of this title. Throughout the redesignation, term authority replaces references to the Vermont Agricultural Credit Corporation, the corporation that previously administered the VACP. The corporation was established as nonprofit by VIDA pursuant to 10 VSA section three seven four c, Vermont Agricultural Credit Program. This section redesignates 10 VSA section three seven four a without any substantive changes. The general powers, this section redesignates 10 VSAs, section three seven four d. This section also replaced the powers of VACC with the powers of Vida as provided in 10 VSA section two one six. This section also gives Vida the authority to dissolve Vermont Agricultural Credit Corporation in accordance with 11 b VSA chapter 14 concerning dissolution of nonprofit corporations. Section 10, amending 10 VSA section two one one c legislative findings are on page 12. This section recommends a cross reference to conform with designating VACP as 10 VSA chapter 12 subsection 16. Section 11, amending 10 VSA two twelve, page 15 under definitions. This section concerns the definition sections for VITA. This section specifies that the definitions set forth in this section do not define terms as used in subchapter 16. Section 12 amends 10 VSA section two one six authority general powers, page 15. This section amends a cross reference to conform with redesignating via VACP as 10 VSA, chapter 12, sub chapter 16. Section 13, amending 10 VSA section two two a, the Vermont Jobs Fund. It's on page 16. This section removes 10 VSA section two two zero a and b because the VACP no longer administers the line of credit program referenced in this subsection. And finally, section 14 amending 10 VSA section two eight zero a, eligible projects, authorized financing programs. This section amends a cross reference to conform with redesignating VACP as 10 VSA, chapter 12 sub chapter 16. Madam speaker, at this time, I would like to yield to the member from Derby.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from STOW yields to the member from Derby.

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Thank you, madam speaker. We will now be reporting on the sections 15 through 10 15 through 20, which is the hemp oversight transfer sections. And for your listening pleasure on page thirty six fifty two of today's journal, you can follow along. I'm gonna speak a little bit about the hemp. We had the battle of Kentucky last year with the big budget bill, and one of the senators in Kentucky decided to protect the bourbon industry, and he went after the hemp industry. Whereas the other senator from Kentucky was very upset that he went after the hemp industry. Kentucky is the third largest purveyor of hemp products in the country. They've been leaders in it and this one Senator thought he needed to protect the Bourbon people. So he created changes to hemp language. In the state of Vermont, we have a very tender hemp industry that's starting out and starting to do great things. A lot of people put a lot of effort into this product and work very hard. And if we don't enact these rules, they will not They may not, if the laws change on November 1, have access to banking and insurance and other federal controlled issues, much like cannabis is. So we've taken these steps to aid this young industry in the state of Vermont, young former farming. So section 15, the transition of hemp process or oversight. This section repeals six VSA chapter 34. This section gives a transition of hemp oversight within the agency of agriculture, the Cannabis Control Board, which I'll refer to as the CCB from now on. In 2018, federal law made it such that certain hemp and hemp derived products are no longer prohibited as a scheduled one controlled substance. In 2025, federal law changed to ban more hemp derived products if they contain certain thresholds of THC causing questions about the legality of hemp and hemp products in interstate commerce. And by the way, our hemp processors and farmers in this state are very concerned about safety and keeping intoxicating factors out of the hemp industry. They really have a concern for what they're doing in this state. Okay, section 16, adding seven VSA chapter 31 sub chapter three. This section brings over the most definitions from existing statute six VSA states statute five sixty two with some edits for clarification and edits to reflect the change in the regulatory body from the agency of agriculture to the CCB. Substantial changes include grow and grower are used interchangeably with produce and producer. Hemp products or hemp and fruze products definition is changed, so it does not include any product that is not lawful in interstate commerce. State statute eight fifty three, hemp and agricultural product. This section states that hemp is an agricultural product and that hemp is subject to and required to comply with the required agricultural practices rule. This is in line with current law. In comparison with this section, corresponding section in current law six VSA five sixty three. This section removes references to federal law that's no longer in fan in effect. I will now yield to the member from oh, no. The member from Virgin's. Thank you, madam.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Derby yields to the member from Virgins.

