Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Will the senate please come to order?

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: Oh, boy.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: We'll observe a moment of silence in lieu of a devotional.

[Senator Philip Baruth (President Pro Tempore, Chittenden Central)]: You have to suspend the rules.

[Senator Terry Williams (Rutland)]: Oh.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Thank you. Are there any announcements? I have an announcement on a committee of conference. We've received h six forty two back from the house. They've refused to concur in the senate proposal of amendment and have appointed a committee of conference. On behalf of the committee on committees, the following senators are appointed to the committee on conference on the part of the senate. Senator Hashim, senator Vyhovsky, senator Mattos. We now have a h bill for reference. H nine fifteen being on the calendar for notice and carrying an appropriation under rule 31 is referred to the committee on appropriations. Orders of the day. We will begin with third readings. We have h six zero six for third reading. Are there any amendments prior to third reading? Seeing none, listen to the third reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: H six zero six, an act relating to firearms procedures.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Question is, shall the bill pass in concurrence with proposal of amendment? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. Nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it, and we have passed h six zero six in concurrence with proposal of amendment. We now have h nine thirty one. Prior to third reading, are there any amendments? Seeing none, listen to the third reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: H nine thirty one, an act relating to miscellaneous changes in education law.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Question is, shall the bill pass in concurrence with proposal of amendment? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. The ayes have it, and we passed h nine thirty one in concurrence with proposal of amendment.

[Senator Nader Hashim (Windham)]: Where are we?

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Top. K. We're now going to the top of the calendar, which brings us to h nine thirty seven, which was passed by the house on 05/08/2026. It was referred to the committee on judiciary, which reports it is considered the bill and recommends that the senate propose to the house that the bill be amended as it appears starting on page thirty five seventy four of today's calendar. And that with such proposal of amendment, the bill ought to pass. Affecting expenditures of the state, the bill was referred to the committee on appropriations, which recommends that the bill ought to pass in concurrence with proposal of amendment as recommended by the commission on judiciary. Listen to the second reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: Each nine thirty seven, an act relating to miscellaneous judiciary procedures.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Recognize the senator from Windham, senator Hashim for the report of the committee on judiciary.

[Senator Nader Hashim (Windham)]: Thank you, mister president. This will be a long floor report just so that folks are aware. H September is this year's miscellaneous bill. It originated in the other chamber and in order for this presentation to flow well, I will present on both the underlying bill and our committee's amendments.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Senator, I don't want to interrupt but because of the fan, I'm having a little trouble hearing. I'm not sure if you're having trouble. Others are having trouble, so could you speak up just a bit more, please? Sure.

[Senator Nader Hashim (Windham)]: Section one was requested by the Center for Crime Victim Services and relocates a subchapter of Vermont law. Specifically, Vermont's profits from crime subchapter permits the attorney general and crime victims to bring a legal action to prevent an offender from profiting on their criminal conduct. Currently, the profits from crime subchapter is located in the crime victims chapter of Vermont law. However since the program is administered by the office of the AG section one relocates the language the AG's chapter in title three of the Vermont statutes. Both the office of the AG and the Center for Crime Victim Services have agreed to this change. Section two was requested by the Community Justice Director in the AG's office and makes a minor change in the statute that prohibits minors from committing various alcohol offenses. Generally a civil offense when a minor older than 12 or younger than 21 possesses or consumes alcohol, uses a false ID to purchase alcohol, possesses less than one ounce of cannabis, or operates a vehicle with any amount of alcohol in their system that is less than the DUI point o eight limit. The minimum age of 12 applies because that is the minimum age for a minor to be charged for the juvenile offense. And if a minor fails to complete the youth substance abuse awareness program, also known as WYSAS, and the minor is subject to a civil penalty and a driver's license suspension. However, due to what was likely an oversight, the driver's license is automatically reinstated after the suspension period for the driving offense, but not for the possession possession or consumption offenses. Section two makes the penalties consistent by providing for automatic reinstatement for those offenses as well. Section three was removed by our committee because the statute involving underage possession of tobacco products is being addressed in another bill s one ninety eight, which makes more substantive amendments to the section. S one ninety eight is currently being considered in the other chamber. Section four was introduced as h five seven two and modernizes a section of title 12 involving public access to records. Currently, the public is able to access criminal records online, but in order to do

[Senator Terry Williams (Rutland)]: so, they have to go to

[Senator Nader Hashim (Windham)]: the public terminal courthouse. Section five also requires the court to promulgate rules to establish the procedures for how this public Internet access will operate in practice. Section five was introduced as h six twenty nine and amends the statute of limitations for actions to renew or revive a court judgment. Currently, such actions must be brought within eight years after the original judgment and filed in the civil division. Under section five, the family division has exclusive jurisdiction if it issued the original order. Section five also establishes specific procedures and timelines that would apply when renewing judgments for money or property in the family division. Our committee's contribution to amending this section was to fix a typo and replace the word affirmation to word affirmative. Section six is a technical change brought to legislative council's attention by a member of Vermont bar. Vermont trial courts are now called superior courts rather than district courts. Section six corrects this outdated language. Section seven makes a technical change by repealing language in title 12 b s a four six zero one, which is related to appeals and foreclosure actions. This language exists simultaneously in two statutes because we reorganized the mortgage foreclosure chapter in 2011 and didn't catch the redundancy, so it's no longer necessary in this statute. Sections eight and nine concern stocking, which is a criminal offense and can also be the basis of a civil order against stocking. Both cases stalking requires proof of a course of conduct by the defendant. Course of conduct is defined as two or more acts over a period of time however short in which the defendant commits the prohibited conduct. In some instances courts have required that the two or more acts occur on separate calendar days. Sections eight and nine make clear that the acts can occur on the same calendar day, both for criminal and stalking cases in section eight and civil orders against stalking in section nine. Section 10 is purely technical and was recommended by alleged counsel, which works each year with the publisher to reissue four titles of the Vermont statute so that they can remain updated. During the course of that work, a number of needed technical corrections are identified, including the one in section 10, corrects an inaccurate use of the term section. Section 11 was requested by the Center for Crime Victim Services and involves existing requirement that a crime victim be provided with certain information by the law enforcement agency investigating a crime. Section 11 adds that if the defendant is held at a correctional facility and the victim must also be provided information concerning the victim's right to know where the defendant is held, if the defendant is released, how to locate the DOC's Vermont offender locator website, and how to register for automated notifications when the defendant is released. This information is already in the form that the center provides to law enforcement agencies for distribution to crime victims. So the change in section 11 is conforming the law to current practice. Section 12 concerns the changes made in section one which reenacted Vermont's profits from crime subchapter in the chapter of law that governs the office of the AG. Section 12 is the first of several instances where the existing law under which the program is located in the crime victims chapter is repealed because it's being moved to the AG's chapter. Section 13 was requested by the Victims Compensation Board, which awards compensation to victims of crime and by the Center for Crime Victim Services. The board consists of five members appointed by the governor, one of whom must be a physician licensed to practice in Vermont. The board and the center agree that this is too restrictive and that other licensed health health care professionals should be permitted to serve on the board. Section 13 expands the language that licensed health care professionals such as nurses and physician's assistants may be appointed to the board. Section 14 is another instance where a reference to profits from crime crime victims chapter is repealed because it is being moved to the attorney general chapter. Section 15 and several other sections that will mention shortly concern the $5,000 cap that exists on advances to crime victims. The crime victims restitution special fund. Restitution unit collects court ordered restitution from persons convicted of crimes and then deposits the money collected into the restitution special fund. Victims are then paid their restitution out of the fund. The fund is also able to make advanced payments of restitution to crime victims, but those payments are capped so that the fund is able to remain solvable. Several years ago, the cap was lowered from $10,000 to $5,000, but that change in the amount was not made in several corresponding statutes. The section 15 enacts that change in three different places. Sections sixteen and seventeen are two more instances that change the reference to profits crime. Section 18 is another instance, regarding the conforming change of 10,000 to $5,000 for the crime victims restitution special fund. Section 19 was requested by the community justice director in the AG's office. This section relates to confidential records obtained during pretrial risk assessments and needs screenings, which currently must be retained for three years. The general state policy provides a minimum of two years for records retention. The section 19 amends a statute to be consistent to that policy. And we are at the halfway point. Section 20 repeals all the Vermont statutes related to a type of guardianship called a spendthrift guardianship. These guardianships were once used when a person could not manage their own affairs, specifically on account of excessive drinking, gambling, idleness, or debauchery. These statutes are archaic and no longer in use, so the judiciary's advisory committee on the rules of probate procedure asked that they be repealed. Section 21 is technical and adds a missing conjunction by inserting the word and. Section 22 is a continuation of the day is a day initiative done by the judiciary in 2017 which adopted a system where all calendar days accounted for, for computing court deadlines, rather than just business days. The system also consistently uses multiple multiples of seven for purposes of court related time periods and the amendment in section 22. Changing the number of days within which the court must schedule a hearing in the contempt case fifteen days fourteen days. Section 23 was requested by the judiciary and repeals the requirement that a certified copy of the child custody determination be mailed to the court administrator. The statute is no longer necessary because these types of documents are filed directly into the court's electronic case management system rather than being mailed. Sections twenty four and twenty five are technical and correct and inaccurate cross reference that appears several times. Section 26 was requested by the Vermont Bar Association and involves transfer of jointly owned property. This is done mostly most commonly in two ways, either through a joint tenancy or through a tenancy in common. Primary difference between the two is that what happens to the property, when one of the owner dies. In a joint tenancy, the property passes to the surviving owner, whereas in a tenancy in common, the property passes to the heirs of the owner who died. Section 26 responds to a recent Vermont Supreme Court decision holding that certain deed language should be interpreted to mean that the property is owned as tenants in common. The Bar Association, the Vermont Title Company, and the Vermont Bankers Association all agree that that this language has instead always been read to establish the joint tenancy. So section 26 is amended to make that interpretation clear. Section 27 provides that section 26 will be applied retroactively to the interpretation of all deeds whenever they were created unless they are already the subject of litigation. Section 28, it feels language in the lease assignment statute that requires a deed to be sealed and witnessed. Deeds no longer have that requirement, so the language is outdated. 29 is an old statute on the books that requires any person who finds property valued at $3 or more to post a notice describing the property in two public places. Apparently, this has been an issue for the Capitol Police when they find items like a forgotten water bottle or any other lost property. So section 29 amends the statute by only requiring posting the property if it's valued at $50 or more. Section 30 is another example of the judiciary's day is a day initiative, changing the court time limit to fourteen days, but it's multiples of seven and now the rule for purposes of court related time periods. Sections 31 through 40 relate to the accountability docket, which is being renamed the rapid accountability docket. Section 31 includes findings relating to the success of the pilot accountability court in Chittenden County. Section 32 outlines the goals of the rapid accountability docket. Section 33 outlines the county deployment strategy for the dockets. At least thirty days before a docket starts in the county, the state's attorney in each respective county must convene stakeholders in that county to assess the needs and resources within the area to develop a plan to implement the docket in accordance with the goals identified in section 32. Section 34 addresses the judicial branch resources dedicated to the dockets. The chief superior judge will assign a sitting or retired judge to each docket and the court administrator will provide a dedicated courtroom, staff and court security to implement the plan for the respective counties. Each operating period can last up to ninety days but may be shorter if the goals of the docket are met as determined by the judiciary from consultation with the state's attorney's office and the public defendant. Each docket must give priority to defendants with five or more pending cases, but the state's attorney or the public defender may request to include defendants with fewer than five pending cases where faster action would serve interests of justice. Section 35 requires a dedicated prosecutor and public defender for each docket. Governor in consultation with the respective county state's attorney and the executive director of the state's attorneys may appoint a special prosecutor, to serve on one of these dockets, or the state's attorney of the prospective county may appoint a designated deputy, state's attorney, to serve. The director of the state's attorney and the state's attorney shall also dedicate victim advocates and administrative staff sufficient to implement the plan for the respective county. The defender general will identify a lead public defender for each docket. Section 36 addresses the executive branch resources necessary for operating the docket, including a DOC liaison for each docket, transport of incarcerated defendants to hearings, and AHS staff to address complex needs of defendants. The governor may designate a rapid accountability docket coordinator to assist with deployment resources. The administration is required to coordinate executive branch resources to track and report data as required by section 37 of the act, The secretary of administration must ensure that information is maintained and distributed to evaluate the programmatic efficiency and disposition of outcomes. Section 37 requires collection of certain data for adoption. Section 38 requires stakeholders to appear at the August 2026 meeting of the Joint Legislative Justice Oversight Committee to report progress on the implementation of the dockets. The secretary of administration is required to submit a written report regarding the implementation of the rapid accountability dockets to the house, senate committees on judiciary, and the governor no later than 12/01/2026. Section 39 provides that the duty to implement, the dockets in section 32 through 37 of the act are contingent on funding. Section 40 repeals sections 31 through 39 relating to rapid accountability dockets on 07/01/2028. Section 40 a. This section clarifies that victims can opt out. We're moving beyond the rapid accountability dockets just so that folks know. Section 40 a, this clarifies that victims opt out of any notification or other services that DOC is required to provide to victims in various sections entitled 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. Section 40 b. So senate judiciary is the proud owner of the first veto for this session. This is the lang excuse me. This is the language from s one eighty three, which was the home and land improvement frauds bill. S one eighty three was vetoed because of a typo, and this section is the same substantive policy of s one eighty three without the typo. Section 40 c. This section clarifies that the liability caps applicable to federal section nineteen eighty three actions under existing law and the Vermont Sports Port 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 correction was based on conversations with the office of the attorney general's office, that this clarification would be helpful in case of any ambiguity as to the, legislature's intent. Sections 40 d e amends act 47 of 2023 regarding legal aids tenant representation pilot program. The act included language that the program would begin only upon, the availability of funds. Those funds were not appropriated until FY 2025 and the pilot began operating on 11/01/2024. The language in this amendment extends the dates of the reporting requirements based on the delayed start of the pilot and directs AHS 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, this was requested by the Human Rights Commission and the sections authorized the commission to disclose investigative reports resulting from a complaint initiated by the HRC itself. It would not apply to investigative reports resulting from complaints by private parties which would remain confidential. The amendment authorizes the HRC to release an investigative report only after the commission has made a final determination and the parties have been notified. The HRC would not be able to proactively disclose reports but could produce it in response to a public records act request. Section 40 h. This section amends the statute involving final relief and abuse orders. Currently the court may order a civil order of protection if the court finds that the defendant has abused the plaintiff and there is a danger of further abuse or the defendant is incarcerated at the time of the hearing for at least one of several violent crimes. The amendment changes subdivision C to be to state the defendant is currently under the supervision of the Department of Corrections. So this language would then apply to defendants who are not just incarcerated but also potentially on probation in the community for one of those, one of the listed violent offenses. Lastly, section 41 provides the bill that takes effect on passage with one exception. Section four requires the court to promulgate rules governing public Internet access to criminal case records and has a has a delayed effective date in order to provide the judiciary with sufficient time to draft the rules. We heard from legislative counsel, the chief superior judge, the state court administrator, the Vermont Journalism Coalition, the Human Rights Commission, a member from the other body, Vermont Bar Association, the Center for Crime Victim Services, the Department of Corrections. And the vote in committee was five zero zero, and I ask for the votes.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Recognize the senator from Franklin District, senator Norris, for the report of the committee on appropriations.

