Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Welcome to House Education, March 20. The committee is meeting Friday afternoon. This is going to be a relatively brief afternoon as the snow is falling and turning to rain or not, roads could get icy. Our purpose this afternoon is to run through the miscellaneous Ed bill just in terms of having our order and whatnot prepared, and then just sort of update everybody on what is going on to have us have some pretty significant stuff to look at on Tuesday. So, let's talk miscellaneous Ed bill. First of all, and while that's coming up, Rob, congratulations. Presenter bill, got a three, two amendments. There's some budgeting on the floor. Yeah, that was And Donovan, you'd question even. It's tame one. Okay, so I will present the bill. I'm just going to basically say, here's what's coming up, and then I will yield to the first person who Jana.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Yield to the rep from All right.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Peter to Jana. Now, Jana, are you feeling fine about yours?

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: So I had a couple of questions that Beth and I are through, but yes, I think it's only a couple of sentences, Should be fine. And then I think I hand it off to Erin, right? Is that the next section?

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Yes. Unless it moved around.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Got a compact. Great. And Erin, you're feeling fine about yours?

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: All the compact language is the universal compact language at every state. Like, it's not up to

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: us to touch it. Actually can't make any changes. That's the office of legislature council. You actually can't make any changes to it.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: And just again, we've been part of this. There's money in the budget for dues.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: I'm not even sure who

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: will be did we formally withdraw? Is that what happened?

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: It's all I put it I

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: put the act number and everything in the section by section summary. I believe it was 1994. Okay.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: And did we withdraw? No one

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: knows why. 1994.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Oh, '94. And why did we withdraw?

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: I don't know.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: He said, yeah, answer that. Lost to

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: the sands of time. Exactly.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Alright.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Let's and what comes up after that?

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Bates is gone then, so I think it's me.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Is the next part the BOCES part?

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: Yes.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Okay, so then Erin, I'm gonna ask you to say section three, we are not gonna go into section three as it is- Three through 12. Three through 12, which was simply changing the name from BOCES to CISA because it is being struck in an upcoming amendment and the language will be put in a different bill.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Struct in the ways is that the ways and means amendment?

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Yes. Yep. And I have that all in the section by section summary.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: And then you will then now defer to To?

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Yeah. Right? Leave, right? Class size minimums next? Yep.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: And Beth, you're feeling fine about I gave

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: it to you just in case I said what needed to be said. Basically, it's the dates. We're not changing any policy Or

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: just the why.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: I just kind of said we're not changing any of the policy about class size minimums. 7A is exactly what Section seven was in Act 73, and we've added a Section 7B to reconcile the dates And I'll go in and change section numbers and page numbers. So

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: let people know that it is to better align statute with those

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Yeah. Think I mentioned that they go into effect on July 1, but rulemaking initiates August 1. Is not accurate. The three year time the three year

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: I'm sorry. I don't have it in

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: front of me. He's got it.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: It's been a long week. Should know. He yanked my finger at

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: you. That's fine.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: That's that's why I had someone to proofread what

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: I wrote.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: This is not about you. The Act 73 required rulemaking to be initiated on

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: or before. On or before. And I think I did say on or before, because I noticed it's on or before August 1. So essentially the doesn't start, the three year clock doesn't start until either 07/01/2027 or rulemaking has been adopted. But I think it's in there. But I always like something to proofread and say, No, you have a funny word in here you didn't mean to say. But I think I'm okay with it for the most part, not having it right in front

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: of me. Questions on the policy part of class size minimums. I know it's not, but if we do,

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: answer. This does not address the policy. And

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: if that

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: isn't satisfactory, can yield to the member from class

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: minimum law is it was passed in Acts 73.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: All we touched was titeracts out

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: of dates, not the policy. All

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: right. And Beth, you are then going to Leanne.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Member from Glover. Wait for the last Yes, for the next section.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: So one of my questions was, since we're taking out the BOCES seesaw part, that doesn't change the number. This is still section 14, right? Correct. Okay.

