 Good morning, everyone. Today, Secretary French will give us an update on schools. Secretary Smith will talk about vaccines and Dr. Levine will give us his health update. To start, those who are 75 and older, if you haven't gotten an appointment as yet for the vaccine, there's still time. There are still plenty of time slots available. The website and phone number will be up on the screen behind me and we'll leave it up during the briefing so that you can call if you'd like to. There it is. Now, we've been very clear about why we're using a vaccine by age strategy because the science and data is real. The older you are, the more likely you are to die if you contract this virus. I've heard concerns and comments from some who wonder why can't we vaccinate younger people first? Those who are out and about. Can't those who are older just stay home? And look, I understand how anxious everyone is and how anxious they are for everything to get back closer to normal. But we feel strongly that our goal should be reducing hospitalizations and deaths rather than prioritize lower risk groups. First, preservation of life must be our top priority. That's why we've taken the measures we have over the last 10 months. And I hope everyone understands this virus isn't just a common cold. We've seen over 400,000 Americans lose their lives to this. Vaccinating those most at risk first will not only save lives and prevent our hospitals from being overwhelmed, but this will allow us to open up our economy quicker too. Because we can't wait for herd immunity to ease restrictions and get back to normal again. And if we protect those who are most at risk, we can end the state of emergency faster. Now, don't get me wrong. Mass and distancing will still be with us for a while. But with a strategy focused on limiting hospitalization and death, we can both open up more and keep people safe. And remember, every dose diverted from the most vulnerable will only prolong our return to more normal times. Second, I want Vermonters to think about what it's been like since March for our parents, grandparents, and elderly friends, and how much they've sacrificed. Like 83-year-old Nancy Stevens, who shared a story with Vermont Digger this week, Nancy was able to get her first dose on Wednesday. The day our clinics opened to those 75 and older. According to Digger, Nancy lives in East Hardwick and has been staying in her home for the past 11 months. She's followed the guidance, skipped Thanksgiving and Christmas gatherings, and hasn't even met her great-grandchild who was born this past year. When she got her vaccine yesterday, she told Digger, and I quote, It's been tough. I miss my family. I used to go places and do things with my family and friends almost every day. I'd like very much to be able to be free again. I hear similar stories all the time, and I know how hard this has been. In fact, I haven't been able to see my own mom in over a year. And by the way, she's been trying to sign up to get her vaccine in Florida for the last month, and just texted me this morning with the good news. She has an appointment next Tuesday. We know those who are older are more vulnerable, and they've always been there for us, each and every one of us. Now it's our turn to be there for them. With that, I'll turn it over to Secretary French. Thank you, Governor. Good morning. I'll begin my update with a review of our surveillance testing data for the last two weeks, since I didn't get a report on this data last week. We've been conducting the weekly PCR surveillance testing for school staff since mid-November. The testing is voluntary, and we see about 40% of staff participating in the testing each week. For the week of January 17th, we had a participation rate of 41%, with two positive cases. This translates to a positivity rate of .08%, which remains significantly lower than the state positivity rate of 2%. This week, we had a participation rate of 39%, or about 2,200 tests. And to date, we have not had any cases from this week's testing. The data from our surveillance testing has been useful to monitor conditions for the virus around the state. We do not use the surveillance testing data in our decision-making around vaccine prioritization. The prioritization of vaccination is largely driven by the very limited supply of vaccines. We do think the surveillance testing is a very important tool. We intend to continue to use it in the coming months. The data from the testing is just one indicator that helps us understand the conditions of the virus in both our schools and our communities. We can use the data to help inform any changes we might need to make in our guidance to ensure the safety of our schools. I do think these data show that we continue to operate our schools very safely. We have cases of virus in our schools, but the mitigation measures used by school staff show we can contain the spread of the virus when it does occur. The dedication of our epi-team is the Department of Health, and their close collaboration with school staff, such as our school nurses, are key ingredients for the success in containing the virus. Implementing these mitigation systems in our schools will remain a priority in the coming months, even as we deploy more vaccines, and will remain a priority as we put more emphasis on recovery efforts in education. I thought I'd give an update on some other things we were working on relative to guidance in our schools. We have not made a decision yet on whether we would permit competitions and games for winter sports. We continue to monitor our epi-data very closely in this regard. Not enough time has passed, however, to understand the impact of expanded practices and team-based scrimmages on COVID cases and the required quarantines. Throughout the pandemic, we've been struggling with developing guidance for music in schools. There are some aspects of music that are inherently more risky than other activities, but we remain committed to trying to find a path forward in music. We will be having a meeting on February 9th with music teachers and our health experts to review next steps for music. Lastly, we've been working on our approach to the mandatory state assessments. In Vermont, we use the Smarter Balanced Assessment, or what we call the SDAC. Last year, the federal government waived the requirement for states to administer these tests because of the COVID-19 emergency. We've been waiting to see how the Biden administration will be addressing the requirement for mandatory assessments. Meanwhile, we've been evaluating our options. Because there are a lot of logistics behind this decision, we'll be providing an update on our approach later in February. Tests are normally administered in May. That concludes my update. I'll now turn it over to Secretary Smith. Thank you, Secretary French. As of today, over 48,000 Vermonters have received vaccines. 32,952 Vermonters received their first dose and 15,400 their second dose. As of last evening, we have now registered 32,556 Vermonters, 75 years old or older, who are scheduled for their first dose of COVID-19 vaccine over the next five weeks. As I mentioned, we anticipate finishing the first dose of this age group in five weeks, looking out further. We anticipate having the first three age bands at 75 years old and older, 70 years old and older, and 65 years old and older, done with their first dose by the end of the winter or beginning of spring. And many will have received their second dose as well. We use the first dose to calculate when we can begin to move to the next phase. That tells us how many new people we can vaccinate with the vaccine allotment that we get from the federal government. You know, several press conference ago, someone asked me about my end of the winter beginning of spring prediction for having first doses completed for the three age bands. And by the way, many of the second doses completed too. I said middle to end of March, and I still feel comfortable in providing that timeframe. In addition, I have not included in any of these calculations any new vaccines that may come to the market or any increase in doses coming from the federal government. Obviously, this would accelerate the timeframe. Speaking of additional doses, this week we received an additional 1,350 first doses of the vaccine. This is above and beyond our regular allocation. Our priorities for the additional allocation are increase appointments in counties that have limited appointments for ages 75 and above. That includes Orange, Bennington and LaMoyle counties, vulnerable populations, which include BIPOC community and individuals in the 1A grouping. We hope to receive 10,375 doses for the next two weeks. We will work to add vaccination sites to areas where there are longer drive times and the homebound and continue to allocate vaccines to group 1A healthcare workers. We will also keep a small reserve on hand to respond to any emerging issues. Last week, to facilitate the transition from group 1A to phase 2, the majority of the vaccine allocation was for Vermonters aged 75 and older. As we transitioned to phase 2, we asked hospitals to use quantities they had in stock first. And in future weeks, we would continue to provide vaccine allocations to complete the 1A group, albeit in smaller amounts than when phase 1A began. Unfortunately, some Vermonters took that to mean that we are no longer providing vaccines for the 1A grouping. This is not the case. We will continue to provide vaccines for those in 1A. Although there may be some who have may have been vaccinated that didn't fall into the definition of 1A, looking at the program in total through the hospital program, we believe that the majority of vaccine recipients in fact did meet the qualifications. We are continuing to work with hospitals to ensure clarity on who is included in group 1A and we are providing screening tools to help them determine who should be included. As I have mentioned before, and I just want to mention again, we have no waiting list for extra doses. However, we are striving to prevent wasted doses in this vaccination program. There are lists of people that we maintain who are eligible for vaccines. This includes lists of eligible Vermonters 75 years and older that have registered for vaccines, 1A Vermonters that are eligible and homebound 75 plus that are eligible as well. These are the priority groups that we will call if there are extra doses at the end of the day. However, the prime objective is to prevent wasted doses and if, as a last resort, a vaccine has to be administered to a person not eligible in order to prevent waste, local health clinics have been given the permission to use Vermont common sense and fairness in not wasting doses. As I mentioned, in response to increased demand in certain counties, we have added appointments in Bennington, Orange and LaMoyle County. We continue to work with Grand Isle County to finalize and add appointment sites. We also are encouraging the call center and all other individuals who are assisting people with registration to make sure that all available locations are considered, including kidney drug, kidney drug operating sites. Each night we monitor the appointments available at each site and although some sites are beginning to fill up, there are still openings in every county across the state. It may not be at a date and time that you wish, but there are still openings and if one fills up, we will expand and react to anything any county that fills up. As I have mentioned previously, there have been only a few bumps along the road as we implemented this statewide vaccination program, but as I said on Wednesday, so far this statewide registration and vaccination process has been a success and I think you've seen that from the reaction of the public. This success is the result of many people, including as I mentioned before, many state employees across multiple departments and agencies, our health partners, neighbors and friends who gave a helping hand to those folks to get scheduled. I just have to say a big thank you to all of them. Again, it is important to emphasize we are vaccinating older Vermonters first to prevent death. That's plain and simple. As the Governor said, over 70% of Vermont's COVID-19 deaths have been among Vermonters 75 and older and more than 90% among age 65 and older. We have an obligation and as I've said before, we have a moral obligation to prevent Vermonters from dying. In addition, as the Governor mentioned, think about this since last March. Our seniors have