[Senator Robert Norris (Franklin)]: Thank you, mister president. Senate appropriations, reviewed h nine thirty seven of miscellaneous judiciary procedures, and we specifically looked at three sections of the bill. The first one would be at section two, was those individuals between the ages of 12 and 21 who were enrolled in the youth substance awareness safety program. And upon not successfully completing these programs, they'll still have to serve their suspension, first defense, thirty days, second defense, ninety days, and they'd be eligible for reinstatement. Having said that, the reinstatement fees were $96 per reinstatement. There were 84 violations, in that year, 2025, which consisted of approximately $8,000 per year due to those violations. The second section was sections 39, which had to do with the, you just heard about the rapid accountability dockets, aka the three b dockets originally. There was $500,000 appropriated in 2026. There are no additional funds appropriated in 2027 for this particular section. And section 40 e, which is the legal aid tenant program, there were there were no additional appropriations associated with this section. So on a vote of seven zero zero, senate committee on appropriations recommends that the bill ought to pass in concurrence with the proposal of amendments recommended by the committee of judiciary. Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: The question is, shall the senate propose to the house to amend the bill as recommended by the committee on judiciary? Are you ready for the question? Senator from Franklin.

[Senator Robert Norris (Franklin)]: Thank you, mister president. I forget to admit that, we've ruled this out by de minimis effect on both groups.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Not less than de minimis. Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor, aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. The ayes have it. You've proposed to the house to amend the bill as proposed by the committee on judiciary. The question now is, shall the bill be read a third time? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed nay. The ayes have it. You've ordered third reading H nine thirty seven. We have on the calendar for action H five fifty introduced on 01/06/2026. It was referred to the committee on institutions, which reports it is considered the bill and recommends that it ought to pass. Listen to the second reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: H five fifty, an act relating to gender equity within Vermont's correctional facilities.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Recognize the senator from Bennington, senator Plunkett, for the report of the committee on institutions.

[Senator Robert Plunkett (Bennington)]: And thank you, president. Mister So, my last report was a corrections bill that was about people under supervision, for department of corrections. This is the other group. This involves those that are inmates, either those that are detained, either state or federal, or, they're serving a sentence, while in the jails, in, Vermont. So the the the bill does essentially two things, kind of three things if you include the reports and it's called an act relating to gender equity within Vermont's correctional facilities, but in a lot of ways and and we and we didn't really look at the title for it but this could really be an act relating to limiting rape within Vermont's correctional facilities because the main thing it does is to and you look at section three it's not in the calendar I'll be looking at the house bill as passed. Section six puts into Vermont statute the prison rape elimination act standards. So what the Prison Rape Elimination Act is, it was passed unanimously in Congress in 2003, signed by George W Bush and that essentially put into place certain standards for correctional facilities to follow that were aimed towards eliminating prison rate and it's a little bit it's a little bit strange that you have to have a law specifically to prevent rape in jail, but that was a problem. It is a problem, and it went into effect in 2003. So in Vermont, it wasn't until bear with me one moment. 2013 when our Department of Corrections started passing its own policies regarding Prison Rape Elimination Act. It achieved PREA and PREA is the acronym for Prison Rape Elimination Act. So I'll be referring to PREA. It was in 2015 that it received certification that it complied with the PREA standards and the federal law does carry with it a little bit more than just the standards. Are certain incentives, there's certain there's some funding, there's some process administration that is included in the federal law. We're not incorporating that into into Vermont. We're putting into statute just as the standards which under section six you'll see the list I believe we have 45 standards that are general standards of policy and what's what's important here to clarify so that there's the federal law then there are also federal regulations. We're codifying the federal regulations. The federal reg regulations were enacted through rulemaking. So that's federal law. And right now, the Department of Corrections policies are simply policies. They did not go through rulemaking, so they do not have the imprimatur of Vermont law as if they had gone through rulemaking. And that's important, because one of the things we're seeing now on the federal level is an executive order, that essentially tells prisons stop obeying the law, and that is illegal, and is important in being, being challenged. In Vermont, however, if there were a similar executive order saying department of corrections don't follow your policies, that would be fine. So what we're doing now is we're making sure that now we are going to have standards that the legislature says DOC has to follow, and luckily enough they are following them. This bill is not going to change DOC operations in any way unless you count the reporting, but it's important to clarify that this is required to be codified because of that. The second part that the bill does is it takes certain well it takes a certain group of inmates, so that's transgender, gender diverse, and intersex inmates, and puts in a floor for the policies that DOC has to follow for that particular population, and you might be wondering why this particular population rather than all of the rest of the population. There's really a couple of reasons. One, it it took a a former inmate who's transgender to bring this issue to her representative in the house, and that's how House Corrections and Institutions started talking about transgender treatment essentially in the facilities, and this this inmate had been in both out of state and in state, and she testified in both facilities and then gave rather harrowing stories about what has happened and underlying the need for this. And and really pointed out that although our Department of Corrections has been really at the forefront of this, the legislature has kind of been asleep at the wheel for making sure that transgender inmates are are protected. I should say however that Vermont has been at the forefront for years in terms of transgender equity. So that's one of the reasons why it's focused on transgender policies as well. The other is that quite simply put this population and federal data shows this is far more at risk to sexual violence in the jails than others. So those are the two reasons why we have the overriding PREA standards that we're putting in place and then another subset of a policy for a particular population. And the the policies regarding transgender, gender diverse, intersex inmates. They do essentially three things. One, it puts in a particular policies regarding placement. It puts in policies regarding simply I'm calling it their recognition. You can call it anti discrimination. You can call it, you know, simply basic human respect, and also regarding searches of those inmates. And I'd mentioned that there are reports the reports that also does is annual PREA data reports to the legislature. Department of Corrections is doing this now federally. We'll now be giving that data. There's a review of the search policy that will then have recommendations for possible future legislation and also the PREA standards as they evolve through the years. We will be looking at this again. So this is just the start of making sure that PREA is maintained in Vermont regardless of what happens federally, but also making sure that we're looking at the policies correctly as we go go forward. There's another report that the Joint Legislative Justice Oversight Committee is going to put together and that's regarding gender affirming care within facilities. That's a little bit different from the rest of the bill, but that's another report that we're asking for. Folks I will go through this section by section now you have the as passed by the House. Section one is some intent language essentially regarding recognition of the difficulty of transgender gender diverse and intersex life in general, but also specifically indicating that there's a higher risk of abuse and violence for this group. Section two is a definition section for the rest of the language in the bill. These are all definitions that either are already in statute or are copied directly from DOC policy right now. As definition of gender diverse diverse as a cross reference to gender identity, gender pronoun, honorific, intersex, and also transgender. So section three is where it starts to put in the specific transgender population language, and this is where the Department of Corrections is going to require to ask each individual intake to specify their gender identity, their gender pronoun and their honorific. Transgender, gender diverse, intersex individuals can also request a gender staff to perform the search that happens next. Right now I believe that males are searched by males, females are searched by females. This is a preference. Department can't discipline anyone for refusing to answer any of those questions and later on an individual can provide all of this information differently later on as their their time in the facility changes. However, none of this is something that is going to require the Department of Corrections to do anything else. The decisions that they make are part of a deeper policy that goes far more granularly in to how this

