 Good morning, everyone. Over the last week, we've talked about the challenges that all businesses and too many workers still face. And this is particularly true in the hospitality sector. Even though we've opened up restaurants and lodging to 50% and allowed travel without quarantine from counties in the Northeast with a low case count, these businesses still aren't bringing in enough customers to make ends meet. And this isn't just about the businesses and the tax revenue they generate. It's about their employees' livelihood. Our most recent numbers show that at least 10,000 hospitality workers remain out of work. This makes up about a quarter of all those covered by traditional unemployment insurance. Many of the places they work are on the edge. And even if all the money I proposed in my economic development package was passed and appropriated, it wouldn't be enough for them to survive without customers. So as I previewed on Wednesday, Mr. Pichek has been working with our epi team to identify where we can safely expand our trusted travel map, meaning we would apply our 400 active cases per million threshold to more states and could welcome those from safe counties within driving distance to Vermont without a quarantine. Mr. Pichek will show you this new map in a few minutes, but beginning July 1, we will include counties in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, Delaware, Virginia, West Virginia, and Ohio. It will also include D.C. Now, I want to be clear. This does not open up travel for the whole state. It's a county by county threshold. And it's just like our current map, it will be updated weekly on accd.vermont.gov. And it doesn't mean they can fly or take a bus here without quarantine. It's only if they drive here on their own. By welcoming people from low risk counties, we can help support our hospitality sector and the thousands of jobs it provides from honors. This is an important step to make as our own data shows our low community spread and most importantly, very few and often zero hospitalizations or deaths. Now, I also want to provide a brief update on playgrounds. As this came up the other day and is an important question from parents as well as their kids. ACCD has updated its guidance, which again, you can find at accd.vermont.gov to help playgrounds open in a safe way. The guidance is simple and it covers the same key practices we're asking of everyday Vermonters. Keep six feet apart, wash your hands, stay home when sick and wear a mask when you can. We'll be asking the operators of these sites to post signage of this guidance and to make hand washing or sanitizer available if possible. In closing, I just want to remind everyone how important it is to continue to follow our health guidance. Vermonters have done a great job throughout this crisis but I can't say it enough. We all have a role to play. The more closely we follow the health guidance and the more self-responsibility we take the better we can control spread and the more we'll be able to restart the economy and the social interactions that are critical for our way of life. So with that, I'll turn it over to Commissioner Pichek for an update on safe regions. Thank you very much, Governor and good morning everyone. This week we'll again first focus on the data from our past week here in Vermont and then discuss how our four reopening metrics are faring and then finish by discussing national and regional trends. And as the governor alluded to how these trends have allowed us to further expand our travel map to include much of the East Coast. As always for those watching at home you can find today's presentation on our website dfr.vermont.gov under our COVID-19 resource page. Over the last week we saw 56 new confirmed cases in Vermont and at this time at least 35 of those cases were related to an outbreak or cluster with the remaining 21 not. The most recent Vermont forecast shows that we can continue to expect low level case growth over the next two weeks. And overlaid on that forecast are both the total cases and then specifically the cases that are not associated with an outbreak or cluster. As you can see the non outbreak cases are trending below our forecast. However we do see our total cases are slightly exceeding our forecast which is really not all that unexpected when we consider the handful of outbreaks and clusters the health department is currently managing. But again overall we can anticipate a continued low level growth rate over the next few weeks. Again we thought it might be important to provide some context to viewers and believe that it's helpful to compare ourselves with states that have had a similar disease growth in the past. Mainly Hawaii, Montana and Alaska. Back on May 15th we pointed out the similarities among these states with each state experiencing a peak around the same time. Each peak being relatively mild and then each state settling into a period of very low growth. Similarly during the last month or so each one of these states has also been dealing with outbreaks and clusters associated with long-term care facilities, work sites, family living arrangements and the like. You can see clearly from this slide that we are not the only state seeing this pattern and the similarities are actually very remarkable. You'll also notice Vermont is doing a good job at containing these outbreaks and these clusters. And this is really all to say that we should expect to continue to see these sorts of situations as we continue to reopen the economy and it only reinforces just how important testing, contact tracing and isolation policies are to stay ahead of these situations. Turning now to our four reopening metrics we continue to see good progress across the board. The percentage of Vermonters reporting COVID-like symptoms to emergency rooms or urgent care facilities has held stable this week between 0.5 and 1.5%. And today sits at just 0.63%, all well below our 4% guardrail. The three and seven day viral growth rates have also held steady this week. Both remain under 1% and neither demonstrates the sort of sustained growth that would give us pause for concern. Regarding test positivity, we saw some volatility