 Will the House please come to order and members kindly take their seats? Good afternoon Members in lieu of a devotional today, will you please join me in a moment of silence? We have a joint Senate resolution to take up at this time JRS 50 is a joint resolution relating to weekend adjournment on March 29th, 2024 This resolution was offered by Senator Baruch who was read and adopted on the part of the Senate Please listen to the reading of the resolution and house of representatives that when the two houses adjourned on Friday, March 29th 2024 the be to meet again no later than Tuesday April 2nd, 2024 You have heard the reading of the resolution and the question is shall the house adopt the resolution and concurrence Are you ready for the question? If so All those in favor, please say aye all those opposed, please say nay The eyes appear to have it the eyes do have it and the resolution is adopted in concurrence Members we have received a request to read a house concurrent resolution that the house and the Senate adopted pursuant to the consent calendar HCR 145 is a house concurrent resolution in memory of jazz aficionado Ruben Jackson Please listen to the reading of the resolution Whereas Ruben Jackson's contributions to the annals of jazz were noteworthy and whereas Ruben Jackson was born in Georgia Spend his youth in the nation's capital and in 1975 arrived in Vermont to attend Goddard College and Whereas in addition to studying writing at Goddard Ruben Jackson inaugurated his broadcasting career working at as a DJ at WGDR the College's radio station and discovering a love for his the radio medium and Whereas for two decades Ruben Jackson was honored to work as the curator for the Duke Ellington collection at the Smithsonian Institution and whereas his aero light jazz Criticism appeared on the airwaves of national public radio in the pages of the Washington Post jazz times and downbeat and on the all-about jazz website and Whereas years later Ruben Jackson returned to Vermont to teach English at Burlington High School and in 2012 he was reunited with his passion for radio her hosting Vermont Public the former Vermont Public Radio's Friday Night Jazz program for six years 2012 to 2018 and Recordings from the series are now in the collection of the American Archive public broadcasting And whereas Ruben Jackson's mentoring at the Young Raiders project Reflected both his deep passion for the written word and his life as a respected published poet and whereas much of his poetry focused on the challenges of the black American experience and his most recent volume scattered clouds was issued in 2019 and whereas most recently Ruben Jackson who died on February 16th 2024 at 67 years of age and has survived by his partner Jen I. Michelle had worked as a jazz Archivist at the University of the District of Columbia and served as a radio host at WP FW FM in Washington DC Now therefore be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives that the General Assembly Expresses its sincere condolences to the family of Ruben Jackson Jackson and be it further resolved that the Secretary of State be Directed to send a copy of this resolution to Jen I. Michelle Vermont Public WP FW radio and the Felix E grant jazz archives at the University of the District of Columbia Are there any announcements? Member from Montpelier Madam speaker today representative McCann and myself are being shadowed by middle schooler Elena Guadagnio She's a fantastic activist who's been in communication with us Her first exposure was to a with a very dry Capitol bill run through today So I do hope it doesn't sour her on the legislative process, but we're very happy to have her here And I hope you welcome her will the guests of the member from Montpelier, please rise and be recognized member from South Burlington Madam speaker tomorrow is all simmers advocacy day And I would encourage all members who would like to wear purple and then come outside at the State House steps at 1245 for a photo. Thank you Are there any further announcements? member from Guilford Madam speaker tonight is Wednesday night, which means it's farmers night and While we are expected to go late this evening Farmers night is kind of like the US postal delivery service farmers night goes on So while we will be holding we have some really fabulous musicians coming from Wyndham County Becky Tracy and Keith Murphy who are Part of the new trad or new traditional music scene in and they will be two renowned fiddlers with roots and music and Quebec and Ireland as well as dance traditions of New England So the event tonight farmers night will be moving into the cafeteria at 730 And I just want to express my appreciation for the to the sergeant at arms and everyone who's helping And to this to the speakers off the speaker in the office to being so flexible And allowing this to continue tonight. So thank you Are there any further announcements member from Holtney? Madam speaker in our haste to leave the building last evening We I failed to recognize one of our members whose birthday was yesterday So please join me in wishing a happy birthday to the member from Bennington. Oh, happy birthday member Member from Burlington. Thank you, madam speaker just a reminder tomorrow is climate solutions Caucus at 12 o'clock in Pavilion 267 there will be pizza and the focus is hearing from several different individuals who are Part of the Climate Workforce Coalition, which is a group of about 50 or so organizations focused on growing the trades and The jobs for meeting our various climate related mandates. So please come join us Are there any further? announcements Seeing none orders of the day Members we will begin with House bill 687 which is an act relating to community resilience and Biodiversity protection through land use the bill was referred to the committee on environment and energy Which recommends that the bill be amended as printed in today's calendar the member from Manchester Representative bongarts will speak for the committee and effecting the revenue of the state the bill was referred to the committee on ways and means Which recommends that the report of the committee on environment and energy be amended as printed in today's calendar the member from From Corinth representative Demro will speak for the committee and then carrying an appropriation The bill was then referred to the committee on appropriations which recommends that the bill ought to pass when amended as Recommended by the committee on environment and energy when further amended as recommended by the committee on ways and means and When further amended as printed in today's calendar the member from Underhill Representative squirrel will speak for that committee. Please listen to the second reading of the bill H687 an act relating to community resilience and biodiversity protection through land use member from Manchester Madam Speaker By the way for those of you interested in following a section by section or if you want to do it with the same page numbers I'm using I I use the calendar from last Friday March 22nd, but it's the sections that matter more than the pages so last year S100 required three studies to be delivered to this body this December One from the Natural Resources Board to examine ways to make the process work more efficiently and effectively one from the Regional Planning Commissions to figure out how to make land use mapping across regions more consistent and One from the Department of Housing and Community Development To streamline the designation process and to find a way to spread benefits to smaller more rural communities The three studies were cross-pollinated and all involved stating close touch with each other throughout the long Arduous summer and fall The result was three reports that compliment each other and provide a unified roadmap for achieving better planning For both climate resiliency and housing and economic development in the right places Most of this especially the mapping is achieved via a bottom-up process with robust public participation The job of the House Committee on environment And energy has been to flesh out the concepts from those reports and bring the process to life So the bill does four key things It fixes act 250 governance with a professional board That was a record one of the key recommendations from the NRV process It establishes consistency in future land use maps across regions in a process for achieving that goal It has act 250 back away From jurisdiction completely in areas of so-called 1a towns and back away partially in areas of so-called 1b towns that also came out of the NRB report and It streamlines the designation program while making it possible to spread the benefits to smaller more rural communities And that came out of the work of the department as housing and community affairs community development On the one hand all of this is important and designed to make everything work more efficiently and more effectively on the other It's simply the next logical step in an ongoing process of moving our planning and regulatory process From the 20th century to the 21st century Madam Speaker in addition to the really really Frankly amazing work of so many people over the summer and fall Something else happened this summer in July We experienced the third hundred year flood in 13 years in Vermont From Londonderry and Ludlow in southern Vermont to Montpelier and Barrie in central Vermont and Johnson further north Businesses were ruined homes were destroyed Modern modern low and moderate income homes were destroyed the damage once again was well over a billion dollars Talk about environmental injustice The world is changing around us The planet is warming Tree species are dying Pollinators a lifeblood of our food supply are under stress with entire species disappearing from Vermont Our state bird when they'll likely longer exist in Vermont 20 years from now There are no longer moose in southern Vermont Virtually all new homes are installing something nobody even thought about 30 years ago air conditioning Our landscape is under stress We human beings are also under stress both emotional and financial but Vermont may be one of the 50 states best positioned to withstand the impacts of climate change While southern states are going to bake We are far enough north that while our summers may