[Senator Terry Williams (Rutland)]: is

[Senator Robert Plunkett (Bennington)]: enacted and the policy was adopted just this year. I believe it in in March. They updated it from the 2015. So section b of section three, this is about how the department will make decisions regarding classification and housing placement and search performance. So again, requests can be made on housing, requests can be made on the search, but again, the department does not have to accommodate your request. Simply what they have to do, is take it into consideration, without, dismissing it out of hand. And again, it all boils down to, in the end, Farm Corrections has discretion on decisions. Section four is regarding searches and this one is remarkably straightforward and surprising that it's needed to be asked, But if you think about inmates in a facility, essentially their entire lives are controlled by the Department of Corrections, and they're not subject to the same rights that all of us are. So an inmate cannot be searched specifically for the purpose of, and I'm going to leave this as the exact language, determining the individual's genital status. So it's a little bit strange to say yes the Department of Corrections can't go and specifically search someone to find their penis, but it's required and this is actually required by the PREA standards as well and it's also part of Department of Corrections law. And I just want to point out again that this is overriding policy. The, more granular DOC policy, does talk about this, about whether or not, and what times, and in what ways DOC would need to know someone's genitals, and this can include for medical purposes, and there is a whole whole procedure that they do follow regarding this. It doesn't prevent DOC from finding out what the genital status is, it just prevents an actual physical search of the person for their genitals. So section five, this is classification and housing placement and this is perhaps the one that is most kind of difficult to understand for for some folks. And again, what it does is it allows each transgender, gender diverse, or intersex inmate to specify the inmate's request as to a housing placement. So they get to say, this is what I would prefer. And there are many reasons for that. Mostly the reason is that if you place a particular transgender person in the wrong placement, they are going to be far more at risk of sexual violence than anything else. This isn't simply just a I would prefer it and feel good doing that. Or on the other hand, this isn't to provide someone that has a aim towards sexual violence to get their preference that they can perform that. It's just so DOC has this information takes it into account when they make the placement and there are procedures that DOC has to follow when they have to make a placement for these folks. And they're specifically in the statute now requiring multi disciplinary team to review it and there are certain folks that are required to be part of that, including medical provider mental health provider and other folks. The same thing will happen for out of state placement. It's no different between in Vermont, and outside of Vermont. I don't know if that's specifically required because that's supposed to happen anyway, but it was very clear what we heard is that transgender folk are treated differently or treated differently out of state than than they were in Vermont. Best of my knowledge, they don't have any, transgender, gender diverse, or intersex, inmates that are placed out of state right now. So, and again, the department gets to determine and they have to determine on an individual case by case basis, and that is to comply with the PREA standards, and ultimately in the end it will boil down to what is the safest placement for any particular inmate and the other inmates that they be placed with. If a a request or a preference is declined, it does have to be documented. And that what we will have in statute. Section six, that is really the the main core of the bill. That is where we're adopting the prison rape elimination standards. Talked about that a little bit. There are a number of, general standards. So those are, I guess general standards is the best way to put it. If you look at the federal regulations, are more granular recommendations on how Department of Corrections can meet those standards. This is something that doesn't actually tell you how to do it. It's just this is the general sense of what you have to do. And that list that we have in there, it's sort of a cross reference, sort of not. It was worked in the house with the Department of Corrections with the PREA coordinator, the DOC director of operations to align the language with the DOC language. And section seven, no substantive changes. That's just conforming language. Section eight, also no substantive changes, just conforming language. Section nine, also the same. Section 10, this is the first report because we understand what this is doing. Is it is is taking a part of what is now DOC policy that they can change at any time and saying, no, you can't change these broad aspects at any time, but we do know that there might be some conflict. So the Department of Corrections is going to review their search policy and submit it to the Joint Legislative Justice Oversight Council. They're in the middle of doing that right now, so that committee will probably have it this summer to be able to to look through. Section 11, again this is requiring the front of corrections to review any changes that have been made to the standards of reporting requirements in the federal law, And this will essentially prompt DOC to both reassess its policies regarding anything that might conflict with federal law or conflict with with this new law and also be able to recommend to the to the legislature any conflicts just regarding their own operations with law so we can review that. It's not the intention intention of this, and we heard from the the Commissioner of Corrections that this will not change their operations right now, but our intention is to not do that other than simply having the floor of the policies to well help prevent rape in our facilities. In section 12, as I mentioned, this is a gender affirming care report that the Joint Legislative Justice oversight council will be, and it's essentially to review current practices relating to gender affirming care in correctional facilities and submit a report on recommended statutory language regarding that. This is in in part because the house had a lot more in their bill originally regarding this, but it's a very it's a very complicated subject and having more information before reviewing it again is is essentially what the what the House agreed upon and the Senate Committee also agreed upon. No, I don't know if that's going to include you know Rogaine. I assume it won't include Viagra in their gender affirming care report, but it could have the gamut of everyone in the facilities on their gender affirming care. And section 13 is simply the effective date, would be 01/01/2026. The vote in the Senate Institutions Committee was three to zero and I ask for the Senate's support. And we did hear from a number of folks. So we heard from Joint Legs, Office of Legislative Council. We heard from a group that well, I'll skip that one for now. We did hear from formerly incarcerated transgender resident. We heard from Commissioner of the Department of Corrections. I believe we heard from the policy director as well. We heard from the medical director of Well Path, which is the contractor for the Department of Corrections. We heard from an individual from a group, a group that's a trans exclusionary radical feminist group, but we also heard from the GLBTQ legal advocates and defenders, which they call GLAAD with, well, one a and one d. I forget which one the other one has a double of. We also heard from, the Rutland Network Against, domestic and sexual violence. And also as I mentioned, the the House here took a great deal of testimony which which all is on the record for the the committee to to hear and they did hear in-depth from the PREA coordinator and the DOC operations director. Although, those two didn't specifically come into the senate institution. Thank you.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: The question is, shall the bill be read a third time? Am I in the right place? Senator from Essex.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Essex)]: Thank you, mister president. Two times in six years, I've stood up in this chamber and talked about a bill that come out of the committee that I voted no against. And and it's, probably, if it not done in the right way, probably could seem, as a political, a problem as far as to do that. Through the all of this bill, we've heard nothing even during the presentation of the report. We've heard nothing but praise for what the Vermont, Department of Corrections is doing in this matter over and over and over and over again. What this bill does is not correct any bad behavior, but it actually puts the people in corrections that are working in there, which we have a serious problem with retention. It puts them in harm's way. And let me tell you how that does. First, I've got I've got people that work for me in all spectrums of life. I've got a transgender person that works for me, and and we are having conversation the other day. And I unintentionally misgendered. And I apologized. And and my employees said, Russ, please don't worry about that. I do it up to myself all the time. So it's not a big deal. Except with this now that we've codifying all this in law, it does it is a big deal now. That person has just broken the law unintentionally and has broken the law. And I can't imagine that everybody is going to be as gracious as what my employee was saying don't worry about it in the situation in this case right here. When asked further in conversation what would happen to the employee, was it automatically said, that employee will go in front of the panel that will determine what their punishment will be after doing that. So, you know, over and over and over again, we ask, what's the problem? What's going on? Nothing. We couldn't have the problem. And the inmate the former inmate, transgender inmate, I don't even believe was incarcerated in Vermont that had brought the bill forward. I could be wrong with that, but from my remembrance of the testimony, there was not never an issue in the Vermont part of it. So I'm a no on this bill mainly because I really don't believe the government should be going over the top of what's already being done very effectively. In fact, mentioned numerous times, the depart Department of Corrections in Vermont is far above already doing what this bill would propose it would do. This bill just puts in harm's way for me. It doesn't offer any extra protection because we're already doing it, but it does put the Department of Corrections employees in a very precariously situation as far as if they are having to make a a innocent mistake. Not a mistake that they made over and over and over again. That should be punishable. But just by simply a complaint saying that this is what's happened and, they misgendered me and and they violated the law. Therefore, I'm a no. I will be a no, and I will defend that no. Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question?

[Senator Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Chittenden Southeast)]: Roll call, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Roll call has been requested, when the vote is taken, it shall be by roll. The question is, shall the bill be read a third time? Are you ready for the question? Senator from Addison.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Thank you, mister president.

[Senator Terry Williams (Rutland)]: Yep.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: This bill is very important to make sure that transgender individuals, transgender Vermonters, people who are members of our community, members of our families, members of our workplaces, are treated with respect and ding dignity and equal protection under the law. As the reporter of the bill clearly stated, this is codifying policy into law to make sure that our Department of Corrections is treating transgender Vermonters with the respect, the dignity, and the equality that they deserve as individuals and Vermonters. I am sure that our Department of Corrections is doing an excellent job, and doing everything that they can right now, but that doesn't, ensure the protection of the law. We are lawmakers in this chamber, and that's what we need to do is ensure the protection of the law, mister president. We have recently heard in this chamber some incredibly disparaging, demeaning, dehumanizing remarks related to transgender individuals based on Internet memes and tropes that are completely baseless and insulting and and, frankly, make me sick to my stomach, mister president. And now we are trying to vote on a bill that would provide equal protection to Vermonters. And we should do no less, mister president. We should hold ourselves to a higher account, and we should ensure that we are doing everything in our power to protect Vermonters regardless of their gender or their situation. Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question? Senator from Windham.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: Thank you, mister president.

[Senator Ann Cummings (Washington)]: I want to let the body know that

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: the question, was asked regarding an employee, not intentionally misgendering someone, and that would not be something that the employee would be disciplined for.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question? The secretary shall call the roll.

[John H. Bloomer Jr. (Secretary of the Senate) — roll call reading (override)]: Senator Ruth. Yes. Senator Ben.

[Senator Philip Baruth (President Pro Tempore, Chittenden Central)]: Yes. Senator Benson.

[John H. Bloomer Jr. (Secretary of the Senate) — roll call reading (override)]: Yes. Senator Bongartz. Yes. Senator Brennan. Yes. Senator Brock.

[Senator Robert Plunkett (Bennington)]: Yes.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Rutland)]: Senator Chittenden. Yes.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Senator Clarkson.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: Yes. Senator Caledonia. Yes.

[Senator Ann Cummings (Washington)]: Senator Cumming. Yes.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Those voting yes, 27. Those voting no, two. The ayes have it, and you've ordered third reading of h five fifty. We have on the calendar for action h eight forty one, which was passed by the house on 05/08/2026. It was referred to the committee on government operations, which reports it is considered the bill and recommends that the senate propose to the house that the bill be amended as it appears starting on page thirty five eighty one of today's calendar. And that with such proposal of amendment, the bill ought to pass affecting the revenues of the state. The bill was referred to the committee on finance, which recommends that the bill ought to pass in concurrence with proposal of amendment as recommended by the committee on government operations. Listen to the second reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: H eight forty one, an act relating to miscellaneous animal welfare procedures.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Recognize the senator from Rutland, senator Calamore, for the report of the committee on government operations.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Rutland)]: Thank you, mister president. Senators may remember that we created the division of animal welfare in act one eighty seven back in 2024 to provide a comprehensive structure for animal welfare issues in Vermont. This bill continues the next steps in developing that system. It gives the director of animal welfare rulemaking authority. It establishes a registration requirement for animal shelters, rescue organizations, pet dealers, and any person importing one or more domestic pets into Vermont for adoption, sale, transfer, or breeding. It requires pet dealers, animal shelters, rescue organizations, and animal breeders to maintain commercial liability insurance. It requires all wolf hybrids six months and older be sterilized. It authorizes the animal welfare fund to accept donations, grants, or gifts, and requires the director of animal welfare to report back in December regarding what more could be done to establish a comprehensive animal welfare system in Vermont. You can follow along on page thirty five eighty one in today's calendar. This is a strike all amendment proposed by the senate government operations committee, and it makes three or four different changes. It will remove a provision regarding a rabies vaccinator program based on testimony we took from the secretary of state's office that this is already being addressed elsewhere. It removes a provision requiring certain information be included in advertising of animals for sale or adoption in Vermont based on discussions that it would be more effective to address it as part of a broader work on licensing and enforcement. And thirdly, removes a provision limiting the number of breeding dogs a person can have to 35 based on discussions that further study would be necessary to determine the appropriate approach to preventing puppy mills. It calls for the director of animal welfare to report back on the appropriate approach on this issue. Section one authorizes the division of animal welfare to adopt rules to implement the provisions of the chapter. It also requires an animal shelters, rescue organizations, pet dealers, and anyone importing one or more domestic pets into the state for adoption, sale, or transfer of breeding register with the Department of Animal Welfare. This will allow the division of animal welfare to gather information about animals in the state. There is no registration fee and an individual importing a domestic pet into Vermont for personal purposes will not be required to register. Section one also provides penalties for, failing to do that, a warning for the first violation, then a fine and cease and desist order for a second or subsequent violation. Section two creates a new statutory section entitled 20 authorizing animal shelter rescue organization that impounds stray cats to sexually sterilize a stray cat with no known owner as soon as one day after impound. This allows the cats to be immediately adopted out. Section three, under existing law, owners are required to register and obtain licenses for wolf hybrid six months or older. Section three requires that all wolf hybrids six months and older be sterilized and that the owner certifies this in obtaining a license for any of those breeds. Section four, because the bill requires that all wolf hybrid six months or older be sterilized, section four repeals the existing provision of law requiring them to be kept for breeding purposes. Sections five through eight, section five through eight update language consistent with modern usage. Instead of referring to spaying and neutering, this uses sexual sterilization. Section seven also changes a shall to a may, which would allow the agency of human services to implement a sexual sterilization program through agreement with an organization, but not requiring the agency to do so. Section nine, under existing law, animal shelters and rescue groups are required to make every effort to collect information about the animals they accept, including the name and address of the person transferring the animal, the vaccination history, and any other background information on the animal. Section nine does clarify that instead of making every effort, shelters and rescue organizations shall collect that information if available. Sections ten and eleven. Again, under existing law, any persons doing business as a fair public auction, pet shop, animal shelter, or rescue group has to be licensed by the division of animal welfare, and operating without without a license is punishable as a misdemeanor. Sections ten and eleven add that a pet dealer is also required to be licensed and subject to those same penalties. Under existing law, importing a dog, cat, ferret, or wolf hybrid into Vermont requires a health certificate showing they are free from communicable disease and have been vaccinated for rabies. Section 12 adds that for a wolf hybrid four months or older imported into Vermont, that health certificate must also certify that the wolf hybrid has been sexually sterilized. Section 13 requires pet dealers, animal shelters, rescue organizations, and animal breeders to maintain commercially reasonable level of general liability insurance. Section 14 requires the director of animal welfare to report back to the legislature this coming December 15 on next steps necessary to create a comprehensive animal welfare program in Vermont, specifically the oversight of dog and cat breeders and sellers and people owning large numbers of dogs and cats. The effective date is section 15, which is effective on passage. The committee heard from the office of legislative council, the bill reporter from the other body, the office of professional regulation, the deputy secretary of state, a master of North Country Hounds, the Central Vermont Humane Society, the executive director of Vermont Can Spay Neuter Clinic, the director of animal welfare, the Green Mountain Dog Club, and a veterinarian and executive director of Spay ASAP Inc. The kind of vote was five zero zero, and we'd ask the senate to vote. Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Recognize the senator from Chittenden for the report of the committee on finance.

