SmartTranscript of Senate Institutions - 2025-05-20 - 2:30 PM

Select text to play as a video clip.

[Chair Wendy Harrison]: Okay. Great. Thank you. So it is still Tuesday, May twentieth, and this we are meeting this afternoon to discuss h fifty and a, an amendment to h fifty. And before we get started, I just wanna mention a couple of things that this list, this inventory is not a separate list from the existing inventory that is produced now. It's additional fields Correct. On the items that are on that list. And you might recall that we received, a nineteen eighty six version of the inventory. We're borrowing this from, senator or, commissioner Manoli. And I went and looked up just some of the items, and they actually do have the use. And, it's done by the parks and recreation, this amount. Thought that was interesting. And I looked at the first page of that, the introduction, and I gave you each a copy of it. It's from Madeline Cunan, who is the governor then. And what she says is, could you provide an updated inventory of state owned buildings? The purpose of this report is to display as accurately as possible a total listing of bill buildings, location, and description of their general use and value. These properties belong to all Vermonters. It is they who have helped build them and use them today for a wide variety of purposes. State government has a continued responsibility to maintain all of our buildings and properties in the best manner to serve the public. And I appreciate having, seen that, and I think our purpose now is the same purpose. And so as much information as we can include in this inventory, the better in my opinion. So who wants to start the conversation? Senator Watson is here, but she doesn't need to speak. She's just here in case we have questions. Why don't you start, senator Douglas? Because you're you are the presenter of the bill, and you also missed some of the meeting today because you were in another meeting. [Member Sam Douglass]: Yeah. There was another bill that I had mentioned. So I have. Senator Watson, are you willing to give a fifteen second overview that I missed of yeah. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Sure. Yeah. So the intent here is that I I sort of share the concern about selling land that might be the decision of, let's say, a commissioner. And I I have all the faith in the current commissioners. That's not my, you know, the the concern here. But, if a commissioner just decided that the purpose of the state somehow did not include, let's say, recreation, for example, that, suddenly that might appear the properties might appear on a list, somewhere. And so, you know, potentially for sale. So I wanted to be clear about who gets to decide, what the purpose of the state are. And so, the language is intended to not be narrowing, but rather expansive in terms of ensuring that the statutory purposes of, the, purposes of an and policies of an agency are included in whatever we deem as purposes of the state. [Member Sam Douglass]: So eliminate subjectivity? By giving the reasons for whether or not the property is unnecessary. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: I would leave that to legislative council to decide. Okay. Because I think it it is at least at the minimum, tying it to an objective thing. Yeah. I think there's still space because it's it says including, you know, the statutory purposes, but that it could it could be other things. But it at least needs to include those statutory purposes. Does that answer your question? [Member Sam Douglass]: Yeah. Thank you. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Thank you. [Member Sam Douglass]: Maybe this is a question for ledge counsel, but could you switch the word policy for purposes? It's it's it's the same thing that reads easier. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Or maybe delete policy. Yes. Because purposes is statutory. Delete policy and. It just says statutory purposes. [Member Russ Ingalls]: I would feel a lot better. I think if we just got rid of that, that part of it, I I just don't think that that is the role of the commissioner to be giving their opinion about the usefulness to the state. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Well, this is the head of each agency [Speaker 3 ]: I don't know. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Who would say that. [Speaker 3 ]: I'm [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Who would just identify the existing statutory purpose. And every property of the state should have a statutory purpose. Every like, at the table has a statutory purpose. I mean, everything that we own has a purpose. [Member Russ Ingalls]: Yeah. But this isn't asking that only at the end of it. It's basically asking their opinion of [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Well, I I know risk and [Member Russ Ingalls]: I've seen the risk matter. I know. I know. But when when you add what Anne adds to it, it does change what the available the whole where we were with it. It just does. And I don't have problem with Anne's language as much as what it does to the whole panel, especially that little section on it. It's just something in there that's pawing at me that I can't agree with. So I'm just trying to find some language in there that would make me feel better. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: So if we if we deleted the word policy and and? [Member Russ Ingalls]: If we if we just prescribe to the commissioner whether any building is vacant and if we got rid of whether the land is is unnecessary for state purpose. I mean, I don't know. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Well, that's the whole point of the bill. K. That's that's how it came to us. Well The the new language is just the which includes the statutory policy and purposes of any state agency. I know. So if the as I see it, the last phrase modifies the other. It does it's not a new item. It's it's a it's more adjectives about the property. [Member Sam Douglass]: I wonder what instance there would be for the land to not be necessary for state purposes. Like, let's say, AHS have a property and there's a lot, along the property, that's the building that isn't being used by AHS. So they might indicate, you know, this is not being used by us, but does that make it unnecessary for state purposes? Because another agency can very well find a purpose for it. [Member Russ Ingalls]: Or two hundred years from then. [Member Sam Douglass]: Or two hundred years from then, we can find a purpose for it. [Speaker 3 ]: Sure. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Sure. And that that's a choice that we that's a determination that we and the house committee make is and we have sold property. We [Member Sam Douglass]: we authorize that. I suppose it doesn't hurt to get the opinion of the agency of whether or not they think it's unnecessary if we're the policy committee making the decisions. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Mhmm. [Speaker 3 ]: So oh, I'm sorry. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: No. Go ahead. [Speaker 3 ]: So [Chair Wendy Harrison]: up [Speaker 3 ]: until about thirty seconds ago, was fine. It's the the unnecessary part of it that is maybe it is getting me a little bit because to Sam's plan, [Member Russ Ingalls]: I [Speaker 3 ]: it it may not be necessarily necessarily necessary, excuse me, for within the boundary of the commissioner at of whatever agency at that time, but it may go to it may become necessary for another agency to for for whatever. So that that's, I guess, what's getting me a little bit training for that. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Right. But the whole purpose of this bill is to understand at least it it's it would be the first threshold of probably ten or Yeah. Or so actions before anything was sold. But the first threshold would be does whichever agency has control of the property need that property. If they don't, then I would think we would look at other agencies of the state or look at potential future uses of the state before we would sell it, but that's the selling process. This is just a list of of properties that the agencies could could do without. [Speaker 3 ]: To to your particular point, this is just saying for the state. I think if you you say for that commissioner or secretaries who's ever making that opinion in order for for their department, then I'm do you do you want me [Chair Wendy Harrison]: to Okay. Yes. [Member Russ Ingalls]: Yes. I'm on board with that. Okay. [Speaker 3 ]: But if I I you can't if I'm, like I don't know. I'm saying if can can say, yeah, for that, but then Farrell can go, okay. But, you know, we wanna go housing here. So you you said and Yeah. Windsor is a perfect example. Yep. You know? So that's that's where I was [Member Russ Ingalls]: hung up a little Yeah. [Speaker 3 ]: Trying to think to senator. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: So I think what you would be suggesting is an amendment online fifteen versus any land is unnecessary for the agency's purposes instead of the state for state purposes. [Speaker 3 ]: I because they're I mean, it's it's I can get [Member Russ Ingalls]: a little closer to that. Yeah. [Speaker 3 ]: It's under their office. Yeah. [Member Sam Douglass]: How about how about this? The head so go to the top of the underlying section. The head of each agency establishment indicates inventory and a former owner described that you mentioned whether any bay building's vacant and whether any land is unnecessary for the statutory purpose of that agency. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Oh, interesting. Put it together. [Speaker 3 ]: I'm I'm a little better for that because it is that that that what they're responsible for, hey. I don't need this anymore. But if it's And this is a perfect narrows that that you know? I'm saying I don't need this anymore, but it's not saying necessarily the state doesn't need it. [Member Russ Ingalls]: Right. Right. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Yep. So the statute I don't [Member Russ Ingalls]: want it to be this list to be all of a sudden to say, okay. This is what we're gonna sell. Right. Yeah. I don't wanna make I don't want anybody making that decision. I'm that easy. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: I'm right. [Speaker 3 ]: I'm good. From anyone, you know, centered with the stuff. So that's that's. I I I just feel better today, man. [Member Russ Ingalls]: Oh, I see. Right. That's fine. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Alright. Well, how about we counter with that? Because then we have statutory purpose, and we have the agency. And I think that I [Member Sam Douglass]: think it makes the language more clear. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: And I think it's consistent with the intent. And you're still listing intents. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Go ahead. [Speaker 3 ]: And you're still listing it. I mean, in in [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Yes. Since it's Yes. And it's easier to understand. [Speaker 3 ]: And I and I apologize, Senator Watson, since this is your amendment. You know, I wanna how do you feel about that? [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Oh, I feel good about that. In fact, I think I like it better because the point is shorter just in general, and I think it's does the clarifying work that I was hoping it would do. And and I I yeah. I think it's great. Great. So Thank you. [Member Sam Douglass]: We can do that as a committee amendment. You won't need to stand up or talk. It's free. It's gonna be free. It [Chair Wendy Harrison]: doesn't mean Oh, [Speaker 3 ]: we're gonna get credit for it. We're gonna get credit for it. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Oh, no. That's okay. We don't. That's alright. [Member Russ Ingalls]: Thank you, senator Watson. Yeah. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: So that is what I do. Credit [Speaker 3 ]: for it. Okay. [Member Russ Ingalls]: Want me to report that on the list? [Chair Wendy Harrison]: Yes. Okay. So Okay. Miss Stravo. Yes? K a five zero. If I may be just so you all are aware, I think that amendment, as I had proposed it, may appear in the calendar, but I would just not offer it. So thank you. Thank you. Alright. So then we need to get the draft changed. It down. So it hopefully, it will be done by tomorrow. Should be able to be done by tomorrow. [Speaker 3 ]: Mhmm. [Chair Wendy Harrison]: K. Well, that's good. Anything else? Okay. We are adjourned.
Select text if you'd like to play only a clip.

This transcript was computer-produced using some AI. Like closed-captioning, it won't be fully accurate. Always verify anything important by playing a clip.

Speaker IDs are still experimental