be beastly hot by our standards They will be manageable and we remain 75 percent forested Giving those forests a chance to maintain and tact ecosystems and to slow storm waters despite all the stress That they'll be under because of climate change and Mountain speaker when we want it to we talk about climate resiliency and protecting our villages at the bottom of the mountains resiliency starts at the mountaintop if We maintain those forests and keep our headwaters wetlands and river quarters vegetated and free of development We can attenuate rushing water and keep our downtown safe There's no free lunch here. We can't have it both ways While we are well positioned It's also the case that we've been losing forests to fragmentation according to the S to the US Forest Service at a rate of Around 12,000 football fields a year in Vermont That fragmentation threatens animal species by blocking the travel quarters in which they rely to spread out and mate and find food It threatens plant migration as species will more and more Need to move up the mountain side and further north as the planet warms One thing this summer's floods made clear to all Vermonters is that the status quo is not an option And less we adapt Unless we get real this summer's round of billion dollar devastation is going to happen again and again and Depending on the specifics of the storm events that will happen in different places Including those that have been spared to date State the obvious Economically, it's a lot less expensive to avoid destruction than to rebuild after destruction We humans are also part of the landscape Animals need a place to live and we need a place to live there are elements to what we call Necessary wildlife habitat and there are elements to what constitutes Ideal human habitat this bill focuses on both trying to create a cohesive whole that benefits all species Including us buried in challenges. There is always opportunity We have the opportunity to be one of the state's best position to do well in the face of climate change We have taken steps to reduce our emissions that matters However, under the best-case scenarios Vermont's going to be a different place than it was 20 years ago Or even as it is now We have to anticipate we have to keep our landscape intact so the ecosystems have a chance to survive And we have to create a built environment that is efficient communal and vibrant in the face of this new reality To that end this bill does four big things It fixes active 50 governance by creating a professional board to oversee the administration and operation of active 50 and Puts the board fully in touch with their charge by having it here appeals of jurisdictional opinions and a district commission decisions There are incidentally about 10 appeals of district commission decisions a year Bringing appeals back to the board moves us Toward active 50s roots as a citizen friendly process, which is as history is now proven also significantly faster than the court system Further it allows the board to shape its own program in a way that establishes precedent and guides everybody involved Be at district coordinators or applicants as to how to interact with the program This does not happen with courts and it's therefore one of the reasons no real precedent has been fleshed out Since we made the mistake of moving the board to the courts 20 years ago Second it moves this from the size of the project being to determine for jurisdiction towards not completely but towards a system of jurisdiction being determined by location Specifically it relaxes jurisdiction in parts of downtowns and villages that meet certain prerequisites And it creates jurisdiction when critical natural resources are involved While this is not a housing bill per se it builds on the work of the last two sessions By by relaxing regulation for housing and centers thus setting the stage for the creation of vibrant walkable downtowns It establishes categories with common definitions for regional commission future land use maps The actual process of then determining to which parts of each region these categories apply will come from a bottom-up process Led by the RPCs in each region These maps once approved at the regional level will then go to the new professional board for review and approval in order to ensure oversight and consistency It is these maps that will underpin the notion of tier one areas those with relaxed active 50 jurisdiction and Tier three areas designed to protect critical natural resources and tier two areas, which is everything in between It streamlines the designation program Which confers benefits by creating only two categories center and neighborhoods while same simultaneously creating three benefit levels For a public investment set working upward from towns with limited or no planning and zoning Currently not eligible for benefits, but they would be under the bill to towns with more robust planning and zoning Madam Speaker no bill can solve every land issue land use issue in and of itself This bill doesn't solve the housing crisis, but just like the regulatory release bills We've passed over the course of the last couple years in particular. It will make a real difference It creates a much-needed framework upon which we can continue to build and It is a framework without which it is very hard to make other anything else work This bill improves the governance of the active 50 process If we can't make active 50 work well nothing else matters until we have a truly cohesive Functioning functional governance therefore focusing first on active 50 governance the first parts of the bill Act to 50 was designed to be a locally centered Citizen-friendly process close to the people so they would know that their voice was being heard This this is a theme of this bill you will hear it again and as we get to the regional mapping sections This bill moves active 50 back in that direction But it does so with the firm hand and efficiency of a professional board a little history When active 50 was passed by the legislature in 1970 it had the 10 criteria for review It still has today It had the nine district commissions It still has today and had a body to hear appeals from district commissions called the environmental board The environmental board had nine members a full-time chair and eight citizen members from around the state When appeals were heard the board went to the town in question in part off times to make a site visit But equally important for the convenience of those involved in the process Through the years the process became more legalistic and it was harder and harder for the eight lay members of the board Most of whom had regular jobs to keep up with the workload and thoroughly prepare For hearings in the meantime it became harder and harder to schedule environmental board hearings because those Eight members had lay members had other jobs and all of this made it harder for the lay members of the board to interact Meaningfully with the complexities of the given case In 2004 the legislature eliminated the environmental board and move the appeal process to the environmental court On the theory that a trained judge would be better able to manage appeals and cut to the crux of the legal issues in front of them Madam Speaker Your committee on environment and energy has reached the conclusion that this change swung the pendulum too far in the other Direction it has left the district commissions and all of active 50 adrift Left the process disconnected from the average remonder Prevented the development of precedent to guide the system and left the natural resources board the successor to the old environmental board With a little involvement in the process or the substance of active 50 It has made the process much less accessible and more expensive Especially when it comes to appeals the current active 50 processes about lawyers and expert witnesses in a judge in a robe sitting on a bench It's not about ensuring the involvement of those most affected by development proposals with this bill We seek a balance between the rights of all parties to present their cases within a predictable legal framework and a citizen friendly process And the citizen friendly process active 50 was intended to be We create that balance with two major and connected reforms to the governance of the active 50 process First the bill professionalizes the natural resources board to now to be renamed the environmental review board The second thing the bill does is to establish the environmental review board is the body to hear appeals of jurisdictional opinions Issued by coordinators and to hear appeals of decisions of district commissions This change is directly related connected to the rationale for a professional board By professionalizing the board we make it possible to build a body of knowledge about the issues in the process The members are paid to spend their days the days required to thoroughly prepare for hearings They are professionals who with the help of the board's legal staff will be able to participate fully in the hearings and decision-making process Sending appeals of district commission decisions to the environmental review board instead of the environmental court is about returning the process to its locally focused Roots with the board hearing appeals We move from the height from the legalistic setting and processes of the environmental court to the more informal setting and processes of the Environmental review board sitting at a table at a local Grange hall Equal important giving the board substantive authority over its own program is needed if the environmental review board is deficient is to sufficiently understand active 50 and be in a position to develop effective policy and rules and to effectively administer the program That lack of connection is why the current board is a virtual virtual Irrelevancy that hasn't issued a rule in seven years This bill proposes a full-time chair in four half-time members We do that so when hearing appeals the board will have both a broader more diverse and More local perspective with four of the five members still working their communities and interprofessional fields We also sharply limit the possibility of political pressure through a combination of nominations coming from a newly created nominating committee The five-year terms