 Moving right along to S 30 draft 1.1, page one of three. Derek, do you want to post the bill? Yes, absolutely. draft 1.1 of S 30. You also have written testimony in our from Chris, Chris Bradley. On the web page. So, Eric patch with the office of legislative council again here to now look at S 30, which is that the committee strike all. So again, this is version 1.1 because it's the first committee amendment. You'll see that the only change here between this and the previous version that we looked at. I'll get to in a moment, but I'm just bringing it up first because it's actually related to lines three and four. See that the bill has introduced was titled an act relating to prohibiting possession of firearms and childcare facilities hospitals in certain public buildings. I know this wasn't something that came up in committee discussion, but I noticed it as I was redoing the amendment that you may want to change the title. You may want to change the title. If you want to change the title, you don't have to. But given that the bill now. Is limited to possible buildings. You may, I put that language in there to. To change the title in case you decide you want to do that, but I could certainly take it out if you don't. I think it's a good idea to change the title. Absolutely. I think the committee is unanimous on that. Sounds good. So the language of the substance of the amendment is, as we discussed before, it prohibits knowingly present knowing possession of a firearm while within a hospital building. That's lines 10 to 11. Again, modeled on the, the prohibition in schools within a school building that says within a hospital building. So one year misdemeanor. One year. It's $4000 fine. Same language, providing the exemption or exception for law enforcement officers. That notice. The required hosting of the signs that's. Virtually identical to the language in. Court house provision. I think Alice might have had a question. Oh, sorry. I was just wondering. Going back to where you said hospital building. It would include like any kind of a building affiliated with the hospital. In other words, doctors offices, half a block away or anything like that, who's part of the hospital. As long as it's as long as it's part of the hospital, yes. When you say, but what do you mean when you say part of the hospital the physical plant or doesn't include all those other office locations for doctors who are part of the hospital staff. When I say part of the hospital I mean the licensed entity. So, if that license entity includes those buildings I would read it is probably coming under the provision yes, but has to qualify as the licensed hospital. And if that's the case that's one of their buildings I think that's what's covered. Okay. If it's a doctor who is a hospital employee I mean full fledged employee not somebody just has privileges there has an office doesn't include his office or her office. I don't know the answer that serenity. I wouldn't think so. I mean, if you take the hospital is licensed and then you could have people working remotely who are employees. If they're working off site, they're not working at the hospital. So I take hospital building to mean the physical plant that is licensed. This goes back to what's the definition of the hospital and discuss that earlier. I asked the question because the orthopedic division of the Southwest medical center is located. Actually in a different completely different building on a different street than the hospital even though they're, you know, it's often saying it's in the same vicinity. So that the question became is, and I believe the answer was no that that orthopedic area was not because they don't perform surgery there. On the definition, I think it all revolves around the definition. We looked at this earlier. It wasn't really clear. I didn't think it is an Eric, the definition that's right there. Eric does that give any clue to how expansive it is. Now remember the definition is in the licensing statute. So this is all hospitals that have to be licensed. So if you come under this definition, then see it's in the licensing of hospitals chapter and you'll see it like there in subdivision one and then go to primary to the maintenance and operation of diagnostic therapeutic facilities for inpatient medical or surgical care of individuals. Okay, so I mean, we had a discussion about inpatient and for, I think the person on the street and patient certainly means in the hospital. But because when you go for surgery and you have it done in the office that's called outpatient surgery. So I guess it's number one that we would be going away. Do you have a good answer, Senator Nica? Primarily. I hope it does. Thanks. Sure. Let's see where were we. We were on the notice provisions as well so again that's the discussion of who's covered by this which is the tracks back to the definition of a hospital. And again as the prohibition is on knowingly possession of knowing possession of firearm while within the hospital building hospitals required to post conspicuously at each public entrance notice of these provisions in other words notice that possessing a firearm there is illegal. And that's the end of that piece. The hospital piece. Currently the capital complex study is still in here. And this was the study by the capital complex security advisory committee and you'll see that it's been changed to firearms. Remember originally or previously anyway it was a report on weapons in the capital complex and the committee wanted to change the weapons to firearms. So the requirement is that the study committee the sorry the oversight committee. The advisory committee report to the justice justice oversight committee by December 1st see that date was changed as well. It was December 15th originally to provide time in case there's legislation to meet the introduction deadlines and the report talk as required to talk about how possession of firearms