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: Okay, because that isn't the delay.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: And also, it won't have been amended yet. Right, okay. Right. So You had criminal background checks, is that right?

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: I have criminal background checks, and like I told you, I wrote two different versions. One goes through every single subsection and explains what it does, and the other Short one. Okay, so I'm gonna go with the one that just summarizes the main points. And I didn't get into the thing that happened that made them ask for this. I just am talking about what the bill actually does in its purpose. Is that okay? I don't think you're totally clear on the trigger thing.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Yeah, no, that's okay. Just that it's all about their desire to be able to do criminal background checks for employees who will be interacting with students, potentially interacting with students. Okay. And then there's a section 15 that just updates how we do that. So I'm assuming it's supposed

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: to include that as well.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: I think when you I'm just looking at this very quickly. As you introduce it, I would say this seeks to allow the agency to do criminal background checks on employees or contractors interacting with students. Okay, before you start saying things like sex offenses and all that.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: I really have sex on the floor.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: But you don't. No, I'm just reading what you wrote.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: Okay. So sorry, can you repeat how you worded that?

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Yes. Section 14 will allow the agency of education to conduct criminal background checks on employees and contractors who potentially they interact with children. I almost don't even know if you need to say anything more.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: That's like my entire floor report. Basically follows the same procedure that You

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: can say section 14 lays out the process for that. Section 15. You can relate it to chaperones.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: So the short version I gave you is still too long?

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Yep, I have to be printed. Have to print

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: The lines too long.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: You just say, you know,

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: So section 14 lays out the process and section 15 does what?

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: I would just say sections fourteen and fifteen, and then whatever I said at the beginning. Sections fourteen and fifteen will allow the Institute of Education to conduct criminal background checks.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: Sorry, I feel like you just said that two different ways.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: I would just say, well, rather than trying to break out the sections, just say section fourteen and fifteen, and then whatever I said allows the agency of education to conduct criminal background checks on employees or contractors, potentially may

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: Basically, it's one sentence. Here's my flow away. Sessions fourteen and fifteen will allow the agency of education to conduct criminal background checks on employees and contractors who potentially may interact with children. I now yield back to the member from court.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: You could do that. You could say this came at the request of the agency or something like

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: This came

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: at the request of me.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Think one time. Right,

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: that's it. Just those sentences.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: I think that that's sufficient.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: We requires them, right? It's not at the discretion of the HCA requires them. They should.

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: Actually think you should

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: put in the word requires.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: Maybe requires a set of allowed. Will require, okay.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: And then, so it may be good to just mention this was a HC-

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Yep, that's my second sentence. Yeah,

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: because if you're requiring someone to do something, it's nice to know that they wanna do it.

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: Yeah. I would suggest to

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: you all of what questions they ask.

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: Yes. Then because when you're that brief, and people have read the language, print out.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: Print out both the long and the short version and have it in front of me so that if people do ask about it, yes. A

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: couple of questions on this. One, the process that is laid out in fourteen and fifteen is the same as what it is for teachers.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Superintendent.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Superintendent. So you may want to throw that little tidbit in there. That's a process laid out in section fourteen and fifteen is the same process for superintendents. Ways and Means is going to be dealing

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: with who pays the fee.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: Do I say that or let's No, say

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: just don't even talk about

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: it. How

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: are they going to pay for it?

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: But in the back of your mind,

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: what else? But if you have a sense of, is it kind of policy among state employees that if they require criminal background checks?

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Oh, I have no idea.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: It's not our issue, it's ways and in any way.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: All right, well, if anyone asks for more detail, I'll have it available, but I'll stay out of it if I can. Yeah.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: And then it comes to me.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Wrap it up.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Wrap it up. So I do witnesses and Oh, and I always forget one of you. Effective date. She's a witness.

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: It says, four eleven zero to vote. Just because you were.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Alright. We will have to hear the other amendments probably. I think that will take us somewhere between forty and sixty seconds.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Credit.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: These are means struck the CISA stuff for us. And then It's good. In that the state pays for the criminal background checks for the employee's contract. Literally. Is that it?