[Representative Matthew Birong (Vergennes)]: Madam speaker, I'll be continuing through title seven Section 16, as this series of sections relates to the adult use market more directly. So your Committee operations and military affairs worked very closely with the committee on agriculture food resiliency and forestry to craft these sections. Now to the meat of the matter, section eight fifty four, hemp registration and licensure. This section replaces the current statutory framework and creates registration and license requirements for three categories, hemp producers, hemp processors, and hemp products. All hemp producers and processors must be licensed by the cannabis control board and pay a fee. All hemp products with more than point four point four milligrams of THC shall be registered with the board prior to sale. This section also sets forth grounds that the board may deny an application including for reasons such as failure to establish that activities comply with state and federal law, refusing the board or its designee, entry upon the applicant's premises to inspect and conform compliance, failure to submit information requested by the board, and then finally, failure to pay the appropriate fee. Section eight eighty five, rulemaking authority. This section largely complies with existing statute in six VSA, section five sixty six, with some additions regarding craft processors and exemptions from the requirements of this subchapter. This section authorizes the board to adopt rules to implement the subchapter. These rules may include testing for THC levels, authorizing methods for testing THC, requirements for inspection and supervision of hemp, requirements that labels contain transparent and accurate product content or source information, establish sanitary requirements for processing facilities, establishing requirements for hemp derived products including testing requirements, requiring disclosure of the amount of cannabinoids in hemp products, requiring licensees and registrants to have commercially reasonable insurance, prohibiting hazardous additives in hemp products or specifying additive limits, requiring that hemp products that contain more than point four milligrams of THC must be restricted for sale to persons 21 years of age or older, define craft processors as a class of small businesses with different needs and risks such that the craft processors could be exempt from some of the requirements, permits exempting craft processors from registration fees, permits exempting certain product categories from registration fees, and establish requirements for the sale of any consumer product containing THC or prohibit false or misleading claims about cannabinoids containing products, cannabinoid containing products. Section eight eighty five b, the board shall adopt rules to establish requirements for the licensure of producers of hemp, hemp derived process intermediaries, and hemp products, as well as permit the same processing facility to process hemp and cannabis. Eight five six, next section, test results enforcement. This section largely complies the existing statutes of six VSA section five six eight. This section permits the board to require the disposal of hemp crops products or hemp infused products that do not comply with federally defined THC concentration levels. This section authorizes the board to enter the premises where the hemp is grown or produced for inspection, inspect retail locations where hemp is sold, and issue a stop sale order. Individuals issued a stop sale order may appeal with the board. Section eight fifty seven, administrative penalties. This section changes the existing statute to authorize the board to issue administrative penalties but no longer specifies the limit of the penalty. Under current law, individuals in violation of the hemp statutes or rules are subject to a penalty up to 1,000 per violation if the individual fails to comply with the corrective action for a violation, has a violation three times in a five year period, or had a has had a violation with a culpable mental state greater than negligence. This section incorporates appeal procedures for cannabis establishments, including the right to file a notice of appeal within thirty days of an adverse decision, the right to have an appeal heard, by an appellate officer, and the right to further appeal to the Vermont Supreme Court. This section authorizes the board to file a civil collection action in Vermont Superior Court to collect a final administrative penalty. Section eight fifty eight fees. This section changes the existing statutory fee structure. This section provides that for hemp producers or growers, the application fee or registration or renewal is $50. For processors, the fee is $500. There's no additional fees based on acreage or pounds of hemp grown. Fees will be annual.