[Senator Thomas Chittenden (Chittenden)]: Thank you, mister president. H h h eight forty one. Let me start again. H eight forty one does have a fiscal impact. It's on the positive side, which is good news. The following sections are relevant to fiscal matters. Section one, there is a fee or sorry, there is no fee attached to the registration that was mentioned, but a failure to register could result in fines as well as warnings and cease and desist order. Also in section one, the statute is amended so that the animal welfare fund can accept grants, donations, gifts, that would have a positive impact potentially. Section

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: four,

[Senator Thomas Chittenden (Chittenden)]: this provision, since this provision, removes a discounted fee for breeders, it would generally be expected to result in an increase in revenue to municipalities with breeders since these animals would be covered by a higher license fee schedule than the current one. So this would result in an increase in revenue in the animal sexualization sterilization special fund because of that $4 surcharge that would apply to these animals. And then section eight does not it there is a $4 license fee for that sexual sterilization fund, but there is no fiscal impact necessarily or predicted to that fund. We heard in senate finance, we heard from JFO and led council, and our vote was seven zero zero in committee. We asked the senate concur. Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: The question is, shall the senate propose to the house to amend the bill as recommended by the committee on government operations? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed nay. The ayes have it. You proposed to the house to amend the bill as proposed by the committee on government operations. The question now is, shall the bill be read a third time? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. The ayes have it, and you've ordered third reading of h eight forty one. We have on the calendar for action h nine thirty two, which was passed by the house on May 5. It was referred to the committee on natural resources and energy, which reports it is considered the bill and recommends that the senate propose to the house that the bill be amended as it appears starting on page thirty five ninety of today's calendar, and that with such proposal of amendment, the bill ought to pass. Affecting the revenues of the state, the bill was referred to the committee on finance, which recommends that the bill ought to pass in concurrence with proposal of amendment as recommended by the committee on natural resources with further proposal of amendment as found in your calendar today on page thirty five ninety. Listen to the second reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: H nine thirty two, an act relating to the regulation of forestry under act two fifty.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Recognize the senator from Addison, senator Hardy, for the report of the committee on natural resources.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Thank you, mister president. I am going to, if if unless someone objects, report on both the underlying bill as we received from the house plus the senate natural resources amendment plus the finance amendment. They are all linked by commas. Thank you, mister president. So the genesis of this bill started a couple years ago with the passage of the infamous act one eighty one, and this required a report from the wood products manufacturers related to wood products manufacturers and the Land Use Review Board on how to modify Act two fifty regulations to better accommodate wood products, the wood products industry, the logging industry as it's more maybe commonly known, and they produced a report, the Land Use Review Board Act two fifty, Act 181 report on wood products manufacturers. They submitted it about a year ago, a little less than a year ago, on 06/30/2025. And the language in H. Nine thirty two comes directly from the recommendations of this report. Just as a background, this report included or this study committee included stakeholders from the industry, stakeholders from forest groups, environmental groups, the relevant agencies, the Agency of Natural Resources and the Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation, and these were consensus recommendations on changes and updates to Act two fifty to better accommodate forestry operations and make it easier for them to do their work without an Act two fifty permit in certain cases. So that is the report and I can answer questions more deeply about that if you want, but that's just important information to know. If you're looking at H. Nine thirty two, which is the version that was passed out of the House, I can walk through the bill. Section one updates a definition, includes forestry as referenced in the subdivision does not include conversion of land for nonexempt uses, such as for commercial or industrial purposes constituting development, as defined in this chapter. So it's not about developing on forest tracks of forests, it's about operating logging or forest products operations on tracts of forest. And when development is proposed to occur on a parcel or tract of land that is devoted to logging and forestry, only those portions of the parcel or the tract that support the development shall be subject to regulation under this chapter. Permits issued under this chapter shall not impose conditions on other portions of the parcel or tract of land that do not support the development or necessary mitigation areas and that restrict or conflict with the acceptable management practices for maintaining water quality on logging jobs in Vermont. So what this is saying is that the portion of land that is used for logging operations shall not be subject to an Act two fifty permit and that the conditions shall not conflict with the acceptable management practices for logging. Those are already in existence, those acceptable management practices. They're well known by logging operations in Vermont. They are required to be followed, and this can't conflict with them any regulations. And this is supposed to make it clearer and easier for logging operations to happen and for loggers to understand what rules they are supposed to follow. In section oh, it also amends the definition of wood products manufacturers to remove log and pulp concentration yards. It was determined that those are of a higher use and need to be regulated differently than operations that are sawmills and various types of mills. No permit or permit amendment is required for logging and forestry below the elevation of 2,500 feet. So below 2,500 feet, forestry operations are not subject to act two fifty. This is this is this mirrors the same regulations for agriculture. So it's already in current law that agriculture under 2,500 feet is not doesn't have to follow act two fifty or get an act two fifty permit. And permits include permits shall include a statement that logging and forestry activities are consistent with this subsection and below the elevation of 2,500 feet. So they have to say yes, this is below 2,500 feet. So that is the bill, and this, as I said, came out of a consensus report, from all of the stakeholders and the land Land Use Review Board about how to make Act two fifty more consistent and clearer and less of a burden for our wood products manufacturers and logging operations. The Natural Resources Committee amendment, which you can find on 3590, rewords the section f about when development is proposed. These are mostly technical changes to this definition that were agreed upon after it came over to the Senate. Everyone came in and said, yes, we agree. We want this these slight changes. You can see those on ninethirty two. It's almost exactly the same. These were mostly, technical changes to commas and things like that. And speaking of commas, when the bill went to finance Mhmm. And if I may, can I give the finance report now, Thank mister you? When the bill went to finance, it went to finance because this would impact some of the permits. So that in fact, there would be fewer permits issued because there would be fewer requirements for an Act two fifty permit, so there's a de minimis impact on the revenues of the state. That is why it went to finance. But finance had the opportunity to further amend this section to move a comma because after it left Senate Natural Resources, there was further discussion, and it was determined that there was an extra comma after the word restrict that the stakeholders and everybody agreed to wanted to be removed. So it's now restrict or conflict without a comma after restrict. So that is the Finance Amendment. It's just removing a comma. And in the Committee on Natural Resources, the vote was five-zero-zero. In the Committee on Finance, the vote was seven-zero-zero. We heard from all the stakeholders in Natural Resources, the the department, the agency, the Land Use Review Board, the Logging Association, whose real name I'm forgetting, but the association that represents loggers and wood forest product manufacturers. And we have heard, of course, from our legislative council in finance. We heard from JFO. Our legislative council had a fun time moving commas around in this bill. So thank you, mister president. We, would ask for the support of the senate.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: The question is? Natural first. Okay. Yes.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: I messed things up by doing the same time. I'm sure that's what you're discussing.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: But We can't vote on them at the same time, senator. So Yes. We we're gonna vote on the natural resources amendment first.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: To and then amend it with the finance amendment. Yes. Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: So the question is, shall the recommendation of proposal let's get the question right.

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: Okay.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: The question is, shall the senate propose to the house to amend the bill as recommended by the committee on natural resources? Are you ready for the question? Senator from Franklin.

[Senator Robert Norris (Franklin)]: Thank you, mister president. Just because I don't know the answer to this, it's not a it's not a hard question, but I was wondering if I can inter interrogate the

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: The presenters interrogated.

[Senator Robert Norris (Franklin)]: I was just wondering as to where the 2,500 feet and the origin of that came from and why it seems to be rather subjective, and I'm sure there's a reason for it.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: That is a great question, mister president. It is in current law for agriculture purposes. I'm not positive of why 2,500 feet was put into law, but it is to protect high elevation development in high elevation and the natural resources in high elevation. But I'm I can get that answer to you on third reading, or there may be a senator in the chamber who can answer that question who knows more about, act two fifty than I do. But if not, I will get that answer to you on third reading, mister president.

[Senator Robert Norris (Franklin)]: Third reading will be fine. Thank you very much.

[Senator Terry Williams (Rutland)]: Thank

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: you. Senator from Rutland.

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: Thank you, mister president. I I can answer that. It is in current law. It's always been anything above 2,200 2,500 feet elevation. You had to have an active 50 permit. Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Senator from Essex.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Essex)]: State, mister president. Can I ask a question of the presenter of the amendment, please?

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: The presenter is interrogated.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Essex)]: Mister president, tells me just a little bit of things change as we move forward. Presumably, if there were to be some changes to act one eighty one, say that section two, section or tier two, tier three in the road rule were to disappear. Does this bill change in any way with any of those if that was to occur?

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: I don't believe so those those changes that we may see later this session in another bill, would not impact this. This would stay, these changes would stay as as passed in this bill unless there's something in those sections that impact, but I don't believe there are. This this was a separate separate, bill from that other bill that you that you're referring to and so this would move forward. The intent is to this would move forward regardless of the the other bill.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Essex)]: I thank the presenter, and I will affirm to what the, senator Rutland said. Yes. Anything over 2,500 feet is subject to act two fifty has always been in that way, and that's from my real estate knowledge. Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: So the question is, shall the senate post to the house to amend the bill as recommended by the committee on natural resources? Senator from Franklin.

[Senator Robert Norris (Franklin)]: Thank you, mister president. I love all the, the discussion here, but it still doesn't address my question as to what was the origin of it. Stimp simply tell me it's in the law presently. That's fine. We know it's in law, but why the 2,500 feet? I wanna know the origin of this, and why is there reasoning for 2,500 feet.

