 Will the House please come to order and members kindly take their seats? Welcome back. Before we begin our work this morning, will you please join me in a moment of silence? Now will you please rise and join me in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. I would like to just remind members about our agenda for today. Momentarily we will be welcoming the newest member to the body. We're going to be postponing action on reading resignation letters and bill introductions since we are trying to keep this session short. We will then be taking up House Resolution 13. We are anticipating two joint resolutions from the Senate, JRS 30 around Operation of Joint Committees, JRS 31. On the Joint Assembly for the Governor's State of the State, we'll have announcements and then adjourn until Friday. So, our first act of the day is to welcome our newest member, Representative Larry Labor, to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of Representative Lynn Batchelor in House District, Orleans 1. Will the clerk please read the Governor's Appointment Letter for Representative Labor. Dated December 13, 2021. Dear Speaker Kroinsky, I have the great honor to inform you that I have appointed Larry Labor of Morgan Vermont to serve in the General Assembly representing House District, Orleans 1. Sincerely, Governor Phillip B. Scott. The clerk has already administered the oath of office to Representative Labor earlier this morning and he is in seat 142. And the chair announces that Representative Labor has been appointed to the committee on corrections and institutions. We plan to hold our customary seating ceremony later this session for all of our members who are new this biennium. So for now, let's welcome Representative Labor member from Morgan. Members, we have received resignation letters from Representative Savage of Swanton and Redmond of Essex. A resignation letter is entered in the journal on the next legislative day that it is received in our practice is also to read the resignation letter later on that day. However, in the interest of limiting our in-person time here today and because we have plans to recognize our former members on Friday, without objection we will postpone the reading of their resignation letters until this coming Friday. And we currently have over 60 bills for introduction with more on the way. Again, in the interest of limiting our in-person time here today and after consulting with committee chairs without objection, we will postpone bill introductions until this coming Friday. Now members, we have a House resolution to take up at this time. HR 13 is a House resolution authorizing remote operation of the House of Representatives and House committees offered by the committee on rules. Please listen to the reading of the resolution. Whereas the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and in particular the anticipated impact of the highly transmissible Omercon variant poses a health of risk to the health and safety of House members, legislative staff, and members of the public if the House of Representatives and its committees operate in person in the first two weeks of January 2022. Now therefore be it resolved by the House of Representatives that the House of Representatives and its committees shall operate remotely until Tuesday, January 18, 2022. And be it further resolved that the House and its committees shall continue to live stream the remote proceedings in order to maintain public access to the legislative process. Now the question is, shall the House adopt the resolution? Are you ready for the question? Member from Northfield, Representative Donahue. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, when we address this in the rules committee, I said somewhat in jest that I'd like to explain my vote. And Madam Speaker, since you requested that I present this resolution to the committee, it's the body as a whole that will be subjected to my explanation of my vote. Just within the past few weeks, on the brink of our new in-person session beginning, some legislators began to express the need or the perceived need to shift to remote legislating through town meeting or for the first several months or full months of January. It was an urge for caution based on fear without any Vermont specific evidence. Remember, until just one week prior to that meeting a week ago, everything was prepared for an in-person session with confidence and safety based upon the physical changes and procedural changes already adopted after the extended work and health testimony before the Legislative Advisory Committee on the State House which had been charged with that work. So what changed in that one week? The question is not what were the overall risks versus benefits in returning during an ongoing pandemic because that had already been decided. We assessed the critical importance of being here in person to fulfill our duties and the mitigation strategies that were in place and the decision to