Download this document in MS Word 97 format

Journal of the House

________________

THURSDAY, MARCH 2, 2000

At nine o'clock minutes in the forenoon the Speaker called the House to order.

Devotional Exercises

Devotional exercises were conducted by Reverend Wayne Jones of the United Methodist Church in Northfield.

Message from the Senate

A message was received from the Senate by Mr. Marshall, its Assistant Secretary, as follows:

Mr. Speaker:

I am directed to inform the House that the Senate has considered joint resolutions originating in the House of the following titles:

J.R.H. 192. Joint resolution in memory of Roberta Haynes.

J.R.H. 197. Joint resolution honoring the contributions of Welch-Americans to the State of Vermont.

And has adopted the same in concurrence.

Bill Referred to Committee on Appropriations

H. 310

House bill, entitled

An act relating to tobacco use prevention, cessation and control, and the master settlement agreement;

Appearing on the Calendar, carrying an appropriation, under rule 35a, was referred to the committee on Appropriations.

Bill Referred to Committee on Ways and Means

H. 691

House bill, entitled

An act relating to the unorganized towns and gores of Essex County;

Appearing on the Calendar, affecting the revenue of the state, under the rule, was referred to the committee on Ways and Means.

Bill Referred to Committee on Appropriations

H. 770

House bill, entitled

An act relating to improving adult basic education services;

Appearing on the Calendar, carrying an appropriation, under rule 35a, was referred to the committee on Appropriations.

Committee Bills Introduced

House Committee bills of the following titles were severally introduced, read the first time and, under the rule, placed on the Calendar for notice tomorrow:

H. 844

House bill, entitled

An act relating to workers' compensation;

H. 845

House bill, entitled

An act relating to standards for disclosures regarding the retail sale of electricity;

H. 846

House bill, entitled

An act relating to governance and policies regarding technical centers and workforce development centers;

H. 847

House bill, entitled

An act relating to civil unions;

H. 848

House bill, entitled

An act relating to zoning of registered or licensed family child care homes.

Joint Resolutions Adopted

Joint resolutions of the following titles were severally taken up and adopted on the part of the House.

J. R. H. 198

Joint resolution urging the United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA/APHIS) and the Vermont Department of Agriculture, Food and Markets to expedite removal of the quarantine imposed on two Vermont sheep flocks located in Warren and Greensboro.

J. R. H. 199

Joint resolution in memory of Arthur Joseph "Art" Beauregard of Mt. Tabor.

J. R. H. 200

Joint resolution congratulating David Bradshaw for 21 years of exemplary service on the Chelsea school board.

Third Reading; Bill Passed

H. 170

House bill, entitled

An act relating to the effects of outstanding resource waters' designation and stream reclassification, and relating to the effects of state permits on the ability to convey real property.;

Was taken up, read the third time and passed.

Bill Amended, Read Third Time and Passed

H. 331

House bill, entitled

An act relating to domestic animals on land or premises of another;

Was taken up and pending third reading of the bill, Reps. Flory of Pittsford, Gervais of Enosburg Falls and Stevens of Wells River moved to amend the bill as follows:

On page 1, line 16, in Sec. 1, section 3345 of Title 20, after the word "animal" by inserting the words "or domestic fowl" and after the word "section" by striking the following: "1151(2)" and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "1151"

Which was agreed to on a Division vote. Yeas, 63. Nays, 16.

Thereupon, the bill was read the third time and passed with a title amendment under Rule 41, to read as follows:

AN ACT RELATING TO DOMESTIC ANIMALS AND FOWL ON LAND OR PREMISES OF ANOTHER

Third Reading; Bill Passed

H. 645

House bill, entitled

An act relating to state police dispatching districts;

Was taken up and pending the question, Shall the bill pass? Rep. Kreitzer of Rutland City demanded the Yeas and Nays, which demand was sustained by the Constitutional number. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll and the question, Shall the bill pass? was decided in the affirmative. Yeas, 143. Nays, 0.

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Alfano of Calais

Allard of St. Albans Town

Anderson of Woodstock

Angell of Randolph

Aswad of Burlington

Atkins of Winooski

Baker of West Rutland

Barbieri of Wallingford

Barney of Highgate

Blanchard of Essex

Bourdeau of Hyde Park

Bouricius of Burlington

Bristol of Brattleboro

Brooks of Montpelier

Brown of Walden

Buckland of Newport Town

Carmolli of Rutland City

Clark of St. Johnsbury

Cleland of Northfield

Colvin of Bennington

Corren of Burlington

Costello of Brattleboro

Crawford of Burke

Cross of Winooski

Dakin of Colchester

Darrow of Newfane

Darrow of Dummerston

Deen of Westminster

DePoy of Rutland

Deuel of West Rutland

Dominick of Starksboro

Doyle of Richmond

Emmons of Springfield

Flaherty of South Burlington

Flory of Pittsford

Follett of Springfield

Fox of Essex

Freed of Dorset

Fyfe of Newport City

Gervais of Enosburg

Ginevan of Middlebury

Gray of Barre Town

Gretkowski of Burlington

Hathaway of Barton

Heath of Westford

Helm of Castleton

Hingtgen of Burlington

Hoag of Woodford

Holmes of Bethel

Hooker of Rutland City

Hube of Londonderry

Hudson of Lyndon

Hummel of Underhill

Hyde of Fayston

Johnson of Canaan

Jordan of Middlesex

Kainen of Hartford

Keenan of St. Albans City

Kehler of Pomfret

Kinsey of Craftsbury

Kitzmiller of Montpelier

Koch of Barre Town

Krasnow of Charlotte

Krawczyk of Bennington

Kreitzer of Rutland City

LaBarge of Grand Isle

Lafayette of Burlington

Larocque of Barnet

Larrabee of Danville

Lehman of Hartford

Levin of Hartland

Lippert of Hinesburg

Little of Shelburne

Livingston of Manchester

Mallary of Brookfield

Marron of Stowe

Maslack of Poultney

Masland of Thetford

Mazur of South Burlington

Mazzariello of Rutland City

McGrath of Ferrisburgh

McNamara of Burlington

Milkey of Brattleboro

Miller of Shaftsbury

Milne of Washington

Molloy of Arlington

Morrissey of Bennington

Mullin of Rutland Town

Neiman of Georgia

Nitka of Ludlow

Nuovo of Middlebury

O'Donnell of Vernon

Osman of Plainfield

Palmer of Pownal

Paquin of Fairfax

Parizo of Essex

Partridge of Windham

Peaslee of Guildhall

Pembroke of Bennington

Perry of Richford

Pike of Mendon

Poirier of Barre City

Postman of Brownington

Pugh of South Burlington

Quaid of Williston

Randall of Bradford

Richardson of Weathersfield

Rivero of Milton

Robb of Swanton

Rogers of Castleton

Rusten of Halifax

Schaefer of Colchester

Schiavone of Shelburne

Seibert of Norwich

Severance of Colchester

Sherman of St. Johnsbury

Smith of New Haven

Smith of Sudbury

Starr of Troy

Steele of Waterbury

Stevens of Newbury

Suchmann of Chester

Sullivan of Burlington

Sweaney of Windsor

Sweetser of Essex

Symington of Jericho

Towne of Berlin

Tracy of Burlington

Valsangiacomo of Barre City

Vincent of Waterbury

Vinton of Colchester

Voyer of Morristown

Waite of Pawlet

Weiss of Northfield

Westman of Cambridge

Wheeler of Burlington

Willett of St. Albans City

Winters of Williamstown

Wisell of Bristol

Wood of Brandon

Woodward of Johnson

Young of Orwell

Zuckerman of Burlington

Those who voted in the negative are:

None

Those members absent with leave of the House and not voting are:

Edwards of Swanton

Houston of Ferrisburgh

Howrigan of Fairfield

Mackinnon of Sharon

Metzger of Milton

Sheltra of Derby

Bill Read Second Time; Third Reading Ordered

H. 839

House bill entitled

An act relating to municipal conflict of interest policies;

Having appeared on the Calendar one day for notice, was taken up, read the second time and third reading ordered.

Bill Read Second Time;

Bill Amended and Third Reading Ordered

H. 840

House bill entitled

An act relating to unclaimed evidence of a fish and wildlife violation;

Having appeared on the Calendar one day for notice, was taken up, read the second time and pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Rep. LaBarge of Grand Isle moved to amend the bill as follows:

First: On page 2, lines 3 through 7, by striking subsection (c) in its entirety and inserting in lieu thereof the following:

(c) Written notice may be delivered personally or by mail. For property confiscated prior to January 1, 1999, mailed written notice may be delivered by first class mail and shall be deemed received three days after mailing by the department. For property confiscated on or after January 1, 1999, mailed written notice shall be delivered by return receipt requested mail. Written notice that is mailed shall be sent to the defendant at the address indicated on the citation on which the seizure was based.

Second: On page 3, line 2, in subsection (g), after the words "is unknown" by adding the following: "or mail is returned undeliverable", which was agreed to and third reading ordered.

Bill Read Second Time; Third Reading Ordered

H. 841

House bill entitled

An act relating to administrative rule-making procedure;

Having appeared on the Calendar one day for notice, was taken up, read the second time and third reading ordered.