and the notion of removal only for cause. This is a quasi judicial body Insulated to the extent possible from political pressure now to the bill Again working from the House calendar of March 22nd starting on page 2150 Section one is the purpose section this is session session law section two is statutory and for the purposes of establishing statutory and set intent Sets forth the goals of protecting and conserving the environment of the state Supporting the achievement of goals of the goals of the capability and development plan the conservation and vision goals of the state of the state established in last year's 30 by 30 bill and supporting equitable access to infrastructure section three establishes environmental review board for the purpose of administering the active 50 program and hearing appeals Section a one subsection a one establishes the five-member member board and the chair that will be full time while the remaining four We have time it begins to set forth a procedure for appointing members to the board via an environmental review Board nominating committee, which is established later in this section It establishes both the governor and the Senate and its confirmation rule shall give consideration to the candidates who have experience In one or more of the following areas environmental science natural resources law and policy and development Land use planning and community planning It's that goes on to say that all candidates shall have a commitment to environmental justice Section a 1a retains current language to the effect that the governor appoints the chair and that's a chair will be a full-time position It then adds language to the effect that the governor shall ensure the board membership shall reflect to the extent possible the racial Ethnic gender and geographic diversity of the state And specifically it states that the board shall not contain Two members who reside in the same county. I want to note that Madam speaker There are fully qualified people all over Vermont and especially as it relates to these four half-time members We want people who live and work in their communities from different parts of the state Section a 1b sets forth the requirements that the members will serve five-year staggered terms So that one term will after they get set up one term will expire every June 30 and that as we get the system Up and running initial appointments appointments will be for staggered terms The next section section a 2a introduces the environmental review board nominated committee which will advertise the position when the vacancy occurs The not the nominating committee shall review the applicants to determine which are well well qualified For appointment to the board and shall recommend those candidates to the governor Names and accompanying information shall be confidential The governor from the list derived by the nominating committee and with a review of it and consent to the Senate selects a well-qualified chair and for well-qualified members Next section still in a section establishes the five-year terms and then a vacancy filled Shall be for the unexpired portion of a term so that no matter what happens one term always expires every June 30 True powder moves move a little faster here The nominating process that the only the next thing to notice that Members can be are insulated from political influence by the fact that they can be removed only for cause Next section 2d mostly existing law Allows the chair of the board to appoint former district commissioners to hear a case at the commission level And allows the chair to appoint a member of a district commission to hear an environmental review board case if necessary to achieve a quorum To move along here section 4 sets up the environmental review board nominating committee The committee will have six members to from the house to from the Senate and to from the administration The nominating committee terms will be for two years And members may serve not more than three consecutive terms Set then in the next parts of this section just set up how how that will work and how they will how they'll do their job They'll establish operating procedures of the committee standard application forms etc Sets up the same thing about the what the candidates will the their errors of expertise The nominating board shall ensure that when forwarding names to the governor Individuals possess the following personal attributes. This is similar to the judicial nominating process integrity impartiality work ethic and availability Section 5 provides for the board promulgating rules for hearing appeals and other contested cases Section 6 sets forth the powers of environment environmental review board and the district commissions largely existing law The only real change is to say that the board shall review and approve regional maps and a1 application So that's a beyond hearing appeals one of the things the board will do is review the regional maps that we'll get to later and applications for 1a status section 7 Grants the board the authority to appoint legal counsel scientists engineers experts investigators etc to help with a given case and to help it prepare for proceedings Second sub subsection c says of the board shall hire an executive director who should be a full-time state employee Right now, incidentally the executive director of the nrb is a temporary employee. This would make it permanent Section 8 sets forth the requirements of notice for an application being Filed the only difference from existing law is that the committee is that the commission does it not the applicant So sends out sends out the notice to our joiners Section 10 deals with appeals from decisions of the district commission It strikes reference to the environmental court and makes clear that appeals go to the eboard It also sets the fee for appeals as per which is the same as for the environmental court now The next section within the subsection Sets forth the requirement that only those who were granted party status and participated Partated in the district commission hearing process can file an appeal. This is very similar to what happens now Subsection 3 requires the appellant to file Notice with the notice of appeal a statement of issues Again similar to what happens now Establishes that appeals before the environmental review board shall be de novo meaning starting from scratch With regard to contested criteria and requires that the hearing be held in an in the municipality with a proposed project Located or as close there to if that is not possible This is about bringing the process to the community citizen friendly easier for local papers to cover back to the roots of act 250 sub five I won't go into that Let me step back one moment here and say that in the days of the old environmental board discovery was established by board rule Um Originally there was basically no discovery the parties simply put on their case Then the board began to allow discovery by rule The purpose of discovery is to allow the parties to gain a full depth of knowledge about the case Others will put on it's designed to avoid surprises such as the withholding of evidence then springing it at the hearing By one side it allows for thorough preparation by all parties. So the board hears well prepared cases from all involved But discovery can also devolve into a tactic where by one side snows the other with unreasonable amounts of discovery Intimidating lay witnesses and causing significant expense to the other party This section seeks to strike a balance between the rights of the parties to well prepare for hearing an overwhelming Lay witnesses and the other side with unnecessary discovery So subject subsection a six a allows for the gathering of discovery from expert witnesses Who may provide testimony relevant to the appeal? It also says that expert witnesses witness Prefiled testimony money shall be in accordance with the Vermont rules of evidence So the next subsection down requires that interrogatory served on non expert witnesses fact witnesses shall be limited To the identity witness in summary of each witnesses testimony except by order of the board for cause shown No depositions except by order of the board for cause shown Sub sub B makes clear the prior decisions of the environmental board water resources board Exceptional service precedent and establishes that appeals from the environmental review court go straight to the Vermont Supreme Court I'm trying to figure out what I can skip there. There isn't really relevant Sub sub e sets forth the reasons that an appeal of the environmental review board To the Supreme Court may be allowed including the unreasonable sort of insufficiency of the conditions Says that upon appeal of the Supreme Court the board's findings of fact shall be accepted unless clearly erroneous just like with a court Sub H says that the case shall be deemed complete when the board enters a final decision Meaning no automatic stay Section 11 deals with jurisdictional determinations Meaning when a coordinator or just a commission Rules that it does not need to have have jurisdiction to hear a case It allows for appeals of jurisdictional determinations to the board section 12 sets forth the fee same as it is now for the e-court $295 Section 13 basically strikes references to the e-court Section 14 does the same thing eliminates reference to The actual 50 50 process with regard to the duties and jurisdiction of the e-court Section 15 deals with the environmental review board positions and required appropriation to put those positions in place It would appropriate Here there will be an amendment but from From the Appropriations Committee will appropriate $484,000 to accomplish these positions And as well as to have time positions, I'm sorry to full-time positions To newer staff attorneys section 16 deals with the transition from the natural resources board to the environmental review board Governor shall appoint the members on or before July 1 25 In the terms of the any current member of the natural resources board not appointed to the environmental review board shall expire on that day All appropriations and employee positions of the natural resources board will be transferred to the new environmental review board and The environmental review board shall adopt rules and proceed rules of procedure