The annual make or break deadline for new legislation was on Friday. VTDigger.org has compiled a rundown of the bills that made the cut, which ones will go the Senate Rules Committee for exemptions, and which proposals are now in doubt.
Here is a short list of the bills that passed out of House committees this week: pre-K expansion legislation; a provision prohibiting public schools from going private; new state reporting requirements for elder abuse investigations; new rules designed to curb opiate addiction; equal pay rules for employers; a program that will advance the state’s commitment to improving the thermal efficiency of residences and businesses; a clarification of insurance rules for preventive medical care. In addition, the House passed a bill on the floor this week that requires the Vermont State Police to coordinate search and rescue efforts with municipal and volunteer groups.
In the Senate, key legislation that has emerged includes: a bill requiring Act 250 regulation of an oil pipeline in the Northeast Kingdom; a controversial bill that requires the Public Service Board to consider Act 250 rules when approving energy projects; a “flexible pathways” bill that would enable more high school students to attend state colleges; a change to the public records law that would allow public access to some information regarding criminal investigations. The patient-directed death bill that passed out of the Senate last month will likely be taken up by the House in early April. A bill that would have allowed child care workers to unionize was shot down in the Senate Economic Development Committee this week. The Senate approved bills requiring non-union members to pay partial dues, expanding workers compensation allowances for firefighters and allowing independent home health care providers to collectively bargain with the state.
A number of proposals that didn’t make the deadline have a chance of resurfacing. There are 10 pieces of legislation that House Speaker Shap Smith, Senate President Pro Tem John Campbell and the Senate Rules Committee will consider exempting from the deadline. A number of these measures are controversial and full passage this year is by no means guaranteed. Here’s a partial list: a bill requiring the labeling of genetically modified foods; the decriminalization of small amounts of marijuana; a shoreline protection bill; legislation requiring more intensive Taser training for law enforcement; unionization of employees who work for state’s attorneys; changes to the open meeting law; drivers licenses for migrant workers; a bill that would make electronic communication between lawmakers and constituents confidential; and proposed regulation of pet breeders and kennels.
A few bills, including new pension forfeiture legislation, which allows the state to seize the pensions of public officials who have been convicted of embezzling, have passed out of both the House and the Senate.
The flurry of activity, which took place largely in policy committees last week, will switch to the floor in the coming weeks, as lawmakers in the Senate and House begin the process of winnowing through the dozens of bills on the slate.
But the real yeoman’s work will be in the House money committees over the next few weeks. Lawmakers will decide whether to raise taxes to pay for roads and bridges; how to proceed with bonding for more than $70 million to pay for the new Waterbury State Office Complex; whether to assess $20 million in additional taxes to fill this year’s budget hole; and how to manage state spending at a time when demand for state programs for low-income Vermonters has continued to grow, even after the recession. Lawmakers on the budget and tax committees say putting together the state’s annual spending and revenue bills is tougher than the worst years of the recession because federal money is shrinking.
Meanwhile, legislators in the House and Senate will also be moving dozens of bills forward in the last nine weeks of the session. Some will pass in one body or the other, but not make final passage, others will make it through the whole process. If history is any guide, by early May about 70 to 80 bills will land on the governor’s desk.
Here is a synopsis of some of the key bills that lawmakers will consider in the second half of the legislative session:
House panel backs bill tackling opioid drug prescription abuse and treatment
The House Human Services Committee unanimously approved a patchwork piece of legislation today that seeks to reduce opioid and methamphetamine abuse.
Rep. Ann Pugh, D-South Burlington, chair of the Human Services Committee, outlined the intent behind the legislation.
“What we hope to do with this is improve treatment, prevent deaths, improve access to treatment and appropriate prescribing, and to keep communities safe,” Pugh said.
The bill amalgamates a handful of bills that began in three different committees — Human Services, Judiciary, and General, Housing, and Military Affairs. Human Services stitched the bills into a single piece of legislation just in time to make the crossover deadline Friday.
Pugh described the bill and the collaborative drafting process, as “a visual picture of the multifaceted way that we need to respond to these issues.”
The bill seeks to make the Vermont Prescription Monitoring System a more effective tool for alerting doctors and pharmacies when people are “doctor-shopping.” It requires physicians to register with the hitherto voluntary database and to consult the database each time a patient requests a replacement prescription and whenever they prescribe medication to a new patient with chronic pain symptoms.