been some of the hardest hit during this pandemic in terms of isolation. If we can reduce the number of people who have severe illness, who are dying, who may be also hospitalized, this positions us to begin to return to normal much earlier than if we take our limited amount of vaccine and prioritize those who are at very little risk of severe illness, complications or death. I would urge those Vermonters 75 years old and older who have not done so to go ahead and register for your vaccine. Please do so by going online at the Health Department's website at healthvermont.gov slash my vaccine or call our registration call center at 855-722-7878. Lastly, on Wednesday, we made a game time call on what to report to you at this press conference on the situation at Springfield Hospital. Just moments before we walking into this press conference, both Dr. Levina and I got a text informing us about a situation at Springfield Hospital regarding the Moderna vaccine being stored there and that vaccination clinics had been canceled. We could have done one of two things, not mention it at the press conference or disclose it with everything that we knew at the time. We chose transparency and I read directly from a text that I received including that the standing recommendation from the manufacturer is to waste doses in this situation. But I also said that VDH was investigating me, investigating. Believe me, the last I wanted to report was news that we may have to waste 860 doses of COVID-19 vaccine, especially when we had such a good track record of minimizing dosage loss. But I thought it was important to be up front with what we knew at the time. As Dr. Levine will report, we have some good news about vaccines at Springfield Hospital, but I know the situation caused some confusion, which is often the case in breaking news situations. I apologize for any confusion, but I am pleased that we'll be able to report, be able to use most of these doses. I'll now turn it over to Dr. Levine. Thank you. Just for a very quick update and then I'm going to speak a little bit about colleges, speak about the doses you just were informed about and a little more on vaccine. Cases in Vermont really remain at steady levels between 78 and 133 cases in the past three days. Most importantly, our seven-day average continues to trend slightly downward in the low 130 range. We continue to have a very favorable percent positivity rate of 2.2 percent. Deaths continue to increase at a much lower rate. We believe this has something to do with the fact that there have been less cases of COVID in long-term care facilities in the month of January than in the month prior and hence less opportunity for death in these populations. That is indeed good news. There has been an uptick in hospitalizations. Yesterday's report was 59 hospitalized patients. There's been a slight delay in my getting the numbers from this morning and if I get them during the conference, I'll report them out. We continue to very closely monitor the colleges and universities as students return. As I mentioned on Wednesday, we're seeing more cases through testing when students first arrive and again seven days later. A number of athletic teams have had outbreaks and had their seasons paused, including UVM, Castleton, and Norwich. Because it's been in the news, Norwich University is where I'll start. It's reported now over 80 cases. This is a situation we're following very closely and we're reviewing existing infection control protocols and prevention strategies. We believe much of the initial impact was from students traveling from many other parts of the country, perhaps not quarantining first, adding in the risk of travel and in some cases students learned on their arrival here that family members from back home had tested positive. We are working very closely with Norwich to refine testing protocols, especially for close contacts, on top of the surveillance testing that's already in place. Examine case location and potential spread on campus to guide us in facility recommendations and review their quarantine housing protocols and where needed provide state support. Now we've heard anecdotally from the colleges about faster spread of the virus, more students with symptoms than in the fall, but we don't yet have data on whether this is the result of any difference in the virus itself. We projected the return for the spring semester would reveal more active case numbers than in the fall, knowing how much more virus activity has been happening throughout the country and the region. We are in the process of submitting specimens from cases for genomic sequencing to see if any of these college cases involve the new variants. I won't have further information on that till sometime next week, as it's not as rapid a turnaround as a PCR test would be. Now, though these cases are concerning, this is exactly why we require returning college students to be tested and quarantined. This helps us identify cases, ensure they isolate themselves, and that their close contacts quarantine before the semester even begins. This allows school to start safely and helps protect the surrounding communities. As they did in the fall, the University of Vermont is doing some testing prior to the student even leaving home through saliva testing. And on a very positive note, we have results thus far from 6,521 students with only 15 positives for a positivity rate of 0.25%. Early data from Champlain College also reveals only a few cases that are positive at this point in time. So these are very promising good news, and again, validate the reason why we do this in the first place, to enable our colleges to return to their semester with safety of their campus and their communities in mind. Now, moving to Springfield, many of you heard, as the Secretary was just talking about, at our press conference about information we received relating to concerns about the temperature of some vaccine doses at Springfield Hospital. We've been notified that its refrigerated vaccine may have reached a temperature slightly above the manufacturer's recommended maximum, and I mean slightly, a little over one degree centigrade. The general guidelines Moderna provided to all of the states indicated that, in that situation, the doses may need to be discarded, and indeed preliminary communications with the company seemed very consistent with that. But because of the very large amount of vaccine involved, 860 doses, and the specifics of the situation, we along with hospital officials worked with the company on a much more comprehensive review. Late yesterday afternoon, Moderna informed me and the Health Department that all of the vaccine doses are indeed effective and safe for use. They determined none of the doses were impacted by temperature inconsistencies, and all could be used with full public confidence. Fortunately, none of the vaccine had been discarded as we waited for these results. I'd like to emphasize that the conclusion was based on a deeper review of all of the facts. We want the public to know that they can have confidence in the vaccine and in Springfield Hospital. We appreciate the hospital's proactive efforts in alerting us about the situation and working with us during this review. You should know that our Immunization Program, which provides vaccination guidance and support for the state's healthcare providers, continues to work with Springfield Hospital to investigate the storage issues. They plan to conduct a site visit today, something that we commonly do in the Immunization Program. Though we always work to minimize what's called non-viable doses or wastage, it does happen in the world of vaccination, and I said this at the last press conference as well. Luckily in Vermont, we have had a very low number of COVID-19 vaccine wastage so far. 99 doses or 0.1 percent of all doses in the state have been considered non-viable or wastage. You've also heard Secretary Smith's update on our vaccination clinics that began on Wednesday for the 75 and older Vermonters. I really can't pass up the opportunity to again say how proud I am of our teams, especially in our local health offices. Even though the COVID-19 vaccine rollout is an unprecedented effort, this is part of what we do, bringing health services to communities. Whether it's WIC, the Women, Infants, and Children Program, or school health, or immunizations, or more, we connect with and serve Vermonters through these offices every day. When you think about this total undertaking that involves so many moving parts and details, it can be easy to lose sight of the big picture. I hope many of us got a glimpse of that big picture this week on the faces of our own patients or parents or grandparents that we are much closer to hugging, of our older neighbors who will no longer feel isolated in their homes, and of our friends and co-workers sharing their own relief that their loved ones will be protected from this virus. We've many more people to reach with these vaccines, but each of these moments help us look ahead with hope. We've certainly faced plenty of glitches, too, and we continue to learn from them and change what we can to make it easy for Vermonters. So for those of you who do have appointments, I'll share just a few quick tips that will help make your experience a good one. First of all, we appreciate your being on time, but try not to arrive earlier than 15 minutes before your appointment. If you need someone to come with you for assistance, please try to bring only one person so we can limit the number of people inside the clinic and follow the distancing precautions appropriately, and clearly dress warmly for the weather and don't forget your mask. We again thank Vermonters for their patience and understanding, and remember, and I think the governor said it very well on Wednesday, just because you got a vaccine does not make you invincible. It does take time for the vaccine to train your body to fight COVID-19, so you might not be protected by the vaccine until a few weeks after your second dose. Second dose. Keep up all the same precautions in the meantime, wearing a mask, keeping a distance, and avoiding gatherings and travel. Governor? Thank you, Dr. Levine. We'll now open it up to questions. Calvin? Thanks, Governor. So as Secretary Smith mentioned, the signups for the 75 plus, they're beginning to kind of tail off, you know, we've already had tens of thousands apply. I'm wondering, you know, what percentage of the 75 plus you expect to sign up, and potentially when you'll decide to move on to the next aid band? Well, a lot of it will depend on the supply, obviously, but we've been very satisfied to date with the number of people who signed up. I think Secretary Smith had mentioned 32,500. Add to that the about 7,000 that are in our long-term care facilities that have already received the vaccine. That brings us to almost 40,000 of the 49,000. So we're getting to the point where that's going to not maybe not close it out, but we're well on our way to to accomplishing our goal. We'll reflect on this and we'll want to open up the next reservation list, so to speak, as soon as we possibly can, but that doesn't mean they'll get to, we'll get them to them any quicker because all is dependent upon the supply, but we want to be ready. So we don't want to open up too quick in case all of a sudden the federal government decides we're going to get another allotment or more of the vaccine, and that would enable us to have more time slots available. So if we do it too quick and then all of a sudden we find that out, we won't have accommodated those who are calling in and signing up. So we'll balance that out, but we want to get to the next aid band just as quick as possible. And a question about school sports, you know, Secretary French, he mentioned that we're still working on the details and when that's going to be possible, but you know, we've heard from several frustrated parents that they just are looking for answers. What specifically in the data is the state looking for to start up galactic gains? And I guess as we, you know, heard people point to towards the hockey incident in Montpelier and how Dr. Levine said there really wasn't much transmission on the ice. Right. Well, again, we we're being cautious. We did open this next phase up. I think it was last week or the week before. We want to make sure that there's not is not any ripple effect from that negative effect on that. We're also somewhat watching some of the collegiate sports as we've seen. There has been some transmission