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: The

[Representative Matthew Birong (Vergennes)]: CCB may prorate fees over a longer period of time. Current law sets the fee schedule for hemp growers at 100 or $25 if applying for personal use. Further, the current statute requires additional fees for growers, processors, or growers and processors based on acreage or pound of hemp product produced or hemp produced, excuse me, not product. These fees with some exceptions for indoor facilities are less than point five acre or less than 500 pounds, 100. Point five to acres to 9.9 acres or less than 10,000 pounds, 500. 10 to 50 acres or less than 50,000 pounds, $1,000. Greater than 50 acres and greater than 50,000 pounds, $3,000. This section adds a fee of $75 to register hemp products. Now on to section 17, we are amending 18 VSA subsection four two zero one definitions. This section amends a cross reference to conform with redesignating hemp to title seven. Section 18 amending 32 VSA. Section seven eight one one b imposition of tobacco product tax. This section amends a cross reference to conform with redesignating hemp in title seven. Section 19 amending seven VSA eight four five cannabis regulation fund. This section amends the cannabis regulation fund to permit the CCB to deposit funds received from regulating hemp. And finally, section 20, adding seven VSA eight three four sales restrictions. This section would add civil and criminal penalties for the sale of unregistered hemp and cannabis products. Criminal penalty not more than five years in prison up to $5,000 fine or both. Civil penalty of up to $5,000. The attorney general may recover fees, costs of the actions, attorney's fees, funds gained from violating this section shall be disgorged and deposited to the general fund. And with that, madam speaker, I will pass to the member from Stowe.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Virginia yields to the member from Stowe.

[Representative Jed Lipsky (Stowe)]: Thank you, member. Thank you, madam speaker. Section 21 addresses natural resource conservation council mortgages. And historically, this body should understand that conservation districts were created across The United States in the nineteen thirties and nineteen forties as a part of the response to the dust bowl. Vermont adopted this soil conservation act in 1939. In that act, it prohibited districts from taking out mortgages. No other state in the union included this language. Similarly situated organizations such as Regional Planning Commissions and Solid Waste Districts are able to hold mortgages. Many districts share office space with USDA, but as districts continue to grow, they are outgrowing that shared space. This change would allow districts to apply for mortgages from banks and the USDA Rural Development Authority. And with that, madam speaker, I will yield back to the member from Derby.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Stowe yields to the member from Derby.

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Thank you, madam speaker. Just a brief memo. I really wanna thank your gov our government and house operations. Government? Committee.

[Representative Patricia McCoy (Poultney)]: Operations and military affairs.

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Government operations and military affairs. Thank you. You don't know how much she keeps me in line. You really don't. She's yanked this mic out of my hands more time to keep me from being sarcastic. Anyways, we'd like to thank them for their work in the hemp side of things. They understand the dark side way better than we do in house agriculture, and they did a great job. So thank you to them for that. I will now speak to the CAFO Permit Working Group on page 3,660 in today's program, sections 22 through the end. And a brief note on this, last year we all passed the act to create CAFO permitting through ANR and we had the stakeholder group. And you actually sat the environmental advocates and the farmers in the same room together. And we didn't fight. And we actually got along. And we're actually starting to have conversation and getting along. And perhaps this will foster new chapters in the state of Vermont for agriculture and the environment. So to that end, we decided we'd like to keep the stakeholder group working together. So that brings us today's permit working group. Section 22, ADN 10 VSA thirteen fifty four, CAFO Permit Working Group. CAFO stands for Combined Animal Feeding Operations. In 2027, Act 67 changed the oversight of CAFOs to give the agency of natural resources the obligation to ensure water quality standards for these operations. This section would create a working group that would study and make recommendations to the KFO permit and process. This group shall meet at least quarterly. They'll provide their recommendations annually to the House and Environment Committee. They will annually report to the agriculture environment committees in the house and the senate. Section 23, adding one session law section regarding capable training on inspection. This section will require the secretary of natural resources to contract with third party consultant to provide training to the agency of natural natural resources and the agency of agriculture, food, and markets on how to conduct and inspect CAFOs. This section does not call for an appropriation. We realized it was late in the year and we've kind of charged the agencies to figure it out. Section 24, adding session law section to KFO training on inspection. This section makes the duties to supplement, implement section 23 KFO training on inspection contingent on an appropriation made in fiscal year 2027. I believe today ANR plans on only doing 10 inspections this year. We've asked for the consultant to be on 10 inspections. They already started their inspection process. So this may work with the consultant may take place next year. Just so you understand, it was the farmers and the advocates that asked for this consultant, because we all want consistency in our inspections. We all want to understand what's taking place. Really, it was when the stakeholder group met without the agencies in the room, we got a lot accomplished. And perhaps we found out the other side didn't wear devil horns. That goes both ways. So, this is really important language to me and to the farmers and to the advocates. That rounds up threetwenty three. The effective dates will be 07/01/2026, except for the section on hemp, which should take effect upon passage. It passed out of our committee seven zero one. Do you want the witness list now or later? Now? Okay, it's a book. We heard from the bill sponsor from down in Senate Ag, CBD business owner from St. Johnsbury Joint Fiscal Office, chief executive off officer for Sunset Lake Cannabis, farm to institution program manager, the agency of agriculture, general counsel, agency of agriculture, director plant industry division, agency of agriculture, Vermont Economic Development Authority, general counsel, cannabis control board, chief executive officer from Vida, director of state government affairs, American Seed Training Association, a board member from the CCB, policy director from NOFA Vermont, founder and owner of Vermont Organic Solutions, executive director of Vermont Association of Conservation Districts, the chair from the CCB, Farm to School director, Shelburne Farms, legislative director, rural Vermont, legislative council, office of legislative council, and I think we heard from two different branches of legislative council. The commissioner of three, we heard from three. Commissioner, Department of Environmental Conservation, Director, Agriculture development division, agency of agriculture, director of agricultural lending, Vermont Economic Development Authority, seed grower, and a NOFA board member. And for that, I'll stop. And