The legislation also sets up a pilot program for distributing opioid antagonists and establishes an electronic database program that will require pharmacists to monitor the sales of ephedrine, pseudoephedrine and other drug products that are used to make meth. It also lays the groundwork for a statewide drop-off program for unused medication, and it attempts to make it easier to crack down on drug sales that take place on abandoned properties.
In addition, the committees had planned to wrap H.65, which would give limited immunity to people reporting drug overdoses, into the larger bill, but it was not included in the version that was approved by the Human Services Committee on Friday.
What the bill doesn’t address, due to budgetary constraints, Pugh said, is the lack of treatment options for people with drug addictions.
— Alicia Freese
S.30 would give towns more say over wind and other energy projects; $75,000 allocated for study
The legislation requires the Public Service Board to conform with Act 250 criteria, which would give towns a greater say in how energy projects, including wind projects, are sited. It also sets aside $75,000 for a study of the impacts of wind turbines.
Act 250, the state’s landmark land use law, uses a different set of criteria than the Vermont Public Service Board, which reviews power projects under its Section 248 rules.
The study will zoom in on the health, environmental and economic impacts of wind. It would also examine sound and “infrasound” emissions – an issue being raised increasingly by opponents and those living near utility-scale wind projects.
Department of Public Service Commissioner Chris Recchia told the committee that a previous study on sound impacts from wind towers cost $60,000. Previously, the Senate Natural Resources Committee killed a proposed moratorium on wind projects, which had been unpopular with the Democratic leadership and the Shumlin administration. The Senate Appropriations Committee green-lighted $75,000 for a newly mandated Department of Public Service study due in October on how the state should proceed with renewable energy projects, particularly wind power.
The study will also examine renewable energy credits, if renewable energy investment impacts the state’s greenhouse gas emissions, and how to fund public participation in the siting process for energy plants. It calls for substantial public participation.
This legislation also convenes an interim legislative committee, of undecided makeup, which will examine the Department of Public Service findings, and report back in December with recommendations on integrating regional and local planning, and standards applying to all wind turbines.
— Nat Rudarakanchana
Bill granting migrant licenses in limbo after vote delayed; legislative leaders agree to waive crossover deadline
The push to grant driving rights to migrant workers suffered a slight setback, as the Senate Transportation Committee failed to vote on the measure on Friday.
Senate President Pro Tem John Campbell has granted the bill a waiver so that it can be considered at some point next week.
The migrant workers legislation has been tweaked to include so-called “driving privilege” cards, rather than a standard driver’s license, to 1,500 migrant farm workers who now lack the ability to drive legally in Vermont.
Brendan O’Neill, an advocate with Migrant Justice, which pushed for the driver IDs, says he supports the “driving privilege” cards.
Campbell sits on the Senate Transportation Committee, which is currently reviewing the bill.
— Nat Rudarakanchana
Senate panel advances bill that subjects oil pipelines to Act 250 review
The Senate Natural Resources and Energy Committee passed legislation mandating that any changes to how oil pipelines are used, excepting routine repairs, will be subject to Act 250 review. The vote was 4-0-1. Sen. Peter Galbraith was absent.
Environmental groups including VPIRG, the Conservation Law Foundation and 350.org have argued in favor of the legislation. Ben Walsh, VPIRG clean energy advocate, told VTDigger that he believes the latest version is an update of existing law. The decision could affect a potential future route for Canadian tar sands oil through the Northeast Kingdom.
Larry Wilson, CEO of the Portland Pipe Line Corp., told House lawmakers that he opposes the bill, that transporting tar sands through the pipeline is safe, and that he’d like to pipe tar sands oil through Vermont in the future.
In an attempt to avoid federal pre-emption issues, the legislation says that district commissions shall not address safety considerations when applying Act 250 criteria.
“It also has language that really simply says that we’re not going into safety issues that are pre-empted under federal law, and it cites the federal statute,” Bob Hartwell, chair of Senate Natural Resources, said.
Lobbyist Joe Choquette, who represents the American Petroleum Institute, said the legislation sets a “terrible precedent” by targeting one unpopular company and placing unreasonable burdens on it.