for its hearing process by October 1st of 26 Section 17 says that the environmental court shall continue to take in here appeals until October 1 26 and That any case filed with the court by that date shall stay with the court and by Definition then any case filed after that will go to the to the new environmental review board Section 18 is largely housekeeping Madam Speaker this concludes the sections dealing with reinvigorating a functional functioning governance structure to the process The natural resources board has become disconnected from the process to the point that there really is no natural resources board There was a chair who was a direct report to the governor The board barely meets because it doesn't have a job. They don't hear appeals. They are largely bystanders They also do not therefore develop precedent to be followed by district commissions and district and district coordinators They develop no expertise. This has left the system adrift An example of this disconnection is that the natural resources board has to appeal a jurisdictional opinion To sue its own staff if the board disagrees with the decision of a district coordinator. That's absurd This lack of authority encourages the coordinators and commissions to go off on their own. This is dysfunctional governance one-on-one We heard testimony to the effect that both the district commissions in the environmental court continued to rely on the Carefully developed case law of the old environmental board. There's a number of sort of famous decisions South Fugui Highland Lodge The environmental court simply does now though the environmental court simply decides the cases on the facts as Presented and isn't thinking about constructing a body of law to serve as guidance to the commissions. That's not what courts do The whole process has stopped Courts do not administer programs or develop policy Making decisions administering the program and developing policy are critical functions Actual involvement in the program by the board develops expertise and informs policy and administration The result of this is that in the absence of continually developed case law The district commissions are left on their own to sort through facts and try to figure out the law This is one of the things that has led to the complaints about inconsistency of decisions between coordinators and commissions The professional board envisioned by this bill will become steeped in the law and the issues and will have the time to Thoroughly prepare for hearings and to think through holistically so that a framework for decision-making can emerge over time This benefits applicants it benefits communities it and benefits everybody in the process The issues being sorted out by the active 50 process evolving over time Housing development in downtown forest fragmentation a change in climate need to be thought through and well implemented by hands-on board Rather than a drift entity without any real role in shaping those important substantive challenges The environmental review board will bring order predictability and efficiency to the process It will position the board to provide guidance to the district commissions Both through its decision-making and through training of coordinators and Commission members by people with true expertise developed through active participation in the process Section 19 takes us into new territory specifically definitions for habitat connectors these are Forest blocks and habitat Habitat connectors connect blocks of habitat That might become this is both for wildlife and plant species that might otherwise become isolated Because wildlife and plants must be able to move between habitats if they are to survive in our ecosystem remain intact Forest blocks are contiguous areas of forest not currently developed for non forest use and Habitat means physical and biological environment in which a particular species of plant or wildlife lives Section 20 amends active 50 criterion 8 by adding a new subsection to protect forest blocks and habitat connectors With an undue adverse impact standard With rules to be adopted by the board for this new sub criterion section 21 Sets forth the proposition that the environmental review board in consultation with the agency of natural resources Shall adopt rules to implement the new 8c. It shall make clear that the intent of the legislature It also makes clear that the intent of the legislature with regard to this sub criterion is to foster fostering development It also charges the board with further defining forest blocks and habitat connectors This subsection also requires this is a theme throughout this bill That the board convene a stakeholder group to provide input before submitting rules to this to bring this section to life And finally the board shall file the rule with Elkar on or before June 15th 2026 Section 22 adds habitat connectors and forest blocks to the maps the agency of natural resources is already required to maintain It just adds those two categories section 23 reduces the agricultural soil mitigation requirement From as high as three to one to a simple two one-to-one under all circumstances if the project in question is related to forest products This is something that came to us from the ag committee and Even though in most cases the agricultural soils The mitigation fee is much closer to three to one or two to one in this case Be for for the for the benefit the forest products industry. We are agreeing to reduce it to one-to-one Section 24 is the so-called road rule this came out of the coalition of groups involved in the NRB study The road rule is designed to foster clustering of development by limiting the length of a single road to 800 feet and to 2,000 feet total between rows and driveways For multiple dwellings before a permit is required in the past Incidentally for a lot for more for almost 30 years There was just a simply an 800 foot road rule We've now moved that to 800 feet with a total of 2,000 feet between roads and driveways section 25 Grants the board rulemaking authority to flesh out the details of the road rule Before we head into section 26 and by the way we are getting there a Pause for overview from here We head into future land use mapping and the notion of tiers 1a and tier 1b Tier 3 and tier 2 We'll get to the details later, but tier 1a is for areas of towns with municipal water sewer and a set of zoning and subdivision regulations along with other requirements Upon successful application appropriate areas of these towns could be exempt from Act 250 This is the first time incidentally that Act 250 on a permanent basis is ever backed away from jurisdiction 1b is for areas of towns with basic planning zoning and subdivision regulations It's a much easier entry level one 1a is Frankly a little harder to get to you 1b is for areas of towns with basic planning zoning and subdivision regulations and Rather than have the requirement of the municipal sewer and water system It requires either water or sewer or soils adequate to maintain a community system So this is qualifying areas of these towns can be exempt from Act 250 for up to 50 units of housing on 10 acres or less This part of the bill these two tiers builds on the work of the last two years when we have also passed legislation to make it Easier to build in downtown Tier 3 establishes a jurisdictional trigger for critical natural resources Likely to be critical headwaters river corridors and habitat connectors of statewide significance Tier 2 was everything in between and it remains the same as now except for the road rule as a jurisdictional trigger, which we just discussed Onward we're getting there section 26 Adds tier 3 is the jurisdictional trigger and grants the board rulemaking authority to flesh out the details Section 27 further defines the rulemaking process for the establishment of tier 3 jurisdiction It is that it provides for a working group to advise the rulemaking which shall include representatives from regional planning Commissions and environmental groups science and ecological research organizations woodland and forestry organizations VHC be the Chamber of Commerce The from Vermont League of Cities and Towns and the land access opportunity board And this the board then the existing natural resources boarders to convene stakeholder group by January 1 of 25 and submit rules by February 1 of 26 Section 28 Establishes the environmental review board will review for approval the maps developed by the regional commissions So this is an important part of the bill Regions spent the summer developing The categories that would be used across all maps whether you're looking at a map from Beddington County or Addison County or Chittenden County You would see the same categories. They'll look differently because they'll result in different placement on maps, but they'll they will You'll be able to recognize what's going on from one one county to the other one region to the other The board shall also produce guidelines for the establishment of the tier 1b area status Section be establishes the board Subsection be the board shall also review future land use maps to ensure that areas shown as downtowns or village centers Planned growth areas and village centers meet the requirements of the designation program subsection C Establishes the requirements for the tier 1b area status as follows that the portion of a town proposed for 1b status Has a town plan is subject to a town plan Permanent zoning and so division regulations is generally not in a flood hazard or fluvial Erosion area and has either sewer or water or soils that can accommodate a community system for compact housing development section 29 Sets forth the requirements for the tier 1a status This is a more exhaustive list a municipal plan. You have to have Flood hazard planning flood hazard and river quarter bylaws a capital budget and capital program permanent zoning a subdivision bylaws that provide good coverage Urban form bylaws historic preservation bylaws wildlife planning bylaws and municipal water and sewer systems And I think it's it's worth noting the difference between the 1b status There will be a lot of 1b towns around Vermont to compare to the 1a, which are going to be your growth centers tend to be your growth centers With a much more exhaustive list of requirements because