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

[Representative Charles Kimbell (Woodstock)]: Thank you, madam speaker. S three twenty three was referred to your committee on ways and means because of a new schedule fees for licensing of pesticide applicators and because of changes to the fees assessed for hemp producers and processor licenses and hemp products. The administrative penalties may be assessed by the secretary of agriculture for persons who sell seed without paying for the tonnage registration fee. We did not cover that because we do not cover penalties. And because the bill moves the oversight of hemp products and hemp derived cannabinoids to the cannabis control board and that board has given rulemaking authority to waive or reduce licensing fees for craft processor applicants, we looked to see what kind of impact that would have. As the member from Virgin's stated earlier, there are new fees for each license or registration for hemp, a producer of $50 processor of $500 and product for $75 And according to the joint fiscal office and the fiscal note that can be found on our committee page that of ways and means, the pesticide applicator license fee changes would affect the special fund by an unknown amount. In the hemp area, the level of impact on the revenues of the state is anywhere from 10,000 to $90,000 in revenue. And the reason for that, madam speaker, is if interstate commerce of hemp is allowed at the federal level, licensing of hemp products could increase substantially in Vermont and could generate up to 90,000 in annual revenue to the Cannabis Regulation Fund. However, that is very uncertain and unknown at this time. And we are offering an amendment to really follow-up on that evolving market. We're offering an amendment which you can find on page three three six three of today's calendar. There are three instances of amendment. The first instant is a technical change that corrects a typo regarding the cannabis regulation fund and the appropriate chapter replacing the word hemp with the word cannabis to reflect its chapter in chapter 31. The second, we're inserting section 16 A that requires a report back to the legislature on the fees assessed for licensing of hemp producers and processors and the fees associated with hemp product registrations. And you'll find that again on page 3,363. It's worth looking at that hemp fees reporting on or before 01/15/2027. The cannabis control board shall submit to the house committees on agriculture, food results, resiliency, and forestry on ways and means in the government operations and military affairs and the senate committees on agriculture, on finance, and on economic development, housing, and general affairs. A report that includes the following information, a summary of all hemp fees in effect for fiscal year two thousand twenty seven, a summary of the revenue derived from each fee in fiscal year twenty six, a comparison of fees in other jurisdictions, an analysis of policies or trends that might affect the viability of the fee amount and a recommendation regarding how the hemp fee schedule is set forth in seven VSA eight fifty eight may be adjusted to better promote the intent of the general assembly to better support small business hemp producers and processors. So we really wanna have that information when we come back next year. The third instance of amendment is section it's insert section 16 b and it repeals the ability of the board to waive or reduce licensing fees for Kraft processors on 01/01/2028. So we'll have the report in hand by that time, and it gives an opportunity to look at those fees before moving forward. We heard from the chair of the cannabis control board, the senior fiscal analysts with the joint fiscal office, and legislative counsel from the office of legislative counsel. Our voting committee to us define the bill favorable as amended 09/2002.