Bill Amended; Third Reading Ordered

H. 830

Rep. Kitzmiller of Montpelier, for the committee on Health and Welfare, to which had been referred House bill, entitled

An act relating to guardianship services for people with mental retardation;

Reported in favor of its passage when amended by striking all after the enacting clause and inserting in lieu thereof the following:

Sec. 1. 18 V.S.A. chapter 215 is amended to read:

CHAPTER 215. *[PROTECTIVE]* GUARDIANSHIP SERVICES FOR *[MENTALLY RETARDED PERSONS]* PEOPLE WITH MENTAL RETARDATION

§ 9301. POLICY

It is the policy of the state of Vermont to assure that *[mentally retarded]* citizens *[who are not residents of state schools or hospitals]* with mental retardation receive such *[supervision,]* protection and assistance as is necessary to allow them to live safely within the communities of this state. In furtherance of this policy, this *[Vermont protective services for mentally retarded persons ]* act is enacted to permit the supervision of those *[mentally retarded persons]* individuals who are unable to *[fully]* provide for their own needs due to mental retardation and to protect such persons from violations of their human and civil rights. It is the purpose of this chapter to limit the state's *[supervision]* guardianship of *[mentally retarded persons]* people with mental retardation who are living in the community to the extent necessary to ensure their safety and well-being.

§ 9302. DEFINITIONS

The words and phrases in this chapter shall be defined as follows:

(1) *["Mentally retarded person"]* "Person with mental retardation" means any person who has been diagnosed as having significantly subaverage intellectual functioning which has been manifested prior to the age of *[19]* 18 and which exists concurrently with deficits in adaptive behavior, as defined in regulations of the department of developmental and mental health services.

(2) "Commissioner" means the commissioner of developmental and mental health services *[unless a different commissioner within the agency of human services is designated by the secretary of human services]*.

(3) "Near relative" means a spouse, parent, step-parent, brother, sister or grandparent.

(4) "Interested person" means a responsible adult who has a direct interest in a *[mentally retarded]* person with mental retardation and includes, but is not limited to, the *[mentally retarded]* person with mental retardation, a near relative, guardian, public official, social worker or clergyman.

(5) *["Mentally retarded person in need of supervision and protection"]* "Person in need of guardianship" means a person who *[is]*:

(A) *[mentally retarded]* has mental retardation within the meaning of this chapter,

(B) is unable to *[personally]* exercise personally some or all of the powers and responsibilities described in section 9310 of this title, and

(C) is not receiving the active assistance of a responsible adult to carry out the powers and responsibilities described in section 9310 of this title.

(6) "Guardianship *[of the person]*" means the legal status of *[mentally]* *[retarded]* a person with mental retardation who is subject to the commissioner's exercise of some or all of the powers listed in section 9310 of this title.

(7) *["Protective supervision" means the legal status of a mentally retarded person who is subject to the commissioner's exercise of some, but not all of the powers listed in section 9310 of this title.]*

(8) "Qualified mental retardation professional" means a psychologist, physician, registered nurse, educator or social worker with specialized training or at least one year of experience in working with *[mentally retarded persons]* people with mental retardation.

(9) "Respondent" means a person who is the subject of a petition filed pursuant to section 9305 of this title.

(10) "Department" means the department of developmental and mental health services.

§ 9303. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

The *[district]* family court shall have exclusive jurisdiction over all proceedings brought under the authority of this chapter. Proceedings under this chapter shall be commenced in the *[district]* family court *[circuit]* in the county in which the *[mentally retarded]* person with mental retardation is residing.

(1) The probate court shall have concurrent jurisdiction to appoint the commissioner to serve as a temporary guardian for a person in need of guardianship when:

(A) a petition has been filed pursuant to section 3063 of Title 14;

(B) the probate court finds that the respondent is a person in need of guardianship as defined in subdivision 9302(5) of this title; and

(C) no suitable private guardian can be located.

(2) Within 60 days after appointment as a temporary guardian, the commissioner shall file a petition in family court for appointment under this chapter and for modification or termination of the probate court order.

§ 9304. *[PERSONS ELIGIBLE]* ELIGIBILITY FOR PROTECTIVE

SUPERVISION OR GUARDIANSHIP OF THE PERSON

*[Protective supervision or guardianship of the person]* Guardianship may be provided to any *[mentally retarded]* person with mental retardation who:

(1) is at least 18 years of age, and

(2) is in need of supervision and protection for *[his]* the person's own welfare *[or the public welfare, and]*

*[(3) is not a resident of a state school or hospital or is to be discharged from a state school or hospital at such time as guardianship or protective supervision is ordered under this chapter or under chapter 111 of Title 14]*.

§ 9305. PETITION FOR *[PROVISION OF PROTECTIVE SUPERVISION ]*

*[OR]* GUARDIANSHIP *[OF THE PERSON]*

Any interested person with knowledge of the facts *[alleged may request the state's attorney having jurisdiction to file a petition]* may file a petition with the *[district]* family court alleging that person is mentally retarded and in need of *[protective supervision or]* guardianship *[of the person. The state's attorney shall file the petition unless it clearly appears that the petition will be insufficient to support an action under this chapter]*. The petition shall set forth:

(1) The name *[and]*, address, and phone number of the petitioner and the nature of his or her interest in the person alleged to *[be retarded]* have mental retardation;

(2) The name, address, phone number, and age of the *[person alleged to be mentally retarded]* respondent and the name *[and]*, address, and phone number of *[the nearest relative and spouse, if any, of the allegedly retarded person]* any near relative, if known, of the respondent and the name of any guardian or person holding a power of attorney of the person;

(3) The reasons and the supporting facts why *[supervision and protection are]* guardianship is needed.

(4) The petition shall be limited to information that is relevant to the respondent's need for guardianship.

§ 9306. *[PREPARATION OF]* COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION

(a) The *[district]* family court shall mail a copy of any petition filed pursuant to section 9305 of this title to the commissioner, who shall promptly arrange for the preparation of a comprehensive evaluation of the respondent. The evaluation shall include *[reports describing the respondent's developmental and social functioning and those educational and habilitative services received by the respondent prior to the evaluation]* information regarding the respondent's developmental and social functioning which is relevant to the person's need for guardianship. The evaluation shall contain recommendations and supporting data regarding the ability of the respondent to function in society without *[supervision and protection]* guardianship and shall specify those activities for which the respondent needs supervision and protection, and shall include information regarding the availability of one or more responsible adults to assist the individual in decision-making.

(b) The evaluation shall be prepared by a qualified mental retardation professional *[and shall be conducted in a community mental health center, school, hospital or other suitable facility]*. The evaluation shall be completed within *[30]* 40 days of the court's service of the petition upon the commissioner unless the time period is extended by the court for cause.

(c) The department shall send a copy of the evaluation to the court, the state's attorney, the director of guardianship services, and to counsel for the respondent. The evaluation shall be treated as a confidential document by the court and the parties and shall not be released without the consent of the respondent or a person authorized to act on behalf of the respondent, except that the department may release the evaluation to a developmental services agency, if necessary, for the purpose of obtaining or improving services to the person.

(d) The evaluation shall not be used as evidence in any other judicial proceeding without the consent of the respondent or the respondent's guardian or upon order of the court.

§ 9307. NOTICE OF PETITION AND HEARING

*[Upon the]* Within five days of filing *[of]* the petition, the court shall fix a time and place for hearing and *[cause the petitioner to serve respondent with the petition and notice of the hearing at least 10 days before the time set for hearing. The court]* shall mail a copy of the petition and notice of hearing to the respondent, the respondent's counsel, *[respondent's spouse or nearest relative,]* the guardian for the respondent, if any, the petitioner, the commissioner, the state's attorney and such other persons as the court *[directs]* determines. The notice of hearing shall be mailed to the respondent's near relatives named in the petition. The hearing shall be held not *[less]* fewer than *[10]* 20 nor more than *[20]* 30 days after the filing of the evaluation with the court. The hearing may be continued for good cause shown for not more than 15 additional days.

§ 9308. APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

Upon the filing of the petition, the court shall *[notify the respondent that he shall be afforded the right to counsel. If respondent is unable to pay for counsel, compensation]* appoint counsel for the respondent, and shall notify the respondent of the name, address, and phone number of the appointed counsel. Compensation shall be paid by the department *[of developmental and mental health services]* to counsel assigned by the court, any rule or law to the contrary notwithstanding. Counsel shall receive a copy of the petition and comprehensive evaluation and such other documents as may be received or issued by the court. Counsel shall consult with respondent prior to the hearing and, to the maximum extent possible, explain to *[him]* the respondent the meaning of the proceedings and of all relevant documents.

§ 9309. HEARING AND APPEAL

(a) *[The respondent, the petitioner and all other persons to whom notice has been given pursuant to section 9307 of this title may attend the hearing and testify]* The state's attorney and the respondent shall be the parties to a petition to establish guardianship. *[The court may in its discretion receive the testimony of any other person. The respondent and petitioner may subpoena, present and cross-examine witnesses, including those who prepared the comprehensive evaluation. The court may exclude any person not necessary for the conduct of the hearing.]*

(b) The hearing shall be conducted in a manner consistent with orderly procedure and in a physical setting not likely to have a harmful effect on the mental or physical health of the respondent. The parties may subpoena, present, and cross-examine witnesses, including those who prepared the comprehensive evaluation. The court may in its discretion receive the testimony of any person. In all *[such]* proceedings, the court shall have taken and preserved an accurate record of the proceedings. The court shall not be bound by the evidence contained in the comprehensive evaluation, but shall make its determination upon the entire record. In all cases, the court shall make specific findings of fact, state separately its conclusions of law, and direct the entry of an appropriate judgment. The general public shall be excluded from hearings under this chapter. The parties, petitioner, and their counsel shall be admitted by the court. The court may exclude any person not necessary to conduct the hearing. The proceedings of the hearing shall be confidential, and a record of the proceedings may not be released without the consent of the respondent or the respondent's guardian.

(c) The state's attorney shall appear and present evidence in support of the petition. The petitioner may be represented by private counsel in any proceedings brought under this chapter.

(d) If upon completion of the hearing and consideration of the record, the court finds that the respondent is not *[mentally retarded or is mentally retarded, but not in need of supervision and protection]* a person in need of guardianship, as defined in subdivision 9302(5) of this title, it shall dismiss the *[application]* petition and seal the records of the proceedings.