between players on that level. So it all factors in community spread is prevalent in some areas. We want to make sure that we don't make the problem worse. So I know people are anxious. I know people are frustrated. I know this is important to kids. It's important to all of us to get back to normal. But we just don't want to make any missteps. We've done this fairly well so far. But but we don't want to set any false expectations either. Because at the end of the day, we're trying to do decrease hospitalizations and limit the number of deaths that we're seeing, bringing that down to zero if possible. But but knowing we have our hands full in that respect. Anything you want to add to that? The only thing I'll add is we are seeing some cases even in the practice environment. It doesn't mean there's epidemics and outbreaks and all of that. But there are cases. So that's noteworthy. It again reflects what's going on in the environment around us. So we need to watch that closely. As the governor said, we need a little more time in terms of the incubation period of the virus. We need to watch the other metrics that we always follow because they are predictors as well of how we're going to do in opening any sector, including more competition in sports. I do have an update on the numbers I just provided. Our positivity rate has actually gone down even further. It's now 2.0%. And the number of hospitalizations has minimally gone down to 57 with 11 in the ICU. So we do need to watch those numbers again very carefully. Not that we're abutting against any of the guardrails that we commonly follow, but we have to watch that very carefully. Governor, just a quick question on your reaction, perhaps to the talk of extending out the sales tax to so much more as far as broadening where that applies. Do you have any comment on that? Or is there anything off limits? Well, increasing taxes has kind of been my limitation. I don't think this is the time to increase taxes on anyone. I'm happy to have the conversation about how it's done and making sure that we deal with the new reality and the new economy in some respects, but we'll, you know, we'll let the legislature have that conversation. We'll be a part of that and give as much information as possible. But I don't, other than making sure that we don't raise taxes during this time, which would be counterintuitive considering the struggles that we're under, we'll be a part of the conversation. I think you would mention that you'd rather not see a tax hike, but possibly broadening. Well, I'm just, if there's an equaling of some sort, I mean, happy to have the conversation. But at this point in time, I don't think we, you know, need to get into conversations too much about restructuring other than making sure that we provide relief for those going through this. Our priority should be at this point in time getting through this crisis. This is what we need to do, making, paying attention to our economy, making sure that we're providing for Vermonters. As we've seen, we had an unexpected surplus in some respects during this, these last few months due to the tax structure we have right now. If the legislature is talking about reducing the burden, reducing taxation, I'm all ears and I'm a willing participant. But at this point in time, we just have to be cautious because we don't know what the surplus, how it was derived. I believe because the injection of all the federal stimulus money, that that's why we're in the situation, the positive situation we're in right now, but that may not be sustainable. So I don't want to make any mistakes as we work our way through this. And we should have the conversations, but let's not take too many drastic steps until we know what's going to happen in the future. Thank you. Thanks. The news this morning from Johnson and Johnson that their vaccine is 66% effective or that's the first number you hear, which is obviously a smaller number than we've seen from Pfizer and Moderna. I'm wondering if you could help us understand that does that mean it's less desirable or might be administered to a different population given the it looks as if the company is going to submit emergency use authorization, you know, imminently. I'm sure this is a question that Dr. Levine would like to answer. Well, you could take a shot if you want. As you'll hear from my answer, he could give my answer. So that's not a problem because this is, you know, this is like one of those headline pieces of news without any of the details. Kind of like the 860 doses, but we don't really have any insight into it yet. It's the same situation. What happens during this process now is that vaccine advisory body to the FDA will have all of the data. And as you're kind of alluding to, there is the overall number and then there is the subgroup analyses looking at specific populations, people with chronic disease, people who have some heterogeneity from a racial or age standpoint, all kinds of subgroup analyses where one vaccine may look different than another. And now we're hearing that another metric when the company has the information is how it performs against a specific variant or not. So I think anything I would say right now would be very premature and not well informed because I haven't been given this data to analyze myself. And that's what we'll learn as we go through the emergency use authorization process. What will the metric be? And what will the threshold be for these advisory panels to say yes or no and advising the FDA to give it an EUA or not? Okay, Dr. Limim while you're there, I'm just about the cold and the elderly standing outside waiting for their vaccine. I mean, it's nine degrees at Springfield right now and minus six was wind chill. Is that dangerous to the point where people should consider rescheduling or do you really want to avoid that? You know, what the council we've given and what I'm under the impression of is that we're telling people to not stand outside in line. We're telling them to stay in their cars, be warm, and then closer to the time of their appointment, be there. And that's why in my opening comments I said, you know, within 15 minutes of your appointment as opposed to some of those lines we see in places like Florida where it's a little warmer, fortunately, but the people are standing for hours at a time sometime. That should not be the case at one of our sites because of the way the appointment scheduling goes. So I would not want anybody, even if they're 45 years old, standing, you know, for a long period of time in that kind of cold environment, especially when they're not doing anything but standing in line. Okay. Governor, one question, please, about this petition drive that I would imagine might feel personal to you. There are almost 1200 people who have signed this thing asking you to leave the Republican Party. How do you take that? Well, again, Stuart, just coming off an election where it took about 67% of the vote, received the highest number of votes in quite some time, coming off from a primary where I did fairly well in the primary, do have a number of people who are not supporters of mine. That's understandable where that's what politics is about. I mean, I think it's unfortunate, but we'll see where this goes. Again, at the end of the day, if the Republican Party decides they don't want me to be a member of their club, that's one thing. But I'm still going to be a Republican at the end of the day. I still believe in the core values that I brought to the table and things that I've done over the last 20 years or plus of political life. So that doesn't change. I mean, I am who I am, and I've never professed to be anything different. Thank you. Hi, thank you. This is a question for Dr. Levine. With these new variants, more infectious variants, particularly the ones from South Africa arriving in this country, would you advise for monitors to take even more precautions like wearing double masks and things like that? I would hope. I don't have to tell anyone to take more precautions because they've been doing all the things that they should be doing every day to protect themselves and their loved ones and their communities. So in that sense, I would tell them to do exactly what they've been doing if they've been doing it all along. Double masking is an interesting concept because it's been in the news a lot lately. The official stance coming down from the newest director of the CDC is actually just mask, please. Masking is the key. Now, you may feel more secure with a double mask. Perhaps your mask keeps slipping down or whatever. So maybe the first mask will stay on and the second one could slip or what have you. Or maybe you're concerned that the side of your mask is too open and so a double mask would help that. But the reality is just wear a mask. That is really the core value and the thing that people need to take home. And unfortunately, if some of these new variants are as they are billed to be more transmissible between people, you need to just keep doing all of the things you try to do all the time and you'll keep yourself safe. Okay. And then in the Norwich cases, you said that the health department working closely with Norwich to refine testing protocols. What are their testing protocols and what would be refined there? Sure. So all colleges have agreed to a day zero and a day seven test. So the day the student arrives, they're tested regardless. They are in a quarantine situation till their day seven test where they're tested again. But what we're talking about now is because they have a significant number of cases who each have at least one if not more contacts, refining their testing protocol with regard to their contacts and trying to make sure that we can identify anyone who's going to become a case early enough in the game. And so just helping them understand the timing of one person's infectious, when a person might test positive. That's the kind of refinement I'm talking about. Not to take away from the initial protocol which still remains in place as their students return. Okay. I see. Thank you very much. I want to want to also just add one other comment to what I said about the return to school sports. Because not that I think people think anybody on our restart team is callous or anything of that sort. But people frequently bring up the issue of mental health. And mental health is a real significant concern nationwide in this pandemic, no matter who you are. If you're a high school student, if you're a 75-year-old, it doesn't really matter. And we all recognize the significant impact that mental health is having on the population at large. And frequently when we hear from parents, we hear from coaches, occasionally from the students themselves, mental health is really listed as the core issue that we should be remedying by returning everybody to the competitions that they're missing. And I just want people to know we hear your voices and we empathize tremendously and we recognize how big our problem this is. But again, we have to do things in a measured way and use our data and really try to be careful and keep people safe. And talk to some of the athletes in the college sports who now have mental health issues because of the fact that they're all quarantined related to the playing of their sport. And they tried to do it in a circumstance that was ultra safe with testing three times a week, living a much more isolating experience than the traditional college student did between games, things of that sort. So I just wanted to add that dimension and to let people know we hear your voices and we certainly integrate that concern into the full picture. Thank you. Good morning. We have an 89 year old reader whose 81 year old wife is in palliative care with Central Vermont Home Health and Hospice. She is homebound in the wheelchair bound and he is her primary caregiver. The home health agency registered this man and his wife to receive a vaccine two weeks ago. But so far the agency has no vaccines and no information about when they will get the vaccines to administer. Is there a timeframe for this home health care agency and other visiting nurse associations in the state? Secretary Smith. Yeah, Lisa, I would think within a week we should have the plan ready to go for where we're going. There are some issues. I mean, we're talking with the manufacturers now on the issue of transporting open vials of vaccine and just making sure that we have permission in order to do that. But that's one of the issues that we're looking at right