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

[Representative Thomas Stevens (Waterbury)]: Thank you, madam speaker. I'll be reporting on this amendment. The committee was on appropriations was referred to senate bill three twenty three. And we respectfully report that it's considered the same and recommends that the report of the committee on agriculture for food resiliency and forestry be amended as these following two instances of amendment. The first will be and and these two instances of amendment came up through a different avenue not directly related to the bill. This is adding more miscellaneous to the miscellaneous agriculture bill. These are two instances that were in our budget that well, one is one is directly related to the budget as we've passed it and one was related to s 60 which we passed earlier this year and which was signed into law, the Farm and Forestry Operations Security Special Fund. And what happened here was a simple change to allow that the secretary of agriculture and forest products be and food resiliency be the one to make a final award determination within fifteen days following the date of the review board's recommendation for a reminder for the the for the farmer and forestry operations special security fund security special fund is meant to we created the structure for this fund and we have not yet funded it, but it is to provide funds for farmers of a certain size who have lacked certain amount of insurance in the case of emergencies related to weather difficulties. This is just clarifying that the secretary will make the final award determination. In the second instance of of amendment, we are adding we are clarifying something that happened. We the in the budget as as recommended by the governor and as supported by the house and now the senate. We are waiving in section, six VSA forty eight fifty one. We are waiving fees in both the large and medium farm operation fee structure. So that is going to cost the state approximately $231,000 of income which we've already accounted for in the budget. What we did not catch was we did not delete the language in the statute that that completes that waiver. So what we cut is the language that said during any calendar year in which a person has a an active large concentrated animal feeding operation permit issued by the agency of natural resources pursuant to the federal clean water act and pays the required associated fee that that person shall not be required to pay the $2,500 annual operating fee described in this section. The fees this is the important part. The fees collected under this section shall be deposited in the agricultural water quality special fund. Since we're not collecting the fees anymore, this language was unnecessary. And the same thing happened in six VSA forty eight fifty eight e and that would have been for the fees that were related to the farms that had a medium sized permit needed. And that is really it. We heard from the reporter of the bill, the representative from Derby. We heard from the chair of the cannabis control board, joint fiscal office, and and legislative council. And so your house appropriations committee favorably reports that s 23 has passed the senate and amended by house agriculture, Food Resiliency and Forestry and further amended by House Ways and Means and further amended by H and House Appropriations by a vote of ten-zero-one.

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

[Representative Richard Nelson (Derby)]: Thank you, speaker. And I'd really like to thank the members from the Ways and Means Committee and House Appropriations for your good work on this. And I'm having a hard time containing my excitement from house appropriation on the waiving of fees. My industry is in dire straits this year with the price of milk, the price of fuel, and the price of fertilizer. And although these fees take effect next year, much, much, much appreciated. To that end, we straw pulled that out 07/2001, and we would hope the body would agree with us and pass this bill. Thank you, madam speaker.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: And member from Woodstock.