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: So if

[Senator Robert Norris (Franklin)]: the senator Mattos and Kennington could get

[Senator Terry Williams (Rutland)]: that before third reading, it'd

[Senator Robert Norris (Franklin)]: greatly appreciated. Thank you, mister president.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: That's all I wanna know. Are

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: you ready for the question? Do you remember the question? The question is, shall the senate propose to the house to amend the bill as recommended by the committee on natural resources and energy? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. The ayes have it. Now the question is, shall the amendment that we just approved from the committee on natural resources and energy be amended as proposed by the committee on finance. Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor say aye. Aye. I'll oppose nay. The ayes have it, and we have amended further amended the bill. Now the question is, shall the senate propose to the house to amend the bill no. Next one. Shall the senate propose this? Yep. Oh, we are over there. Okay. K. Question is, shall the bill be read a third time? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed nay. The ayes have it, and you have ordered third reading of h nine thirty two. We have on the calendar for action h nine thirty eight, which was passed by the house on 05/13/2026. It was referred to the committee on health and welfare, which reports it is considered the bill and recommends that the senate propose to the house that the bill be amended as it appears starting on page thirty five ninety one of today's calendar, and that with such proposal of amendment, the bill ought to pass. Affecting the expenditures of the state, the bill was referred to the committee on appropriations, which recommends that the bill ought to pass in concurrence with proposal of amendment as recommended by the committee on health and welfare with further proposal of amendment as found in your today's calendar on page thirty six fourteen. Listen to the second reading of the bill.

[John H. Bloomer Jr. (Secretary of the Senate)]: H nine thirty eight, an act relating to the to establishing the Vermont homelessness response continuum.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Recognize the senator from Chittenden Southeast, senator Lyons, for the report of the committee on health and welfare.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: Thank you, miss thank you, mister president. Excuse me. I don't know. Maybe it's what whatever fumes are circulating right now.