remain on track to return was settled. The question is what changed in that week? We heard on national news media that the Omicron variant was spreading exponentially but also that it appeared it caused less severe illness on average in particular among those who were vaccinated. Obviously, it is serious illness and death, not case counts that really matter. However, we had new Vermont data as well. In the prior two weeks before our meeting, hospitalizations had gone down by 23% and the subgroup with the most severe illness requiring ICU care went down by 30% but those numbers were not yet able to show the time lag impact from holiday gatherings. Intuitively, a more contagious variant plus expected increased spread from holiday gatherings would increase the threat of serious illness and death among Vermonters. That was the fear factor. The lack of Vermont specific data, however, meant that whether our very high levels of vaccination combined with the lower severity of Omicron will offset the near certain spike in case counts after the holidays. That was the total unknown. Case counts only really matter if they lead to serious illness. So what had changed last week when we took up this resolution? Nothing yet. The critical question is whether a post-holiday case surge will lead to the time lagged effects on hospitalization and serious illness among Vermonters. And this is where timing can be everything. If we waited the time lag after the December 25th weekend for impacts to be evaluated, we would be waiting for today and still not yet have the New Year's weekend impact data. It might have been better, but it might also have been unrealistic to look at data today, assess it, decide on remote or not, and have the appropriate systems flow then kick in instantly. What did seem really clear last week was that reversing course and moving to remote legislating for well into the session without any established evidence of an increase in danger would be a fear-based overreaction contradicting the detailed work of our legislative advisory committee on the State House. The unfortunate timeline, however, does make it reasonable to hold off for two weeks until we know more about how Vermon is faring under a new set of circumstances. Not until town meeting, not for a full month, but for the two-week time lag to see what the actual evidence tells us about any changes in the risk profile for being here in person compared to what that profile was in mid-December when our intent remained to be here in person. That is what the resolution before you this morning states. And for people who want to see it to follow, you can find it on your legislative website under the House Overview tab showing HR 13. The first resolve clause simply states that we will be operating remotely until January 18 and the second resolve clause to continue live-streaming. The language in the whereas clause sets out the reason, and there was an important wording change between the first and second drafts that communicates that your rules committee was clear that there was concern about a potential more severe threat, not one that already existed. The draft whereas clause talked about the highly transmissible Omicron variant as a current risk to safety if we were to meet in person. It was amended to reference the language you see today an anticipated impact. We adopted the change to make it clear that the change was not because the risk-benefit balance had already changed, but because there was an anticipated impact that could affect that balance if we met in person during these first two weeks. A very important component that is not before you in the wording of the resolution is the commitment that comes alongside it. Timing forced our hand for these two weeks, but that will not be true in the future. We will now have the time to see actual data evolve on the effects of both post-holiday and an emerging Omicron variant. Your rules committee agreed and your speaker communicated to the body in a memo on December 30 that the joint rules committee will use these two weeks to hear from health experts and identify the indicators that should be used to assess any potential changes in the level of threat created by meeting in person, and thus any future recommendations. Those will be evidence-based indicators such as hospitalization and ICU bed capacity, community transmission, and our own internal case numbers. These indicators will incorporate the specific features of and mitigation measures in place at the State House in assessing any increases in risk to members, staff, and members of the public. Hopefully that will ensure that we will not again be in this position where fear of a potential risk forces a decision that might not have been necessary at all. I know from conversations with many colleagues how much we share the urgency of returning to in-person legislating. We cannot fulfill our constitutional duties in the way we need to. We cannot represent our constituents as