this week associated with the recent outbreaks. However, the positivity rate never exceeded 3% and on a seven day rolling average sits at 1.28%. Again, well below the 5% guardrail that we've established for ourselves. Our fourth metric is hospital and critical care bed availability. Vermont's ICU's remain free of a COVID-19 patient and this has been the case for over a month which in and of itself is quite remarkable. Additionally, our non ICU hospital capacity remains high and we've also seen a very limited number of COVID-19 patients needing hospital care over the past month. However, the last two days we have exceeded our 30% ICU buffer but as the last three indicators just indicated we are trending very low and in the right direction and do not anticipate needing ICU facilities anytime in the near future. So this is not a cause for concern at this time. Turning now to our national and regional trends, you know, certainly across the country we've seen a and heard about a steady increase in new COVID-19 cases leading some states to pause their reopening plans but we wanna put this growth into some context. As you can see, the South and the West regions which had a much smaller peak in April are now starting to grow at a considerable clip. The South is now essentially where the Northeast was when New York was experiencing its peak in the month of April. In fact, the South is now on pace to a clip the Northeast in terms of total cumulative cases in the very short term. And again, you can see that both the South and the West regions remain on trajectories of rapid growth. And these include states obviously that we've talked about like Arizona and Texas and Florida but they also include states like California that is experiencing considerable growth over the last few weeks. But again, as we pointed out in the past the Northeast continues to see improvement both as the previous charts have shown and as our sort of Northeast regional view shows as well. Over the last week we had an 18% reduction in new cases across the Northeast and we also had a 13% reduction in active cases within a five hour radius of Vermont's borders. This has all allowed us to turn our attention to expanding the travel map that we have set out for the last few weeks. And we're happy to say as the governor pointed out that we are expanding the map to include many of the states that are within a reasonable driving distance of Vermont including Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, West Virginia and Virginia and also the District of Columbia. With the addition of these states and the counties that meet the threshold there are now about 19 million people that can travel to Vermont free of a quarantine requirement. The regional population is about 85 million so it is a significant percentage of the regional population. And again the forecast is only improving in this area. We saw improvement across the Northeast this week. We only have seven counties that are mapped red in the Northeast on our map. That includes counties that have moved into sort of that yellow zone in both New York City and Boston metro areas. So we anticipate seeing continued improvement over the weeks ahead with many more visitors being allowed to enter Vermont without a quarantine which is certainly good news for the lodging industry. So with that at this time I would like to turn it over to Dr. Levine. Good morning everyone. I'll begin with an update on our outbreaks and then a few small rules that we can adopt and then a little bit about some new information regarding people who are at increased risk for more severe illness with COVID. As you saw in the slides, there was a slight uptick in cases over the course of the week. But really the Winooski-Berlington outbreak is at 115 cases. And if you look at that over the course of a week in terms of the growth, it was perhaps seven cases. Things are really still on the down slope, on the epi curve and there's no indication that there's marked expansion. So now we're in that period of time where we're just trying to document new cases, look at the incubation period of the virus being 14 days and hopefully see this continue to lessen and lessen with time. Really nothing new on the characteristics of the cases and aggregate to report from previously. We reported last time on a cluster in Wyndham County, which still remains a cluster confined essentially to a family and no expansion of that since the last time we talked. And then finally, what we discussed about Fairhaven previously. Currently there are 12 cases associated with that, so I would caution people that more testing is occurring today at the work site. The number of people total in the outbreak cases plus contacts is 22, but again, that's before we do further testing today. And no hospitalizations, no deaths. It's noteworthy that of the 12 cases, only two are Vermont residents, the other 10 are residents of New York State. Our health department has been working very closely with the Washington County Health Department in New York to make sure that all the appropriate contact tracing continues to occur. I know people are interested in the workplace itself and I have to say again that I cannot convey the name of the work site as that would be identifying to the individuals who work there, especially in light of the very small number of Vermonters, only two affected thus far. I will reassure everyone that all are actively isolating and quarantined and as I've stated, we are working very closely as a health department with the New York State Department counterpart. I do want to make a specific statement for the benefit of the public, again, to be reassuring but not to be falsely reassuring. Whenever we hear about outbreaks or clusters, we understand everyone has a desire to know more. It may make you feel safer, but feeling safer isn't necessarily the same as being safer. The way we keep Vermonters safe is by talking to people who have tested positive, learning who they were in close contact with. It's not someone who you just passed by in the grocery store. It's their families, their friends, maybe their coworkers. The whole concept of contact tracing, of course, finding