[Representative Charles Kimbell (Woodstock)]: Madam speaker, your house committee on ways and means reviewed the amendment from the house appropriations committee today. And because of the impact of the removal of the fees and it's worth noting that in 2021, the fees for large farms were $95,000 and for medium sized farms about 192,000. In 2026 estimated revenues 92,500 for large farms, but the real decline is in the medium sized farms at a 136,500. And it really reflects the unfortunate decrease in the number of farms that meet that definition. So we recognize that there are hard financial times that are facing this particular industry. And the reduction in the fees or the removal of the fees are being picked up in the appropriations bill from the general fund. So there really is no fiscal impact on the state from that perspective. And so our committee reviewed the amendment and found it favorable by a vote of eleven zero zero.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: So the first question is, shall the report of the committee on agriculture, food resiliency, and forestry be amended as recommended by the committee on ways and means? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it. And you have amended the report of the committee on agriculture, food resiliency and forestry. Now the question is shall the report of the committee on agriculture, food resiliency and forestry as amended be further amended as recommended by the committee on appropriations. 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 further amended the report of the committee on agriculture, food resiliency, and forestry. Now the question is shall the house propose to the senate to amend the bill as recommended by the committee on agriculture, food resiliency and forestry as amended. Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it. And you have proposed to the senate to amend the bill. Now the question is, shall the bill be read a third time? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and third reading is ordered. Member from Pulte Pultely, can you please offer us a motion to suspend our rules to place senate bill three twenty three in all remaining stages of passage?

[Representative Patricia McCoy (Poultney)]: Madam speaker, I make a motion to suspend rules in order to place s three two three in all remaining stages of passage.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Pulte moves that we suspend our rules to place senate bill three twenty three in all remaining stages of passage. 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 placed senate bill three twenty three in all remaining stages of passage. Please listen to the third reading of the bill.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (Clerk of the House)]: S three twenty three, an act relating to miscellaneous agricultural subjects.

[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. Member from Pulteney, can you please offer us a motion to suspend our rules to message our action on senate bill three twenty three to the senate forthwith?

[Representative Patricia McCoy (Poultney)]: Madam speaker, I make a motion to suspend rules in order to message our action on s three two three to the senate forthwith.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Pultely moves that we suspend our rules to message our action on senate bill three twenty three to the senate forthwith. Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The ayes appear to have it.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The ayes do have it and you have suspended our rules to message our action on senate bill three twenty three to the senate forthwith. Member from Pulte on our notice calendar is the senate proposal of amendment on house bill nine thirty seven which is an act relating to miscellaneous judiciary procedures. Can you please offer us a motion to suspend rules to take up house bill nine thirty seven off the notice calendar for immediate consideration?

[Representative Patricia McCoy (Poultney)]: Adam speaker, I make a motion to suspend rules in order to take up off the action calendar for immediate consideration. H nine three seven.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Pulte moves that we suspend our rules to take up House Bill nine thirty seven off the notice calendar for immediate consideration. 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 suspended rules to take up house bill nine thirty seven for immediate consideration. House bill nine thirty seven is an act relating to miscellaneous judiciary procedures. The bill passed the senate in concurrence with a proposal of amendment that is printed in today's calendar. Member from Brattleboro.