effectively. We cannot fully live out our oaths of office over Zoom. I voted in support of this resolution, Madam Speaker, with reluctance and with regret. This was not an easy decision, but I believe it was the right balance, the right compromise between a potential overreaction and our inability to assess a potential actual threat to health within our timeline for the start of a new session. So I want to conclude by stealing the quote of our librarian in Northfield, because I think she identified that exact same balance when she announced a few days ago the decision to delay the restart of storytime until January 17. The quote, we are hoping that by waiting two weeks we will get past the initial spike in holiday cases and have the opportunity to see how this new more contagious variant plays out in our state. In other words, use prudence, but then gather and use actual evidence. Madam Speaker, your Rules Committee voted 7-0 in support of this resolution, and I ask for the body's support. The question is, shall the House adopt the resolution? Are you ready for the question? Member from Stowe. Thank you, Madam Speaker. And thank you to the Rules Committee and the Joint Rules Committee for doing this work throughout this challenging time, and I certainly appreciate it. That said, I rise in opposition to this resolution. I understand and appreciate the risks involved in meeting in person. Again, during this challenging time, I do not, though, believe those risks outweigh the importance of developing critical public policy that will govern the lives of her mentors in person. Every day I see restaurant and hospitality, retail and grocery workers, employees working, teachers and staff are going to work, kids are going to school, but we're telling them that we can't go to work. I think this sends the wrong message to the people of Vermont again at this very challenging time during which there is a lot of anxiety. We have protocols in place here in this building, vaccinate, wear masks, testing. All of the precautions are in place. In my view, Madam Speaker, we should be meeting in person. Zoom legislating is bad. It's bad for Vermont and bad for Vermonters. In my view, there is far too much done behind the scenes that does not get the scrutiny of the press, the public, the minority parties. Vermonters deserve better. Just because we can work remotely doesn't mean we should work remotely. Thank you, Madam Speaker. The question is, shall the House adopt its resolution? Are you ready for the question? Member from Dover. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I rise and to say that I will reluctantly support this resolution today. And that is out of respect for you, Madam Speaker, and the work that you have done, the work that the staff here has done to scramble last minute to put us here and to allow us to go back remotely. Like the member from Stowe, I do not believe that we should be legislating remotely. And if we have to do so, as we have shown that we can, we should be really minimizing what we are taking up. This session, we will be taking up issues related to changing our Constitution, to women's reproductive freedom, to a number of very serious issues. In addition, while we are not feeling safe to be here in this building, our kids and our teachers are in theirs. And we have some very important issues around education finance, teacher pensions that we need to take up. And we should be doing that in person, Madam Speaker. I cannot say enough about the work that you, the leadership team, the staff have done to prepare this building to be safe for members to participate here and to allow us to have a hybrid option where folks can also participate remotely. And so again, Madam Speaker, out of deference to you and the work that has gone into allowing us to participate remotely, I am going to support this today, but it will be the last time. Thank you. The question is, shall the House adopt the resolution? Are you ready for the question? Member from Rutland Town. Madam Speaker, roll call. The member from Rutland Town requests that when the vote is taken, it be taken by roll, as the member sustained. The member is sustained. When the vote is taken, it will be taken by roll. The question is, shall the House adopt the resolution? Are you ready for the question? If so, member from Orange? Orange. Thank you, Madam Speaker. As I sat here this morning for roughly half hour, I saw our entire body communicate with each other. Not one person seemed scared. There was laughing. There was people going out of their way to communicate and to go over to the different sides of the aisle. I didn't see fear. I didn't see people socially distancing. And quite frankly, every single member seated here today ran during a pandemic, asked to be elected during a pandemic. You're going to work during a pandemic. Are you ready for the question? Member from Chittenden. Well, I was... I'm sorry. I saw you first, member. Can you remind me, your town member? Enosburg. Enosburg. Thank you, member from Enosburg. The floor is yours. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I am grateful for all of the work that this body has done during this pandemic to maintain the safety of Vermont. But this resolution smacks of disrespect and misuse privilege. This body is with this resolution implying that we are more important than every other Vermonter who is at work and at school right now. The very same Vermonters that have been working to this pandemic with the best protections we had to offer. And sometimes that was only a mask. We now have vaccinations, masks, and changes to behavior that have become habit. It is a double standard to use our privilege today to push to remote legislation while the rest of Vermont is at work and that we are telling them it is safe to be at work, but not safe for us. It is either safe enough for all of Vermont or it's not safe for any of us. And to exempt ourselves at the highest, is the highest level of elitism. It screams let them eat cake if ever anything has. Let us take every precaution to show up to work and to show up for Vermonters and be the legislature that they deserve and are constitutionally guaranteed. Thank you. Member from Chittenden. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Not to repeat some of the sentiments that have been shared thus far, but I too want to see us get back in person just like we are today. There are multitude of reasons why meeting in person lead to better legislation. Opportunities to better understand the nuances and conversations and committees are on the floor. Less opportunity to multitask when you're looking at a computer screen. And Madam Speaker, I've been guilty of that at times. It does not allow you sometimes to have your full focus on what someone else is saying. So I do want to get back in session ASAP. However, I will support this resolution. I appreciate the work of you, Madam Speaker, and the minority leader for coming together and having all seven members of the House Rules Committee support this resolution. It's for two weeks. We're going to revisit in my support in two weeks may change unless the sky has fallen. So, Madam Speaker, I will support the resolution and I urge other members to support it. It's the first two weeks of the session, which typically doesn't mean we pass a lot of things in those two weeks. Thank you. The question is, shall the House adopt the resolution? Are you ready for the question? Member from Hartman. I share the sentiment held by, I believe, most of us that we, the profound disappointment that we can't be in person at this point. I am on the Rules Committee and I did support the resolution. I would say reluctantly, but I recognize it as a need in moving forward. While it is certainly true we are not able to legislate at our best remotely, we do have the tools to legislate effectively. It's not the best situation, but it's what we have. And I would like to take an opportunity to really acknowledge our technology, our information technology staff or what they have done to prepare us not only to be in person, but to continue remotely. And I would also add that I believe Remonters at this point have unprecedented access to our activities. If you think about the past committee, proceedings were recorded and they were audio recordings only and they were accessible if someone requested them. Now they're streamed live video accessible to anyone in the world. Our sessions here are recorded and are being streamed and are accessible to anyone in the world. So we do have unprecedented access. We are not operating in a situation where Remonters don't know what we're doing. So while it's not ideal, let's take the two weeks. I support the resolution and let some hopefully be back very soon for in-person legislating. Are you ready for the question? If so, the clerk shall commence to call the roll. Aki of Middletown Springs. Two minutes. Remind members that we are in the middle of a roll call vote. Members and guests are reminded that the use of electronic devices and passing of notes and conversation during a roll call is prohibited. Please answer and allow a clear voice so the clerk may accurately record your vote. The question is shall the house adopt the resolution? Will the clerk please continue to call the roll? Ansel of Calis. Anthony of Berry City. Erison of Weathersfield. Austin of Colchester. Bartholomew of Heartland. Beck of St. Johnsbury. Arong of Regens. Black of Essex. Bloomley of Burlington. Bongart of Manchester. Boslin of Westminster. Brady of Williston. Brennan of Colchester. Briglin of Thutford. Brown of Richmond. Brownella Pownell. Brumstead of Shelburne. Burdett of West Rutland. Burke of Brattleboro. Burroughs of West Windsor. Campbell of St. Johnsbury. Canfield of Fairhaven. Chase of Colchester. Christie of Hartford. China of Burlington. Coffey of Guilford. Colburn of Burlington. Colson of Winooski. Conlon of Cornwall. Copeland-Hanses of