they're going to be exempt from active 50 altogether Effectively taking over its functions The section goes on to provide for the process of application for the for the board for 1a status And the section also contains provisions for notice of intent to seek tier 1a status And how groups or individuals who live there can participate and or even object to the delegation of 1a status section 30 Requires at the board for the board to publish guidelines for 1a applications by January 1 of 26 Section 31 is largely existing law Except that it adds to the requirements of regional future land use maps the requirement to add Areas eligible for designation under the downtown program. The name will be changed in a couple of minutes here section 32 Establishes the levels of regulatory relief provided in 1a and 1b status areas In section also makes clear that conditions attached to a previously issued active 50 permit must by and be Enforced by the municipality and lester change Where the tier one area is located? Tier 1a area is located Section 33 sets forth the requirements for immiscibility taking on the requirements that would have adhered to an active 50 application For construction or amendment section 34 requires that the environmental review board Ordered before February 15th 2026 issue a report with recommendations on a variety of outstanding issues How to address Active 50 jurisdiction in tier two areas beyond what we're doing with this bill Remember that tier two was largely unchanged the vast majority of the state unchanged by this bill How to address fragmentation of rural and working lands review the effectiveness of ag mitigation Review the effectiveness of jurisdictional triggers review how the active 50 process as well as the agency of natural resources permitting process has been working for Forest processing facilities and review whether and how active 50 jurisdiction over commercial activities on farms should be revised You'll note those Last two relate to the work of the ag committee that we tried to incorporate here to be able to figure out how to make a Couple of things move forward section 35 requires the Department of Housing Community Development VHC be the land access opportunity board and Vermont housing finance agency to engage with the diverse group of stakeholders To identify regulatory policies that incentivize mixed income mixed-use development and support affordable housing production as a percentage of new Housing units that basically to take a look at whether or not inclusionary zoning will work and this report would be due by December 15th of 2024 Section 36 takes us to the third major element of this bill the regional commission future land use maps This is the purpose section for regional planning maps basically to encourage and make it easier to build housing in downtowns I'll call your attention to the last line in section 36, which speaks to the regions Fostering a system that equitably equitably distributes environmental benefits and burdens Section 37 modifies the duties of the regional planning Commission missions in three ways It beefs up public participation Consistent with the environmental justice statute It adds the requirement for the process to consider potential Environmental benefits and burdens consistent with the environmental justice statute And it calls for the process to review and issue comments with regard to proposed transportation projects for consistency with the regional plans and maps Section 38 revives the statutorily established purposes of regional plans by adding a new element Focused on helping communities equitably build resilience to address the effects of climate change Section 39 adds language to the regional plan adoption and amendment process designed to dig deep for public participation In order to explain the process and statutory changes Resulting from this law It also sets up a process for regions to submit a draft plan to the ERB for initial review and comment before starting the public participation process Establishes the review process itself Stablishes that regions can make minor tweaks to approved maps without the need for review and It says that RPCs must adopt regional plans and maps in accordance with this chapter no later than December 31st 2026 RPC testimony incidentally Suggested to us that the work can be most of the work will be able to be done before then section section 40 Adds a natural resources in working lands element tier 2 to regional plans and regional mapping It requires that the maps indicate areas of significant natural resources Including wetlands vernal pools rare and irreplaceable natural areas flood plains and river quarters to the existing list It then requires the regions to encourage preservation of these areas The regions through this mapping now This is just making it more clear the same section goes on to require the addition of a future land use element Locating the categories of land use mapping as follows and this is the core of the work that the regions did over the course of the summer The categories are downtown and village centers which are mixed-use centers bringing together economic activity and civic assets Planned growth areas. These are the densest existing settlement and future growth areas with the highest concentration of population Housing and employment public water and wastewater and municipal transportation centers Village areas. This is more a whole lot of our towns traditional settlement areas or a new proposed settlement area typically comprised comprising a cohesive mix of residential civic Etc buildings walkable municipal water wastewater or and or zoning and subdivision regulations Transition or infill areas. These may be the areas just outside the center of a town But close enough to be served by municipal water or wastewater or plans for the same The idea is to transform these areas into high-density mixed-use settlements or residential neighborhoods through infill and Redevelopment of what may now be scattered development Autodependence trip development would not be allowed in order to create economic viability for these areas in close proximity to downtown Note that these areas can include green fields along rivers that may be flooded if developed This area has the potential and it's designed to allow towns to shift their center of gravity Away from rivers is that if that's what makes sense for them. There's a category for Resource-based recreation areas really scary is and will scare is in particular enterprise areas areas of high economic activity That are away from playing growth areas. These are things like industrial parks Hamlets these are your little villages little village areas Maybe a crossroads a church handful of homes. Maybe a store. Maybe not They're not planned for growth. No water or wastewater. Then there's the your categories of rural areas So to the extent that any of these areas are qualified as critical resources area Resource areas by the ERB. They'll be shown as an overlay on the maps This section also requires the RPCs to map which communities may be eligible for designation for benefits of centers and neighborhoods Consistent with chapter 139 Vapta shall may shall develop and maintain standards and methodology and processes for the mapping of areas eligible for 1b status section 41 Requires Vapta to hire an independent contractor to study the strategic opportunities for regional planning commissions to better serve Municipalities in the state. This is something they requested that we put in the bill And they're going to do this on their own with no additional cost to the state shall review governance Funding programs service delivery Equity accountability and staffing. There's an ump. There's stakeholder groups in here including the League of Cities and Towns the Council and World Development, etc Section 42 requires the regional planning commissions to conduct a robust planning public Engagement process with stakeholders in the public on land use climate change and regional structures That's that will be enacted this year and to educate the public About the changes in Act 250 the regional planning process new state programs River quarters, etc. And it appropriates two hundred thousand dollars for the RPCs for this work Section 43 adds climate resilience of as a purpose of the work of the regional commissions section 44 provides the agency of commerce and economic development with a million and a half dollars for grants to towns and regions to Assist resiliency planning and to identify and plan for resiliency projects to reduce damages from flooding and other climate related hazards The idea is to help RPCs increase staff in order to support municipalities in conducting climate resiliency planning Project development and implementation implementation and hazard mitigation section 45 appropriates a hundred twenty five thousand dollars to the agency of commerce and community development for the purpose of creating a new Permanent full-time position to staff the climate resiliency grants and municipal planning and resilience grant program This is making what is now a limited service position permanent The next section same section also Appropriates a hundred twenty five thousand dollars to fund a full-time permanent position in the water investment division of the Department of Environmental Conservation for the purpose of assisting in the financing of climate resilience projects from the special Environmental revolving fund under 24 VSA chapter 120 Section 46 eliminates the old designation program Section 47 replaces the designation program with a community investment program. There are changes But this is really just a revamping of the program not a complete elimination and or something brand new This section is the definition section Remember that the program now renamed the community investment program is about creating compact downtown's smart streets walkable downtown's renovating historic buildings, etc It's a very popular program that has a lot more grant applications than the department is able to fund The program helps promote community revitalization and economic vitality while preserving the historic character of Vermont's downtown's The community investment board replaces the old downtown board made up largely of the same except for the addition of a member from the