(e) If upon completion of the hearing and consideration of the record, the court finds that the petitioner has proved by *[a fair preponderance of the]* clear and convincing evidence that the respondent is:

(1) *[mentally retarded]* a person with mental retardation,

(2) at least 18 years of age, and

(3) *[not a resident of a state school or hospital or will be discharged from a state school or hospital at such time as guardianship or protective supervision is ordered under this chapter or under chapter 111 of Title 14, and]*

(4) in need of *[supervision and protection]* guardianship for his or her own welfare *[or the public welfare]*, it shall enter judgment specifying the powers of the commissioner pursuant to section 9310 of this title. The court may grant or restrict the powers of guardianship to the commissioner. An appointment of the commissioner to provide guardianship shall not constitute a judicial finding that the person is legally incompetent, but shall restrict the person's rights with respect to those powers expressly granted to the commissioner.

(f) Any party to the proceeding before the *[district]* family court may appeal the court's decision. The appeal shall be taken in such manner as the supreme court may by rule provide for appeals from the *[district]* family court.

§ 9310. POWERS OF COMMISSIONER AS GUARDIAN *[OF THE]*

*[PERSON]*

(a) The court may appoint the commissioner guardian of the *[person]* respondent if it determines that a guardian is needed to supervise and protect the *[retarded person]* respondent through the exercise of the following powers:

(1) The power to exercise general supervision over the *[retarded person]* respondent. This includes choosing or changing the residence, care, habilitation, education, and employment of the *[retarded person]* respondent and the power to approve or withhold approval of the *[retarded person's request to sell or in any way encumber his personal or real property]* sale or encumbrance of real property of the respondent;

(2) The power to approve or withhold approval of any contract*[, except for necessaries, which the retarded person wishes to make]* by or in the name of the respondent;

(3) The power to obtain legal advice and to commence or defend against judicial actions in the name of the *[retarded person]* respondent;

(4) The power to *[consent to surgical operations in non-emergency cases as provided in section 9312 of this title]* seek, obtain, and give consent to initiation and continuation of medical and dental treatment that promotes the health, comfort, and well-being of the respondent, or to withhold consent for initiation or continuation of treatment which does not promote the health or well-being of the respondent. Any decision to withhold or abate medical treatment for an irreversible or terminal condition shall be reviewed by the department's ethics committee.

(b) Nothing in this chapter shall give the commissioner authority to place a *[mentally retarded]* person with mental retardation in a state school or state hospital except pursuant to section 7601 et seq. *[of Title 18]* or section 8801 et seq. of *[Title 18]* this title.

(c) The commissioner shall exercise *[his]* supervisory authority over the *[retarded person]* respondent in a manner which is least restrictive of the *[retarded]* person's personal freedom consistent with the respondent's need for supervision and protection.

*[§ 9311. POWERS OF COMMISSIONER WHEN PROVIDING ]*

*[PROTECTIVE SUPERVISION]*

*[The court may place the mentally retarded person under the protective supervision of the commissioner if it determines that appointment of the commissioner is needed to supervise and protect the retarded person through the exercise of some, but not all of the powers enumerated in section 9310 of this title. The court may further restrict each individual power. An appointment of the commissioner to provide protective supervision shall not constitute a judicial finding that the mentally retarded person is legally incompetent but shall restrict his rights with respect to those powers expressly granted to the commissioner. ]*

§ 9312. *[CONSENT FOR MEDICAL TREATMENT]* LIMITATION OF

LIABILITY

*[Except as otherwise provided in this section, the commissioner shall obtain the informed consent from a near relative for a surgical operation necessary to save the life, eyesight, hearing or limb of any persons receiving services under this chapter. If such relatives cannot be found after diligent search, or in the case of an emergency, the commissioner may give such consent upon the advice of the chief medical officer of the hospital to which the retarded person has been admitted. When a retarded person whose right to consent to surgery has not been restricted pursuant to section 9310 of this title is admitted to a hospital for surgery, the chief medical officer shall determine if the person's medical condition is such that the person has sufficient capacity to make a responsible decision. If the person has such capacity, his informed consent shall be obtained before such surgery. In such cases the person's consent shall be determinative and no other consent is necessary.]* No person who consents to the performance of a *[surgical operation]* medical or dental treatment pursuant to the provisions of this *[section]* chapter shall be civilly or criminally liable for the performance or the manner of performing *[such operation]* treatment. No person who acts within the scope of the authority conferred by *[such]* consent in the course of discharging his or her official duties shall be civilly or criminally liable for the performance of *[such operation]* treatment, but the provisions of this chapter shall not affect any liability which they may incur as a consequence of the manner in which such *[operation]* treatment is performed.

§ 9313. DUTIES OF COMMISSIONER WHEN PROVIDING`

*[PROTECTIVE OR]* GUARDIANSHIP SERVICES

(a) When providing *[protective or]* guardianship services to a *[mentally retarded]* person with mental retardation, the commissioner shall maintain close contact with the *[mentally retarded]* person with mental retardation no matter where the person is living in this state and shall permit and encourage maximum self-reliance on the part of the *[mentally retarded]* person with mental retardation under his or her protection. The commissioner shall permit and encourage involvement by the *[retarded]* person with mental retardation, and *[his parents, spouse or near relatives]* family members of the person's choice in planning and decision making *[on behalf of the retarded person]*.

(b) In addition to the supervisory powers vested in the commissioner by the court pursuant to section 9310 *[or section 9311]* of this title, the commissioner shall *[assure that]* assist any *[retarded]* person who is under guardianship *[or protective supervision is assisted in obtaining]* to obtain those services to which *[he]* the person is lawfully entitled and which *[he]* the person needs in order to maximize *[his]* opportunities for social and financial independence. Those services include, but are not limited to:

(1) Education services for a *[retarded]* person with mental retardation who is of school age;

(2) Residential services for any *[retarded]* person with mental retardation who lacks adequate or appropriate housing or residential supervision;

(3) Medical and dental services as needed;

(4) Therapeutic and habilitative services, adult education, vocational rehabilitation or other appropriate programs or services for any *[retarded]* person with mental retardation who is in need of such training or services;

(5) Counseling and social services;

(6) Counseling and assistance in the use of and handling of money.

§ 9314. ANNUAL REVIEW

(a) The commissioner shall prepare an annual review of the social adjustment and progress of every person who is receiving *[protective or]* guardianship services under this chapter. A copy of the review shall be kept on file by the commissioner and shall be made available upon the request of the *[mentally retarded]* person with mental retardation, *[his parent or spouse]* and such other *[persons]* people as receive the written permission of the person or the commissioner.

(b) The commissioner shall annually review the legal status of each person receiving services under this chapter. If the commissioner determines that the annual review of social adjustment and progress warrants a modification or termination of *[protective or]* guardianship services for the *[retarded]* person, *[he]* the commissioner shall petition the *[district]* family court pursuant to section 9316 of this title for the appropriate relief.

§ 9315. REVIEW OF COMMISSIONER'S DECISION

A person who is receiving services under this chapter may appeal a decision of the commissioner in accordance with section 3091 of Title 3 or by petition to the family court.

§ 9316. MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION OF *[PROTECTIVE OR]*

GUARDIANSHIP SERVICES

(a) The commissioner shall provide *[protective or]* guardianship services in accordance with the order of the *[district]* probate or family court until termination or modification thereof by the court.

(b) The commissioner, the *[mentally retarded]* person with mental retardation, or any interested person may petition the appointing court or the family court *[where venue lies]* in the county in which the person resides to modify or terminate the judgment pursuant to which the commissioner is providing *[protective supervision or]* guardianship *[of the person for a mentally retarded person]*. The petitioner, the commissioner, and the respondent shall be the parties to a petition to modify or terminate guardianship.

(c) Notice and hearing on the petition shall proceed in the manner set forth in sections 9307-9309 of this title.

§ 9317. GENERAL PROVISION

The commissioner may delegate his or her powers and duties under this chapter to staff within *[his]* the department, and *[he]* may adopt, pursuant to section 803 of Title 3, such rules and regulations *[as he determines]* necessary for the proper and efficient administration of this chapter.

Sec. 2. 4 V.S.A. § 454 is amended to read:

§ 454. JURISDICTION

* * *

(13) All care for *[mentally retarded persons]* people with mental retardation proceedings filed pursuant to *[chapter]* chapters 206 and 215 of Title 18.

* * *

The bill, having appeared on the Calendar one day for notice, was taken up, read the second time, report of the committee on Health and Welfare agreed to and third reading ordered.

Bill Amended; Third Reading Ordered

H. 832

Rep. Kinsey of Craftsbury, for the committee on Appropriations, to which had been referred House bill, entitled

An act relating to access areas for nonmotorized boats;

Reported in favor of its passage when amended as follows:

First: On page 3 lines one and two by striking the words "committee on fish, wildlife and water resources" and inserting in lieu thereof "house committee on fish, wildlife and water resources, the senate committee on natural resources and energy"

Second: On page 3, lines 5 through 8, by striking Sec. 2 in its entirety.

The bill, having appeared on the Calendar one day for notice, was taken up, read the second time, report of the committee on Appropriations agreed to and third reading ordered.

Action on Bill Postponed

H. 784

House bill, entitled

An act relating to Act 250 jurisdiction, district commission chairs, review on the record, violations, and presumptions accorded to agency permits;

Was taken up and pending the reading of the report of the Committee on Natural Resources and Energy, on motion of Rep. Freed of Dorset, action on the bill was postponed until the next legislative day.

Action on Bill Postponed

H. 629

House bill, entitled

An act relating to special education services;

Was taken up and pending the reading of the report of the Committee on Education, on motion of Rep. Freed of Dorset, action on the bill was postponed until the next legislative day.