now is the transport from one area to the to the next. But we have the EMS contracts in place. We have the home health agencies ready to go from my understanding. And so I'm hoping next week I can announce what that and we have we're going to be allocating a vaccine in that area as well. I'm hoping next week we can sort of map out a plan that we're just trying to get over the hurdle with CDC and the manufacturers over this one issue. Hey, and another reader wanted to know how the vaccine is getting to Vermont, whether by plane or truck, and what happens after it gets here? How is it transported to the various distribution sites? Yeah, the way that it's it's it's come in a variety of ways. I think it's FedEx actually that it gets here. And, you know, until recently it went directly to hospitals. It's now going to our our state facility where it is stored. And then it's distributed by us to the various locations that it needs to go. But it use it it there's been sort of a change in that it was going directly to hospitals. It's now going to our state facility and then transported out from there. And just one quick follow up. Were there any no shows or cancellations in the first two days of the vaccine distribution? And can you say a little bit more about the Vermont common sense the vaccine clinic operators were exercised to avoid wasting any doses? Yeah, I think I don't have the numbers. I think they were minimal. I'm not hearing that it was widespread. I heard if there are if there are any, and I haven't heard of any, it was minimal. I just wanted to make sure we have a long, like I said, we have lists of eligible people. But in the end, if there's a dose that's left over, I do want people to use common sense and not waste that dose. And if that means if they if there's a 75 year old that's in the local hospital or or or a 65 year old that's in the local hospital, use it there. At the same time, I'm not going to punish anybody for trying not to waste that dose. If there's somebody that they can put that dose into their arms. We have to allow that. Thank you. Thanks. Hello. I heard Dr. Levine earlier talking about for months, sending samples out with genomic testing to see if we've encountered any of the the new that have been spotted around the world. Has the nation as a whole been doing genomic testing? I guess I'm wondering if there is the kind of surveillance available that we have in terms of mapping areas of higher prevalence of COVID around the state to have a sense of when things are approaching us. I believe there's a protocol criteria for every region of the country. And they have to send in samples on a regular basis so that they can have this surveillance. But Dr. Levine can give you the details. Yeah, Joe, thanks for bringing this to attention. You know, next to the issues we had with testing back in the beginning of the pandemic, the genome sequencing issue in this country has been raised as the second biggest disaster part of the pandemic, to be honest. We are woefully behind many, many other nations in genome sequencing and having that apparatus set up and functioning at a high level, which is unfortunate, but it is the way life is. The CDC is doing genome sequencing, but the number of samples it will accept from any one state is limited based on volume. So we are by no means having a random sample of Vermont positive PCR tests being analyzed by the CDC for genome sequencing, but nothing that they've analyzed thus far has shown any of the variants, which I guess we can say that is very good news. The Norwich outbreak has only further solidified our resolve to make sure that we have more capacity to do genome sequencing. I would like to say we could already give you results, but due to the technical factors in the kinds of swabs that were used for the test that got sent to Boston, that assay can't be used for genome sequencing. So we have to use a different assay, which means positive students will have to be reswabbed for that genome sequence test. But we're working very closely with the lab in Boston that we have worked with for these college samples, and we're also working with the state of Massachusetts as well, and with UVM to ramp up, if you will, that capacity for genome sequencing and get a true reflection of what's going on. But just an answer to your question, remember, there was a case in Saratoga. There's now a case in Essex County, New York. There have been cases in Boston and in Massachusetts. So we all know that it's around us, and it will show up, and we just need to make sure our ability to find it quickly when it shows up is there. Just to be clear, what we're talking about right now is the variety that first came to public attention when it showed up in Great Britain and not the, I guess, more troubling variety that has appeared in South Africa? Yes. That's what I was talking about in my last sentence or two of comments. But genome sequencing will, you know, we'll find all of them. So that's the goal. But you're right. The one that is of more immediate concern just because we know about it in the region is the UK variant. This is a question, presumably for Dr. Levine and perhaps for Secretary Smith. And it relates a bit to what Dr. Levine said earlier regarding the mental health benefits and so on of competitive sports for use. We're seeing an increased amount of attention in the national media in recent days to rising rates of depression, anxiety, and even suicide among children, adolescents, and teenagers tied to COVID, social distancing, and so on. And I just wondered, this question that's come up here before, but I'd like to get a current snapshot of how the state characterizes our experience with youth mental health issues in the present day and what we're doing to work with local mental health providers to respond. Yeah, I think, again, I'll let Dr. Levine answer the question more broadly, but we've heard from our pediatricians, for instance, about the need to get back to in-person learning because there is such a prevalence of the emotional drain on our kids. They need that contact. They need to be back in school. And that's why it's a priority for us. We're working on it with the stakeholders and teachers and superintendents and so forth, and hopefully we'll get to a point where we can get back everyone. All the districts will be able to get back to in-person learning because we know that's what's best for our kids. And just to augment that, the reality you speak of is quite clear and quite true, but the other reality is that we have a mental health system in Vermont that does have capacity, especially for this kind of outpatient interaction that we're thinking about, whether it be done in person or through telepsychiatry, I guess you would call it, or telebehavioral health. I think the good news from what you've recited to us is that people are admitting to symptoms and acknowledging these issues. We would hate for people to feel that they need to hide that because that's a sign of weakness or what have you. So I would just shout out to anybody in the child adolescent or parent arena that we have systems in Vermont, and Sarah Squirrel, our commissioner for mental health, has talked about this at a previous press conference that are poised and ready to accommodate any and all who may have these issues and want to deal with a professional to help improve their outlook. So please make sure that don't hide those things and in the sort of mentality of avoid gatherings and distance from one another. That doesn't mean keep yourself from accessing services that are really available to you even during a pandemic, if not now more than ever. Thank you very much. Yes, good afternoon. I have a couple of quick questions. Governor, when you first started talking this morning, you indicated that the mask and social distancing will stay around for a while. Any indication on when that will end? And I'm also wondering if there's any concerns about why gatherings now that we're going to be having Super Bowl and about just over a week as well as Daytona 500 coming up in mid-February? And if there's any concerns about why gatherings and your recommendations for people who are planning those? Well, first of all, what I made the comments about masking will be around in some of these guidelines that we've been talking about for the last 10 months will be around for a while longer. It's just due to the fact that we are distributing or vaccinating as quick as we possibly can with the supplies we have. It's going to be a while before all the groups can and all Vermonters will have that ability to be vaccinated. So in the meantime, we have to keep doing what we're doing. Even if you, as I said, I think was on Tuesday, even if you've received the vaccine of late, that doesn't prevent you from getting the transmission of the disease. It doesn't mean that you're not going to get COVID. It's going to take a little bit of time for you to for the vaccine to work its way in to your system and get your second dose as well. So that's a matter of a month to two months. So the message is, in the meantime, we just need to continue to exercise the practices we've been doing so well over the last 10, 11 months until we get through this and we get through the vaccination process. In terms of the Super Bowl parties, the Daytona 500 parties, again, we would advise that you don't get together, that you do it individually. You watch it at home and you're trying to do whatever you can to interact with your friends and family in a different way because this is still prevalent here. Maybe next year, we'll be able to do this together like we have in the past, but this isn't the year. You need to avoid those gatherings. We've seen where these types of gatherings amongst multiple households have led us to outbreaks. The latest I think was in Bennington where we saw a number of cases and we've seen a lot of a lot of spread within Bennington County region. A lot of that can be can be looked back upon these these multifamily gatherings. So again, avoid them if at all possible and wait until next year or another opportunity when we get through this when the times are much safer. Okay, great. Thank you. Hi, I'm going to piggyback off of the last question that was just asked. I know the science is still kind of undecided on whether people who have been vaccinated and are fully vaccinated could spread COVID-19, but at what point I guess will the state make the call that the people who are fully vaccinated can go about more normal lives and we trust the vaccine works? Dr. Levine, I can tell you quite candidly that the entire governor's leadership team discussed that issue just this morning. So there are a few states that are already trying to be a little bit ahead of the science to be honest and say that perhaps if you've been vaccinated, you are able to pretty much do everything you want and move on. Most states are being more reserved than that at this point in time, especially because we're so early into this national vaccination effort. The CDC has not yet weighed in. I'm sure they will. And I very much respect their new leadership and believe that this is one of the top of their agenda items. I don't want to offer people, you know, overpromise them with hope or make them feel despair either way because it's really something that we're really grappling with. It's a very challenging situation. It's a kind of question we want an answer for and things are moving so fast in this pandemic that we want the answer to be the one we want it to be. But at the same time, we do have a little bit of time yet to wait for some more data to emerge and some more broad national guidance. And I say national guidance not to punt and say, you know, we in Vermont don't want to be innovative this time because, as you know, we're often the trendsetters and we're very creative and innovative. But this is an example of something that really does beg for a national policy because it has so much to do with how we live our lives and when we cross borders of other states or other countries and when others come into our borders and etc. So it's a pretty high impact discussion and it really needs to be done with some element of deliberateness so that we can really make the right decision and not just make it in isolation necessarily but make it as part of a broad consensus. I hope that answers it for you. It does. And then taking it a slightly more specific to a group that already has been vaccinated and is approaching the being fully vaccinated point. When can or