people who were in close contact and could be at risk of getting COVID. If we find through contact tracing that you could be at risk, the health department contacts you. Only if the risk occurred in a public setting where people could have been put at risk and could not otherwise be found would the health department make a public announcement. In fact, if you look at what we're requiring of restaurants right now, when people are dining in, they are keeping a roster of everyone who dined on a certain date, just with that in mind. Next, I'm not going to reiterate the sort of four rules that the governor presented and that we've talked about many times here, but just go back to the concept of contact and sort of three rules of contact. First one is common sense. If you're in one-to-one close contact with someone, whether that be a healthcare provider, a hairdresser, a friend, doesn't really matter. The goal is that you keep those kinds of contacts to a minimum and certainly use facial covering and as much physical distancing as is reasonable in that contact. And that's where we have this whole concept of trusted households. So there may be households you will have closer contact with than the vast majority of those in your community and that's fine because you've made an agreement implicitly with that household that you're both bringing low risk to the encounter. Second rule is about what I call contact density, which essentially means avoid crowded places. It's the reason we're not yet having mass gatherings of a thousand people together where there is little opportunity for physical distancing and the risk of transmission of disease from just a few people would be high. Again, when you're in those kinds of conditions and it's indoors, facial covering is very much important. And then the third part is what I call contact duration or intensity, really how long you're in contact with someone. And obviously if it's a higher risk proposition, you wanna be there for less time. It's frankly why we don't worry when you walk into a very large store where there may be a lot of people but where you can still kind of physically distance and you're not gonna be in there long because you're there for a purpose, you're gonna look for what you need and then you're gonna buy it and leave. It's a lot different than if you're in a setting where everyone is together for a couple hours at a time and you really do need to be very conscious then of your distance from people and how crowded and how long you are there. And you always wanna watch the ventilation. So we always say outdoors is better than indoors. Outdoors is pretty free ventilation. Indoors, most ventilation will be good and if you're in a large auditorium, you're gonna be aware of that but if you're in a smaller room, you need to be very conscious of how much ventilation is there in that room at a time. There's one concept that I did in an event that I'd like to present and it's called managing your exposure budget. An exposure budget is just what it says. It's how many of those three things are happening in your day, day to day. How close have you been to people? How much have you been in crowded circumstances? How long have you been there? And you need to think about that like you think about other things in your life that may have some risk to them and sort of manage your risk accordingly and make trade-offs. So if you're gonna visit your elderly mother and you're really concerned that you don't bring disease in that unwittingly that you might bring in, that might not be the time that you're going to be at a crowded event at the same day or within those couple of days. Likewise, if you're really wanting to go to some event that you normally might have thought twice about, you might do that event and then in the rest of your life not due to many other things that are gonna replicate that. It's kinda like when you're on a diet and you've decided I'm having a piece of birthday cake today and that breaks every rule in my diet but I'm gonna do something different later today or tomorrow because I'm aware of the fact that I have to make some trade-offs here and it's still important for me to celebrate that event. Last thing I wanna talk about is that the Centers for Disease Control has just published an expanded list of people who are at an increased risk of severe illness with COVID and I wanna put some of those things in perspective and just give you an idea of what they're all about. And this is besides the usual things we say about age. It's besides the known things like heart disease, lung diseases like emphysema and diabetes and being immunocompromised. So the additional items on the list that should make, if you have one of them, give you pause as you begin to try to apply the rules that we've given you to live your life include obesity, which we kind of knew before but it's now more prominently displayed, if you will. Chronic kidney disease, sickle cell disease. And then there are a number of conditions where frankly there is still less certainty but people should at least think about things. Asthma, stroke, hypertension, dementia and other neurological conditions, liver disease like cirrhosis and having a smoking or vaping habit. And I've pointed out many times here about the fact that smoking or vaping can give more severe complications of someone if they contract COVID. So always worth thinking about that. And the final one, again, I'm only talking about it not to create mass hysteria but also to put it in perspective because you're gonna be hearing about it on the news and reading about it is pregnancy. Pregnancy is one that people have talked about up until this point as probably not having much increase in risk. Well, now it's being talked about as a little uncertain still but possibly having a slight increase and having a worse outcome. More severe disease in the woman who is pregnant perhaps more risk of a complication like a premature birth in the offspring of that individual. So this needs to be balanced very carefully. It doesn't mean a mass message, don't get pregnant. Be fearful if you are pregnant. It's just, again, you may wanna make your exposure budget err