Recess

At ten o'clock and forty-five minutes in the forenoon, the Speaker declared a recess until the fall of the gavel.

At eleven o'clock and fifteen minutes in the forenoon, the Speaker called the House to order.

Consideration Resumed;

Consideration Interrupted by Recess

H. 842

The House resumed consideration of House bill, entitled

An act making appropriations for the support of government;

Pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Rep. Marron of Stowe moved to amend the bill as follows:

By inserting a new Sec. 90a to read:

Sec. 90a. Salaries; Supreme Court Justices

(a) 32 VSA §1003 (c)(1) and (2) [Chief justice; associate justices; salaries] are repealed.

(b) 32 V.S.A. §1003 (e) is added to read:

(e) The annual salary of the Chief Justice shall be that of the Speaker of the House pursuant to 32 V.S.A. §1051 and the annual salary of the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court shall be that of members of the General Assembly under 32 V.S.A. §1052

Pending the question, Shall the bill be amended as recommended by Rep. Marron of Stowe? Rep. Marron of Stowe asked and was granted leave of the House to withdraw his amendment.

Pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Rep. Mazur of South Burlington moved to amend the bill as follows:

By adding a new Sec. 174a to read:

Sec. 174a. Higher Education; Costs of Remedial Courses

The Department of Education shall develop a plan for reimbursement to any Vermont State College or the University of Vermont for the costs of remedial education programs provided to and required by graduates of any Vermont secondary school. The plan shall provide:

(1) On July 1, 2002 the Vermont state colleges and the University of Vermont shall report to the Commissioner of Education the number and type of remedial education courses, the number of graduates of Vermont secondary schools required to take such remedial courses, and the costs incurred by the college or university to provide such remedial courses.

(2) On and after July 1, 2004, any Vermont secondary school district shall reimburse any Vermont state college or the University of Vermont for the costs of any such remedial program provided to and required to be taken by any of its graduates.

Which was disagreed to.

Pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Rep. Mazur of South Burlington moved to amend the bill as follows:

By inserting a new Sec. 103a to read:

Sec. 103a. OFFENDERS ON FURLOUGH; COMMUNITY HOUSING

The commissioner of corrections shall examine the housing in the community of offenders on furlough. The study objective shall be to identify how such housing can be provided (i) without diminishing the supply of housing available in the private market for use by persons not in the custody of the commissioner, and (ii) while maintaining sufficient supervision by correctional officials of such persons on furlough. The study shall consider the new construction of special purpose community housing to be owned and operated by the department or by a private party under contract with the department. The commissioner shall report study findings and recommendations by January 15, 2001 to the house and senate committees on appropriations and institutions, the house committee on general, housing and military affairs, and the senate committee on general affairs and housing.

Which was disagreed to on a Division vote. Yeas, 36. Nays, 70.

Pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Rep. Maslack of Poultney moved to amend the bill as follows:

In Sec. 76, by inserting a new subsection (g) to read:

(g) The Vermont State Police shall maintain no less than 24 hour patrols in the Counties of Rutland and Bennington, and shall have no less than two troopers on duty in those counties during the hours of 2:00 AM through 6:00 AM. The requirements of this section shall not prevent the dispatching of state police officers, who are regularly assigned to Rutland and Bennington counties between the hours of 2:00 A.M. and 6:00 A.M., to an emergency situation in any other county.

Which was disagreed to.

Recess

At eleven o'clock and fifty-five minutes in the forenoon, the Speaker declared a recess until the fall of the gavel.

Afternoon

At one o'clock and fifteen minutes in the afternoon, the Speaker called the House to order.

Consideration Resumed;

Bill Amended and Third Reading Ordered

H. 842

House bill, entitled

An act making appropriations for the support of government;

Consideration resumed and pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Rep. Fox of Essex moved to amend the bill as follows:

First: In Sec. 76, page 38, line 19, by striking out the figure "24,894,782" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 24,688,212 and on page 39, line 3 and 11, by striking out the figure "31,521,630" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 31,315,060 and on line 9, by striking out the figure "1,278,106" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 1,071,536

Second: In Sec. 95, page 50, lines 8 and 19, by striking out the figure "139,564,229" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 139,357,659 and on line 17, by striking out the figure "6,607,247" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 6,400,677

Third: In Sec. 96, page 50, line 21, by striking out the figure "3,126,592" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 3,146,592 and on page 51, lines 4 and 10, by striking out the figure "10,080,860" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 10,100,860 and on line 7, by striking out the figure "6,038,802" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 6,058,802

Fourth: On page 54, after line 11, by adding a new section to be numbered Sec. 100a to read as follows:

Sec. 100a. 28 V.S.A. § 752 is added to read:

(f) Any legislative initiatives in the general provisions governing offender work under this subchapter that may affect or impact the fund shall be reviewed by the joint fiscal office and a report of such review shall be provided to the general assembly prior to the implementation of any such initiative.

Fifth: In Sec. 117, page 67, subsection (d), lines 6 through 14 by striking out the following: "for beneficiaries whose household income is equal to or exceeds 25 percent of the federal poverty level and is less than 50 percent of the federal poverty level, payment of a semiannual program fee of $20.00; for beneficiaries whose household income is equal to or exceeds 50 percent of the federal poverty level and is less than 75 percent of the federal poverty level, payment of a semiannual program fee of $40.00; for beneficiaries whose household income is equal to or exceeds 75 percent of the federal poverty level and is less than 100 percent of the federal poverty level, payment of a semiannual program fee of $60.00;"

Sixth: In Sec. 122, page 74, subsection (b), at the end of line 2, by adding the following: law,

Seventh: In Sec. 146, page 89, line 19, by striking out the figure "939,394,005" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 939,414,005 and on page 90, line 2, by striking out the figure "520,127,130" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 520,147,130 and on line 10, by striking out the figure "939,394,005" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 939,414,005

Eighth: In Sec. 149, page 91, line 17, by striking out the figure "16,522,765" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 16,537,765 and on line 19, by striking out the figure "21,001,667" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 21,016,667 and on line 21, by striking out the figure "5,012,234" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 5,027,234 and on page 92, line 6, by striking out the figure "21,001,667" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 21,016,667

Ninth: In Sec. 150, page 92, lines 14 and 21, by striking out the figure "58,582,784" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 58,567,784 and on line 12, by striking out the figure "55,105,461" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 55,090,461 and on line 16, by striking out the figure "1,750,296" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 1,735,296

Tenth: In Sec. 234, page 129, line 21, by striking out the figure "5,516,435" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 5,416,435 and on page 130, line 1, by striking out the figure 16,435,111 and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 16,535,111 and after line 8, by adding a new subsection (b) to read as follows:

(b) The agency of transportation shall utilize toll credits available to it as the state match for multi-modal center projects in fiscal year 2001. Of the amounts appropriated above, the agency shall make available $5,000 of federal funds as part of the state matching requirements for the multi-modal center projects that don't have earmarked federal funds for this purpose.

Eleventh: In Sec. 245, page 135, line 6, by striking out the figure "143,105,273" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 143,005,273 and on line 7, by striking out the figure "175,474,433" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure 175,574,433

Twelfth: In Sec. 252, page 145, subdivision (34), line 16, by striking out the word "board" and inserting in lieu thereof the word: fund

Thirteenth: In Sec. 253, page 148 subdivision (1), line 9, by striking out the word "board" and inserting in lieu thereof the word: fund

Fourteenth: On page 161, by striking out Sec. 273 in its entirety and inserting in lieu thereof a new Sec. 273 to read as follows:

Sec. 273. 30 V.S.A. § 218 is amended to read:

§ 218. JURISDICTION OVER CHARGES AND RATES

* * *

(c)(1) The public service board shall take action, including the setting of telephone rates, enabling the state of Vermont to participate in the Federal Communications Commission telephone lifeline program. The board shall set one or more residential basic exchange lifeline telephone service credits, for those persons eligible to participate in the Federal Communications Commission Lifeline program.

* * *

(4) Notwithstanding any provisions of this subsection to the contrary, a subscriber who is enrolled in the lifeline program and has obtained a relief from abuse order in accordance with the provisions of chapter 21 of Title 15 shall qualify for a lifeline benefit credit for the amount of the incremental charges imposed by the local telecommunications company for treating the number of the subscriber as nonpublished. Such subscribers shall be deemed to have good cause by the secretary of human services for the purpose of extending the application deadline in subdivision (3). For purposes of this section, "nonpublished" means that the customer's telephone number is not listed in any published directories, is not listed on directory assistance records of the company, and is not made available on request by a member of the general public, notwithstanding any claim of emergency a requesting party may present. The department shall develop an application form and certification process for obtaining this lifeline benefit credit. Upon enrollment in the program such participant shall receive the lifeline benefit credit until the end of the calendar year. Renewals shall be for a period of one year.

*[ (4)]*(5) The public service department shall report annually on or before *[February 15]* March 1 to the speaker of the house and the president pro tem of the senate on the implementation and effectiveness of the telephone lifeline service, including information on the degree of participation in the program and the cost of the program's benefits and administration.

Fifteenth: On page 165, by striking out Sec. 279 in its entirety and inserting in lieu thereof a new Sec. 279 to read as follows:

Sec. 279. Sec. 272b of No. 62 of the Acts of 1999 is amended to read:

§ 272b. REPEAL

3 V.S.A. § 2225 (establishing an emergency relief and assistance fund) is repealed, and any balance in the fund on July 1, 1999 is transferred to the emergency relief and assistance fund established in 20 V.S.A. § 45 (c).

Sixteenth: On page 166, by striking out Sec. 282 in its entirety and inserting in lieu thereof a new Sec. 282 to read as follows:

Sec. 282. EFFECTIVE DATES

This section and Secs. 30(a), 123, 159, 278 and 279 shall be effective on passage. Secs. 278 and 279 shall apply as of July 1, 1999.