— Nat Rudarakanchana
Fate of Statehouse bill regulating use of stun guns uncertain
It’s unclear if action on statewide training and deployment policies for Tasers will have to wait until next year. The measure didn’t come to a vote in the House Government Operations Committee by Friday afternoon.
Committee Chair Donna Sweaney, D-Windsor, told VTDigger she’d asked Senate President Pro Tem John Campbell for an extension for the bill, but hadn’t yet heard back on Friday, the deadline for bills to move between chambers.
She emphasized, however, that she doesn’t want the measure to be rushed through. “There’s still more information to come, and we decided that we should wait and hear what the attorney general is coming up with, from after his hearing,” said Sweaney.
She also plans to hold an evening hearing next month for public input regarding Tasers and their use, or misuse, by law enforcement.
“Of course it would be hard to get it through this year, possibly, but certainly we want to get it through within the biennium,” she said.
Although there’s broad committee consensus welcoming more training and standardized policy on use of the stun guns, which tend to be administered and managed at a local police level, law enforcement officials have said they object to legislators micromanaging how Tasers should be used, Sweaney said.
“Police ask that we not be so prescriptive, as to what their procedures could be, when they need to intervene with a Taser,” she said. “It’s an issue and a sticking point that we need to iron out.”
One issue in the debate is whether Tasers should be considered lethal weapons, and whether police should only use them in situations that call for deadly force.
Officials with the Vermont Police Academy support a proposal to increase required officer training for Tasers.
— Nat Rudarakanchana
Bill setting social media protections for job applicants sidetracked for summer study
The Senate Committee on Economic Development unanimously delayed legislation that protects the social media privacy of job applicants, delegating the issue to a summer study committee instead.
An 11-person committee including labor representatives, civil rights advocates and lawmakers, will study the experience in other states as well as federal law before reporting back in January 2014.
Allen Gilbert, ACLU-VT’s executive director, told VTDigger that in the last few weeks, the bill somehow switched from a “job applicant protection bill to an employer surveillance bill.”
“This resulted in the bill being sidetracked to a summer study committee because of all the complicated issues involved with employers monitoring employees’ habits while at work,” Gilbert said.
Gilbert proposed eliminating any issues about employees and focusing again on job applicants only, but said last minute objections from the Department of Public Safety scuttled his attempts to pass legislation this year.
Public Safety Commissioner Keith Flynn previously argued that candidates for state trooper positions should be forced to turn over their Facebook passwords, because screening the character and judgment of such candidates is crucial to hiring police the public can trust.
— Nat Rudarakanchana
Reporting requirements for elder abuse
Last year, Gov. Peter Shumlin vetoed a bill that would have mandated reporting of elder abuse investigations to a legislative oversight committee.
The House Human Services Committee passed a new version of the legislation on Friday in a second attempt at requiring the state to regularly disseminate data about abuse, neglect and exploitation reports and investigations. The bill requires the Department of Disabilities, Aging and Independent Living to issue reports to lawmakers on a quarterly basis through July 2015.
In its findings, bill H.105, states that the Adult Protective Services program received 1,829 reports of abuse, neglect and exploitation in 2012; of those, 872 were investigated. “Currently, there are no data that explain why 957 reports received in 2012 were not investigated,” according to the bill. In addition, “consistent data are not available that explain what referrals were made to assist or protect the alleged victims.”
Advocates say the state isn’t doing enough to investigate elder abuse complaints.
The state is currently embroiled in a lawsuit with Vermont Legal Aid over the issue.
–Anne Galloway
Pre-K bill would expand early ed programs; Vermont Strong Scholars program gets approval; provision would block another North Bennington
The House Education Committee advanced a bill that allows school districts to expand preschool programs with money from the statewide property tax system. Qualifying districts would be able to include pre-kindergarten students as part of the average daily membership rate used to determine state reimbursement levels for schools.
Rep. Johannah Donovan, D-Burlington, chair of the committee, says the legislation will enable school districts to provide “universal” access to 10-hour a week preschool programs for students in about 15 communities, including Stowe, Colchester, Woodstock, Norwich and Rutland.
The legislation would also make it easier for families living in areas of the state without programs for young children to get access to programs in other school districts.
The pre-K education initiative is a key component of Gov. Peter Shumlin’s education plan.
The Joint Fiscal Office and the Agency of Education estimate that the total cost will be about $2 million a year.
