Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Will the house please come to order and members kindly take their seats? Welcome back. We have two bills that we will be taking up at this time and then we will be adjourning until tomorrow. The first bill we will take up today is House Bill seven ten which is an act relating to defining electricity generating facilities and then house bill two ninety four which is an act relating to telecommunications services and wages in correctional facilities. So members earlier today the senate message to us the senate proposal of amendment on house bill seven ten which is an act relating to defining electricity generating facilities. The clerk emailed you the senate proposal of amendment at 05:19 today and it's also posted on the house overview webpage and paper copies are available at the main table. Member from can you please offer us a motion to suspend rules to take up House Bill seven ten for immediate consideration pending its entry on the notice calendar?

[Representative Patricia McCoy]: Madam Speaker, I make a motion to suspend rules in order to take up for immediate consideration pending notice pending entry on the notice calendar, H710.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Pulte moves that we suspend our rules to take up House Bill seven ten for immediate consideration pending its entry on the notice calendar. 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 seven ten for immediate consideration. House bill seven ten is an act relating to defining electricity generating facilities. The bill passed the senate in concurrence with a proposal of amendment that you can in your email, step five nineteen on our house overview webpage and there are paper copies available on the main table. And members, the member from Cabot, representative Burtt will be offering further amendment there too which the first assistant clerk emailed to you at 05:09PM. This is also posted on the house overview webpage and paper copies are available at the main table. But first to explain the senate proposal of amendment member from Burlington.

[Representative Bram Kleppner]: Madam speaker, you may or may not remember a month called February when we last discussed h seven ten. It was a simple bill that addressed one unintended consequence of one definition in the section of Vermont statute that regulates clean energy, 30 VSA section 8,002. That change was in the definition the Public Utility Commission or PUC uses to delineate which clean energy facilities, like solar or wind farms, count as separate facilities and which have to be counted together as a single facility called a single plant. The original definition of single plant the PUC adopted defined all projects that shared infrastructure, like access roads, as a single plant. The goal of that definition was to prevent people from building a facility that was too big to qualify for one of Vermont's clean energy programs, like the net metering program or the standard offer program, but then claiming the facility wasn't one big facility and was actually several smaller facilities. That rule did, in fact, prevent anyone from taking unfair advantage of the programs. However, it had the unintended consequence of require of requiring that if a community wanted to add a second solar field next to an existing site, the developer would have to build a second access road right next to the original access road. This was not anyone's intent. To eliminate this unintended consequence, over last summer, the PUC conducted a proceeding that included two rounds of public comments and a public workshop and developed a proposed new definition, which they then circulated to a large group of stakeholders for comment. Based on its broad support, your committee on energy and digital infrastructure turned that new definition into h seven ten, changing the definition of single plant from any facility sharing infrastructure to any facilities that use the same point of interconnection to connect them to the grid. As a body, we supported that change of definition, and we passed h seven ten on February 18 on a roll call vote of one zero eight to 30. Yesterday, the senate adopted an amendment requiring a report from the Department of Public Service. The Department of Public Service sent us a letter last night detailing a number of concerns with the amendment. Specifically, they believe that some of the data the amendment requires is unavailable, and some would be unduly expensive or time consuming to collect. Madam speaker, this amendment adds what appears to be an unworkable requirement on the Department of Public Service. Given the strong support for the underlying bill in the administration as expressed by the Department of Public Service and in both chambers, your committee on energy and digital infrastructure on a straw poll of seven one one refused to concur with the senate instance of amendment, and we request a committee of conference.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: And now we'll turn to the member from Cabot to offer his further amendment there too. Member from Cabot.

[Representative Gregory "Greg" Burtt]: Thank you madam speaker. My amendment makes a small change and simply pushes out the implementation of the build to on sections one and two. I don't know where it would be in a calendar right now, but it is available in the well. Section one changes the definition of plant to allow for multiple electricity generating facilities regardless of when each is constructed. The idea which the member addressed is to no longer have the system be based on a program, but based on what makes sense for the construction of these sites to be able to expand if they would like to. And I'm my amendment really is asking to delay the process on that to allow for more input and more tools to be given to the PUC to decide whether or not it's a good idea in the first place. And I have also been made aware that a stakeholder process has already taken place but in conversations that I've had with some of the stakeholders, not all the concerns have been addressed. The concern I have mainly is that our working lands, our primary agricultural soils, our farms are not on the increase. Our farmland is certainly not on the increase and so we need to be careful what we do with our legislation. I'd rather see the needle being pushed toward an expansion of our working lands and an expansion of the economy associated with agriculture. So I think there needs to be more conversation had around this before going forward and that's why I'm asking for a two year delay on that process. I would like to see the working lands be given up greater emphasis from the legislature. The renewable energy standard did a lot for renewable energy but it's coming at the cost of our farmland and so the single plant bill is not necessarily the ideal place to target this or to address it but it's a bill that I think encourages the sighting of solar on more and more farmland and that's a large concern of mine and many others. And I would ask that when the vote is taken, it will be taken by division.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: When the vote is taken, it will be taken by division. Member from Burlington.