Pending the question, Shall the bill be amended as recommended by Rep. Fox of Essex? Rep. Fox of Essex moved to amend her recommendation of amendment as follows:

By striking the first, second and fifth recommendations of amendment, and inserting a new Fifth recommendation of amendment to read as follows:

Fifth: In Sec. 117, page 67, subsection (d), lines 6 through 14 by striking out the following: "for beneficiaries whose household income is equal to or exceeds 25 percent of the federal poverty level and is less than 50 percent of the federal poverty level, payment of a semiannual program fee of $20.00; for beneficiaries whose household income is equal to or exceeds 50 percent of the federal poverty level and is less than 75 percent of the federal poverty level, payment of a semiannual program fee of $40.00; for beneficiaries whose household income is equal to or exceeds 75 percent of the federal poverty level and is less than 100 percent of the federal poverty level, payment of a semiannual program fee of $60.00;" and on line 17, by striking out the figure "$80.00" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure $40.00 and on line 19, by striking out the figure "$100.00" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure $50.00

An by renumbering the remaining recommendations of amendment to be numerically correct.

Which was agreed to.

The recurring question, Shall the House amend the bill as recommended by Rep. Fox of Essex, as amended? Rep. Wood of Brandon asked that the question be divided and that the second recommendation of amendment be taken up last.

Thereupon, the first and third through fourteenth recommendations of amendment were agreed to.

Pending the question, Shall the House amend the bill as recommended by Rep. Fox of Essex in the second instance? Rep. Wood of Brandon demanded the Yeas and Nays, which demand was sustained by the Constitutional number. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll and the question, Shall the House amend the bill as recommended by Rep. Fox of Essex in the second instance? was decided in the negative. Yeas, 53. Nays, 76.

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Alfano of Calais

Aswad of Burlington

Atkins of Winooski

Bouricius of Burlington

Bristol of Brattleboro

Brooks of Montpelier

Buckland of Newport Town

Corren of Burlington

Costello of Brattleboro

Cross of Winooski

Darrow of Newfane

Darrow of Dummerston

Deen of Westminster

Doyle of Richmond

Fox of Essex

Heath of Westford

Hingtgen of Burlington

Hooker of Rutland City

Jordan of Middlesex

Kehler of Pomfret

Kinsey of Craftsbury

Krasnow of Charlotte

Kreitzer of Rutland City

Lafayette of Burlington

Levin of Hartland

Lippert of Hinesburg

Masland of Thetford

Mazzariello of Rutland City

Miller of Shaftsbury

Nuovo of Middlebury

Osman of Plainfield

Paquin of Fairfax

Partridge of Windham

Pembroke of Bennington

Poirier of Barre City

Postman of Brownington

Pugh of South Burlington

Rivero of Milton

Rusten of Halifax

Seibert of Norwich

Smith of Sudbury

Starr of Troy

Stevens of Newbury

Sullivan of Burlington

Sweaney of Windsor

Symington of Jericho

Tracy of Burlington

Valsangiacomo of Barre City

Waite of Pawlet

Westman of Cambridge

Wheeler of Burlington

Woodward of Johnson

Zuckerman of Burlington

Those who voted in the negative are:

Allard of St. Albans Town

Anderson of Woodstock

Angell of Randolph

Baker of West Rutland

Barbieri of Wallingford

Barney of Highgate

Blanchard of Essex

Bourdeau of Hyde Park

Brown of Walden

Carmolli of Rutland City

Clark of St. Johnsbury

Cleland of Northfield

Colvin of Bennington

Crawford of Burke

Dakin of Colchester

DePoy of Rutland

Deuel of West Rutland

Dominick of Starksboro

Emmons of Springfield

Flaherty of South Burlington

Flory of Pittsford

Follett of Springfield

Freed of Dorset

Fyfe of Newport City

Gervais of Enosburg

Ginevan of Middlebury

Gray of Barre Town

Gretkowski of Burlington

Hathaway of Barton

Helm of Castleton

Hoag of Woodford

Holmes of Bethel

Houston of Ferrisburgh

Howrigan of Fairfield

Hube of Londonderry

Hudson of Lyndon

Hummel of Underhill

Hyde of Fayston

Johnson of Canaan

Kainen of Hartford

Kitzmiller of Montpelier

Koch of Barre Town

Krawczyk of Bennington

LaBarge of Grand Isle

Larocque of Barnet

Larrabee of Danville

Lehman of Hartford

Little of Shelburne

Livingston of Manchester

Mallary of Brookfield

Marron of Stowe

Maslack of Poultney

Mazur of South Burlington

McGrath of Ferrisburgh

McNamara of Burlington

Metzger of Milton

Milne of Washington

Molloy of Arlington

Morrissey of Bennington

Mullin of Rutland Town

Neiman of Georgia

Nitka of Ludlow

O'Donnell of Vernon

Palmer of Pownal

Parizo of Essex

Peaslee of Guildhall

Perry of Richford

Pike of Mendon

Quaid of Williston

Randall of Bradford

Richardson of Weathersfield

Robb of Swanton

Rogers of Castleton

Schaefer of Colchester

Schiavone of Shelburne

Severance of Colchester

Sheltra of Derby

Sherman of St. Johnsbury

Smith of New Haven

Steele of Waterbury

Suchmann of Chester

Sweetser of Essex

Towne of Berlin

Vincent of Waterbury

Vinton of Colchester

Voyer of Morristown

Weiss of Northfield

Willett of St. Albans City

Winters of Williamstown

Wisell of Bristol

Wood of Brandon

Young of Orwell

Those members absent with leave of the House and not voting are:

Edwards of Swanton

Keenan of St. Albans City

Mackinnon of Sharon

Milkey of Brattleboro

Pending the question, Shall the bill be read a third time? Rep. Colvin of Bennington moved to recommit the bill to the committee on Appropriations.

Rep. Poirier of Barre City moved that the rules be suspended to make a non-debatable question fully debatable, which was agreed to on a Division vote. Yeas, 119. Nays, 16. (A 3/4 vote of 102 needed).

Pending the question, Shall the bill be recommitted to the committee on Appropriations? Rep. Poirier of Barre City demanded the Yeas and Nays, which demand was sustained by the Constitutional number. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll and the question, Shall the bill be recommitted to the committee on Appropriations? was decided in the negative. Yeas, 50. Nays, 95.

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Allard of St. Albans Town

Angell of Randolph

Atkins of Winooski

Baker of West Rutland

Barney of Highgate

Blanchard of Essex

Bourdeau of Hyde Park

Clark of St. Johnsbury

Cleland of Northfield

Colvin of Bennington

Crawford of Burke

Dominick of Starksboro

Flaherty of South Burlington

Freed of Dorset

Gray of Barre Town

Gretkowski of Burlington

Hathaway of Barton

Holmes of Bethel

Houston of Ferrisburgh

Howrigan of Fairfield

Hube of Londonderry

Hudson of Lyndon

Hyde of Fayston

Kainen of Hartford

LaBarge of Grand Isle

Larocque of Barnet

Larrabee of Danville

Livingston of Manchester

Marron of Stowe

Maslack of Poultney

Mazur of South Burlington

McGrath of Ferrisburgh

McNamara of Burlington

Metzger of Milton

Molloy of Arlington

Morrissey of Bennington

Neiman of Georgia

O'Donnell of Vernon

Palmer of Pownal

Peaslee of Guildhall

Pike of Mendon

Robb of Swanton

Schiavone of Shelburne

Sheltra of Derby

Sherman of St. Johnsbury

Smith of New Haven

Towne of Berlin

Vinton of Colchester

Willett of St. Albans City

Wood of Brandon

Those who voted in the negative are:

Alfano of Calais

Aswad of Burlington

Barbieri of Wallingford

Bouricius of Burlington

Bristol of Brattleboro

Brooks of Montpelier

Brown of Walden

Buckland of Newport Town

Carmolli of Rutland City

Corren of Burlington

Costello of Brattleboro

Cross of Winooski

Dakin of Colchester

Darrow of Newfane

Darrow of Dummerston

Deen of Westminster

DePoy of Rutland

Deuel of West Rutland

Doyle of Richmond

Emmons of Springfield

Flory of Pittsford

Follett of Springfield

Fox of Essex

Fyfe of Newport City

Gervais of Enosburg

Ginevan of Middlebury

Heath of Westford

Helm of Castleton

Hingtgen of Burlington

Hooker of Rutland City

Hummel of Underhill

Johnson of Canaan

Jordan of Middlesex

Keenan of St. Albans City

Kehler of Pomfret

Kinsey of Craftsbury

Kitzmiller of Montpelier

Koch of Barre Town

Krasnow of Charlotte

Krawczyk of Bennington

Kreitzer of Rutland City

Lafayette of Burlington

Lehman of Hartford

Levin of Hartland

Lippert of Hinesburg

Little of Shelburne

Mackinnon of Sharon

Mallary of Brookfield

Masland of Thetford

Mazzariello of Rutland City

Milkey of Brattleboro

Miller of Shaftsbury

Milne of Washington

Mullin of Rutland Town

Nitka of Ludlow

Nuovo of Middlebury

Osman of Plainfield

Paquin of Fairfax

Parizo of Essex

Partridge of Windham

Pembroke of Bennington

Perry of Richford

Poirier of Barre City

Postman of Brownington

Pugh of South Burlington

Quaid of Williston

Richardson of Weathersfield

Rivero of Milton

Rogers of Castleton

Rusten of Halifax

Schaefer of Colchester

Seibert of Norwich

Severance of Colchester

Smith of Sudbury

Starr of Troy

Steele of Waterbury

Stevens of Newbury

Suchmann of Chester

Sullivan of Burlington

Sweaney of Windsor

Sweetser of Essex

Symington of Jericho

Tracy of Burlington

Valsangiacomo of Barre City

Vincent of Waterbury

Voyer of Morristown

Waite of Pawlet

Weiss of Northfield

Westman of Cambridge

Wheeler of Burlington

Winters of Williamstown

Wisell of Bristol

Woodward of Johnson

Young of Orwell

Zuckerman of Burlington

Those members absent with leave of the House and not voting are:

Anderson of Woodstock

Edwards of Swanton

Hoag of Woodford

Randall of Bradford

Pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Rep. Crawford of Burke moved to amend the bill as follows:

On page 69 and 70, by striking sections 117(a) and 117(b).