Another one of the governor’s proposals — the Vermont Strong Scholars Program — was also backed by the committee. The program would repay a portion of the cost of tuition for post-secondary graduates who study science, technology, engineering or math at state educational institutions and choose to stay in Vermont. The scholarships would not be issued until 2015; consequently, the bill does not include an appropriation.
In an attempt to “prevent another North Bennington from happening,” as Donovan puts it, the committee approved a provision in a technical bill that prohibits a community from closing a public school and re-opening it as a private school. The conversion of the North Bennington Village School from a public school to a private, nonprofit entity was recently approved by the State Board of Education. Several other schools around the state, including an elementary school in Burke are considering a similar switch. Donovan says there was previously nothing in state statute to prevent public schools from going private. Lawmakers in House Education are concerned about the use of public funds for private schools that do not comply with the same standards for universal student admittance, special education, teacher certification and free and reduced lunches for low-income students. The Senate Education Committee has proposed legislation, S.91, that would require private schools to adhere to state mandates for public schools.
Thermal efficiency bill bifurcated; committee separates policy goals from revenue proposal
The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee divided and conquered this week. Most of the media attention on the committee’s “big bill,” a thermal efficiency proposal that aims to facilitate the weatherization of 80,000 homes in Vermont (about 25 percent of the state’s housing stock), between now 2020, has been focused on how the state plans to finance the proposal and the Clean Energy Development Fund.
Discussion in committee this week ranged from funneling the gross receipts tax on fossil fuels to a new special fund, which would have effectively removed roughly $15 million a year from the General Fund, to applying a 55 cent monthly surcharge on meters. House Natural Resources Chair Tony Klein’s gross receipts trial balloon was popped when Rep. Martha Heath, chair of House Appropriations, caught wind of the proposal.
The latest iteration of the funding mechanism is the 55-cent monthly electric meter charge. An identical proposal two years ago passed the House then was reversed when Rep. Oliver Olsen, R-Londonderry, launched a hue and cry over what he deemed a regressive tax proposal designed to subsidize renewable investors who receive subsidies through the Clean Energy Development Fund. Gov. Peter Shumlin asked the House leadership for a revote and the representatives then canned the idea.
The 56-page thermal efficiency bill outlines why the state needs to continue to make investments in building weatherization.
The proposal cites climate change and the economic impact of Vermonters’ dependence on heating oil as the two main reasons for accelerating efforts to insulate the state’s aging building stock.
Two-thirds of the sources of Vermont’s greenhouse gases in 2010 were from transportation and heating buildings and water, according to a study the legislation cites. Household and business expenditures on fossil fuels for hot water and buildings, doubled between 2000 and 2010, from $300 million to $600 million.
Rep. Margaret Cheney, D-Norwich, who helped to craft the bill, said the proposal makes economic and environmental sense. Insulation can save the average homeowner about $1,000 a year on heating fuel, she said.
“If people invest in thermal efficiency and reduce the need for oil, they will have a positive impact on greenhouse gases and save money,” Cheney said.
The bill highlights the importance of investments in weatherization programs for low-income Vermonters who rely on the Low Income Heating Assistance Program. Cheney says the state must move ahead with these investments in order to save money over time, especially since the federal government has reduced its support for LIHEAP over the last few years.
The state’s $12.5 million low income weatherization program is currently funded by a 0.05 percent gross receipts tax (which was put in place in 1990) and funding from an agreement with Green Mountain Power as part of a $21 million payback to CVPS ratepayers.
For middle and upper income Vermonters, the thermal efficiency bill sets up a clearinghouse program like Efficiency Vermont for residents who want information about how to get an energy audit; how to obtain loans for weatherization projects; what incentives are available; and how to find contractors to do the work.
A new entity would coordinate the delivery of efficiency services and provide a one-stop shop for consumers with a web portal and a help line.
The bill also allows IBM to pay $55,000 into a “self-managed” energy efficiency program in lieu of paying an efficiency fee on natural gas.
In addition, the legislation sets new residential building energy standards. Homeowners must obtain a Residential Energy Building Standard certificate under the bill.
— Anne Galloway
Editor’s note: This story was updated at 1:40 p.m. March 18.
Clarification: S. 30, in the form that passed out of the Senate Natural Resources and Energy Committee, would mandate that the Public Service Board require conformance with Act 250 criteria for energy generation projects over 500 kilowatts in capacity.