Bond Bank office of wreck in the office of racial equity The board will do what it does now award tax credits But the program is being changed to the extent that the board will no longer designate downtown's that will be done by the RPCs There are transition provisions but this is where the real the real work of the With the consultant over the course of the summer was to develop these new steps Step one creates a low barrier entry for villages across the across the state Designation is automatic on approval of the future land use map showing the particular area as a village Benefits include assistance for site-based projects including better places Access to the downtown and village center tax credit program and other programs as may be included in the department's guidelines step two was a mid-level entry for emerging villages to build planning and implementation capacity and Step you know step two has a few more requirements to get there and step three is simply it's really close to the existing Designated downtown program a higher level entry for downtown's to create vibrant mixed-use centers higher benefit set We'll jump to section 48 housekeeping section changing terms like designated downtown to centers Section 49 is housekeeping section 50 Increases the amount of potential tax credits for improvement projects for flood mitigation section 51 Increases the amount of tax credits the investment program may allocate from three million three Three million to five million there will be an amendment to deal on that one section 52 Grants ledge council the ability to properly align statutory references section 53 establishes the act takes effect on passage Except that the new board will start hearing appeals on October 1st 2026 section 19 and 20 dealing with a new criterion 8c shall take effect on December 31st 2026 Providing a long time for the board to engage the envisioned stakeholder process section 26 starts the The start of tier 3 is a jurisdictional trigger for December 31st to 2026 for the same reason not a speaker the committee vote was 8 3 0 We heard from The director center for geographic information agency of digital services wildlife division director department of fish and wildlife Ecologists from the department of fish and wildlife Bureau director of policy planning and research agency of transportation The executive director of the Vermont League of Cities and Towns the chair of the Crosbury planning Commission the executive director of the Wyndham Regional Planning Commission a Resident of the city of Montpelier a resident of East Montpelier The chair of the Bradford Planning Commission the chair of the Westfield Planning Commission Transportation and engineer agency of transportation director of community planning revitalization department of housing and community development general counsel agency of agriculture food and markets senior agricultural Development coordinator agency of agriculture food and markets director of policy and planning agency of natural resources Legislative counsel from legislative counsel chair of Vermont association of planning and development agencies The director of community relations for the Champlain housing trust former board chair Former downtown board smart growth appointee Vermont planners association Commissioner department of housing and community development executive director of Vermont natural resources counsel general counsel Forest and wildlife program director of Vermont of the NRC Sustainable communities program director from Vermont natural resources counsel policy and water program director from Vermont natural resources counsel the executive director of the natural resources board the chair of the Natural resources board the former chair of the natural resources board general counsel the natural resources board associate general counsel the natural resources board Howard, Housing, Historic Division, Department of Housing and Community Development. Attorney from the resident of Bennington, Attorney from Bennington, Director of Environmental Justice and Civil Rights, Agency of Natural Resources, Racial Equity Policy and Research Analyst, Office of Racial Equity, Executive Director of the Otakwichi Two Rivers Regional Planning Commission, Director of Community Development, Mount Oskotny Regional Commission, Executive Director, Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, Assistant Director and Planning Program Manager from the Bennington County Regional Commission, the Executive Director of the Northeastern Vermont Development Association, Partner from Hale Resources, Director, Attorney from Paul Frank and Collins, Chairman of the Montgomery Select Board, Community Planning and Policy Manager, Department of Housing and Community Development, Director of Planning and Zoning from the City of Colchester, the Chair of the District Four Environmental Commission, the President of the Vermont Ski Erase Association, the Director of Planning and Community Development for the City of Montpelier, former Select Board member from Hinesburg, Research Forester, United States Forest Service, Director of External Affairs, Nature Conservancy, Vice President, Otakreek Engineering, Director of Conservation Science, Vermont Center for Eco Studies, Director, Litigation Group in Complex Land Use Development from Towns Rackland and Martin, Executive Director of Vermont Housing and Conservation Board, Executive Director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment, Ecologist from Vermont Conservation Design, Vice President of Government Affairs, Vermont Chamber of Commerce, Former Chair of the District Three Environmental Commission, Planning Director and Zoning Administrator from the town of Morrisville, Ecologist, Wetlands, Woodlands, Farmlands and Communities from Farmlands and Communities and another attorney from resident of North Bennington. Madam Speaker, it's time. This bill has been years into making. It acknowledges and goes straight at the complaints about Act 250. For the first time since its inception, we seek to permanently relax jurisdiction in significant parts of Vermont and it helps prepare us for climate, for the climate change future we know is headed our way. It does not attempt to resolve every issue that could possibly adhere to this bill because that list is endless. What it does is create the new framework necessary for this to work. Act 250 governance is an indispensable ingredient. Consistent regional plan mapping is key. The shift to location based jurisdiction lessened downtowns sets the stage for a lot of housing. New jurisdictional trigger for critical natural resources is key to preparing us for the climate future into which we are headed and a revamped simplified designation program with benefits available to smaller more rural communities. On top of years of preparation, the huge amount of work this summer with broad stakeholder groups, studies often end up on a shelf, not this time. There was a determination underlying this summer's work because this needs to happen now. There is something in this bill for everyone. I would ask my colleagues to think big, to have the courage to think big, to focus on the whole and recognize that this bill emerges from an incredible effort from individuals and organizations with a wide variety of opinions. They came together and agreed on the vast majority of what's in this bill because they know that inaction is no longer an option. Thank you and the committee asked for your support. Madam Speaker, as we heard from the member from Manchester, H687 would make changes to land use regulations, municipal zoning law, Act 250, and laws pertaining to the construction and maintenance of housing supply in Vermont. The bill would also restructure the administration of Act 250 with a professionalized environmental review board or ERB. The bill would further establish programs and special funds for the purpose of supporting revitalization and resiliency efforts. The fiscal note for H687 can be found under the bill's fiscal information tab. Your committee on Ways and Means appreciates the work of the committee on environment and energy and reviewed the bill as amended by your committee on environment and energy. We looked at the fees proposed in sections 12, 47, 50, and 51. And while the bill is expected to have a downward impact on fees of less than $1 million in fiscal year 2027, the committee believes it is possible those fees will be recovered through a larger grand list and the revenue generated by an expanded workforce. The committee proposes an amendment that can be found on page 2381 of today's calendar. The committee's amendment has two instances of amendment. The first found in section 47 regards the step three designation which would also allow the area to become eligible for a tax increment financing district. Since these districts are not yet defined and since any TIF district designation results in a loss of revenue for the education fund, our amendment strikes out this section of the bill. We do look forward to revisiting this issue once the step three designation is fully defined. Our amendment also renumbers the remaining subdivisions to be numerically correct. And our second instance in section 51, the bill as amended by your committee on environment and energy would increase the aggregate annual cap for downtown and village center program tax credits from $3 million to $5 million which would result in foregone revenue to the general fund. Developers who may claim the credit against their personal income tax liabilities upon completion of the eligible project. Typically these credits are sold to banks or insurance companies who may claim them against their tax liabilities. Our amendment would strike out 32 VSA 5930 EE in its entirety eliminating the increase in the downtown and village center program tax credits from $5 million back to $3 million as it is in current law. Madam Speaker, we heard from the following witnesses, fiscal analyst from the joint fiscal office, the tax credit and grants coordinator from the Department of Housing and Community Development, Legislative Council from the Office of Legislative Council and a senior fiscal analyst from the joint fiscal office. Your committee on ways and means found the bill as amended by your committee on environment and energy and as recommended by