Which was agreed to.

Pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Reps. Mullin of Rutland Town, Barney of Highgate, DePoy of Rutland, Gretkowski of Burlington, Morrissey of Bennington, O'Donnell of Vernon and Sheltra of Derby moved to amend the bill as follows:

In Sec. 117, on page 69, following line 18, by adding a new subsection (j) to read:

(j) No funds appropriated by this section may be spent to reimburse health care services relating to abortion procedures unless such procedures are performed by a licensed physician.

Pending the question, Shall the House amend the bill as recommended by Reps. Mullin of Rutland Town, et al? Rep. Mullin of Rutland Town demanded the Yeas and Nays, which demand was sustained by the Constitutional number. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll and the question, Shall the House amend the bill as recommended by Reps. Mullin of Rutland Town, et al? was decided in the negative. Yeas, 38. Nays, 105.

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Allard of St. Albans Town

Atkins of Winooski

Baker of West Rutland

Barney of Highgate

Blanchard of Essex

Buckland of Newport Town

DePoy of Rutland

Flaherty of South Burlington

Flory of Pittsford

Fyfe of Newport City

Gervais of Enosburg

Gray of Barre Town

Gretkowski of Burlington

Helm of Castleton

Holmes of Bethel

Houston of Ferrisburgh

Howrigan of Fairfield

Hudson of Lyndon

McNamara of Burlington

Metzger of Milton

Molloy of Arlington

Morrissey of Bennington

Mullin of Rutland Town

O'Donnell of Vernon

Palmer of Pownal

Peaslee of Guildhall

Pembroke of Bennington

Quaid of Williston

Robb of Swanton

Schiavone of Shelburne

Sheltra of Derby

Smith of New Haven

Starr of Troy

Valsangiacomo of Barre City

Willett of St. Albans City

Winters of Williamstown

Wood of Brandon

Young of Orwell

Those who voted in the negative are:

Alfano of Calais

Anderson of Woodstock

Angell of Randolph

Aswad of Burlington

Barbieri of Wallingford

Bourdeau of Hyde Park

Bouricius of Burlington

Bristol of Brattleboro

Brooks of Montpelier

Brown of Walden

Carmolli of Rutland City

Clark of St. Johnsbury

Cleland of Northfield

Colvin of Bennington

Corren of Burlington

Costello of Brattleboro

Crawford of Burke

Cross of Winooski

Dakin of Colchester

Darrow of Newfane

Darrow of Dummerston

Deen of Westminster

Deuel of West Rutland

Dominick of Starksboro

Doyle of Richmond

Emmons of Springfield

Follett of Springfield

Fox of Essex

Freed of Dorset

Ginevan of Middlebury

Hathaway of Barton

Heath of Westford

Hingtgen of Burlington

Hooker of Rutland City

Hube of Londonderry

Hummel of Underhill

Hyde of Fayston

Johnson of Canaan

Jordan of Middlesex

Kainen of Hartford

Keenan of St. Albans City

Kehler of Pomfret

Kinsey of Craftsbury

Kitzmiller of Montpelier

Koch of Barre Town

Krasnow of Charlotte

Krawczyk of Bennington

Kreitzer of Rutland City

LaBarge of Grand Isle

Lafayette of Burlington

Larocque of Barnet

Larrabee of Danville

Lehman of Hartford

Levin of Hartland

Lippert of Hinesburg

Little of Shelburne

Livingston of Manchester

Mackinnon of Sharon

Mallary of Brookfield

Marron of Stowe

Maslack of Poultney

Masland of Thetford

Mazur of South Burlington

Mazzariello of Rutland City

Milkey of Brattleboro

Miller of Shaftsbury

Milne of Washington

Neiman of Georgia

Nitka of Ludlow

Nuovo of Middlebury

Osman of Plainfield

Paquin of Fairfax

Parizo of Essex

Partridge of Windham

Perry of Richford

Pike of Mendon

Poirier of Barre City

Postman of Brownington

Pugh of South Burlington

Richardson of Weathersfield

Rogers of Castleton

Rusten of Halifax

Schaefer of Colchester

Seibert of Norwich

Severance of Colchester

Sherman of St. Johnsbury

Smith of Sudbury

Steele of Waterbury

Stevens of Newbury

Suchmann of Chester

Sullivan of Burlington

Sweaney of Windsor

Sweetser of Essex

Symington of Jericho

Towne of Berlin

Tracy of Burlington

Vincent of Waterbury

Voyer of Morristown

Waite of Pawlet

Weiss of Northfield

Westman of Cambridge

Wheeler of Burlington

Wisell of Bristol

Woodward of Johnson

Zuckerman of Burlington

Those members absent with leave of the House and not voting are:

Edwards of Swanton

Hoag of Woodford

McGrath of Ferrisburgh

Randall of Bradford

Rivero of Milton

Vinton of Colchester

Pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Rep. Buckland of Newport Town moved to amend the bill as follows:

By inserting a new Sec. 155a to read:

Sec. 155a. STATE AID FOR EDUCATION; COVENTRY SCHOOL DISTRICT

Due to an error in reporting of actual average daily membership in the Coventry school district, the district received less state aid than it should have received in fiscal years 1992 through 1997. Any money appropriated to be paid to the Coventry school district for underpayments of state aid in fiscal years 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996 and 1997 shall be deposited into a special fund to be expended, upon approval of the electorate, for legitimate items of current education expense. The funds shall not be used for municipal services and shall not be considered local education spending under 16 V.S.A. § 4001(6).

Which was agreed to.

Pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Rep. Freed of Dorset moved to amend the bill as follows:

First: By striking Sec. 117a and inserting a new Sec. 117a to read:

Sec. 117a. 33 V.S.A. §1912 is added to read:

§1912 MEDICAID; MEDICARE; COMPARABLE REIMBURSEMENT RATES

(a) Comparable rates required. Reimbursement rates of the medical assistance program under Title XIX of the Social Security Act (Medicaid) for medical services rendered by hospitals, home health agencies, physicians, dentists and all other providers participating in the Medicaid program shall be no less than the reimbursement rates paid by the health insurance programs authorized under Title XVIII of the Social Security Act (Medicare) for the same services.

(b) Phase in to comparable rates. This section shall take effect for medical services rendered on and after January 1, 2001, except that the Medicaid rates for any medical service rendered by any participating Medicaid provider shall not be increased more than 10% in any single fiscal year until rates comparable with the Medicare program are attained.

Second: By striking Sec. 117b and inserting a new Sec. 117b to read:

Sec. 117b. 33 V.S.A. §904 is amended to read:

§ 904. RATE SETTING

(a) The director shall establish by rule procedures for determining payment rates for care of state-assisted persons to nursing homes and to such other providers as the secretary shall direct. The secretary shall have the authority to establish rates that the secretary deems sufficient to ensure that the quality standards prescribed by section 7117 of this title are maintained, subject to the provisions of section 906 of this title. The director shall establish by rule procedures for determining rates for care of Medicaid recipients who are residents of Medicaid certified nursing homes. The rates determined under this chapter shall reflect the objectives of this chapter and shall be reasonable and adequate to meet the costs which the director finds must be incurred by efficiently and economically operated facilities in order to provide care and services in conformity with applicable state and federal laws, regulations and quality and safety standards.

(b) No payment shall be made to any nursing home, on account of any state-assisted person unless the nursing home is certified to participate in the state/federal medical assistance program and has in effect a provider agreement. No Medicaid payment shall be made to any nursing home unless the nursing home is certified to participate in the Medicaid program under Title XIX of the Social security Act and has in effect a provider agreement.

Rep. Freed of Dorset asked that the question be divided.

Pending the question, Shall the bill be amended as recommended by Rep. Freed of Dorset in the first instance? Rep. Mullin of Rutland Town demanded the Yeas and Nays, which demand was sustained by the Constitutional number. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll and the question, Shall the bill be amended as recommended by Rep. Freed of Dorset in the first instance? was decided in the negative. Yeas, 66. Nays, 75.