[Senator Terry Williams (Rutland)]: Yeah. Mister

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: president, we know we've had a continuing problem with homelessness and risk of homelessness in our state. And but Vermont has always cared very well for those in need. We have neighbors helping neighbors that epitomize Vermont values and build our sense of community. I remember a senator from Caledonia, former senator from Caledonia, talking about overseers of the poor. We no longer have overseers of the poor, but we certainly do have our social services groups within our communities helping people who either need food or shelter. This bill is about shelter. At at one point, we developed a general assistance program to keep people warm and sheltered in, cold winter months. We continue that program, and it's become more and more complex, expensive, and somewhat chaotic. Ultimately, what we know is that homelessness is a is is is the fundamental issue around homelessness is poverty. People who lose a job or risk of losing a job, have low wages, can't make their rent, can't afford unaffordable housing, change of circumstances like a disability, a short term disability, a single parent who isn't making enough to provide for their kids. Over past sessions and more recently, you know, we've passed many bills about this, but now we're at an we have an opportunity to correct the problems that really have been exacerbated by the pandemic, which was a chaotic time for many people stretching to make ends meet. We're moving we're moving into a reality of that being poor means being homeless, and we wanna correct that. We grapple with how to move ahead. We grapple with the general assistance program when it became a motel hotel program, trying to figure out how many days folks can stay in hotels or motels depending on the weather, what services are needed for folks, whether they have children, whether they're aging, whether they have mental health issues, disabilities. And so the past few sessions have been extremely challenging for us and our ability to care for the 4,000 people who are, who are homeless and finding the over 3,000 primary homes that they need, to have shelter. H nine thirty eight is a responsible approach in response as a way to move people from unhoused to house and stay within a budget. The bill transitions away from the hotel motel program to a continuum of housing services at the local level. We will begin with a 2027 transition year at our five community local action programs across the state and others to bring a process that provides levels of housing, levels of services, all at the local level in response to folks at the local level. As I said, '27 year twenty seven twenty twenty seven is a year to set priorities, establish guidelines and rules, reduce dependence on hotels and motels, and find permanent housing options, including using some of our recovery residences, our transitional housing, and our moving toward affordable permanent homes. The program will build a process for people to identify and move through a supportive system of levels and ensure people are respected, which is critical. There's there seems to be some lack of respect for people who don't have a home, and we just need to understand that they are very much in poverty without a job or in some current medical crisis. The bill provides flexibility for case managers. It provides flexibility for people who are served, and it provides for state and local organizations to have flexibility to offer services. So overall, the goals of this bill are to stabilize people and reduce indeed for the program. The goal a goal is to coordinate access to needed services, but most importantly, a goal to ensure that homelessness is rare, brief, and nonreoccurring. Mister president, I will go through, a summary of the bill briefly. Because it's a 42 page bill, I'll try to be, as efficient as possible. But understanding how critically important this program is and how hard folks have worked together to bring it to you, both in the house, the administration, and then in your senate committee on health and welfare. So the legislative intent, as I had said earlier, is to provide housing, to reduce reliance on the hotel motel program and to administer the new program flexibly in a manner that provides a pathway to permanent housing, meet specific needs of households experiencing homelessness, and support community partners who are doing the work. We've got five community partners across the state, our, folks who are in our community action programs, whether they're in Rutland or whether they're in the Northeast Kingdom, Northwest Vermont, Washington County, or Southeast Vermont. All of those programs become a locus for beginning this continuum of response to our homelessness. So I have already expressed the purpose of the bill. I won't go through the entire list of the bill, but just that this is about people who are experiencing homelessness or at risk of experiencing homelessness. So when you we saw this during the pandemic when people were not working and all of a sudden people were looking for help, whether it was in a a line for the food shelf or a line at their local shelters asking for financial support or for financial planning assistance. Section section four of the bill provides a number of definitions, and I will talk briefly about those, and then I will elaborate a little bit as we go through the bill. So the first definition is about the Vermont homeless homelessness response continuum. This will be a program that is administered through the Office of Economic Opportunity and the Agency of Human Services, DCF. This is the same office that oversees SNAP benefits and eligibility for various economic programs in the state. The bill requires that the Office of Economic, Opportunity, which I will say OEO from now on, to maintain a continuum of service that are designed to prevent homelessness and prioritize early intervention, rapid resolution of housing crises, and equitable access to emergency and permanent housing. There are requirements listed for the program. And, one of the things that your senate health and welfare committee added is that all funding opportunities available under the program are open to any entity or community partner, including those not previously receiving funding. We look in this bill for some expansion of services, and albeit they would be nice if they were temporary, but some of them won't be. Some of them will be permanent, permanent affordable housing. The program can components, include different levels of services. I'll just spend just a short period of time talking about what those levels are. So, the first level of service is prevention and diversion services. This is a place where, overall, let me say that there will be an opportunity to, evaluate folks and provide an assessment when they come into any of the program shelters or offices and to provide some kind of coordinated entry to determine what are the needs for the households coming into, the program. And so at they'll when they come in, talk with them, have a case manager or folk folks there who can triage and say, seems to be the need that you have, whether it's employment, whether it's mental health services, whether it's substance use disorder services, whether it's someone with a disability, whether it's a family with children, all of those things can be evaluated early on for a core at the coordinated entry. And at the coordinated entry then will also have understanding and linkages with the different levels of services available to folks who are coming in. And at the first level would be, in twenty twenty, twenty two zero three if you're following the bill, first level or prevention and and diversion services. So folks might need financial assistance. They may be understood that they need some to move to a domestic violence shelter. They may need help with short term rental. So financial assistance would be available at this level or a short term rental process would might be available at this level of prevention and diversion. So theoretically, it could be someone who's very worried about what's going on in their lives and are not yet homeless or have just become homeless could receive some immediate service. Level two shelter services actually are split into two different levels, two a and two b. These are highly structured, shelter services. This is where folks would be assigned a case manager, might look for employment if employment is the biggest issue, or might decide that they need some form of housing, specific form of housing based on a disability or other need. Level 2B is low barrier shelter services. A low barrier shelter is one that has reduced rules for entry, allows people to come in on a temporary basis, and they can at that point receive case management. Again, be, I use the word diagnosed, but can be sort of engaged in determining what their specific needs are. Level three are specialized services. This is a more intense provision of substance use disorder services, health care, mental health services for folks. And again, there will be rules about how long one can participate and stay within these programs. Level four are hotels and motels, which I will talk about a little bit later, but with some priorities given to folks, in particular those with children or, and families. There's also a level of, there's also a separate section on permanent supporting supportive housing. So this could be the case for, providing renter rebates for folks and perhaps some placement and housing and some alternative types of housing that could be available for people within within the program, and that includes other emergency housing services is another section, so this would be rapid rehousing or perhaps some vouchers made available through the OEO and others to get folks into into shelter as quickly as possible. The pro program requires the OEO to address each level of the continuum with separate line items in the budget, so we'll be keeping track of what it costs for each of these types of shelters and types of services and the type of case management that's going on, so to the inclusion of what workforce will be needed going forward. Once it's assessed, the Office of Economic Opportunity or community partners within this program will offer to place a household. One of the discussions that we've had within our committee, and I'm sure in the in the house as well, was that this needs to feel welcoming, respectful, and so the offer to a household to participate is important and offer them to participate at a level of care to address the household specific needs. And that is if capacity staffing and geographic accessibility are available. Remember, we're starting. We're we're fitting up a program. We don't have all the services we need now, and so it's going to take some time to put those services in place. And that's why we have 2027 as the year for transitional year. Then prevention and diversion services are is a primary entry point into the program for for households. Households could come in at any level. I mean, if you have someone who obviously has specific needs, they can enter into any one of the shelters and be, evaluated in that way. But the upon request for assistance, all households shall receive a brief standardized initial prevention and diversion assessment and to identify safe alternatives to homelessness and resolve immediate housing housing barriers. And then the shelter services level one and two, as I mentioned before, these are more highly structured and the OEO will determine what what is the need for a highly structured services and develop and develop sufficient beds for for folks. DCF, which is the department for with within which OEO exists, will enter into agreements with organizations across the state to provide these levels of services for folks. So the shelters will be established in the five geographic regions across the state, and the people who are homeless or at risk of homeless will have access to those shelters. Again, the word we the Center of Health and Welfare is very sensitive to concerns about respect, and one of the words that we've added into the bill is offer programming. So to offer programming to folks who might need housing stability, employment, education, or treatment services within the this would be within the level two a shelters. Don't have to memorize all of this. But just so you know that there are different levels of services. The low barrier shelters, which is level two b, will be provided to the extent that funds are available. And they will, as I said before, low barrier minimizes barriers to entry by reducing rules and program requirements. So people can come in for short period of time. They can seek services. These shelters are time limited. Some of them are open during the day only, so people come in for a short period of time and they may then be transitioned to a more higher a higher structured shelter or to permanent housing. The specialized shelter services, which are level which is level three, again, dependent on funding, we will be evaluating the need going forward, and we have a little bit of that information now. But going forward, we'll have to budget for each of these, levels. But level three, will provide specialized services for folks, whether it's mental or physical health conditions, substance use disorder, or other specialty services. And again, we'll offer, case managers will offer, support services and for folks who would like to, participate at that level. Level four, as I mentioned before, hotels and motels. The intent here is to reduce, our intent in the general assembly is to reduce the reliance on hotels and motels and move people into more permanent, homes and rental environments so that they have shelter on a more permanent basis. So as we go forward, we'll be looking at the necessity of, what the necessity is for funding hotel and motel programs. There are will be there will be population, there'll be blocks of rooms that the agency can negotiate for. There will be specific types of housing, services offered within some of these blocks of rooms going forward as people then receive case management and are moved to, more, to other places. There will be we have established, there are established budgetary guidelines within the bill that I will mention later. There are also timelines for participation and staying in hotels and motels. And as some of you know, this has been an ongoing debate and discussion. So this will begin to place hotels and motels into into the continuum of of care for those who are homeless. And that's and so then, one of the things that we have talked about in the past, and I think people are very sensitive to is, as I said before, the length of time within which folks can stay in hotels and motels. And that, you know, if you remember the April 1 date when people, when we have the the cold weather, you think of the cold weather general assistance program, where folks are allowed to stay in motel and hotel rooms. There are a thousand of those rooms available between December 1 and March 31. But then there is also the rule about how long people can stay in the hotels and motels during the during the year, so that becomes an issue. We have capped the program the hotels at 700 rooms between April and November, and we have capped the number of, hotels and motels at a thousand between December and March. Then, and we'll talk further about we will bring that up another time as well. Then we also have the section, in the continuum for permanent supportive housing and the agency of human services and their departments, because every single department in the agency is involved in this, whether it's a Department for Aging and Independent Living, whether it's mental health, whatever, whether it's Family Services Division, the departments will work with their community partners and offer permanent supportive housing to an eligible household depending, on the program, whether it's a long term relationship, community based rental assistance, offering voluntary, flexible, supportive services. This is the place where people will have a a case manager to help them determine what is best for them, whether they need to find a job, whether they need some type of counseling service, and so on. And so this, the permanent supportive housing section allows for supportive housing by an eligible household as long as the eligible household household plan indicates it as a necessity. So the planning process, is important for folks who, are in actually in any of these programs, but in particular for identifying permanent supportive housing. We also have a section in on other emergency housing services, to to help folks, when we when there's the cold weather. We talk about cold weather, whether it's a shelter that needs to be built and authorizes eligible municipalities to submit a grant application to the Office of Economic Opportunity containing the estimated cost of the municipality's proposal and other identified funding sources. Some of our towns and cities have really gone above and beyond what has been needed to to help people get in out of the cold weather. And we saw that this year in many of our communities. They built shelters. They put small homes up. They've they've worked with community partners to to open up buildings. So this, there is a grant within the bill that allows for municipalities to, sub, submit an application and receive funding. There are within there is within the bill a section on which is twenty two ten, a household responsibilities. It is important that a household qualifies for service services if it is physically president present and decide is in Vermont residing in Vermont and gives evidence by active participation in housing, employment, or another recognized plan by the agency of human services. The household is responsible to agree to coordinated entry, so they they would agree to go through the coordinated entry process, and then they would agree to engage with a lead case manager to develop a housing plan. So we had a discussion with folks in our committee, about autonomy, versus mandatory. Do you mandate mandate that people, move into a specific program? Do you mandate that they engage with a case manager and follow through? And it was very clear that that isn't going to work. So what we have in here is an opportunity for people to engage with a case manager and to engage with the program and maintain some of their, respect and some of their autonomy as, a determination is made is made as to what they can do, within the program and how they might participate. Then there are requirements for, making sure that folks, there's household responsibilities, that they will not provide false or misleading information, that they will, act in good faith, that also that if they are terminated from a program, they have the right to appeal that termination or eviction or whatever it is that's related to the program itself. And they can appeal that to the Human Resources Board. Humans Human Services Board. Sorry. Then there's also language in the bill that allows for our community partners that would be our our our cap agencies, our cap programs, community action programs across the state, that they also can prioritize folks who might need services and are so would priority would be for people who are over the age of 65, someone who has a disability, someone with a minor child, someone who is pregnant, someone who's experiencing domestic violence, and someone who's under a court order eviction or others. So it would allow for people to be prioritized within the system who might have be more vulnerable than, than others. Then there is time limits for program participation. So for if there's temporary rental assistance program, they would be allowed to have that temporary rental assistance for thirty days within a rolling twelve month period. So from, let's say, they started in March 15 that within that next whole year, they would have rental assistance for thirty days to the next March 15. Shelter services that are the level two that I was talking about earlier, they will we the Office of Economic Opportunity will is currently working with, community partners to establish maximum lengths of stay and then specialized services similarly looking for what would be maximum lengths of stay for folks who are receiving specific, treatment. For hotels and motels, that is the one that has seemed to cause the biggest problem in in the news and with the concerns that people have. So within the the time frames that I mentioned earlier between April and November, then folks are allowed to stay in motels or hotels for seventy days within a twelve month rolling period. So it could go into the next year. And then between December and March or the first day of April, they would also have that seven day day period. There was a discussion in our committee about having that start all brand new on 07/01/2026 that posed a huge administrative problem, and it didn't seem like it was necessary. So we've kept the rolling language for, participation. And a a number of the issues that I am bringing up will be resolved during the rulemaking process. Then each household will be allowed to have or assigned a least lead case manager and, again, to offer flexibility to the household. The household may ask for a change of case manager. They don't necessarily they're not necessarily going to get that switch, but they can ask for it. There will also be an a needs assessment through the, by the OEO to determine where where are our gaps, what more do we need. And again, this is all part of the, twenty twenty seven year for transition. And as the program goes on, we'll be learning more and more about what do we need and where do we need to better invest the funds that we have. And then as I said before, there's a notice of appeals or right to a fair hearing at the Human Services Board for anyone who's been denied, reduced, suspended or terminated from the services that they were originally offered. And there's a there's a notice provision and there's a timing provision within that, right to appeals. Then there is a rulemaking section, including any process for reinstatement after termination, those rules will be developed, very soon. The recording requirements by the Department of Children and Families addressing the different levels of, the continuum, what's needed, and how how the funds have been expended. Then there is section section five of the bill. The 2028 program the program will be in place in 2028. So we have a little bit of time for the transition to occur. And so the requirement during the interim is for the office of economic opportunity to work in collaboration with various community based organism organisms organizations. I must be a biologist. Organizations, the Chittenden County Homeless Alliance, the Balance of State Continuum of Care, US HUD, and to produce a single continuum of care by October 2028. By, and then January '28, we'll get a report summarizing efforts to establish that single continuum of care. And then there were there are grant requirements for being established by for our community partners, whether it's a a shelter or other organization. Also requirements for putting together a coordinated entry assessment. There is language that the Senate Health and Welfare added that confirms that the limits on the use of motels and hotels will not begin on July 1, but it will be a continuous process on the seventy day rolling year. Then we've been through the transition piece. Then the rule making is important because as we go forward, the folks who are out in the community have been used to a specific set of rules. And that specific set of rules that was approved by LCAR in March 2025 will continue, and then emergency rules will be produced for September September first this year, twenty '6. So once the emergency rules are in place that will supplant the rules from last year and then new rules will be promulgated and brought back to House Human Services and Senate Health and Welfare for consideration in April of next year twenty twenty seven. So there's a review process, for those rules. And then the by February 2027, the Office of Economic Opportunity will present a progress report and then a final report. There is language that will ensure that folks who need treatment in prevention and treatment of sexual abuse and domestic violence will have a place to go and as DCF will be negotiating and finding an organization to help with that. Then one of the more exciting things that's in the bills in section 11, which is the Vermont Rental Assistance Bridge program. This is a program between the Agency of Human Services and the Vermont, State Housing Authority, With those two organizations, we'll collaborate to develop develop a framework for establishing a unified housing voucher program. So there are a number of house housing vouchers right now within, the agency and the Vermont State Housing Authority. So we'll bring those together, and they'll re report their findings about how to utilize those vouchers effectively within the continuum. So there's a requirement for the Versus Vermont State Housing Authority and AHS to incorporate existing rental assistance funded by AHS and its departments and designated for Vermonters exiting homelessness into the program. And so that program, they will now have a new program, which was consolidating a number of other areas for rental assistance bridge program. And it does reference some the home program, which is the or the HUD grants by statute, then the we don't will be a priority to folks who currently participate in the home program to allow for them to continue participation in that in having affordable rental. The program the the bridge program is should be accessible to eligible households served by AHS departments with priority given to those exiting homelessness, but not to the exclusion of other eligible populations. And that's important, so we don't want to, kick people out while we're putting people in. Then there's a payment and rate structure analysis that will come back to us in April '27 to determine how much it costs to provide shelters at these different levels or services so that then the budget can be determined, for those services and shelters when the program is complete in 2028. There's also a section capping the room rates that we have had, previously at $80 a night for, hotels and motels. And then there is a section on the budget. The budget was included in the bill. The amount of money spent at each of these levels was included in the bill. It's also in the the big bill, September, and the the task given to both the House and the Senate was to review what those line items are, and then within the $21,000,000 that were about, what should we shift around. So, we did not shift much, from what the House had changed. The governor's budget included all of, everything except the one thing that we added in. The house included everything except the one thing we had in, but the money is all the same. So the the money is consistent. The budget is consistent from the governor to the house to the senate. The difference is we've moved line amounts within some of the line items, and they're not significantly different. I can sort out for you if you need to know what did the governor do, what did the house do, what did we do. They're all in different pages, but I can I can help you with that? So when you look at section 14, it looks like a huge amount of money and it is because this is a huge problem, and we have challenges. So the HOP operation, the homeless opportunity program, is the program that has traditionally done general assistance, and they provide money for services, for shelters, for all kinds of treatment, and that that that is a that's a large line item. We we did not touch that in the senate. There's also a four point that's $39,000,000 in case you're running wondering. There is 4,400,000 for shelter development. That means actually building shelters or renovating places where folks can be. There is a line item for emergency hotels and motels. The senate took $500,000 of that and placed it in another line item to support the community resource center, which is a low barrier shelter for folks in Chittenden County. There is $2,400,000 for case management, $4,200,000 for, permanent supportive housing and family supportive housing, $3,000,000 for rental assistance, $500,000 for grants to municipalities. That was added by the house. That was not in the governor's budget. And then, and we concurred with what the house had done because we I think we all understand the role that our communities have played and the their need for some some funds to support their work. Then there's $1,500,000 for emergency cold weather shelters that's fit up when you have an extra cold time and more people, more demand than, than access. And then there's, $314,000 for other expenses, and this is a range of things that people might need to accomplish administration, or other work. There is $3,000,000 for staffing grants and contracts between, OEO and our community partners. And then as I indicated earlier, the Senate added 500,000 to the low barrier community resources center, that we had heard from. All the all the funds that are not expended at the end of twenty seven will be carried forward for the for for to be used exactly as they were appropriated initially. And then any any hop housing opportunity program funds or general assistance emergency housing funds will also be carried forward to into the Vermont homeless response continuum. So the money that is now appropriated for HOP or for general assistance will gradually move into the, continuum of care. There will be quarterly reports from the OEO on how the money is being utilized. We actually repeal a report. We repeal the report on the general assistance program. It's no longer necessary. And then, effective dates, rulemaking, take effect on passage. And as I said before, the emergency rules will be promulgated on by September 1, and then more permanent rules will come back to the General Assembly for review next year. All other sections of the bill, the grant requirements take effect on October 1. That gives the agency an opportunity to establish what the grants look like. That's 10/01/2028. That's when the program is complete, and we know then what the rules are and what the program actually looks like. And then finally, the act takes effect on, July first of this year. There is a lot in the bill. There's a lot of work that is has to happen within the five regions of the state, where we have our community action programs. There's a lot of work that has to happen at the agency, but a lot of this work is going on now in an uncoordinated less coordinated fashion. I would never say what the the work that's going on is uncoordinated. People are working extremely hard to help in our communities and help people who don't have a place

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: to

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: live. So the coordination that will take place is key, and that's the transition year until 2028. So we heard from a bunch of folks. We heard from our ledge counsel, sponsors of the bill, from the, from the other, from the house. We heard from Joint Fiscal Office, Vermont Legal Aid, Vermont State Housing Authority, the ACLU of Vermont, Housing and Homeless Alliance of Vermont, and Homelessness Vermont, the Northeast Kingdom Community Action Agency, Department of Children and Families, Agency of Human Services, Champlain Valley Office of Economic Opportunity, the Good Samaritan Haven of Berry, Vermont Developmental Disabilities Council, the chair of the Human Services Committee from the house house Human Services, and then the other the other departments within AHS. As I said, every department in AHS is involved in this development of this homeless response continuum. Mister president, the vote out of committee was four one zero. We ask for your consideration and vote to move the bill forward. It's one that we have worked on in the past. We have worked very closely with the administration and with community organizations, so we feel like we've filled in the gaps, and we brought people together, in the process, and think that it will be it will be a really important continuum of care for people who are homeless or at risk of being homeless in our state, and so that we can continue the the sense of caring that we all have, in Vermont. So, that's my report, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Would you like to give your report for the committee on appropriations while you're on your feet, senator?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: Thank you, mister president. The committee on appropriations was particularly interested that we did not that the Senate Health and Welfare Committee did not add more funds than were in the original bill or in the big bill, and we didn't do that as I have reported. So committee on appropriations agreed with the distribution of funds and the availability and the funds that are available here for that program. Appropriations did make some technical changes. There was a lack of consistent it was one place where the phrase offer to was missing in the in the bill, so we added that in in section four. And then in section 14, there was a the $500,000 that was subtracted from one line item and moved to another was was changed. So instead, the line in section 14 subsection a subdivision three, we struck out, $23.08 70 $23,870,000 and inserted in that in place $23,370,000 to make it accurate with the report of the committee, on health and welfare. Then we also inserted a statutory reference for grants for municipalities in section 14, and then, we struck out the phrase in this section because it refers to the whole bill, not just the one section. Your committee on appropriations voted seven zero zero, to advance the bill. Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: The question is, shall the recommendation of proposal of amendment of the committee on health and welfare be amended as recommended by the committee on appropriations? Senator from Rutland.