the capital complex is regulated past situations into which people have possessed firearms have those those have been handled and make any recommendations if they have any. If there should be legislation to address the issue. And lastly you see the effective date as well as the changing of the title to an act relating to prohibiting possession of firearms within public building within hospital building sorry. I think that's it. Yeah. Mr chair. Yes. I just wanted to since I don't think it got posted on the website I just wanted to mention that we had all of us an email from Stephanie Winters. This is on behalf of Vermont Medical Society physician leadership American Academy of pediatric pediatrics American College of Surgeons Vermont Academy of Family Physicians Vermont ophthalmological society Vermont orthopedic society Vermont psychiatric association Vermont Society of anesthesiologists and Vermont Association of osteopathic physicians and surgeons. That's from the letters from all of their executive directors in support of this provision the hospital provision. It is on the website as well. Okay thank you Peggy. I don't have a website but thanks for. I have one, two, one question in the bill Eric in the schools, it says, no person shall knowingly possess a firearm or a dangerous weapon while within a school building or on a school bus. There should be no person shall knowingly possess a firearm or dangerous deadly weapon on any school property with intent to injure another person. Does that mean that you can possess a firearm on school property, as long as you don't intend to injure another person, or does it mean that is it with. So either two separate provisions there. Please. Yes, exactly as you said Senators here's. And you may recall, I wasn't here when the school statute was first passed but I have been involved in some of the amendments over the years, and that provision I remember is intended to exactly permit that so that, for example, if someone is. I remember the discussion and committee and someone is, you know, driving up to pick up their child at high school and they happen to have a hunting rifle in the car, but they didn't bring it into the building, you did not want that to be illegal. So the possession as long as you're not have it with the intent to injure anybody, you can still have it on school property as long as you don't bring it into the building. And this bill is so one might say that this bill is consistent with the school, with the school building in that the standard is knowing. Correct. Yes, Senator Sears. Yes. I was on education, I believe for that debate of the second part. And another piece was that some school properties in rural areas, people hunt in large wooded areas and they were worried that they might stray on to what was technically school property. And so, again, the idea was in school buildings. Knowingly, and then there's an additional for the for the grounds of school buildings with the intent piece. So that was also designed to have people not be caught up in the net if they were. If they were, had their hunting rifles with them outside. Other comments, questions. I guess we can take the the bill down. There's only four of us. And what's new with Norton protection, my protection's been updated. Okay. That's all I can see right now unfortunately, not you but my Norton actions been updated. I'm really thrilled about it but as soon as I oh, there, I've gotten back to you now that my Norton security is updated. I know you're all happy for me. So here we are. So, our discussion yesterday, I, I thought people kind of expressed where they were on the bill, with the exception of Senator Nica. So I, I think in some ways, that's the missing data pointers. Senator Nica how you, how you are looking at the bill now. I'm thinking about it and thinking about it and weighing all the parts. I do think that I actually like the trespass piece that is in place now I think it. It, it works. If someone bent on terrible destruction will come into the hospital if they want to no matter what unless there's like, you know, screening devices at the door. I know that there are many people who are absolutely very very scared, many of them expressing to me that they're afraid of many of the people who come into in the hospital emergency rooms. They do come in some are dealing with severe mental illness and the staff there have felt they've been dangerous to have in the emergency room and are afraid of some of them. And I think those for those persons and indeed there are many people very stressed out right now due to COVID lack of services that they might normally be receiving and have been arriving at the emergency room. I've been looking at both ends of this I think there certainly are issues that I don't like in it and there are other issues that I know few people feel they need so I'm basing my vote on that to see when I vote. Well, I, I, it's. I guess. So if you had a tie vote. It doesn't pass out. It doesn't pass. Is that correct, Senator Sears. That would be correct. Senator whites not here. Yes, I can wait till Tuesday. Well, I didn't think that dangerous to be since the bill doesn't have to go to some other committee. Right, so in the would not pass would not make crossover. In the event there is a tie. I'm the bill could still go to the floor with the tie vote or even a no vote. Do you have a. I, I think, Peggy, could you see if secretary bloomers available. I, I think I can answer that because I spoke with the secretary. Okay. Yesterday. You, you need a positive vote to have the bill go out of committee. That, that could be a positive vote to report it unfavorably. So in other words, the reason why I ask Alice is. If, if you can support the bill, then it would be three one and it would move for the Senate to debate. And if it was. Well, if Senator White were here and it was to three. I, I, honestly, I would make a motion. To report it