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Allard of St. Albans Town

Angell of Randolph

Baker of West Rutland

Barney of Highgate

Bourdeau of Hyde Park

Bouricius of Burlington

Brown of Walden

Buckland of Newport Town

Clark of St. Johnsbury

Cleland of Northfield

Corren of Burlington

Crawford of Burke

DePoy of Rutland

Flory of Pittsford

Follett of Springfield

Freed of Dorset

Gray of Barre Town

Hathaway of Barton

Helm of Castleton

Hingtgen of Burlington

Holmes of Bethel

Houston of Ferrisburgh

Hube of Londonderry

Hudson of Lyndon

Hyde of Fayston

Johnson of Canaan

Kainen of Hartford

Koch of Barre Town

LaBarge of Grand Isle

Larocque of Barnet

Larrabee of Danville

Livingston of Manchester

Mallary of Brookfield

Marron of Stowe

Maslack of Poultney

Mazur of South Burlington

Metzger of Milton

Milne of Washington

Morrissey of Bennington

Mullin of Rutland Town

Neiman of Georgia

O'Donnell of Vernon

Palmer of Pownal

Peaslee of Guildhall

Perry of Richford

Pike of Mendon

Quaid of Williston

Richardson of Weathersfield

Robb of Swanton

Rogers of Castleton

Schaefer of Colchester

Schiavone of Shelburne

Severance of Colchester

Sheltra of Derby

Smith of New Haven

Steele of Waterbury

Suchmann of Chester

Sweetser of Essex

Towne of Berlin

Valsangiacomo of Barre City

Voyer of Morristown

Willett of St. Albans City

Winters of Williamstown

Wood of Brandon

Young of Orwell

Zuckerman of Burlington

Those who voted in the negative are:

Alfano of Calais

Anderson of Woodstock

Aswad of Burlington

Atkins of Winooski

Barbieri of Wallingford

Blanchard of Essex

Brooks of Montpelier

Carmolli of Rutland City

Colvin of Bennington

Costello of Brattleboro

Cross of Winooski

Dakin of Colchester

Darrow of Newfane

Darrow of Dummerston

Deen of Westminster

Deuel of West Rutland

Dominick of Starksboro

Doyle of Richmond

Emmons of Springfield

Flaherty of South Burlington

Fox of Essex

Fyfe of Newport City

Gervais of Enosburg

Ginevan of Middlebury

Gretkowski of Burlington

Heath of Westford

Hooker of Rutland City

Howrigan of Fairfield

Hummel of Underhill

Jordan of Middlesex

Keenan of St. Albans City

Kehler of Pomfret

Kinsey of Craftsbury

Kitzmiller of Montpelier

Krasnow of Charlotte

Krawczyk of Bennington

Kreitzer of Rutland City

Lafayette of Burlington

Lehman of Hartford

Levin of Hartland

Lippert of Hinesburg

Little of Shelburne

Mackinnon of Sharon

Masland of Thetford

Mazzariello of Rutland City

McNamara of Burlington

Milkey of Brattleboro

Miller of Shaftsbury

Molloy of Arlington

Nitka of Ludlow

Nuovo of Middlebury

Osman of Plainfield

Paquin of Fairfax

Parizo of Essex

Partridge of Windham

Pembroke of Bennington

Poirier of Barre City

Postman of Brownington

Pugh of South Burlington

Rusten of Halifax

Seibert of Norwich

Smith of Sudbury

Starr of Troy

Stevens of Newbury

Sullivan of Burlington

Sweaney of Windsor

Symington of Jericho

Tracy of Burlington

Vincent of Waterbury

Waite of Pawlet

Weiss of Northfield

Westman of Cambridge

Wheeler of Burlington

Wisell of Bristol

Woodward of Johnson

Those members absent with leave of the House and not voting are:

Bristol of Brattleboro

Edwards of Swanton

Hoag of Woodford

McGrath of Ferrisburgh

Randall of Bradford

Rivero of Milton

Sherman of St. Johnsbury

Vinton of Colchester

Thereupon, Rep. Freed of Dorset asked and was granted leave of the House to withdraw his recommendation of amendment in the second instance.

Pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Reps. Mallary of Brookfield and Mazur of South Burlington, moved to amend the bill as follows:

By inserting a new Sec. 117c to read:

Sec. 117c. PROVIDER PAYMENTS UNDER MEDICAID AND VHAP.

(a) Except for the expansion of benefits authorized by section 117 of this act, no other expansion of eligibility for Medicaid, or of eligibility for the Vermont Health Access Plan ( No. 14 of the Acts of 1995, as amended), and no expansion of benefits under such programs is authorized until health care facility and health care provider services are reimbursed by such programs at the rates determined in accordance with subsection (b) of this section.

(b) Comparable rates required. Reimbursement rates of the medical assistance program under Title XIX of the Social Security Act (Medicaid) for medical services rendered by hospitals, nursing homes, home health agencies, physicians, dentists and all other providers participating in the Medicaid program shall be no less than the reimbursement rates paid by the health insurance programs authorized under Title XVIII of the Social Security Act (Medicare) for the same services.

Rep. Fox of Essex raised a Point of Order saying that this amendment is in violation of Rule 77 in that it is the same as the amendment offered by Rep. Freed of Dorset, which Point of Order the Speaker ruled not well taken as the two amendments are different.

Thereupon, the recommendation of amendment offered by Reps. Mallary of Brookfield and Mazur of South Burlington was disagreed to.

Pending third reading of the bill, Reps. Bouricius of Burlington and Johnson of Canaan moved to amend the bill as follows:

In Sec. 116 , on page 65, in lines 2 and 4, by striking the figure "9,881,128" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure "10,735,128", and following line 4, by inserting a new subsection (a) to read:

(a) The above appropriation shall be used to provide an adjustment of benefits to recipients of Aid to Aged, Blind and Disabled (AABD) in the amount of a 12% increase to partially restore previous benefit reductions.

Which was disagreed to on a Division vote. Yeas, 54. Nays, 61.

Pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Rep. Crawford of Burke moved to amend the bill as follows:

In Sec. 116 [Social Welfare - aid to aged, blind and disabled], on page 65, following line 4, by inserting a new subsection (a) to read:

(a) All funds appropriated under this section are for grants to AABD recipients. Any funds not expended for that purpose in fiscal year 2001 due to caseload estimates or any other reason shall not revert, may not be transferred, and shall be distributed to all grant recipients on a pro rata basis.

Which was agreed to.

Pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Rep. Johnson of Canaan moved to amend the bill as follows:

In Sec. 252 ( FY 2000 surplus one-time appropriations), in subdivision (48) (survey of the Champion land), by striking the figure "$150,000.000" and inserting in lieu thereof the figure "$300,000.00"

Which was agreed to.

Pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Reps. Milkey of Brattleboro, Young of Orwell, Bourdeau of Hyde Park, Darrow of Dummerston, Edwards of Swanton, Emmons of Springfield, Keenan of St. Albans City, Little of Shelburne, Mazur of South Burlington, Parizo of Essex, Richardson of Weathersfield, Rusten of Halifax, Waite of Pawlet, Weiss of Northfield, Westman of Cambridge, Wood of Brandon moved to amend the bill as follows:

In Sec. 88, on page 47, after the period on line 11 by adding two new subsections to read:

(b) On the effective date of this act all call-taker positions under the control or supervision of the department of public safety shall be transferred to the E-911 board, and all employees in such positions shall be employees under the control and supervision of the E-911 board performing the functions of such positions at locations determined by the board, including dispatch centers administered by the department of public safety.

(c) No funds appropriated by this section may be spent to construct or operate more than one additional public service answering point in fiscal year 2001 without the prior approval of the joint fiscal committee.

Pending the question, Shall the House amend the bill as recommended by Reps. Milkey of Brattleboro, et al? Rep. Emmons of Springfield moved to further amend the recommendation of amendment offered by Reps. Milkey of Brattleboro, et al, as follows:

In Sec. 88,subsection (c), after the following: "answering point" by inserting the following: "in either Rutland or Rockingham"

Which was agreed to.

Pending the question, Shall the House amend the bill as recommended by Reps. Milkey of Brattleboro, et al, as amended? Rep. Keenan of St. Albans City demanded the Yeas and Nays, which demand was sustained by the Constitutional number. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll and the question, Shall the House amend the bill as recommended by Reps. Milkey of Brattleboro, et al, as amended? was decided in the affirmative. Yeas, 132. Nays, 4.

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Alfano of Calais

Allard of St. Albans Town

Anderson of Woodstock

Angell of Randolph

Aswad of Burlington

Atkins of Winooski

Baker of West Rutland

Barbieri of Wallingford

Barney of Highgate

Blanchard of Essex

Bourdeau of Hyde Park

Bouricius of Burlington

Brooks of Montpelier

Brown of Walden

Buckland of Newport Town

Carmolli of Rutland City

Clark of St. Johnsbury

Cleland of Northfield

Colvin of Bennington

Corren of Burlington

Costello of Brattleboro

Crawford of Burke

Cross of Winooski

Dakin of Colchester

Darrow of Newfane

Darrow of Dummerston

Deen of Westminster

DePoy of Rutland

Deuel of West Rutland

Dominick of Starksboro

Doyle of Richmond

Emmons of Springfield

Flaherty of South Burlington

Flory of Pittsford

Follett of Springfield

Fox of Essex

Gervais of Enosburg

Ginevan of Middlebury

Gray of Barre Town

Gretkowski of Burlington

Hathaway of Barton

Heath of Westford

Helm of Castleton

Hingtgen of Burlington

Hoag of Woodford

Holmes of Bethel

Hooker of Rutland City

Houston of Ferrisburgh

Howrigan of Fairfield

Hube of Londonderry

Hudson of Lyndon

Hummel of Underhill

Hyde of Fayston

Johnson of Canaan

Jordan of Middlesex

Kainen of Hartford

Keenan of St. Albans City

Kehler of Pomfret

Kinsey of Craftsbury

Koch of Barre Town

Krasnow of Charlotte

Krawczyk of Bennington

Kreitzer of Rutland City

LaBarge of Grand Isle

Lafayette of Burlington

Larocque of Barnet

Lehman of Hartford

Levin of Hartland

Lippert of Hinesburg

Mackinnon of Sharon

Mallary of Brookfield

Marron of Stowe

Maslack of Poultney

Masland of Thetford

Mazur of South Burlington

Mazzariello of Rutland City

Metzger of Milton

Milkey of Brattleboro

Miller of Shaftsbury

Milne of Washington

Molloy of Arlington

Morrissey of Bennington

Mullin of Rutland Town

Neiman of Georgia

Nitka of Ludlow

Nuovo of Middlebury

O'Donnell of Vernon

Osman of Plainfield

Palmer of Pownal

Paquin of Fairfax

Parizo of Essex

Partridge of Windham

Peaslee of Guildhall

Pembroke of Bennington

Perry of Richford

Pike of Mendon

Poirier of Barre City

Postman of Brownington

Pugh of South Burlington

Richardson of Weathersfield

Robb of Swanton

Rogers of Castleton

Rusten of Halifax

Schaefer of Colchester

Seibert of Norwich

Severance of Colchester

Sheltra of Derby

Smith of New Haven

Smith of Sudbury

Starr of Troy

Steele of Waterbury

Stevens of Newbury

Suchmann of Chester

Sullivan of Burlington

Sweaney of Windsor

Sweetser of Essex

Symington of Jericho

Towne of Berlin

Tracy of Burlington

Vincent of Waterbury

Voyer of Morristown

Waite of Pawlet

Weiss of Northfield

Westman of Cambridge

Wheeler of Burlington

Willett of St. Albans City

Winters of Williamstown

Wisell of Bristol

Wood of Brandon

Woodward of Johnson

Young of Orwell

Zuckerman of Burlington

Those who voted in the negative are:

Freed of Dorset

Fyfe of Newport City

Livingston of Manchester

Schiavone of Shelburne

Those members absent with leave of the House and not voting are:

Bristol of Brattleboro

Edwards of Swanton

Kitzmiller of Montpelier

Larrabee of Danville

Little of Shelburne

McGrath of Ferrisburgh

McNamara of Burlington

Quaid of Williston

Randall of Bradford

Rivero of Milton

Sherman of St. Johnsbury

Valsangiacomo of Barre City

Vinton of Colchester

Pending the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? Rep. Freed of Dorset demanded the Yeas and Nays, which demand was sustained by the Constitutional number. The Clerk proceeded to call the roll and the question, Shall the bill be read the third time? was decided in the affirmative. Yeas, 84. Nays, 51.

Those who voted in the affirmative are:

Alfano of Calais

Anderson of Woodstock

Aswad of Burlington

Atkins of Winooski

Barbieri of Wallingford

Brooks of Montpelier

Buckland of Newport Town

Carmolli of Rutland City

Colvin of Bennington

Costello of Brattleboro

Cross of Winooski

Dakin of Colchester

Darrow of Newfane

Darrow of Dummerston

Deen of Westminster

DePoy of Rutland

Deuel of West Rutland

Doyle of Richmond

Emmons of Springfield

Follett of Springfield

Fox of Essex

Fyfe of Newport City

Gervais of Enosburg

Ginevan of Middlebury

Heath of Westford

Helm of Castleton

Hoag of Woodford

Hooker of Rutland City

Hummel of Underhill

Jordan of Middlesex

Kainen of Hartford

Keenan of St. Albans City

Kehler of Pomfret

Kinsey of Craftsbury

Koch of Barre Town

Krasnow of Charlotte

Krawczyk of Bennington

Kreitzer of Rutland City

Lafayette of Burlington

Lehman of Hartford

Levin of Hartland

Lippert of Hinesburg

Mackinnon of Sharon

Marron of Stowe

Masland of Thetford

Mazzariello of Rutland City

Metzger of Milton

Milkey of Brattleboro

Miller of Shaftsbury

Milne of Washington

Molloy of Arlington

Mullin of Rutland Town

Nitka of Ludlow

Nuovo of Middlebury

Osman of Plainfield

Paquin of Fairfax

Parizo of Essex

Partridge of Windham

Pembroke of Bennington

Perry of Richford

Poirier of Barre City

Postman of Brownington

Pugh of South Burlington

Rogers of Castleton

Rusten of Halifax

Seibert of Norwich

Severance of Colchester

Smith of Sudbury

Stevens of Newbury

Suchmann of Chester

Sullivan of Burlington

Sweaney of Windsor

Symington of Jericho

Tracy of Burlington

Vincent of Waterbury

Voyer of Morristown

Waite of Pawlet

Weiss of Northfield

Westman of Cambridge

Wheeler of Burlington

Wisell of Bristol

Wood of Brandon

Woodward of Johnson

Zuckerman of Burlington

Those who voted in the negative are:

Allard of St. Albans Town

Angell of Randolph

Baker of West Rutland

Barney of Highgate

Blanchard of Essex

Bourdeau of Hyde Park

Bouricius of Burlington

Brown of Walden

Clark of St. Johnsbury

Cleland of Northfield

Corren of Burlington

Crawford of Burke

Dominick of Starksboro

Flaherty of South Burlington

Flory of Pittsford

Freed of Dorset

Gray of Barre Town

Gretkowski of Burlington

Hathaway of Barton

Hingtgen of Burlington

Holmes of Bethel

Houston of Ferrisburgh

Howrigan of Fairfield

Hube of Londonderry

Hudson of Lyndon

Hyde of Fayston

Johnson of Canaan

LaBarge of Grand Isle

Larocque of Barnet

Livingston of Manchester

Mallary of Brookfield

Maslack of Poultney

Mazur of South Burlington

Morrissey of Bennington

Neiman of Georgia

O'Donnell of Vernon

Palmer of Pownal

Peaslee of Guildhall

Pike of Mendon

Richardson of Weathersfield

Robb of Swanton

Schaefer of Colchester

Schiavone of Shelburne

Sheltra of Derby

Smith of New Haven

Steele of Waterbury

Sweetser of Essex

Towne of Berlin

Willett of St. Albans City

Winters of Williamstown

Young of Orwell

Those members absent with leave of the House and not voting are:

Bristol of Brattleboro

Edwards of Swanton

Kitzmiller of Montpelier

Larrabee of Danville

Little of Shelburne

McGrath of Ferrisburgh

McNamara of Burlington

Quaid of Williston

Randall of Bradford

Rivero of Milton

Sherman of St. Johnsbury

Starr of Troy

Valsangiacomo of Barre City

Vinton of Colchester

Rep. Kinsey of Craftsbury explained his vote as follows:

"Mr. Speaker:

For too many years we have had to say - wait till next year. With this budget we have kept our promises and helped a lot of people. I am proud to be on the committee and I am proud of our product and I am proud of the members who served with me."

Committee Bills Introduced

Hosue bills of the following titles were severally introduced, read the first time and, under the rule, placed on the Calendar for notice tomorrow:

H. 849

House bill, entitled

An act relating to penalties, dairy sheep, nonpoint source water pollution and large farm operations;

H. 850

House bill, entitled

An act relating to capital appropriationis and state bonding.

Joint Resolution Placed on Calendar

The Speaker placed before the House the following resolutions which was read and in the Speaker's discretion, placed on the Calendar for action tomorrow under Rule 52.

J.R.S. 91.

By Senator Munt,

Joint resolution designating May 2000 as Osteoporosis Awareness Month.

Whereas, osteoporosis, the thinning and weakening of the bone with age, is a major public health threat to Vermonters, and

Whereas, osteoporosis affects an estimated 17,040 Vermont women and 4,386 Vermont men over age 50, plus an additional 3l,685 Vermont women and 6,579 Vermont men who have low bone mass, placing them at higher risk for developing osteoporosis, and

Whereas, the major consequence of osteoporosis are fractures, most often of the hip, vertebrae, and wrist, which lead to chronic pain, disfigurement, reduced mobility, impaired function, loss of independence, and increased overall mortality, and

Whereas, one in three women and one in eight men age 50 or older, totaling 36,752 Vermonters will break a bone during their lifetime due to osteoporosis, and

Whereas, hip fractures, one of the most common osteoporosis-related fractures, are the most serious and costly fractures, and

Whereas, 50 percent of persons who sustain hip fractures become permanently disabled, and over 20 percent require long-term care, and

Whereas, the annual national health care costs for hip fractures is $13.8 billion, and

Whereas, 90 percent of hip fractures in women, and 80 percent of hip fractures in men, are due to osteoporosis, and

Whereas, due to the aging of the population, and Vermont's slightly higher than national average incidence of osteoporosis, if this affliction is not medically treated, there will be increasing health care costs and a decreased quality of life for thousands of Vermonters, and

Whereas, osteoporosis is a silent disease, as it often goes unrecognized for years, until one or more fractures have occurred, and

Whereas, osteoporosis is not an inevitable part of aging, and

Whereas, while everyone loses bone with age, bone mass can be maximized and bone loss can be minimized so that osteoporosis does not occur, and

Whereas, osteoporosis is thought of as a problem for the elderly, but the problem of low bone mass actually begins early in life, and

Whereas, a healthy lifestyle in childhood and adolescence can set the stage for optimum bone mass throughout life, and

Whereas, although proven methods are available to both prevent bone loss and treat established osteoporosis, most persons are unaware of their risk of developing osteoporosis and the steps to prevent, detect and treat this ailment, and

Whereas, sadly too many Vermonters do not choose a lifestyle leading to healthy bones, now therefore be it

RESOLVED BY THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:

The General Assembly designates May 2000 as Osteoporosis Awareness Month, and strongly supports the efforts of the Vermont Osteoporosis Taskforce, the National Osteoporosis Foundation, and regional osteoporosis programs to educate Vermonters on the risks related to this disease, and be it further

RESOLVED: That the General Assembly encourages the Vermont Department of Health's efforts to promote healthy lifestyles, leading to prevention of osteoporosis; including good nutrition, increased physical activity, prevention of smoking, and avoidance of excessive use of alcohol, and be it further

RESOLVED: That the Secretary of State be directed to send a copy of this resolution to Dr. Edward Lieb at the Fletcher Allen Medical Center.

Senate Bills Referred

Senate bills of the following titles were severally taken up, read the first time and referred as follows:

S. 303

Senate bill, entitled

An act relating to treatment of opiate addictioin;

To the committee on Health and Welfare;

S. 311

Senate bill, entitled

An act relating to an interstate compact for the supervision of adult offenders;

To the committee on Instituions.

Adjournment

At seven o'clock and ten minutes in the evening, on motion of Rep. Fyfe of Newoprt City, the House adjourned until tomorrow at nine o'clock in the forenoon.