[Representative Mollie S. Burke (Brattleboro)]: Thank you Madam Speaker. Before the body is the Senate's proposal amendment to H nine thirty seven an act relating to miscellaneous judiciary procedures. There it's not printed in today's calendar, but it can be found on legislative website. There are four instances of amendment. The first three instances of amendment make changes to sections that were in the bill that was passed out of the house. So I'll go through those three first and then I'll go to the fourth which are new sections. Starting with the first instance of amendment, it amends the statute involving underage possession of alcohol or cannabis to clarify that an automatic and immediate driver's license suspension upon violation only occurs for operating, attempting to operate, or being an actual physical control on a highway of a vehicle when the person's blood alcohol concentration is point zero two or more. The second instance of amendment deletes the section amending the statute involving underage possession of tobacco products to establish a minimum age of 12. This section was deleted because another bill S 198 makes more substantive amendments to this section and the policy choice of establishing the minimum age is more appropriate in that bill. S 198 passed the Senate and is currently being considered by your House Human Services Committee. The third instance of amendment fixes a typo in the section involving the renewal of family division judgments, specifically changing the word affirmation to affirmative. Madam speaker, the fourth instance of amendment adds nine new sections to h nine thirty seven. Section 40 a, this section clarifies that victims can opt out of any notification or other services that DOC is required to provide to victims in various sections in title 28. This change was a request from the victim notification task force group and will allow DOC to offer a menu of notification and other services for victims to select which ones they want and which they don't. Section 40 b, this is the language from s one eighty three, the home and land improvement fraud bill. S one eighty three was passed out of the house and senate and then vetoed because of a typo, specifically a cross reference and this section is the same without the typo. Section 40 c, this section clarifies that the liability caps applicable to federal section nineteen eighty three actions under existing law in the Vermont Tort Claims Act also applied to the new state cause of action created in h eight forty nine, which is modeled after the federal section nineteen eighty three law. This technical correction was based on conversations with the office of the attorney general that this clarification would be helpful in a case of any ambiguity as to the general assembly's intent that protect that that it should apply to this new law as well. Sections forties 40 d and e amends act 47 of 2023 regarding legal aids tenant representation pilot program. The act included language that the program would be begin upon available funds. Those funds were not appropriated until f y twenty twenty five and the pilot began operating on 11/01/2024. The language in this amendment extends the dates for the reporting requirements based on the delayed start of the pilot and directs the agency of human services and Vermont legal aid to update existing grant agreements to implement the tenant representation pilot program amendments under this act. Sections 40 f through g, these sections authorize the Human Rights Commission to disclose investigative reports resulting from a complaint initiated by the Human Rights Commission, a Human Rights Commission employee. And I'll refer to Human Rights Commission during this as HRC. It would not apply to an investigative reports resulting from complaints by private parties which would remain confidential. The amendment authorizes the HRC to release any investigative report only after the commission has made a final determination and the parties have been notified. The HRC could not proactively disclose this report, but could produce it in response to a public records act request. The HRC must redact information in the report that the HRC is required to keep confidential under current law. It cannot disclose the identities of non party witnesses if good cause is shown to protect the witnesses confidentiality. The HRC cannot disclose any information if release of the information is prohibited under state or federal law absent a court order. And finally, the HRC cannot disclose the identity of the parties and any information that would identify the parties if the commission finds that there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the that any kind of discrimination occurred in the final report. These changes would apply to any human rights commission investigation that is currently pending at the bill's passage. The second to last section, section 40 h, this section amends the statute involving final relief, from abuse orders, RFAs. Currently, the court may order a civil order of protection if the court finds that the defendant has abused a plaintiff and one of two things, either there is a danger of further abuse or the defendant is incarcerated at the time of the hearing for one of several violent crimes. So one or the other. The amendment changes subdivision c two b of the statute to the defendant is currently under the supervision of Department of Corrections. So that changes it from the person is incarcerated to the person is under the supervision of Department of Corrections. This language would then apply to defendants who are either incarcerated or serving a sentence such as probation or are on furlough in the community for one of these violent crimes. Finally, madam speaker, the final section is 40 I, which will look familiar to the body as it was section one of h four zero nine passed by the house earlier this session. Section 40 I amends 13 VSA seven five five b one b and b one two I'm sorry, and b two, replacing the word expungement with the word ceiling as it applies to eligible eligible misdemeanors for the $200 bail cap. Last session, this body amended our expungement and sealing laws so that these listed misdemeanors along with others are now sealable, not expungible. We neglected to change the corresponding language in the bail statute, and this technical correction ensures that the bail cap continues to apply to these now sealable misdemeanors and avoids confusion in the judiciary. Madam speaker, we heard from a number of witnesses on the senate's proposal amendment including the team lead, a legislative council from the office of legislative council, another legislative council from the office of legislative council, the community justice unit director from the attorney general's office, the executive director from the Center for Crime Victim Services, the interim executive director from the from Vermont Legal Aid, the director of policy from the Network Against Domestic and Sexual Violence, and finally, the executive director and general counsel from the Vermont Human Rights Commission. Madam speaker, your house judiciary voted a straw poll of eleven zero zero to concur with the senate's proposal of amendment, and we ask for the body support.

[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. Members at this time, we will be recessing. Please keep an eye on your email for bills that may be coming to the floor for our 3PM block. So with that, the house will stand and recessed until the fall of the gavel at 3PM.