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: Two instances, and that's what it

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Alright. And did did anything happen in Approach?

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: I say it did it even go to Approach? But does it have to if okay. It did. Yeah. Because now that this agency's paying the fee

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: It's about the I'm sure. It's about the membership in ECS, why you had to go to Approach.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Yes, yeah. Can

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: I ask a question about- because

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: they didn't change anything? The

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: section fourteen and fifteen that I

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: don't know the answer to.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Yeah.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: That is that I noticed when going over it that they have the option to put the background check into subscription service so that it will just automatically and periodically spit out if an employee has committed a crime since they were hired. And is that something that we also do in public education for employees?

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Question for Beth. That's a really good question.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: I have no idea what you're talking about.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: So it says at the end of this bill, the subscription service. I mean, it uses the language in the bill.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Yeah, hold on. Let me pull

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: it up. And I looked up what that was, and it's like you can sign up rather than have

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Go in and do it.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: An employee who already has worked in public schools have to get fingerprinted again. You can just put in their name and birth date and do it more easily because they've already been fingerprinted.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Oh, oh, oh, yep. Let me Let me Yep. Hold on. Let me pull it up. Okay.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: And so, like, once you've done that, you've also been signed up for a subscription that will anytime they commit a crime, eventually, spit it back to

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: you. And

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: I just wondered if that's going on for me as an employee. I think they've accused

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: of committing a crime. Or if

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: they had to be committed.

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: Why are you just wondering? Not

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: me particularly. Teachers. I bet it's a contract.

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: Rechecking criminal record may be accomplished through subscription service. So some may insist So on the

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: public school employees also could potentially be subject to ongoing criminal background checks all the time? Yes. Well, you want to go through a criminal background check because you've done it. Well, no, this is saying that even after you're hired, the subscription can do this over and over and over. So the next

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: time you apply for another job.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: Don't think that's So what it's even

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: if records is accomplished, it may be accomplished through that.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: But it also says that even after they're hired, in case they commit a crime after they were hired. Well, looked up what the subscription service You're

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: looking at what a subscription service does.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: That's what we do. Right.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: So it's not just at the time of hire. It's after you were hired. If you got in an accident or drunk driving or something six months after you were hired, eventually it would tell your own player. I mean, they'd probably

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: If they were to stand up for that feature in terms of with a sporadically hired contractor.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: Yeah. My question is, is this just the AOE, or are

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: we doing this throughout public schools? No. But it's not germane to the bill. It's germane.

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: That's a question for your attorney.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: And I'm asking it.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: I was trying to figure out the answer for this question.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: I would ask someone in your school community. I'm right here.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: Are there ongoing criminal background

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: I cannot answer whether there are ongoing background checks, but I will tell you, I'm trying sorry. I had to restart my computer.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Okay. Anyway,

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: but I'm looking at it now. Section 15 is an amendment to section two fifty six, which is current law in title 16. The title of that statute tells you, I think, all you need to know for this bill from a legal perspective. Continued validity of criminal record check, maintenance of records. This is current law that's applicable to all of the criminal record checks that are conducted pursuant to this chapter in Title 16. So that's teachers, superintendents, AOE now, and anyone else listed therein. The only reason it's here is because we needed to add AOE in from one of the employers who this section now applies to. What this section says is, or at least what you see here, subsection a says, anyone required to request a criminal record check under the subjunctor about a person who has previously undergone a check, regardless of whether the check was for student teaching, licensure, or employment purposes, shall comply with that requirement by acquiring the results of the previous criminal record check unless So if you are changing schools, maybe for licensure you had to have a background check and now you're being employed. Maybe you're going from the field to AOE. This is saying you have to use the same background check that was already done unless the person refuses to authorize the release of information, the record no longer exists. Since the record check, there has been a period of one year or more during which the person has not worked for Vermont School District. And then that lists all of the applicable employees, and that's the only reason we have this in here because we have to list AOE or as otherwise required by this chapter. And then the subscription service language is current law. So whether or not anyone is taking advantage of this, I have no idea. Outside of all of this is labor law and employment law. And I am making an assumption, and we all know what ASSUM stands for, that your contracts address your behavior as far as criminal conduct, arrests, convictions, etcetera, and how those may fit into your employment contract. So if there's a question about how often are people's records checked or something like that, you have no idea. Just what