Bradford. Corkren of Bennington. Cordes of Lincoln. Coupoli of Rutland City. Dickinson of St. Albans Town. Dolan of Essex. Dolan of Weathersfield. Donahue of Northfield. Donnelly of Hyde Park. Durfee of Shaftesbury. Elder of Starksboro. Emmons of Springfield. Fagan of Rutland City. Feltas of Linden. Gannon of Wilmington. Goldman of Rockingham. Ghostland of Northfield. Gratt of Moortown. Graham of Williamstown. Gregoire of Fairfield. I'm sorry, Gregoire of Fairfield. Thank you. Hango of Berkshire. Harrison of Chittenden. Helm of Fairhaven. Higley of Lowell. Hooper of Montpelier. Hooper of Randolph. Hooper of Burlington. Houghton of Essex. Howard of Rutland City. James of Manchester. Jerome of Brandon. Jessup of Middlesex. Kalaki of South Burlington. Kimball of Woodstock. Kitzmiller of Montpelier. Kornheiser of Brattleboro. Labour of Morgan. Leclerc of Berrytown. Lalonde of South Burlington. Lanford of Regens. Lafave of Newark. Lafave of Orange. Lefler of Venusburg. Lippert of Hinesburg. Long of Newfane. Mark of Coventry. Martell of Waterford. Martin of Franklin. Maslin of Thetford. Matthos of Milton. McCarthy of St. Alvin City. McCormick of Burlington. McCoy of Holtney. McCullough of Williston. McFawn of Berrytown. Morgan L. of Milton. Morgan M. of Milton. Morris of Springfield. Morris C. of Bennington. Rolicky of Putney. Mulvaney Stanek of Burlington. Murphy of Fairfax. Nicole of Ludlow. Nigro of Bennington. Norris of Sheldon. Norris of Shorham. Not of Rutland City. Noyes of Wolkett. O'Brien of Tunbridge. Odie of Burlington. Page of Newport City. Gala of Londonderry. Polacic of Milton. Parsons of Newbury. Partridge of Wyndham. Pat of Worcester. Pearl of Danville. Peterson of Clarendon. Pugh of South Burlington. Rachaelson of Burlington. Rogers of Waterville. Rosenquist of Georgia. Sackowitz of Randolph. Shy of Middlebury. Sherman of Stowe. Seymour of Sutton. Shawson of Stowe. Shy of Middlebury. Sherman of Stowe. Seymour of Sutton. Shaw of Pittsburgh. Sheldon of Middlebury. Sebelia of Dover. Sims of Craftsbury. Small of Wienewski. Smith of Derby. Smith of New Haven. Squirrel of Underhill. Stebbins of Burlington. Stevens of Waterbury. Strong of Albany. Sullivan of Dorset. Supernada Barnard. Taylor of Colchester. Taranzini of Rutlandtown. Tilt of Jericho. Tolino of Brattleboro. Toof of St. Albans Town. Townsend of South Burlington. Triano of Stannard. Vihovsky of Essex. Woltz of Berry City. Webb of Shelburne. White of Bethel. White of Hartford. Whitman of Bennington. Williams of Granby. Wood of St. Albans. Wittman of Bennington. Wittman of Bennington. Wittman of Bennington. Wittman of Bennington. Wittman of Bennington. Wittman of Bennington. Williams of Granby. Wood of Waterbury. Yacovoni of Morristown. Yantachka of Sherlock. Falk of Chester. Brady of Williston. Bronelle of Pownell. Burdett of West Rutland. Christie of Hartford. Cina of Burlington. Dickinson of St. Albans Town. Dolan of Essex. Howard of Rutlandtown. Dolan of Essex. Howard of Rutland City. Martin of Franklin. McCarthy of St. Albans City. McCormick of Burlington. McFawn of Berry Town. Morrissey of Bennington. Mulvaney Stannock of Burlington. Sims of Crosbury. Smith of New Haven. Stebbins of Burlington. Stevens of Waterbury. Tiffin of St. Albans. Stevens of Burlington. Stevens of Waterbury. Till of Jericho. Behovsky of Essex. Yantachka of Charlotte. For purposes of explanation, member from Williston. I voted for HR13 with the intention of avoiding not creating a legislative anus horribilis. Member from Burlington. Madam Speaker, the legislature is in the unique position of drawing representatives from every single corner of Vermont. Each of us represents 4,000 or 8,000 Vermonters. I voted yesterday based on the best advice we have to protect all of the more than 624,000 Vermonters we represent. Member from Albany. Thank you Madam Speaker. Two weeks to flatten the curve was a year and a half ago. And our constituents here in person without restrictions. And member from Granby. Risk factor. Member, can you please use your microphone? Yes. Voting yes. Not because I'm concerned about the risk factor. I'm voting yes to show my respect to those who have a concern. The state of Vermont has spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayers' money to get here. God bless the people with a plan, diagram, measure, coordinate, move connected and reconnected for hours and days on end to make this a safe working environment. I look forward to getting back to the State House on the 18th day of this month to do the work I was elected to do at a wedding that best serves the people. Member from Fairfax. Fairfield. Madam Speaker, may I explain my vote? You may. Let's see if I can handle this here. I voted yes out of respect for minority leadership who work to achieve compromise. However, we must not continue to hold this body above those we represent. Those who go to work every day, including those who work around populations. This is especially true given the extraordinary