should senior living facilities, long-term care facilities resume some of the programming that they might have put on pause for residents during the pandemic that encouraged interaction between people within the facility because one would think in theory if everyone in there is vaccinated there shouldn't be a need for more restrictions within this cohort anymore, correct? Absolutely and I'm looking forward to that with much optimism whether it be a visitation policy whether it be a more community dining kind of thing or game room or what have you social events things of that sort at these facilities they're begging for that I'm sure it's been a very long lonely time. The reality is there are some pretty good guidelines in place we actually haven't talked about them as pretty good in the past from CMS because they we thought they were dangerous at times and would open things up too much but they're very appropriate for this period of time where we're trying to open things up in a fashion where people are vaccinated at a high rate. So this has to do with the testing protocols and how a long-term care facility can move from a lower phase to a higher phase and improve all of those things like visitation and other activities. So will rely on those to be able to make those decisions in a much more informed way and I think you'll start to see the pace of that increase once we get everybody past their second dose of vaccine several weeks later. So that's certainly on the drawing board of both the Department of Health the Agency of Human Services and Dale our Agency for Independent Living in Aging. So that's how a little glimpse at what we perceive in the future. Thank you. Good morning Governor. Special thanks to Mike Smith for his quick response and hopefully getting some possible vaccination sites located in Grand Dott County after the county it was ignored. In just one day I got an email saying the state is working with three schools up there to in the health center and the readers and sent us emails asking you to ask me to give thanks to you guys. My question today actually has been delayed a couple of times but sort of dovetails with the transparency issue that you mentioned with the Springfield Oscillage. The health department finally did provide a partial list of the outbreaks in Vermont recently after we were told the public had to file a formal public records request when Dr. Levine talks about the large outbreaks and the people impacted. And I wanted to ask about an outbreak at one of the hospitals. The health department sent the list but it withheld the name of the hospital yet the public list includes McDonald's restaurant in Ruff. And the health department also included an unidentified fire department which we're wondering what the name is that doesn't bother to tell the taxpayers in that town get a list of places like St. John's very Subaru has had an outbreak where the public goes in and there's a whole lot of other businesses listed on this that I'm not going to bother to identify but just wondering what can be done to even the playing field so that everybody is treated alike here in Vermont and that the public can get information so they can make well recent decisions about their health where to go where not to go and if the people and again I appreciate the Springfield Hospital transparency people down there can now make a decision whether they want to go there or they can go to another site nearby instead of their shots. Is there any way to increase the transparency here? Dr. Levine. I'll try to address every facet of what you said you covered a lot Mike. First of all I'll go on record the public should consider using Springfield Hospital for their care and for their vaccine. I would dare say that multiple healthcare settings around the state at some point in the last several years would have had similar issues regarding temperature regulation of a vaccine. I would hate for any of them to be characterized in a negative way because that may have happened to them because this is part of what happens and this is why we have sensor equipment this is why we have very specifically regulated refrigeration equipment etc but these things do happen and that's why all the systems are in place to make sure that we're alerted to them quickly and they don't cause any harm. Second of all many of the more anonymously listed places on the list you have are because of potential violations of personal and patient confidentiality so it has to do with the size of the amount of employees that are there the total size of the place and what percentage of them may have been positive or not positive. There are a whole variety of epidemiologic considerations legally supported that go into determining if we can actually put a name next to a certain number of positive cases. The other part but can you tell me that we have a hospital in Vermont that says some hospital in Vermont is so tiny that it cannot be identified. I'm going to have to get the details on that hospital listing you're talking about to speak more eloquently about it but let me go on with regards to what you said Vermonters making a decision about where they go or where they don't go I would hate for that to be the end result of what knowing a particular place would be. For instance the reality is you can find multiple fast food restaurants I'm sure that would have a case because people live in their communities and they essentially go to work and then they may get sick and test positive and we want to make sure that no one in their work site is a close contact etc but whether or McDonald's or Burger King or who knows what your decision to drive up to the window probably shouldn't be biased by knowing if there was a case or wasn't a case. Likewise God forbid you don't call the fire department because you heard there was an outbreak there and they might come to your house and give you COVID because we would hope that your municipality actually understands who has cases who doesn't who needed to be quarantined who didn't and who is available to work and who's not available to work so that you can continue to maintain faith in your fire department. This goes on to any sector of the economy we're talking about any sector of our lives that we're talking about. We want people to make decisions based on not just seeing a name on a list or a number of cases on a list but on the public health implications of what's going on there and just like we've alerted people numerous times to situations that occur around the state because there are public health implications and they need to know about them there are also thank goodness way more abundant situations that actually have no public health implications for anyone and the contact tracing has been done and it was one case at one McDonald's just like it could have been one case in the office that somebody else works in. So these are all the kinds of considerations that go into how this data needs to be portrayed and discussed and how the public needs to integrate knowledge of when it's a public health issue that they should really be careful with versus when it's not. So I just need to emphasize that as part of the point. We also you know clearly know of many businesses that have been stigmatized and received received the brunt of criticism that they didn't deserve just because they happen to have cases. We're also aware of major congregate living facilities where buses wouldn't stop and postal service wouldn't deliver mail because cases had been identified and these were really unjustifiable actions knowing what was going on on the ground there and so I again I'm trying to make sure that we discussed this topic in the context of really understanding some of the unintended consequences and some of the implications that having this knowledge can give somebody. But again these are outbreaks. These are not single cases and shouldn't people in the Springfield area have the right to make a determination as to whether they're going to go to Springfield, Rockingham, Hartford based on what they hear and and I do understand you think that people aren't going to call 911 when somebody's breaking into their house but I suggest that they don't care when they call 911 whether somebody's coming in a blue, gray, or green uniform. They want service. Correct, correct. I agree with you. There'll be no reason. I mean you guys hid the Bennington Police Department. You hid three pharmacies earlier this year last year that when you were urging people to go get flu shots but yet these at least three unnamed pharmacies had outbreaks shouldn't the public be aware that they might be walking into those places. That's all I'm asking and I actually try to address the Secretary Smith and the governor because obviously this is the health department position. I'm asking more on the greater scale of the state. Sure. I'll just make one more comment on it. The definition of an outbreak can be as few as two people or three people so keep that in mind. An outbreak is not necessarily 100 plus people or large numbers. It can be very, very small and narrowly defined by an epidemiologic definition that has no implications for any persons public health who would frequent such a venue. Exactly. So if we've listed it as an outbreak, it means we've already determined it was an outbreak. All the contact tracing has been done and if the facility needed to be closed, it was closed. If it was a school and a classroom needed to be remote, it was sent remote, etc. So that all work is occurring every time especially at the level of an outbreak. I know we're pressed for time so I will stop there. Some of these places still have outbreaks, right? I mean the list that you sent, some of these have outbreaks ongoing, it looks like. Yeah so often an outbreak won't be in the resolved column for 28 days because we have to wait for two incubation periods to pass without a new case. So that's another thing that could be very misleading whereas on December 27th one could actually see an outbreak and it could still be on the list mid-January yet nothing's going on there at all and everybody's recovered and things have been fine but it may still show up in the list. Thank you very much. I write a lot about restaurants and obviously they're struggling these days and I wonder if somebody could talk a little bit more about plan for perhaps long term heading towards spring which is actually only less than a couple months away even though it doesn't feel like it today but ways that maybe the state will try to work with restaurants to improve business that has taken such a hit over the past year. I know the Better Places program is starting to roll out right now but I wonder if someone could talk a little bit more about long-term plans for helping restaurants. Yeah getting back to some sort of normalcy is important. What we've done again over the last a few months with the relief funds stimulus relief funds recovery funds we've received from congress we've been able to to point a lot of them in the direction to make sure that these businesses survive and then recover we're still in that mode as you know hospitality sector isn't just about opening up the the percentage of people who can come I mean the lodging facility for instance we've we had that open at a hundred percent for a number of months now but people aren't coming because we have some restrictions on travel as do other states so people and people don't feel confident in traveling either so there are a number of obstacles in the way that are out of our control and a lot of respects until we get a handle on the virus itself and try to get the vaccination process moving along so that we can get as many people again in a position where we can travel we can go to restaurants and and people feel confident in doing so but in the meantime I know there's another recovery package being debated in congress we hope that that at least a portion of that will come our way so that we can keep these businesses going until spring when better weather opening up outdoor dining in some of the measures that that we've that we put into place will help so again everything that we've done we believe has helped them recover or helped them stay alive and survive but also during better times better weather to help them in their business so we'll continue moving down this path but they are not forgotten from my perspective I know the hospitality sector in particular has been hardest hit and we have an obligation to help them and that's why you know we had a 10 million