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: Thank you, mister president. Just wanna make a statement first, and then I've got a question for the reporter if I can interrogate her later. But one of the advantages or disadvantages of being an older Vermonter is I can remember when my when I grew up in my town, we had three nursing homes, and they all were run by independent owners. The advantage of those nursing homes being in the community were the people that the families of people that were in nursing homes could actually go down there and help with their care. They could bring them their special dish, you know, whatever their dessert was, whatever. We seem to have gotten away from that. And if I may interrogate the presenter

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: The presenter's interrogated.

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: So I I was trying to do the the math in my head, and I got somewhere around $700,000,000 and I and it my brain went fuzzy. But for all the, things that have been we've been talking about there, that's a lot of money. When during COVID, my district was really heavily inundated with homeless people, and they they really had problems. And I got involved with the homeless prevention center down there. I was also a member of a board that had homeless veterans, two of them, two different organizations. And I used to go to all these homeless prevention meetings. And I think at one time, I counted 23 different independent nonprofit organizations that were involved in that. And I just sat there and took it all in. At first, it was it was kinda I mean, these people were working hard to take care of the people that needed the help, but they were all kinda looking for a leader to step up. So I raised my hand one day after about the third meeting and said, so who's in charge of all this? And they kinda looked at each other. Nobody was really in charge. It almost like they needed a navigator there to help them get the things that they needed. Those those organizations were religious groups. They were nonprofits. They were government organizations, DCF and the like. And I my question to the presenter of the bill is, did we ever think about taking all this service and the money and pushing it back down to the local municipalities where the overseer of the poor used to be? And it and I think that at one time, you could get some people as old as I am that would consider that they've got better service, as far as taking care of the people that needed it.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: Thank you for that question because that's exactly what this bill is going to do. So there will be a coordinated set of rules, guidelines, procedures, and people at the local level, case managers at the local level, local shelters, the one that you have and the one cap, community action program that you have in Rutland, and then all of the other, folks who want very much to help will know exactly what the roles and responsibilities are, and they will be able to help at the local level. Now we didn't use the word navigator, but we do use the word case manager, and we do have folks who will be working at the local level. So we are that that's, that's one of the goals here, and that's why it will take a bit of time for transition from I look at as order out of chaos. I don't and I don't like using the word chaos because I know how hard people are working and how they're trying to coordinate together, and they are working together. But, yes, what you are asking is an excellent question, and it will allow for folks at the local level who know what is needed at that local level to participate and do it effectively.

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: I thank the presenter and mister president. And if I can conclude by saying that those people, the families that came to those three nursing homes in my town, which, by the way, the buildings are still there. One of them was turned into a mansion. The other one is derelict and fallen into disrepair. Those this community could use that that effort, that financial infusion at the local level, and the people the families could actually walk down to those nursing homes and see their people. They wouldn't have to drive to Rutland or to Burlington. Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Senator from Rutland.

[Senator Terry Williams (Rutland)]: Thank you, mister president. I'd like to thank the chair. I'd like to thank the committee for, handling the delicate topic. We know we've invested hundreds of millions.

[Senator Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Chittenden Southeast)]: May I request a recess?

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: We'll take a quick recess. Come to order. The hornet has been wrangled. You. Senator from Rutland.

[Senator Terry Williams (Rutland)]: Thank you, mister chair. Good diversion. Again, I'd like to thank the chair. I'd like to thank the committee for their work on this very, very delicate topic. Over the years, we've all know we know that we've all invested hundreds of millions of dollars into these programs. This bill clearly outlines the intent to continue the the investment for those entitlements. The need for a safety net for the destitute in any culture is certainly appropriate, But in the reporters' delivery, I did not hear any metrics of success from our previous investments. And if I could interrogate the reporter of the bill.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: The reporters interrogated.

[Senator Terry Williams (Rutland)]: At $83,000,000 per year, does the report does the bill have any metrics for the success of moving folks off reliance from state investments? Thank you.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: Yeah. Thank you. And and that is the goal. As I said in the beginning, the goal is to provide housing for folks so that the program will go away. Will we ever be able to do that is a question. The one metric, that is clearly in the bill is a reduction of hotel and mo motel program, eliminating the number of hotel and motel rooms needed to house people. And at the same time that we're doing this, we all know we've invested millions of dollars in housing and affordable housing. So the answer to your question is, there is no goal established for each line item here to say that by 2030, we're going to see fewer shelters. We're not seeing that. What we are looking at is a measurement of of success. What are the needs that we have in our communities? How many people actually on an ongoing basis require, shelter? You know the one of the things that I probably should have mentioned also is so I I am answering your question because what we are going to have to rely on our recovery residences we are building recovery residences within other legislation and those residences in this bill we will be able able to supply financial assistance for folks who need to go and stay in those recovery residences while they recover from opioid or other substance use disorders. Once that investment is made then those folks will be able to return to employment and to, rental or other affordable housing. So is there a direct request or demand in the bill for a reduction? The answer is no. The the program won't be fully established until 2028. That time, when as we go forward over the next couple of years, and as we see requests coming in, whether it's in the BAA or whether it's in the big bill, as we start seeing those, changes, we'll be able to think about how to best serve, how big is that safety net that we need. Right now, we've got 4,000 people who need, shelter. So that I it that doesn't say answer your question with a specific metric or analysis or set of data that you want, but it does establish a goal for reducing the need for the program overall and most specifically for reducing the need for a 1,007 and then 1,000 hotel and hotel rooms and so on.

[Senator Terry Williams (Rutland)]: Mister president, I I thank the reporter. I didn't say anything about reductions. I don't know if we're dealing with the same people rotating in and out. I don't know if we have if we have a success of moving people off of our entitlement programs, whether it be housing or or what have you. We certainly want to avoid arbitrary room limitations, but we don't know if the program is working. There's nothing in the bill to substantiate whether our investments are actually having any net effect. We really don't know. I'm really challenged to support a bill that doesn't have metrics. In my world, no metrics, no money, and that it was very, very simple. So, we would create metrics. I'm I'm very much at a point where very unsure about supporting continued investments without metrics and Mr. President, I implore the chamber and the state house to at some point understand if the investments that we're making in these types of programs are having the net positive benefit effect. Period. Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: Oh, thanks, mister president. I'd like for folks to look at twenty two two seventeen, which is a reporting section that requires the Department of Children and Family to provide annual status report as part of its budget presentation addressing each level of the continuum as well as various other topics, and there's a list in the bill. The number of households served, the average length of participation, the utilization of hotels and motels, housing stability outcomes, and total expenditures. That's the best we can do right now. Once the program is fully established, we probably can do better. But we don't know what we will what we don't know. So we don't know what we need to ask at this point until we have a continuum in place. But I very much think, you know, it's it's it's it's a good thing to ask for metrics. Right now, what metric do we have? We have 4,000 people who need a place to serve, and we need 3,200 homes within which they should be placed so that they won't be homeless. That is a metric to look at. What is the reduction in the numbers? And we've been looking at that. We don't have a good way of measuring. The department is looking at a better way of measuring and providing that analysis, and that will cost some of the money that's in in the budget that we currently have.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: I would remind senators that we are on the appropriations amendment. Senator from Rutland.

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: I'll ask your indulgence for one more question for the reporter of the, of the bill.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: The senator is interrogated as the reporter of the appropriations amendment.

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: Was there any data my concern is the any additional full time FTE or, state employees that are gonna be added in, in the fall off in this budget? Alright. Mister president.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: Thank you, mister president. There aren't any specific requests for FTEs within the proposed bill.

[Senator David Weeks (Rutland)]: Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question? The question is shall the recommendation of proposal of amendment of the committee on health and welfare be amended as recommended by the committee on appropriations? Senator from Rutland.

[Senator Brian Collamore (Rutland)]: Thank you, president. May I please request a recess for caucus in

[Senator Nader Hashim (Windham)]: the quarter?

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: We'll take a brief recess. Are you ready for the question? The question is shall the recommendation of proposal of amendment of the committee on health and welfare be amended as recommended by the committee on appropriations. Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. The ayes have it. And we have amended the recommendation of proposal of amendment of the committee on health and welfare as recommended by the committee on appropriations. The question now is shall the senate propose to the house to amend the bill as recommended by the committee on health and welfare as amended? Are you ready for the question? Senator from Chittenden.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: Thank you, mister president. Understanding that we were, talking about the appropriations amendment, I'd like to move back to make, answer the question from the senator from Rutland regarding metrics. And if you look at twenty two seventeen, which I referenced very briefly earlier, I will read what the reporting is. Annually, as part of the department's budget presentation, the department shall provide a status report addressing each level of the Vermont homelessness response continuum. Minimum, the status report address shall address the number of households served within each level of the program. The average length of participation for households with it within each level of the program. And the rate at which households successfully transition to permanent housing. Three, the number of households diverted from entering shelters or hotel motel placements through prevention and diversion services. The utilization of hotels and motels, including average nightly number of rooms used, average and medium length of stay, the extent to which hotel and motel usage has decreased relative to the prior fiscal year, The number of eligible households denied a hotel or motel room due to authorized rooms being fully occupied. Housing stability outcomes, including rates of return to homelessness within six and twelve months following exit from the program. An assessment of regional capacity and access to services, including identification of geographic areas with unmet needs or disproportionate disproportionate utilization of emergency housing resource. Total expenditures by program level and funding source, including state, federal, and other funds, and an analysis of cost efficiency across housing models, and any operational barriers to implementation of the program along with recommendations for administrative or legislative action. Annually, as part of the department's budget presentation, the department shall set goals for increased housing capacity, including permanent supportive housing, permanent affordable housing, shelter beds. The department shall provide data pertaining to the increased shelter capacity and the extent to which shelter capacity meets the needs of eligible households experiencing homelessness each year. On or before the last day of each month, the office or other relevant agency or department shall post on its website a substantially similar report to that due in the 2023 action results number 81 section six b, including the office's monthly expenditure on the program level. Mister president, in the initial in the beginning of a program that will be complete in '28, we're asking for data as we go forward so we know what the program is doing, whether we consider it success or failure. Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Senator from Washington.