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: I was wondering, was if that was part of teachers and other employees as well.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: But yeah, we don't know.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: All right, so are everybody feeling good about the Leland Morgan Building, which is on notice towards Tuesday. And there hasn't been any talk about token sessions that advances the calendar. On Monday, you called it.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Oh, yeah, we're not there yet.

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: I haven't heard,

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: but I will.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: All right, so then before we kind of call it a week, next week we're gonna hopefully be very busy in here working on stuff. Had dispensation from before if we need it. We've got lots of time with Beth Quimby. I have asked Beth to work on language sort of based on what we were discussing the other day. It is about the merger part of it and basically talking about taking some of our goals, but working within existing statute rather than having to create a whole new set of statutes, but to work within chapter 11 of Title 16, which talks about formation of union school districts. So we'll have a lot of that to go through next week in terms of procedure. And there's gonna be decisions we'll need to make if we wanna modify what exists in current law to make it perhaps more mandatory or more equipped or more whatever.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: Are you talking about making the CESAs more mandatory or?

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: No, this is the work of essentially what we are talking about is, in the way we did things in Act 46, but it's now in statute, the formation of a union school district, There's a whole process laid out. It's voluntary right now, if you wanna do the process, can, if you don't, you don't have to. We are talking about making sort of the initial part of that mandatory, but you have to get together and talk, period, and then it lays out the rest of the steps.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: You're talking about changing act 100

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Act 46 was all session law, it's gone. This is all titles, chapter 11 of title 16, which took all of that processes included in the statute in case in today's world, any two districts wanted to get together and create a new school district.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: Sorry, I'm wondering about something you just said. You said whether we want to make it quicker or more mandatory, and you're talking about the consolidation of districts.

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: The

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: process by which communities come together to discuss it. If I can ask, I guess,

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: as clarity, what that means is we learned a lot during Act 46 in how challenging the process was and how time consuming it was. And because we learned so much during that time, it is my hope that we can actually make it easier because communities really struggle with that matter.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: So what we'll do when we come back is let Beth walk through the process as envisioned by the chair, which differs very little as envisioned by chapter 11. Y'all might wanna read chapter 11 of title 16 while you're there over the weekend? I

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: have to get my bill report. I wanna like, summary. The summary.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: That's even by section.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: But it's actually, it's a good read just in terms of, it's an important read just in terms of the fact that this is what we're talking about as a way to get folks merging, but in a way that seems to respond to concerns of over forced or not, the costs of things.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: But so far, the legislation we're working on still seems to be moving towards non mandated

[Leanne Harple (Member)]: Mergers. Yeah, just mandated talks.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Right, yes, facilitation. Yep, yep. Long term.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: But mandatory thesis.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: Yeah, yep.

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: Feel like this can get really confusing.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: I think Tuesday we'll have a much better-

[Jana Brown (Clerk)]: Well, in fact, to me, what I mean is I feel like it can get really confusing in the game of telephone, sort of to talking about mandated discussions of non mandated districts.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Yes, why don't we call it voluntary keeping? Yes. We are all gonna have to understand what we are talking about in order to keep it as clear and clean as possible in the public. Well, I mean, years ago, we basically rewrote all of chapter 11 of title 16, and it's clean and clear, the process is clean and clear. It's worth reading because that's gonna be the one we're gonna be working off in.

[Beth Quimby (Legislative Counsel)]: I put it on my homework list.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: And there are many reasons for doing this, but the fact that it exists, it is in statute, we don't have to reinvent the wheel, think it'd be very helpful. With that, we will, yes, send everybody home. We won't get to ready. Thank you everybody for a week. Next week's gonna be lots of fun, a lot of work, a lot of discussion.