dollar package that we have in the budget adjustment that that we offered to the the legislature and thus far I don't believe the house has looked favorably upon that they want to do it to maybe in a in the the big bill but that won't be passed for a number of months and this is important so anything we can do to help them in the meantime to get them through this we'll continue to focus on one quick follow-up some restaurants that have opened especially in the last year have talked about any they have spent the startup cost yeah we lost you I'm sorry I will say you mentioned the restaurant that may have opened up in the last year or so a lot of those businesses wouldn't have been able to get PPP loans would not have qualified for some of the initiatives that the the congress has put forward and that's exactly what this 10 million dollar package the types of businesses this 10 million dollar package would help so that's why we're moving trying to move forward with it and trying to get it passed now so we can get them relief as we speak I believe I heard you say that you did a review of 1a group and found that some vaccinations of people could not fall into 1a so you believe the majority of them did what kind of review did you do to ensure you know to check whether people fell in 1a and you know people that received vaccinations but were not in 1a have you figured out why they got vaccinated anyway Secretary Smith as you know we the vaccination program in 1a was predominantly administered through the hospitals as we went forward we issued various haunts in terms of what was available we issued various lists in terms of what was what who were eligible very haunts health advisory notifications of what was what was eligible but we did find that that there was discrepancies between various what I would call districts around hospitals and what they were their service areas around hospitals wasn't widespread and we didn't go into enormous detail in terms of what we were looking at but we did notice and we did hear of some that were vaccinated I think on this call we heard of some that were that were vaccinated that that shouldn't have been vaccinated we've clarified that now as I said in my remarks we've clarified that now we've provided toolkits to make sure that doesn't happen we haven't expanded any of the 1a qualifications we've just made sure that it's very clear what we're talking about and by the way and by the way that's going to become less and less of an issue because we're we're moving to phase to now where there's a registration process there's an affirmation process in that registration process so this is going to become less and less of an issue has the chopper kind of informed discussions about what would happen if you expanded eligibility to frontline essential workers or kind of the more broad category of essential workers yeah I'm not sure that we've had certain discussions on that but if we did a group of frontline workers obviously that's going to be a problem in terms of how we would qualify how would we make sure that those frontline workers are the eligible group that we're talking about we haven't gotten that far yet Aaron on our discussions on where we are we have to get through the three age bands and then the age group with underlying conditions but I will tell you this age group this 1a was pretty easy I mean either you're a resident in a long-term care facility you worked in a long-term care facility or you were a healthcare worker and some instances that you know we found where some in that in that definition got expanded inadvertently but we will have to pay more attention to this issue as we start expanding those what you call frontline workers I think it's going to be very important that we're very specific on it and we make sure that we're we have some sort of controlling devices on that okay thank you thanks Rebecca I'll even number these first on Wednesday I asked when will some downstate pharmacies be enlisted in vaccine distribution the way that 20 kidney drugs locations have up north and I wonder if there's anything new on that and second there were three temperature monitors used with the doses at Springfield hospital two read within the correct temperature range one was above that which was incorrect Shawn I'll take the first one obviously our agreement right now with our partnership is with kidneys but we're looking at locations down there that we can open up to to help with the situation that you did you just got to give me a little bit more time than a couple days and I'll pass it over to Dr. Levine on the second question on the second question that's a big part of the reason for the site visit that's occurring today so I don't have a full data for you I do know though that all the temperature data was provided to Moderna and they were very comfortable in giving us the decision that they gave us and again not to build off too much on Mike Donahue's question about Springfield hospital but Moderna told us that literally in the course of a week there were many many many hundreds of phone calls just like ours and situations just like ours because this is so common in the vaccine world because of the specificity with which they advise you about the temperature bandwidth that vaccines can be stored at so they were very very comfortable in assessing our situation in context of all of the situations they've had in this very short time that vaccines being used so we'll have more for you at another time would you say that the Moderna range is narrower than it needs to be I'm not qualified to answer that that's a very specific scientific question based on all the research that went on in their vaccine so we will rely on that that range and that range is what their vaccine was approved at for an emergency use authorization thank you we have a question directly from a viewer who they were in the previous grouping so healthcare worker or someone in a long-term care facility and they're saying that they were not able to get their shot what should they do now yeah that will still be available to them but secretary Smith hey very I had mentioned this in my opening remarks we are not shutting down phase one a we will continue to to do phase one a unfortunately some because we're transitioning to phase two some took that to mean that we're no longer providing vaccines for phase one the one a grouping that's not the case we will continue to provide vaccine for that that area so we are allocating vaccine for one a to the hospitals in the upcoming week and so that you that person should use the regular channels that they were told to use to get the one a vaccine so they told us that they actually received a response from when they tried to sign up and it said given the state of Vermont shift to the next phase of vaccine distribution and very limited supplies of vaccine we are temporarily pausing direct scheduling of tier one a eligible individuals four points yeah the word pause was unfortunate what we were doing during that time was asking hospitals who had inventory to use their inventory up during that week we are now allocating doses so you know I saw the the word pause and it would have probably caused some confusion on my if I read that same thing as well okay and just a quick related question as well does the state have a schedule they are planning to release to the public of these tiers and the the deadlines that they're setting age bands yeah it's it's all based on registration and as I think your colleague Kelvin asked a similar question about when is the next age ban going to be going to be opened up and the governor answered when we start looking at the various registrations the allocations and putting together I don't have a time frame for you right now but we're looking at this just about every day to determine when's when's a good time to open up the next age ban now it it will be open enough for registration if you know we're on a five week schedule for to get through this age ban but opening it up for registration we'll make a determination I think in the next few weeks and go from there as the governor mentioned thank you hi governor getting back to the tax commission the other big kahuna was switching out the property tax for the income tax but we're an even some some game would you care one way or the other whether the property tax was funding that the education fund or the income tax does it matter yeah just looking for for parity you know my concern has been all on details matter if we just switched automatically over to an income tax it might further burden for monters and right now we have this spread over a larger population outside of our borders so again the details matter we'll hopefully have the conversation but from my perspective let's let's walk before we run let's get through this pandemic and focus on the on the task at hand but one of the other issues they brought up was the now that the current complication in doing this is there is that a big concern in doing any kind of change is the the complication of the whole process at this point well yeah obviously there's a lot of moving pieces there and we don't you know you have to consider what the ripple effect what what you know if you make any change at all that could have an impact somewhere else so we want to just make sure again as I said better better walk before we run let's not get into this too quickly and that's this isn't a knee jerk reaction moment we've known this has been an issue for quite some time we should have conversations about this and and and have some of the debates in the within the legislative process so I think everyone should weigh in but again how does this you know does this put us at a unfair disadvantage let's say if we were to tax certain services as compared to another state that does not I mean we just have to to weigh all that out and go in with our eyes wide open because what seems simple may not be as simple as you think until you get into it the other part of the equation is I would hope that we look on as what we can do to make the the spending side of the equation and let's we should take a look at that at the same time this doesn't have to be about funding just a two billion dollar system I am figuring out ways to fund it differently maybe to get more affordability we just make make sure that the system that we have is working as efficiently as possible so that that for modernized burden further great thank you and we have 10 left in the queue we'll go to Greg at the county courier thank you Rebecca good afternoon governor Rebecca you'll be happy to hear that I'm going to try to keep it to one question and I'm not going to ask the bank a question because I think I probably overdrafted that bank at this point I don't know if this is for governor dr. Levine in regards to the vaccines at the springfield hospital correct me if I'm wrong but I assume those vaccines are going to stay there to be deployed there will the patients be notified that their vaccine was part of the group that went slightly above the temperature range or will that just get mixed in and nobody's going to know if their vaccine was part of that yeah I think that's a dr. Levine question I don't have the answer to that if they're deemed safe I would just assume that they just be put into inventory and then you would you know that they're safe the Moderna has deemed them safe everyone says they're safe so I'm not sure why we would separate them I guess I was curious you know six months down the road if it turned out that some of these patients were indeed getting COVID if if there would be a way to track back and be like okay you know that was the group that went slightly above or six months from now you could go back and say oh we were right there's no higher indicator here and thank you for bringing it up because that's exactly what I was going to say every time you're administered a vaccine there's a lot number and it's carefully recorded so if any untoward event occurred that's usually why it's recorded it could be traced back to what you got so the reality is that that connection will always be there but as I alluded to this happens to vaccines literally every day in this country for some vaccine or another and as long as the vaccine has been approved for use and it's deemed still effective and safe nobody gets that kind of informed process if people are nervous about that I can say that clearly the second dose they would get would not be from the same lot because that will have been exhausted very quickly so