[Senator Ann Cummings (Washington)]: Thank you, mister president. I served

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: on the committee on health and welfare, and

[Senator Ann Cummings (Washington)]: when I first heard this, actually heard it from state agency after state agency after state agency. I think my mind was where I think most of yours are, which is somewhat numb and confused. And my initial reaction was, this is a beautiful academic program written by people that live under a gold domed ivory tower. I really had a hard time figuring out how this was going to work in the reality of homelessness. How is this going to work where in a world in which your public health nurses will not go in to hotel rooms because of the prevalence of weapons and drugs when social workers only enter with police escorts because of the danger of violence. And we finally did get to hear from some of the providers. Actually, I think it was after the committee was officially shut down. And I've thought through this, and we have people that all they need is a home. Many people, it came in with COVID, it peaked, but because of the increased cost of rentals, people working on minimum wage and above jobs have been priced out of the housing market. All they need is a how a house, an apartment. They need a roof over their heads. The bottom line is we don't have enough affordable housing. And until we do, those people are kind of in limbo, and we don't have anywhere for them to go except their car or motels in the winter. We need more affordable housing. We also have a significant number of people who have severe, and I know it's not the politically correct term, addiction problems. And we have some people who are prone to violence because I live in a neighborhood with a shelter. I see the school bus, and I see the police cars, and occasionally, I see the ambulances. It's a mixed bag. I came around to supporting this and be clear, what this bill does is it takes the governor's recommend for the amount of money we have been spending on homelessness. And in the past, all we've done is focus on getting them out of motel rooms, cutting down on motel usage. This does that, but it does it by saying, okay, for the first time, we're going

[Senator Robert Plunkett (Bennington)]: to have to

[Senator Ann Cummings (Washington)]: start taking a more organized approach. There is an emphasis on case managers and having someone that works with that person to help them work through. And we've done away with some of the more punitive, like, either you get with the program or you're out, you know, you kick your addiction, you're gone. It's does have the ability to keep working, understanding that people with addictions, the pattern is you do well for a while, then you fall. Then you get back up and you do well. And hopefully, in the end, you you've come out the other side. It recognizes that people sometimes just need help finding housing. We are losing section eight vouchers. I mean, the federal government is is not helping anymore, and we need to deal with that. But this is our first effort. This is our first effort to do an organized system. We don't have the answers yet, and we don't have the resources, but will help us better determine what we do need to help people be able to differentiate between who needs housing, who needs recovery housing, how much recovery housing do we need, who needs hospitalization, who needs home health services, and where do we put them so they can get I've come full circle on this one, but I think it is a good first step in taking the resources that we've been investing and use them in a more constructive and forward moving manner.

[Senator Philip Baruth (President Pro Tempore, Chittenden Central)]: Senator from Addison.

[Senator Ruth Hardy (Addison)]: Thank you, mister president. I just wanted to add to some of the things that the senator from Chittenden South said regarding the question from the senator from Rutland regarding accountability and performance measurements. On page thirty five ninety six of the calendar in the bill, related to the Homelessness Response Continuum Program. One of the requirements of the program that the program shall do is ensure accountability, transparency and cost efficiency in the use of public funds. Then on page thirty six zero six, section twenty two sixteen of the bill regarding the rule making that's required for this pro these programs is that number 11 is expectations for the office's oversight and quality monitoring, including performance measurements applicable to all community partners and grantees. That would be in the rules for the program. And finally, on page 3,608, Section six of the Bill two thousand two and eighteen, Grant Requirements, and this is for any grant or grant agreement executed by the Agency of Human Services or its departments shall require a community partner as appropriate to, and number four is measure performance outcomes, including diversion success, time to housing, and housing retention. So, mister president, it does seem, and this is just a quick read of the bill, it does seem like there are methodologies embedded in the bill to actually require performance measurements to get at the the things. I I wholeheartedly agree with the with the, senator from Rutland that we don't often do a good enough job of measuring the performance of government programs. I have, in the past, worked on legislation, to have performance measurements across government that has not been sort of successful on a broad sense, but in this specific sense, it does seem to be embedded in this bill, mister president. And so I would urge the body to support the bill and and to hold the hold the programs accountable as they're developing these performance metrics, we're seeing the data come back to us. Thank you.

[Senator Philip Baruth (President Pro Tempore, Chittenden Central)]: Senator from Rutland.

[Senator Terry Williams (Rutland)]: Thank you, mister president. So I I fully understand the language that the reporter of the bill and the senator from Madison, senior senator from Madison highlighted. I I see it. I've read it. The bill is about the future, but we need to reflect back over the past six years. So from the bill, we could get results, data results, metric results in a year, and then take action maybe in two years, we begin to pull some levers and we we we update programs and such, but all these services currently exist. We're trying to put order into chaos. I get it. It's a worthy effort, but I'm wondering if our hundreds and millions of dollars of investments that we've already made have worked? That's my really my question. It's metrics of what we've already invested. I acknowledge that the that the bill has language about the future. But before we put more money into these programs, are we having the desired net effect? Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Senator from Chittenden Southeast.

[Senator Kesha Ram Hinsdale (Chittenden Southeast)]: Thank you, mister president. I think I heard my calling card, which is essentially to look back at the data that we have, the cost per unit, and keep a laser focus on how successful we are in meeting various goals. But Mr. President, what we have to be really clear about is what goals actually define success and which committee is responsible for measuring that. Mr. President, every We've had a lot of debates on good data and asking the right questions. And then I worry that we kind of gloss over when we get the answers. Various committees have various metrics of success and your general housing and, your economic development housing and general affairs committee looks at some of the most objective metrics of how successful we have been. How many units of housing have we built? What is the cost per unit for different types of housing? But Mr. President, we also have to look at what the cost is of homelessness, not simply the cost of a motel room. So Mr. President, what I really like to say first in that regard is that we have to be very careful about what we measure because what we measure tends to be how we define success. And I caution any member, particularly those who have the misery or fortune of being back next biennium to make sure that we are not, and you heard this in some of the language of the study, just looking at who has been pulled out of homelessness. And I say that Mr. President, because you can begin to hear stories, and this has been an issue with our continuum of care for a long time, you can begin to hear stories about individuals who are in desperate situations where they are about to lose their housing and they can have someone on the other end of the line from state government say, we have to wait until you are homeless to help you. That is what can happen if we measure too stringently what our metric of success looks like. And Mr. President, I know that the Health and Welfare Committee knows this. If you are precariously housed and you are a parent and you try to tell a housing agency or some social service provider that you are sleeping couch to couch and you have a child with you, you are in danger of having your child taken away from you. So until we're all ready to ask the right questions about what we mean by protecting people from homelessness, making sure they can afford their housing, and making sure that the system, does not put them in impossible scenarios in their life circumstances, then we cannot have this conversation on a level playing field, Mr. President. So what I worry about for, on behalf of the Senate Health and Welfare Committee, is that their metrics have to be largely subjective in a way that ours do not in the housing committee. And now I'm happy to get to some of the more objective metrics of whether or not we are successful in housing folks. And what I want to repeat every year that I have the floor, is that a motel room is cheaper than homelessness. It costs us $38,000 per year for someone to live twelve months in a motel room. Granted, it's not ideal because they're not in a living situation that's suitable for a family or long term living. And, know, that is not housing that we own or are getting any closer to creating permanence for that individual. But Mr. President, it bears repeating that as of last year, and I'm sure these numbers have gone up maybe exponentially, if not incrementally, it costs us about, or it did last year, dollars 1,400 a night for an emergency room visit and an emergency room bed. It costs us $380 for, a stay in prison per night. And it costs us $250 for interaction with other municipal services like local law enforcement and local efforts to try and keep someone off the streets because why Mr. President? We are a society that believes in not having people sleep on the street, who we could be providing other options, who would like to seek those other options. And so, Mr. President, especially when we set up temporary shelters for extreme cold weather, now possibly extreme heat in the future, those temporary shelters cost millions of dollars to stand up when you do it one shelter at a time for a very short period of time. You end up actually spending hundreds of thousands of dollars potentially per individual you're sheltering. So I'm asking us to be thoughtful about the cost of homelessness for the sake of our budget, for the sake of our hospital budgets, and for the sake of our municipal budgets. Finally, Mr. President, what I worry about even in the language of this bill, though I don't have significant enough qualms with it to change it, is that we are focused entirely on the actual number of units of housing. That was a early metric to look broadly at how far away we are from meeting our housing goals. But Mr. President, I ask every one of my colleagues to go home to your community and you can ask your listers, your assessors, private entities, what is the vacancy rate in my community? When we were at the height of the pandemic, the Chittenden County vacancy rate for rental was 0.8%. 0% vacancy is extremely dangerous for tenants, for renters. Why? Because it gives them zero opportunity to leave a dangerous situation, to leave an apartment that is not suitable for housing, to lose something like childcare or the existing housing they are in and be able to stay stable and stay in their community. So every one of us should be fighting to have a healthy vacancy rate in our communities. Because Mr. President, the vacancy rate in Chittenden County now is 4% and national data, all of the metrics that we have available to us show us that when you increase vacancy to a healthy level, you then affect the cost of rent and you then affect the rate of homelessness. This is nationally accepted data. You can see it very visibly, between municipalities in the country that have increased their availability of multi family rental housing and the communities that have not. And so Mr. President, with a 4% vacancy rate in Chittenden County, we are starting to see a huge difference. And vacancy matters because you also don't wanna overbuild the number of units because guess what else we saw? UVM has seven percent under enrollment in its incoming class. So you have to be measuring both the number of units you have and the number of people that are going to be coming into your community. So Mr. President, I really want us to be having informed discussions about the data we are seeking and how we measure success. I think we will be serving our constituents better by doing so. And it is incumbent upon all of us as policymakers and lawmakers to seek out good data and then further interrogate that data. But I am worried, Mr. President, that in all of the debates we are having, we are casting such doubt on the idea of collecting data and that there is availability of good data if you seek it out, that we are trying to pull our state and our country back into the dark ages. So, Mr. President, I just hope when we ask questions about how we are measuring success and what we are looking for, we consider it part of our jobs as elected officials to do that in a way where we actually know the type of answer that we are seeking and we are trying to measure success every year and from now into the future. And so for better or worse, I will probably continue making this speech until we all use metrics that we believe in and that we share because that's how good government works. Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Are you ready for the question? The question is, shall the senate propose to the house to amend the bill as recommended by the committee on health and welfare as amended? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. The ayes have it. And you've proposed to the house to amend the bill as proposed by the committee on health and welfare as amended. The question now is, shall the bill be read a third time? Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed nay. The ayes have it. You've ordered third reading of h nine thirty eight. Senator from Chittenden Central.

[Senator Philip Baruth (President Pro Tempore, Chittenden Central)]: Thank you, mister president. I had hoped to get a little further down the calendar but several of our debates stretched a little longer. So I think that's good for today. I did want to, before I make an adjournment motion, did want to let senators know we've moved over h nine fifty five, the education bill today. We will do that tomorrow and probably the next day as well. We are trying our best to put together an amendment that may be acceptable to all of the relevant parties. That is the that is the intent. So we're taking a little extra time before we begin on the floor in the hopes that we will be shortening the amount of time we spend getting the bill out of here and to the governor's desk. So with that said, mister president, I would ask that pending announcements, the senate stand and adjourn until 10AM, Thursday, 05/21/2020

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Are there any announcements? Senator from Washington.

[Senator Ann Cummings (Washington)]: Thank you, mister president. Senate finance will meet at 01:00. We have about 10 witnesses to hear in one hour, and I'm gonna scoot down because our staff was going to send them home if

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chittenden Southeast)]: we weren't there by one.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Senator from Washington.

[Senator Robert Plunkett (Bennington)]: Senator appropriation will meet after the conference committee, which is at 01:15. We're hoping that means that when you would meet at 02:00.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Senator Windham.

[Senator Nader Hashim (Windham)]: The conference committee for page six forty two will meet at 2PM in senate judiciary.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Senator from Rutland. Thank you,

[Senator Brian Collamore (Rutland)]: mister president. Government operational meeting at 02:30.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Senator from Essex.

[Senator Russ Ingalls (Essex)]: Thank you, mister president. The agriculture committee, if we could just huddle for a minute. We have a bill back, and I just wanna see, when we could possibly meet. Thank you, mister president.

[Lt. Governor David Zuckerman (Presiding Officer, President of the Senate)]: Are there any further announcements? Seeing none, the senator from Chittenden Central has moved that the senate stand in adjournment until 10AM, Thursday, 05/21/2026. Are you ready for the question? If so, all in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed, nay. The ayes have it, and we'll stand in adjournment until 10AM, Thursday, 05/21/2026.