efforts of leadership to ensure that our workplace is safe. I will not vote to extend remote legislation in the future. Thank you. Listen to the results of your vote. Those voting yes, 106. Those voting no, 19. And you have adopted the resolution. Now members, we have two joint resolutions that have arrived from the Senate. You can read those online. The clerk emailed those out at 10 20 to a N. And that is JRS 30 and JRS 31 with that, we have a joint resolution to take up at this time. JRS 30 is a joint resolution relating to amending temporary joint rule 22 a it was offered by Senator Ballant and was read and adopted by the Senate. Please listen to the reading of the resolution. JRS 30 resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives that temporary joint rule 22 a is amended to read as follows. Rule 22 a emergency rule regarding joint committee meetings subsection a the joint rules committee is vested with the authority to permit any joint committees of the Vermont legislature including itself and conference committees to meet and vote electronically as the joint rules committees determines appropriate if necessary the joint rules committee may make this authorization remotely in conformity with this rule. Subsection B the authority of the joint rules committee under this rule 22 a terminates on January 18 2022. Subsection C not withstanding the provisions of sub subsection B of this rule if the governor thereafter reissues capacity restrictions at gatherings and events or requires masks and physical distancing in response to COVID-19 the joint rules committee is again authorized to meet remotely and to permit any joint committees of the legislature to meet and vote electronically as the joint rules committee determines appropriate. Now the question is shall the house adopt the resolution in concurrence are you ready for the question if so those in favor please say aye all those opposed please say nay. dyes appear to have it dyes do have it and you have adopted the resolution in concurrence now we have one final joint resolution to take up at this time JRS 31 is a joint resolution to provide for a joint assembly to receive the state of the state message from the governor it was offered by senator Ballant and was read and adopted by the senate please listen to the reading of the resolution resolved by the senate and house of representatives that the two houses meet in joint assembly on Wednesday January 5th 2022 at 2 o'clock in the afternoon to receive the state of the state message from the governor and be it further resolved that the joint assembly shall be concurrently conducted electronically such that members of the joint assembly may participate as permitted by the respective chambers now the question is shall the house adopt the resolution in concurrence are you ready for the question if so all those in favor please say aye all those opposed please say nay dyes appear to have it dyes do have it and you have adopted the resolution in concurrence that completes our business for today are there any announcements there is a brief one there are none so members today we gavel in for the start of our 2022 legislative session and continue the work after last year's momentous session unfortunately with COVID case counts at record highs we are beginning our legislative work remotely which I know is disappointing to many we will continue to monitor the spread of COVID-19 in Vermont and hear from health and science experts that we can best return to the state house safely however that will not deter us from doing important work that Vermont is in all 14 counties are counting on in order to recover from this pandemic and build a more resilient equitable communities across our state I want to give a big thank you to all of our staff for all the time and effort that you put in that you have done and you continue to do to support us and the legislative branch the staff keeps the whole process moving forward and we couldn't do it without all of you thank you to all of you for coming in to get these important votes done so we can continue to work a remote work environment and not let this pandemic hinder the job in front of all of us I will continue to update you all and please feel free to reach out to my office if you ever need anything we will get through this together and I look forward to working with all of you and I would be remiss if I did not take this opportunity to remind you that you have until Wednesday January 12th to get co-sponsors for bills and approve them for introduction with that please be well and stay safe member from Pultney can you please offer us a motion to adjourn until Friday January 7th at 9 30 a.m. Madam Speaker I make a motion this body stand in adjournment until Friday January 7th 2022 at 9 30 a.m. you have heard the motion are you ready for the question if so all those in favor please say aye all those opposed please say nay the ayes do have it and we are adjourned until Friday at 9 30 a.m.