that they would be getting a second dose that would be very separate and still retain the effectiveness that they're concerned about appreciate it thank you I guess we'll see you on Tuesday hello governor have you been advised on the impact of Vermont fuel price and availability if any on stop and construction on the excel keystone pipeline I can answer no I have not that hasn't risen to to my desk at this point thank you thank you rebecca and governor scott scott hope all as well for the both of you obviously here at nason we work directly with thousands of student athletes fans coaches athletic directors so my questions here are not all not only just on behalf of nason but they're also on behalf of a big chunk of all the aforementioned as well um park my first question has to deal with the data or along the line considering the success of your neighboring peers neighboring states in their execution of high school sports this fall as well as this winter your success in exiting and executing Vermont fall sports can you give us an update on what statistical data you're referring to as to what's holding you back from giving Vermont the green light on this especially when the statistical data nationally as well as the statistical data for your neighboring states shows that high school sports are very low risk and they do not they have not affected transmission rates you know to a to a high rate to go along with the fact that you know you guys have said you know from honors are doing very well with with the controlling of this and that you're one of the healthiest in the states uh healthiest states in you know in the country i guess what my question is is what data how is your data so much different than everybody else's data that um you're not allowed to get these kids uh to go ahead and um and move forward here with this winter season um i may refer to secretary more she has any of that data dr. Levine may want to weigh in uh i might ask if you if you can tell me which neighbor neighboring states you're referring to obviously um New Hampshire is one of the neighboring states that have been going very strong uh here with their with their winter sports well i i just maybe i'll just stop you there i mean and again this has this is all data but but i i watch their numbers every single day they have upwards to seven to seven hundred to a thousand cases every single day they have just now exceeded i think they're over a thousand deaths in uh in new Hampshire they're twice our population so they're five times what the what we've experienced so you know we're doing something right here and and i'm not sure where all the cases are so so i would say you know a lot of that's community spread and and they have to be integrated with some of the sports i would say i'm not saying that that's the problem but uh but their consideration their guidelines are a little bit different their thresholds are different than ours but secretary more anything you can offer as to what we've been looking at happy to governor uh so so we have a phase restart plan obviously the first phase took effect back on december 26th and it allowed for no contact practices our assessment of the efficacy of that approach was looking at the the epi data and seeing that there were no close contacts identified through sports which gave us confidence that that folks were adhering to the the guidance we produced we advanced to phase two of the return to play on january 18th which allows for for expanded practices what people i think more would think of more traditionally with contact as well as some team-based scrimmage activities but we really need a at least a couple of weeks of being in that posture to be able to determine whether it's it's having an impact on virus cases and and frankly um any changes in what what has to take place for in-person instruction in our schools which remains our priority so we will be taking a look at the epi data again at the beginning of next week um and discussing what inappropriate timeline is uh to potentially move to that that third phase that i know folks are so looking forward to which is gains but i i think dr. Levine made a couple of really important points earlier about the the real benefits we have heard from students um and coaches alike about being able to to resume practices and we are being cautious in trying to protect and preserve that opportunity all the while looking at um what might be able to come back thank you very much that answers my first part now the second one's a little interesting question um it's about the cooperative program so for instance um there's a small community which up in north in the north eastern part of ramon king of ramon obviously um they have they have a cooperative program with uh pittsburgh and hampshire and pittsburgh obviously has been given the green light to participate in competitive sport and um they are being affected obviously by um the fact that we aren't allowed in vermont to uh move forward has there been any discussions or dialogue in regards to those kids um who might not get a season whatsoever um and if so what is that dialogue is is there anything that i that you can send to them for a message um so that you know they have something to look forward to that type of deal we we have had some of those discussions about bordering communities uh secretary moore anything you can offer yeah i as we did the case that there are there are several both the canaan school districts as well as a couple of in the upper valley and we have been working um with those school districts and the education agency and secretary french on uh appropriate solutions given the the individual circumstances of each of the schools okay uh thank you very much i appreciate both of you both of you for the feedback i appreciate it right next up we have andrea seven days hi there um i have um two questions uh the first is um and i i just read a um cvc paper that came up this week suggesting that um shutting down things like in-person dining at restaurants um might be a way to prioritize reopening schools um especially in areas where virus levels are high um is that something that the administration is considering or might consider as a potential tool um for achieving that goal of full in-person school um in april um we're we're not seeing the outbreaks in some of the dining facilities we're at 50 capacity um we uh we have a limited number of people able to dine at the same table that via the same family we have a number of restrictions in place so we don't believe that is the problem and that would help in any way uh to opening up schools at this point in time and um the second question um is the question we got from a reader whose father is in the 70 to 75 age group so not yet eligible for a vaccine um but battling um cancer has a weakened immune system and needs a crucial treatment to kind of interrupt the progression um but cannot get that until after he's vaccinated um the reader is concerned that the delay in treatment will allow the cancer to progress much further and really reduce the chance of a good outcome um so I think the question there is why aren't serious medical needs like this uh where COVID would really impact that outcome regardless of age um prioritized among uh this first vaccine group um in this particular case the the um person in question will be in the next age band but others battling similar conditions um you know might might not be there um particularly as we do get down to the 70 and 65 um age groups where that case fatality rate has been lower um why wouldn't other conditions that um sort of don't fit that age group but um do you really heighten those risks of complications or really delay treatment um be included um and it's just that it's easier to define and verify age than severe medical conditions yeah again I think Dr. Levine can answer this but as we saw with the data it's 90 percent of the deaths we've seen we're prioritizing prioritizing prevention of death um so 90 percent of the deaths we've seen thus far are in the population over 65 um so that's where we thought we should go first not a perfect system but it's easily understood um the next population uh that uh that Dr. Levine and others had determined in terms of uh the type of health conditions uh we want to uh to focus on is fairly significant it's a large population so we're able to get to the 90 percent of the population the 90 percent of those uh those we have experienced death uh in a far quicker way so that's just been our priority if we had more of the supply more vaccine available obviously we do a much larger population but that just isn't reality at this point Dr. Levine and just to reiterate uh we're using the data we're using the age and we're using the percentage of deaths that occur in Vermont uh in the case fatality rates in each of those age bands to have made this decision um because it really is significant for that population it does not mean by any means that we think less of people who have high risk conditions um but the reality is it's really hard to move every Vermont or to the front of the line whether you have cancer and you're on treatment or waiting to have treatment whether you're a transplant recipient and are on immunosuppressive drugs which you've been on for the whole year of the pandemic but now that there's a vaccine uh there seems to be a more urgency to protect you even more than you've been protecting yourself now whether you have one of the chronic conditions and you feel that it is of such severity that it warrants you going to the front we would literally be uh equaling the number of people in this first age band if we were giving a pass to each person again don't want to sound callous I have tremendous empathy for everyone but the reality is we don't want the fact that there is a vaccine available to interfere with someone's cancer therapy if the if the vaccine can't be received as quickly as that individual would like it to it doesn't mean that their cancer therapy needs to be turned off and they're allowed to languish and suffer from their cancer these are the very hard decisions that all clinicians are making every day during the pandemic about how to manage their patients appropriately and the reality is we would love to have 300 000 doses of vaccine coming in in the next month and we could reassure everybody that they're going to get what they want but with eight to nine thousand doses a week these are very very challenging circumstances that we're dealing with thank goodness we're not dealing with the kinds of ethical dilemmas Los Angeles and other places in the country are dealing with where they have to decide if a person should even be dropped off at the hospital by EMS or should get a ventilator or even get a ICU room those are got to be tremendously heartbreaking challenging decisions we're not there in Vermont thank goodness but we can't again take our eyes off of this north star of really using the data and trying to preserve lives as much as we can in this early phase of limited allocation of vaccine and need to try to protect the population as much as possible thank you yes this is also for Dr. Levine when the springfield hospital news broke you said as of last week they had less than 30 vaccines spoiled today you said that there's 99 doses what caused that spike I think that's just we have better data and accumulation of data I'm not aware of like a event that occurred or anything of that sort again I don't want to call it a spike uh I agree it's 69 more doses than 30 but again in the context of we've received by now 100,000 doses in the state between first and second doses and we vaccinated over 60,000 people so I don't want to use the word spike for that kind of a change in the data are there any common themes with these 99 doses were they mishandled was it due to people missing appointments or was it just a variety of factors I don't have any insight into that Secretary Smith you know either to Secretary Smith we can probably characterize them and get back to you because I'm not aware of it at this point in time though okay thank you Secretary Smith you referenced earlier that a portion of the 1,300 or so uh extra doses that Vermont received would be set aside for BIPOC Vermonters how many doses are being set aside for BIPOC Vermonters which BIPOC Vermonters are going to be eligible for those and how are you going to notify them and set up some kind of sign-up infrastructure the health department right now is reaching out to the BIPOC community as I've