our committee favorable on a vote of 651 and we ask for the body's support. Member from Manchester. Madam Speaker, my committee met and reviewed the work of the committee on ways and means and voted to find their proposed amendment favorable on a vote of 920 and we thank the Ways and Means Committee for its work. And now speaking for the committee on appropriations, Member from Underhill. Thank you Madam Speaker and thank you to the House Environmental and Energy Committee for bringing us age 687. As a result of a discussion of age 687, House Appropriations Office, two instances of amendment regarding sections 15 and 42. The amendment can be found on page 2608 of today's calendar. In the first instance of amendment subsection B of section 515 is struck. Member, apologies, we're having a hard time hearing you. Can you move your mic up? Thank you. Sometimes I get a lot of feedback too, so I'm trying to find that middle ground. Would you like me to start again? No, just keep it. You're okay. Keep it. Okay. In the first instance of amendment, subsection B of section 15 is struck and a following language is inserted. In fiscal year 2025, 112,500 is appropriated from the General Fund to the Natural Resources Board for the attorney positions established in subsection A1 of the section. Subsection A is retained, which establishes the six positions of the Environmental Review Board to attorneys and for halftime review board members. These positions are not active until FY26. However, funds are appropriated in FY25 in order to get attorneys on board before FY26. The second instance of amendment strikes section 42 in its entirety and inserts a new section 42. The new section 42 appropriates 125,000 from a general fund to the Department of Fish and Wildlife, Wildlife Division for one new permanent classified biologist position to assist the department in supporting the implementation of this act. The House Committee on Appropriations favorably recommends H687 as amended by the House Committee on Environment and Energy and further amended by the House Ways and Means and further amended by the House Committee on Appropriations on a vote of 840. We ask for the body's support. Thank you. And member from Manchester. Madam Speaker, the Committee on Environment and Energy thanks the Committee on Appropriations for its work. We heard the amendment in committee and voted 740 to support the amendment. So members, the first question is, shall the report of the Committee on Environment and Energy be amended as recommended by the Committee on Ways and Means? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it. And you have amended the report of the Committee on Environment and Energy. Now the question is, shall the report of the Committee on Environment and Energy, as amended, be further amended as recommended by the Committee on Appropriations? Are you ready for that question? Member from Berlin, Winnuski. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, while I appreciate the work of the House Appropriations Committee, I rise in opposition to this amendment. Too often we talk about the importance of equity and equity in our work, and yet here we are unfunding the public engagement process for the RPC and making sure that the work on Act 250 and the Environmental Justice Act is in alignment with what our communities want. I understand the need for an appropriation for another position, but wish that we would have kept the funding in to ensure this equitable process moving forward and therefore will not be supporting the House Appropriations Amendment. The question is, shall the report of the Committee on Environment and Energy, as amended, be further amended, as recommended by the Committee on Appropriations? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it, and you have further amended the report of the Committee on Environment and Energy. Now, members, we have multiple amendments to consider to the report of the Committee on Environment and Energy, as amended. And we will start with the member from Starksboro, Representative Elder, and others, member from Starksboro. Thank you, Madam Speaker. And thank you to the Committee on Energy and Environment. May I speak to the underlying bill as well as to the amendment? You may. Just an observation that I think, as a member of your Committee on General and Housing, I wanted to mention here, this bill has a statement of purpose that is 236 words long, which is a good length. None of those words is housing. So I'm going to try to bring a perspective to this that starts with a housing lens. And I hope you'll hear me out. Not just hear me out, but, you know, give it a think. I know you'll hear me out. Five and four instances of amendment. The first one is this. So let's bring our minds back a little bit to last year when we passed S 100, which turned into Act 47. There were some short term exemptions that were put in place that had a sunset on them. The first of these amends what's known as the 10-5-5 rule. Without getting too far into it, it boosted the limit of 10 units to trigger this rule to 25 units. And the first instance of amendment pushes that exemption out six months. This is going to be a theme, a six month extension. So I'll just mention what this does is it bridges the gap until the new tier system that we've just heard about. The representative from Manchester takes effect. Okay. So that's what this does. So this is the first instance. We're doing this for the 25-5-5 rule. So that you can build up to 25 units within five years, within five miles without triggering Act 250 on any of those units. Okay. That's the first instance. The second instance of amendment, another six month extension. And this is for construction of priority housing located in a designated downtown or development district, designated neighborhood development area or a designated growth center. I won't say more about that unless folks have questions, but it's a six month extension. The third instance has to do with the exemption to jurisdictional opinions that was also a part of Act 47. This is another six month extension. And it reads, in order to qualify for the exemptions established in 10 VSA, 6,001, 3A, XI and 3D, VIII, Rome numeral three, you shall request this opinion previously by June 30th of 2026 and now by December 30th. So it's another six month extension. Okay. So it's just, and you've got to have that built still by 2029. There's no change to when it has to be built. So that's the third instance of amendment. The fourth is actually inserting three new subsections. So this is where we get to new law. This is not extending the sunset, excuse me, of provisions of Act 49. This is new language. Some of this language has been considered by the other body. Some of this language was included in bills introduced in this chamber, but for the purposes of 687, it's new. So fourth, we've got AA. No permanent amendments required for the construction or improvements for a hotel or motels converted to permanently affordable housing as defined in 24 VSA 43032. Permanently affordable housing is an incredibly important tool in Vermont. When we make housing permanently affordable, we make it so that that affordability lives with the property and not with the tenant. This means that if another tenant were to take over in the future, they too have the benefit of our state's investment in that permanent affordability. This is an incredibly powerful tool over time, especially when we see the volatility that's come to the Vermont real estate market in the past four years. Some will remember that, you know, during the crash of 2008, Vermont's real estate market didn't see the same volatility as the rest of the country during this last moment through COVID. Clearly, we're not immune. So so these provisions of permanent affordable ability are as important as ever. This basically says that if you are going to take a motel or a hotel that might have been part of our general assistance program, it might not have been. And you already have a permit. Let me stress that you already have an active 50 permit. You don't have to amend it. If you're going to turn those units into permanently affordable housing. Now, what it's not doing is saying you don't need a permit in the first place. This is saying you don't need a permit amendment. Okay. Moving on to be be no permit or permit amendment. So this is no permit, no new permit or permanent amendment. It's a difference is required for the construction of improvements for an accessory dwelling unit as defined in our statues. A lot of folks will know this simply as an ADU accessory dwelling units are always auxiliary to another building. They piggyback, if you will, off shared infrastructure. Of course, they are still subject to state review for the wastewater permit. But in this case, you would not have to get an active 50 permit. This means that if you were to develop, you know, after the sunset ends for the 2555 rule and it goes back to 1055. If you were to develop 11 of these in five miles in one year, you would not need an active 50 permit. Now, we did a similar carve out last year in Act 47 for local zoning, just in case people were remembering that. This is the state law and admittedly this would apply to a pretty narrow series of projects. It would be a project where you would otherwise trigger an active 50 permit, which a lot of residential ADU construction would not admittedly. But if it does, this exempts you entirely, not just for a permanent amendment from the permit. And that's critical because this is some of the most efficient housing we can produce. The wastewater in many cases is there. The lot is there. You don't need a subdivision. The equity is there to secure financing. This is supported by the Vermont housing improvement project, which has been successful. So this is a real area of with his room for, I think, hope and optimism as we look at construction in the state. And so I think this provision would be very helpful indeed. The final provision here is CC. And again, these are all part of the fourth instance of amendment. No permanent amendment is required for the construction of improvement for convert or construction. I think I should say or improvements. Anyhow, no permanent amendment is required for construction improvements for converting a structure used for