The state Senate voted to approve, with some changes, Gov. Ned Lamont’s standing executive orders on Monday.

Following the House’s passage of Lamont’s remaining executive orders last week, the Senate took up the issue Monday and approved a bill encompassing most of the governor’s orders with a 21-14 vote. As in the House, the Senate voted mostly along party lines, and Senate Republicans introduced multiple amendments that resembled Republican amendments in the House. Sen. Cathy Osten, D-Sprague, voted with Republicans against the measure.

The Senate also passed a resolution the House passed last week declaring a new public health and civil emergency in the state by a 21-13 partisan vote. While the bill goes to the governor to sign, the resolution doesn’t require the executive branch’s approval.

The public health and civil emergency declaration was passed in order for the state to qualify for tens of millions in monthly federal FEMA and SNAP aid. According to the text of the resolution, declaring this emergency “is essential to the health, safety and welfare of Connecticut’s citizens that there continue to be declared public health and civil preparedness emergencies to enable state agencies to access crucial federal funds.”

In comparison, the debate about whether to codify Lamont’s executive orders, a separate measure, lasted longer and inspired greater controversy. The executive orders were set to expire Tuesday.

Sen. Heather Somers, R-Groton, criticized the legislative process to bring the bill to the floor. She and other Republicans took issue with what they characterize as an insufficient amount of public input on the bill during a public hearing last week. Somers said the “supposed hearing” on the executive orders “was really anything but a public hearing.”

 “It was a shortened forum, and the people sitting on that forum weren’t even allowed to ask the questions that they had,” she said.

“I think one of the most frustrating parts about doing this today is we’ve known about these deadlines for months,” Somers said later. “What have we been doing to not have a full public hearing on each one of these executive orders before today?”

Ahead of Monday’s session, Senate Minority Leader Kevin Kelly, R-Stratford, and Senate Minority Leader Pro Tempore Paul Formica, R-East Lyme, also took issue with how the bill came before the Senate.

“It’s a bit of a sham to call the informational hearing a public hearing that had public input,” Kelly said. “The bill and the language we’re looking at wasn’t even made available prior to that informational hearing.”

Formica said during debate on Monday that he couldn’t vote in favor of the bill because he didn’t support each executive order individually.

“Some I agree with and some I cannot. Part of the problem I have with this bill is it’s an all-or-nothing vote,” Formica said. “As far as the governor saying on February 28th he’s going to stop the mask mandate and allow local boards of education to move forward, I think that’s great. But the extension into the end of June for people under his control to make that determination is a little bit concerning to me.”

Among the policies the legislature debated to possibly extend Lamont's executive orders was one that would allow the commissioners of the state Education and Public Health departments to again implement statewide school and day care masking or social distancing rules if they see fit up until the end of the school year on June 30.

The governor hadn't directly ordered a mask mandate in schools, but rather signed executive orders empowering the commissioners of the Department of Public Health and Department of Education to require masks, which they have. Lamont developed his plan to eliminate the statewide mandate in consultation with both. Following his announcement last week that he is moving to end the statewide school mask mandate Feb. 28 and put the decision in districts' hands, superintendents in southeastern Connecticut are figuring out what to do — and awaiting more information.

On Monday, Republicans proposed an amendment to leave the decision of whether to require masks to school boards rather than the commissioners of the state public health and education departments, which was defeated along party lines. Republicans also proposed an amendment to leave the decision on masking to parents, which failed.

Somers and other Republicans argued that mask-wearing in schools is negatively impacting students, particularly in terms of behavior and learning quality. Democrats said they wanted the state to be able to respond quickly in case of another coronavirus outbreak and noted that its deadlines are all within the next four months or so.

Last week, legislators included an amendment in the bill passed by the Senate on Monday to give renters/landlords until April 15 to apply for COVID-19 relief. The bill also includes a coronavirus vaccination requirement for nursing home visitors (expiring March 15) as well as long-term care workers and state hospital employees, who have until March 7 to be vaccinated. Unvaccinated people aged 2 or older still must wear masks in indoor spaces through April 15 when adequate social distancing is not possible.

Also extended to April 15 is an executive order that allows the state DPH to divulge a person’s vaccination status to their local health director, health care provider or school nurse, and allows health directors and school nurses to look up an individual's vaccination status when responding to COVID-19 outbreaks.

An order issued to make it so state contracting agencies can forgo certain state statutes requiring a competitive bidding process for equipment or for essential services contracts has been extended to April 15.

After opposing the bill codifying Lamont’s executive orders, Osten stood in vigorous support of the resolution.

“This resolution is exactly what I’ve been asking for since we first started talking about the governor having an extension of his executive powers,” Osten said. “I believe the legislature should stand up and be the one responsible for any extension. It’s exactly why I voted against extending the governor’s executive orders, because I believe the legislature should … be a coequal branch of government.”

In September 2021, Osten said she philosophically disagrees with extending the governor’s emergency orders: “I think the legislature should be doing the work.” She voted against such a measure the two times prior to September of last year, too.

During Republican leadership’s news media availability ahead of debate on Monday, Kelly argued that SNAP benefits are not at stake, as other states that have not declared a public health and civil preparedness emergency are still able to receive the federal allotment. That argument played out on the floor, with Democrats maintaining that the state is required to display a public health and civil preparedness emergency.

Republicans argued the state is not still in a public health and civil emergency, and it was a mostly symbolic move meant only to get more money for the state. Aside from the monthly federal aid, Democrats said it was important the legislature acknowledge that people are still living through a pandemic that has had lasting social and financial effects.

"The reality is we should not do anything that could even potentially jeopardize that flow of funds, but it's not the primary reason why we are doing this resolution here," Senate President Pro Tempore Martin Looney, D-New Haven, said Monday. "It is because we recognize that it is an assertion of legislative authority to deal with what we perceive to be a continuing crisis."

s.spinella@theday.com