[Representative Bram Kleppner]: Madam speaker, your committee on energy and digital infrastructure met to consider the amendment to h seven ten proposed by the member from Cabot and we thank him for bringing his amendment forward. As he stated, the amendment would delay implementation of sections one and two, by two years, and section one is actually where we fix the problem. So it would delay fixing the problem by two years. We had a robust committee discussion with the member from Cabot, and again, thank him for bringing this forward. The definition change, the new definition proposed in h 07/10 has been widely vetted with a large circle of shareholders by the Public Utility Commission, and that circle of shareholders who vetted the new definition included both the Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food, and Markets, and the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources. Because the amendment would likely cause harm by leaving in place for two more years the negative unintended consequence that h seven ten addresses, we found no benefit to that delay. And on a straw poll of seven to two, we found the amendment unfavorable and we ask the body to join us in voting no on this amendment.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: So the question is, shall the house concur in the senate proposal of amendment with further amendment thereto as offered by the member from Cabot. Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor please stand. You may be seated. Now all those opposed, please stand. You may be seated. Members please listen to the results of your vote. Those voting yes, 42. Those voting no, 65. The nays have it and you have declined to concur in the senate proposal of amendment with that further amendment there too. So now we will return to the motion at hand. The member from Burlington moves that the house refuse to concur in the senate proposal of amendment and that a committee of conference be appointed. 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 refused to concur in the senate proposal of amendment and requested a committee of conference. Pursuant to your action, the chair appoints the following members to serve on the part of the house. The member from Manchester, representative James. The member from Dover, representative Sebelius and the member from Burlington, representative Klepner. Member from Polkhardt, can you please offer us a motion to suspend our rules to message our action on house bill seven ten to the senate forthwith?

[Representative Patricia McCoy]: Madam speaker, I make a motion to suspend rules in order to message our actions on h seven ten to the senate forthwith.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Pulte moves that we suspend our rules to message our action on house bill seven ten 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. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it and you have suspended our rules to message our action on House Bill seven ten to the senate forthwith. Members earlier today, the senate message to us the senate proposal of amendment on House Bill two ninety four which is an act relating to telecommunications services and wages in correctional facilities. The clerk emailed you this Senate proposal of amendment at 05:22 today and it's also posted on the house overview webpage and paper copies are available at the main table. Member from Pulteney, can you please offer us a motion to suspend our rules to take up house bill two ninety four for immediate consideration pending its entry on the notice calendar?

[Representative Patricia McCoy]: Madam speaker, I make a motion to suspend rules in order to take up for immediate consideration pending entry on the notice calendar H294.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The member from Pulte moves that we suspend our rules to take up House Bill two ninety four for immediate consideration pending its entry on the notice calendar. 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 two ninety four for immediate consideration. House bill two ninety four is an act relating to telecommunications services and wages and correctional facilities. The bill passed the senate in concurrence with a proposal of amendment that you can find in your email at 05:22PM. Also on our house overview webpage and paper copies are available at the main table. Member from Montpelier.

[Representative Conor Casey]: Madam speaker, the amendment to H two ninety four is very narrow. It strikes one word in section two. The underlying bill remains the same. It directs a study on the feasibility and impacts of providing free or reduced cost communication services for incarcerated Vermonters. What the senate did was simply removed CoreCivic from the list of named stakeholders to be consulted in that study. As you likely know, CoreCivic is a private prison company that houses roughly a 150 inmates in Tallahatchie, Mississippi. We'd included them to make sure this out of state population was considered, and the senate agreed but felt because CoreCivic is a private for profit corrections corporation, it was not appropriate to formally designate them in statute as a stakeholder in shaping Vermont's corrections policy. That said, nothing in this amendment prevents the Department of Corrections from gathering operational information from CoreCivic, as needed. This change is really about the appropriateness of elevating a for profit prison company to develop Vermont's corrections policy, and we agreed. For those reasons, your corrections and institutions committee voted favorably nine zero two and asked for the body support to concur with the senate proposal of 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. Members that completes the orders of the day. Members we have a joint house resolution to take up at this time JRH 12 is a joint resolution authorizing remote joint committee voting through the remainder of the calendar year 2026 and the application of the ADA thereto offered by the House Committee on Rules. Please listen to the reading of the resolution by title only.

[BetsyAnn Wrask (House Clerk)]: JRH 12 joint resolution authoring limited remote joint committee voting through the remainder of calendar year 2026 and the application of the ADA thereto.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: The resolution has been read and will be placed on the notice calendar for the next action calendar for the next legislative day. Members, also the senate refused to concur in the house proposal of amendment on senate bill two zero eight which is an act relating to standards for law enforcement identification and requested a committee of conference. So pursuant to that action, the chair appoints the following members to serve on the part of the house, the member from South Burlington, representative Malone, the member from Essex Junction, representative Dolan and the member from Brattleboro, representative Goodnow. Are there any announcements? Member from Bennington.

[Representative Mary A. Morrissey]: Madam speaker, accuracy is important. Although the representative from Lowell cleared cleared it up with his follow-up question, I want to apologize for accidentally saying a 105,000,000 in an earlier floor report when I meant to say a 105,000. Despite the possible deepest fears of the body, I assure you that your house appropriations has no desire to add several zeros to the end of every number.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: Are there any further announcements? Seeing none. Member from Pulte, can you please can you please offer us a motion to adjourn until Thursday, May 28 at 09:30AM?

[Representative Patricia McCoy]: Madam Speaker, I make a motion this body stand and adjournment until Thursday, 05/28/2026 at 09:30AM.

[Representative Jill Krowinski (Speaker of the House)]: You've 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