unfavorably. And then ask that the people who oppose it vote yes on that, which would take it to the floor with an unfavorable recommendation. Yes, I understand. Okay. I'm worried about what happens to a bill that comes out unfavorably on the floor. I, I, I'm uncomfortable with that, not knowing where folks are happy. Where folks are happy ads. It's really the last time I had an unfavorable vote was the scene. It's not a general affairs committee or the general economic development general affairs committee negatively because Howard Dean wanted to make sure it was dead. Wasn't very. It's not a good policy. I don't know what the, what the Senate would do with the bill if it comes out unfavorably. You mean the body itself. Yeah. I think I recall one being there previously that. Well, maybe it wound up being sent back to committee, but they certainly have been out there before. But that that doesn't mean anything in terms of what I'm going to do. No, I understand. I'm just saying, I'm not sure I want to vote on. Does that leave it open to all kinds of amendments. Commitments. Amendments. I, I, I can't speak for any other senator, but I will say that I've, I've had discussions broadly in the Senate. And I believe the support is there for the strike all. And I believe that there's the will to have it move through on amended. Because if there are amendments that are substandard, I will vote against the bill. Yeah. And I, I will repeat, I support the strike all and would not. You know, be supportive of amendments. I would like to say that I appreciate the changes that have been made to the bill with regard to its limitations now. And putting in knowingly, which is certainly vital, I think, to the bill and. Well, being a people of the state. Alice, can I, can I. I don't know how you'll receive this. I mean it in a already made up my mind how I'm going to vote. Okay. Well, it's. I hear from you. If this chair wants. Yeah, sure. I was just wondering. And again, it's difficult because you haven't expressed which way you're leaning. But I believe this is an issue that should be discussed by the Senate. So my, my primary. Thought is that it would be it would be best to have it somehow come before the Senate. If, if you were to vote the bill out of committee, you could certainly then vote however you please on the bill on the floor. And one possibility might be to make that clear that you were voting it out of committee without commitment about about a later vote. To allow the Senate to take it up. Yes, I'm aware of that. Thanks. Sorry. No, that's right. Good reminder. So, there's a revolution to do something. Well, I have two motions, but I, I. Well, it's difficult if I don't if I don't know where people are. On the issue. So, the first motion fails, you can always make another motion. If the first motion fails, where it is tied. Failure. Then I will ask for the secretary to come down. I did reach out to secretary bloomer. I have not heard back. I'm going to call you. Do you have any. I would like to set contact him by email. Email and then I did try and do a. Like an automatic invite. Is there. I'm going to call. I'm going to call him on his cell right now. Okay, great. Thank you. Yeah. You might want to mute yourself when you call him. Thank you. Senator Bruce, do you have an emotion? I do. I would, I would ask that the committee move the bill favorably. As amended. Actually, I think we should probably move the amendment first. Oh, then I would vote to amend as per the. Committee amendment offered by Eric Fitzpatrick just now. The motion is to. The motion is to amend S 30. As seen in the amendment that we just dealt with. Which would amend it so that you wouldn't have the government buildings. And. Child care any longer in the bill. That would be titled. This is for technical clarification. I don't think you can address the amendment as. From Eric Fitzpatrick. What I meant was the one we just made. The one we just made. The one we just made. And that's what I meant. And that's what I meant. That's what I meant. Eric Fitzpatrick. Committee amendment draft. Graph 1.1 of S 30 dated 311. 2021. 155. Is there any further discussion? Not Peggy. Could you please call the roll? Do you need a second? No, not to amend the bill. Oh, not to amend it. Senator Benning. No. Senator Nica. Yes. Senator. Yes. Senator. Ruth. Yes. Senator Sears. Yes. We have now amended the bill. The next motion would be to report favorably S 30 as amended. So moved. Senator. Ruth has moved that report favorably S 30 as amended. Ready for the vote. Yep. I am. Unless there's any discussion. Hearing none. Peggy, would you please call the roll? Senator. Senator. Senator. Senator. Senator. Senator. Senator. Senator. Senator Denning. No. Senator. Yes. Senator. Yes. Senator Sears. Yes. Motion carries 311. I would like to say I'm sorry that. Senator White was not able to. Is out sick and was not able to be here to vote. She participated very actively. In the last meeting. Okay. I'm going to take a. Presentation of this in our committee. All right. I'm going to take a. Reporting. Who is reporting the bill? Oh. Not me. Senator Bruce. Would you like to? I would like to report the bill. Senator Bruce. And same thing, Eric. I'll wait for you for the. Edited version. to have Michelle, I know she was somewhere else. Actually, not till 1030. All right. If she's available, we'll try to get back at 1020. If she's available at 1020. OK. I'll email her and let you guys. Yeah, that'll be a 15 minute break. Eric, thank you so much for all three bills today. Thank you, Eric. I don't know what it means. But very, as always, very professional. Very well done. Thank you, Senator, I appreciate it. And while the last vote was not unanimous, obviously, I want to do my own thanks to the committee on S3. That's a really important bill. Hopefully, we can get the House to deal with it and provide public service. We'll see you all at 1020. Very good.