commercial purpose to 29 or fewer housing units. So let me give an example. Again, this is only if you have a permit. This is not a new project. This is not something new from the ground where you don't have to get a permit. In this situation, you have an active 50 permit. And maybe it's for a widget factory where those widgets are no longer economically feasible to make. And you have abandoned said factory. Or at least abandoned it from its previous permitted use. Now, if you wanted to say, you know what? That would make a pretty good 25 unit housing development. You would not need to get an active 50 amendment. That's what this does. In fact, if you said 29, I gave 25 as an example, but this is 29 or future fewer. If you wanted to go bigger than that, you would need it. You would need a permit amendment. Again, this does not get you out of needing to get a wastewater permit. You still have to do all that. All it does is saying if you have a quote stranded asset that is a commercial permitted building that you would like to turn into 29 or fewer units of housing, you can go ahead and do that without an act to 50 permit amendment. It's the only thing we're carving out here. That is the end of the amendment. And I would just say there are many tools that we could use to try to boost housing development our state. And I think that some of the work in this underlying bill, 687, will do that and does good work to reform Act 250. There are elements that are frankly not good for my rural community of Starksboro, but also understanding it's a big bill with a lot in it. What it doesn't do in the short term is get out of the way of the very development that our constituents so desperately need. It does not get out of the way sufficiently of commercial interests, commercial building owners, be they hotels or be they former manufacturing centers that said, you know what, our communities need housing and we're willing to make the investment. Sometimes a big investment. But what we need is regulatory predictability. What we need to sink our money into this community is the knowledge that it will be received and not drawn out in a year's long process, not having to wait for 2027 because we do need these units now. So with that, Madam Speaker, I thank the body for their consideration of this amendment. Member from Manchester. Madam Speaker, on behalf of the committee, number one, we thank the member from Starksboro for coming into the committee and I would move to divide the question. The question is divisible. I'm sorry, divide the amendment. Yes. Along the lines of one, two, three being heard as one, the first amendment and then the fourth amendment being heard separately. Member, the amendment is divisible in that manner. Would you like to proceed with your vote? So Madam Speaker, having made the motion, the committee, having heard from the member from Starksboro, voted on the first three proposals of amendment favorable by a vote of 11-0-0 and would ask for the body support. Those are the ones that really changed the date. The fourth proposal of amendment, the committee found unfavorable 9-2-0 and I do want to take a second and say that all of the, it may make total sense as we listen to the member from Starksboro in the committee go through the fourth proposal of amendment. There was sympathy, there was sort of underlying philosophical support perhaps for what's trying to be done there, but the committee did not have time to bring in witnesses and hear about one of the things we're always careful about and want to make sure that we understand our unintended consequences. For instance, we weren't able to explore the difference of what might happen in a town with no zoning, no active feature review, no zoning and what might happen under those circumstances. So we, in the end, after a good discussion and committee, thought this amendment is premature. It would be a great thing to work on over the summer and be ready for next year perhaps, but without time to review it, without time to get in testimony from town planners, town select boards and all kinds of people we normally have in, the committee felt it would be unwise for us to move forward with the fourth proposal of amendment. So on that, so the first one, the first three, we voted favorable, 11-0-0, the fourth order of amendment, we voted unfavorable, 9-2-0. I would ask for the body's support accordingly. Member from Corinth. Madam Speaker, your committee on Ways and Means heard from the member from Manchester on the amendment from the member from Starksboro, and we appreciate the member from Starksboro, Starksboro's work on the amendment. Your committee also divided the amendment and found sections one through three of the amendment favorable on a straw poll vote of 11-0-1, and section four of the amendment unfavorable on a straw poll vote of 8-3-1. So members, the question is, shall the report of the committee on environment and energy as amended be further amended as offered by the member from Starksboro and others in the first through third instances of amendment? Member from Starksboro. Thank you, Madam Speaker, and thank you for the committees for taking a look at this. I will say I appreciate the support on the first three sections. On the fourth section, I'll just say these ideas have been on the wall all year. I understand the committee's busy. Ultimately, what we take testimony on is an articulation of priority. And I hope that in future years we may expand the jurisdictional reach of who can think about Act 250 because I believe your committee on housing would be ready and willing to help with that work. Question is, shall the report of the committee on environment and energy as amended be further amended as offered by the member from Starksboro and others in the first through third instances of amendment? Are you ready for the question? If so, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed, please say nay. The ayes appear to have it. The ayes do have it, and you have amended the report of the committee on environment and energy as amended. Now members will consider the second division of the amendment, which is the fourth instance of amendment. The question is, shall the report of the committee on environment and energy as amended be further amended as offered by the member from Starksboro and others in the fourth instance of amendment? Are you ready for the question? Member from Fairfax. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I stand in wholehearted support of this amendment, of the entire amendment, one through four. This amendment respects the conservative work, or the conservation work, that the rest of the bill has established while extending modest exemptions that will provide actual relief in our housing crisis. The exemptions in this amendment are what we heard and what this body supported last year in the Homes Act. Vermonters cannot wait for any housing development. That is why, when the vote is called, I would like it to be taken by roll. The member from Fairfax 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. So the question is, shall the report of the Committee on Environment and Energy as amended be further amended as offered by the member from Starksboro and others in the fourth instance of amendment? Are you ready for the question? Member from Northfield. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I also join in rising to support this fourth instance of amendment. Madam Speaker, we have all worked, I think, the vast majority of us repeatedly focused and talked about the depth of our housing crisis. That includes the fact that we all know that we have people living in our streets, that we have a very high rate of homeless, including unsheltered people, waiting a year is not acceptable for trying to bring a few critical steps forward in addressing that crisis. I urge support. Are you ready for the question? Member from Middlebury. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I just want to point out that your Committee on Environment and Energy, we did have a robust conversation about this, but also on the day that the member from Starksboro brought us this amendment, we did learn that the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Energy was actually that day taking testimony on a bill that contains these very considerations, changes, excuse me, and while, you know, we know they may have merit, we like to do our due diligence and we did find this fourth instance of amendment unfavorable on a vote of nine to zero. And I ask the body to vote no. The question is, shall the report of the Committee on Environment and Energy as amended be further amended as offered by the member from Starksboro and others in the fourth instance of amendment? Member from Berkshire. Thank you, Madam Speaker. These are developments that already have Act 250 permits. This is the fastest, simplest way to build new housing units and to alleviate our housing crisis. I hope people will join me in voting for this amendment. Thank you. Member from Fairfax. Thank you, Madam Speaker. This instance of amendment is in S311, which is a bill that did not meet crossover. So this will be the only instance that this body will be able to vote on this amendment. So I urge the body to vote in favor of it. Are you ready for the question? Member from Burlington. Madam Speaker, having spoken with various Senate colleagues, I just want to share that the thinking is that within Senate Natural, S311 and H687, there can be opportunities to look at where there are synergies and how we bring in additional components that our Committee did not focus on because it is not our jurisdiction. Thank you. Are you ready for the question? Member from Morristown. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of this amendment. Housing is a priority. We claim that. We say that. We should mean that. This is a means to help us increase housing as fast as possible. And I hope the body joins me in supporting this amendment and supporting housing as a priority for our monitors. The question is, shall the report of the Committee on Environment and Energy as amended be further amended as offered by the member from Starksboro and others in the fourth instance of amendment? Are you ready for the question? If so, will the clerk please call the roll? Andrews of Westford. Two minutes.