mentioned several times we have a very active group within the health department to reach out to the BIPOC community we have about 320 300 some odd people in the BIPOC community that are over 75 for next week I think we are allocating about a hundred of those extra doses for that BIPOC community in particular now that doesn't mean that they can't go to a registration site or have already lined up for registration but we have allocated that amount for this special group within the health department to reach out with vaccinations to the BIPOC community so that's where we are thank you and I think they're both from Secretary Smith uh the first is uh before if you could clarify uh you talked about extra um um additional uh vaccine appointments in Bennington Lamoille and Orange County um is that I just want to be to clarify if that's a result of the extra doses the state is getting or is that a reflection on um additional demand in those counties particularly Bennington County I was going to be clarify a little bit on that it's it's both Eric it's both extra demand and our ability to respond to that extra demand with some extra doses that we're getting second uh related question uh did you also mention that there was uh you're looking for an additional we were I was correct in hearing that you said you were looking for an additional vaccination site in the Brattleboro area no um I I didn't say that okay um but uh because I was wondering um we had heard from um one reader about a situation to someone in the uh Guilford Vernon area I got a I wound up with a um uh an appointment in Rutland uh which is about an hour and a half away from from uh South what Eastern Vermont I was wondering if uh if there is any consideration to uh additional uh an additional site in Brattleboro or if there's um or whether you know in a larger picture just so you know we can sort of talk about how um area where demand has uh has been surprising across Vermont or in areas where demand has geographically been less than you are anticipating or more than you're anticipating and how that's affecting uh how that's affecting the rollout yeah it's been it's been surprisingly equal in in sort of demand except in the three counties that that I had mentioned you know we've had 32,000 Vermonters 32.5 thousand Vermonters uh sign up so obviously um it has rolled out nicely I was surprised to hear about uh the person because we do have slots in each sort of geographical area where the person should be able to we also just to let that was in the first stage I'm better than a glitch you know I don't have any have any more context on that okay let me let me just also say we're we will be partnering with uh with hospitals as we roll into the the next week and weeks after and I think I think you will see us partnering with Brattleboro Memorial as well as we move forward okay thank you very much yep hi there thank you very much uh question from a reader who's 64 and a half uh years old they're wondering what their um what their grouping looks like is there going to be a 60 to 65 age band or will they be um complying with 20 and 30 year olds for appointments when their turn comes up yeah that's yet to be determined we want to get through the age banding from 65 and over due to the the data that we know exists and then go from there I mean obviously after that population we said we want to get to those with health conditions that uh that are who are at risk um so but we haven't determined what the next step will be so I don't have a a good answer um if he's 64 and a half at this point this one individual reader uh he might get to 65 and would automatically be qualified uh at that point because we don't close any of those sectors out in the future okay uh and then uh second question um uh how many doses were administered each day uh uh with the 75 brackets so far and what are the appointment totals um expected for next week yeah I do have that secretary Smith I think it's like 1500 but I've got some of the data um I don't have the data for the appointments for next week but I do have some of the data um Wednesday and Thursday we did uh 2,500 and one um and on today we have a uh 1,105 scheduled to be vaccinated for a total of 3,606 uh for the for the three days and do you so do you expect next week's pace to be yes similar to that or no it it will start it will start increasing and uh can you clarify it it seemed uh earlier in the press conference you indicated that you're now looking at this first five weeks for initial doses not not to get through the bulk of both doses is that correct yeah I want to I just want to clarify that because you you and I had this discussion last time at the press conference we look at first doses because that means new people that we can vaccinate we have an allotment that comes in from the federal government that takes care of the second dose but we look at uh first dose so when we move from phase to phase we're talking about first dose so five weeks out from now we expect that we'll be moving into vaccinating the next phase based upon the fact that we won't have any more people to give first dose to we will have people giving second dose but we won't have any more people giving first dose and we do have a reserve uh I don't want to call it a reserve we do have a pipeline that comes in for second dose um I did as I mentioned last time there will be a bulk of people that will be through their second dose on this um on this five week period so there will be a bulk of people that will have both first and second dose done during this period but but we look at first dose because it's it's the way that we estimate how many new people we can vaccinate so if you get through a month here of first doses and then people become due for their second doses and you're going to carry on with the same phase of first doses do you need to dramatically increase clinic capacity in terms of uh space and personnel um because you'll be administering first doses and second doses simultaneously once you're about a month out and and do you have the staffing and and the space for that we've already calculated that and yes uh we calculated uh at the beginning how many staff capacity would be needed for both first dose and then when the second dose and first dose are being administered at the same time okay thank you hi can you hear me you can yeah i'm i'm here um i've got a couple for the doctor if i may um dr lubeen have we uh have you got um any new directives uh from the new administration about lowering or standardizing uh the pcr cycles i know our lab range from 32 to 37 um have have you got any new directives to to lower or standardize the cycles number one so number one i i have had no new directives from anyone in the federal government including the cdc regarding even using that cycles in our reporting and i've received um further communication from the um council of state and territorial epidemiologists and the national association of public health labs specifically uh even more strongly arguing against using those values so that that's the answer to your first question so you mean standardizing them higher or standardizing them lower or both uh i was specifically referring to not using them in the reporting of the positive value but no directives on no directive on what you just said either on standardizing in any direction i think most of that would also come from the fda and the fda has not uh indicated either okay great um and number two uh we had a i guess there was a directive from the uh from the white house um that uh nobody was to uh to mention um the virus or call it the china virus um but yet there seems to be no problem with calling the variants the south african variant and the uk variant uh is is it isn't kind of weird to just kind of like discriminate uh against the country of origin um versus countries of variants you know i hadn't thought about it but you you raise an interesting point um i think you know calling it the china virus was criticized mainly because of the implications it had for people of asian descent who actually live in the united states in some of the stigma that that created uh so i think that was the initial layer of concern long ago and early in the pandemic um but the point you raise um i think we should think about that the variants now that they're being identified do come from parts of the world and they're being called out i think as long as again we approach it maturely and realize that's just our way of calling a variant a variant and it has nothing to do with uh never wanting to be in a room with somebody who came from the uk or from south africa um that would be fine um so i think you know scientifically we usually call these variants by letters and numbers and that would probably be the better way to go about it than it would eliminate all opportunities for stigmatizing people who happen to come from those parts of the world yeah but um with with other viruses like marburg and ebola uh they were specifically named um and and we knew uh with the other viruses we knew the host or we knew where it came from within uh within like a month of uh of uh you know of finding um this virus uh it's been over a year now and we still don't know uh where this uh where this came from whether it was bats or pangolins or a lab accident um do you have any idea why it's been over a year and we still don't know where this came from yeah i think part of it is it was only i think two weeks ago that the team from the who was allowed into china to start to do some of the legwork surrounding that and they've just been let out of quarantine because they had a mandatory two week quarantine when they arrived in china so uh even though china has been pretty transparent about the genome and all of that uh this team is just starting its good work so um i think that tells you something about why we may not have as much information and my last comment will just be for years now we've been very comfortable talking about the flu and this year it's the h1n1 next year it's the h3n2 or what have you uh so we could get used to doing that with coronavirus too thanks well let's hope we don't have to thank you very much hi can you hear me we can um so my question is kind of picking up on that uh mental health conversation from earlier among students um governors try you had mentioned that the conversations are progressing when it comes to getting people back into schools by the end of this school year i was wondering if you could kind of shed a little bit more light on how that's developed since making that announcement and um if there's been anything done to address some of teachers concerns and trying to get everybody on the same page when it comes to getting back in the classroom yeah um we are having the conversations there is a group working they they meet weekly uh secretary french is on the line and could describe some of that but i uh again i think that we all agree with the goal and it's how we get there is going to be the question but we have some time um before we we get to that point but i think that they've been worthwhile the conversations thus far so uh secretary french anything you want to add to that yeah thank you governor i think i would emphasize the point that um we do have a luxury of time to a certain extent um you know based on the hard work uh the folks that put in uh i think we feel that there's an opportunity to do some planning as we sort of pivot the system uh towards the recovery phase so i think our our planning is a two two tracks at the moment on the one hand uh we're meeting with stakeholder groups to conceptualize what do we mean by recovery and education um all the things we need to do to consider the impact of the emergency on kids whether it be their mental health well-being their academic success um or just the re-engagement uh with them so those are emerging as central teams that work but we're positioning our districts to really engage in that planning as the weather gets better and as the vaccine takes hold and in fact the other barrel of track as the governor mentioned is sort of on the larger sort of planning initiative about reopening our state and the economy and the central rural schools play at that so we do have some time to do that planning and we're actively involved in that um and as we develop more specificity on that we'll be sharing it with uh with you and other stakeholder groups that's all ahead thank you both all right thank you very much and with that we'll see you next Tuesday thanks for tuning in