on the side of much less exposure because of that. And just consider that as you factor in how you live your life day to day. There was some recent literature indicating there may be more hospitalizations in those who are pregnant than those who are not. That data is being questioned a bit because it turns out if you are pregnant, there's a very low threshold for admitting pregnant women to the hospital when it comes to concerns about their pregnancy. Forget about another illness just about their pregnancy. And if you don't account for that increase in hospitalization that pregnancy alone leads to, you might be misled into thinking COVID is causing more hospitalizations. So stay tuned on that one that needs to be sorted out a little bit better yet. I'll stop my comments there and return it to the governor. Thank you, Dr. Levine. We'll open up to questions at this time. We'll start with Calvin. All right, thank you, Dr. Levine. So I guess when it comes to people coming from out of state, it's been a growing number of hotels and those accommodations, but restaurants still are suffering. They have a lot of overhead costs. And what they say they need is the capacity when they're lifted above 50%. I guess, when and when will we see any attraction on that and what does the data have to look like for us to open up? Yeah, again, as you know, I've been trying to move us towards a percentage basis. We're at 25% at one point in time. Most sectors have been opened up to 50%. We gotta have a couple more to go. I'd like to do that by July one. And then, just continue to watch the data, all the things, the factors that commissioner Pichek laid out and listen to the science and data. And if we continue to move in the right direction or we're stable, then we can push the envelope a little bit more. We can open up a little bit more. But at this point in time, getting to 50%, allowing more traffic into the state, which is what we're told, even restaurants lodging and so forth really do need it right now because there's not enough capacity within the state or not enough people within the state as customers to satisfy their overhead. So again, it's going to be a measured approach. We're just going to wait and see. I can't put a timeline on it, just to say we want to open up just as quick as we safely can. And the legislative session is in fear of wrapping up today. We might go a little bit into next week, but I'm just wondering sort of had any thoughts on sort of how the session went and maybe any bills that you would like to see that maybe did or didn't pass. Well, the beauty of what we have right now is that it's going to be somewhat of a short recess. They'll be back as I understand sometime in late August. And then we'll go back and take a look at what the next three quarters of the year we're going to look at, we'll be able to present our budget, expanded budget at that point. And there'll be continued initiatives that could be brought forward. We'll have a better idea of how the economy's doing, how we're doing with the COVID response and things that we may need of them as well in terms of the rest of the money, the economic package that we put forth. They didn't adopt all of the measures that I laid out, but there's still time to do that in a month and a half or so. So again, we'll see. I haven't seen all of the bills. They passed a number of them this week. And so we'll have to go through those and see what is in them because we haven't been, it's been a lot to keep up with for them and for us as well as trying to keep up with the COVID response at the same time. And specifically, I understand some of the Blue Warm Solutions Act that passed through, I guess, what were your thoughts on that? Well, again, that's an initiative that passed the Senate. I understand last night. And now it's being sent back to the House. They have to, they made some changes. They'll have to determine whether they'll adopt those or not. And I don't know what's in it completely. So we'll take a look and decide what action I'll take from there. I had some concerns about it, but they may have alleviated that. I just don't know. Governor, just on what you're telling your monitor, looking to leave the state for a vacation as we're seeing the July weekend, as we're in later in the summer here, what is the reciprocity with like, and can Vermonters go to other states and not quarantine there? Yeah, here's, the only thing I know for sure is that Maine has a reciprocity agreement with us in concept. They've said that they would open up to Vermonters, to come to their state. I believe the Hampshire may be the same, but I'm not positive of that. The rest, I think everyone would have to check with those states to make sure we're adhering to their quarantine requirements. A number of the Northeast states did have quarantine requirements. I know, New Hampshire, Maine, Mass, and others had those. So I don't know, I haven't spoken to any of the other states to see about any formal reciprocity, but again, I would just urge everyone to check their sites to make sure that you're adhering to them. Otherwise, stay here in Vermont. We have a lot to offer. Explore the state a little bit. You'll find a lot of opportunity right here in our own backyard. So if you don't have to travel, don't stay here and spend your hard-earned money right here in the state. And just to be clear, the Maine situation is not for sure yet. That's just so weird. Well, no, I think Governor Mills had said before. I just don't know if the date, maybe Commissioner Peachick today. Okay, it's enacted today. So I knew that she had said that we were a trusted neighbor and they would open up the border to us and believe in New Hampshire as well. So that is us as of today. All right, we'll go to the phone starting with Anne Wallace Allen at BT Digger. Hi there. So this is a lot of good news that we're hearing out in Vermont, but there's also a lot of very disturbing news that we are all hearing from other states. And I know that our economy relies on the other states. The function, as you mentioned, is tourism is also manufacturing and lots of other things. And I'm just wondering, are you thinking that we're all gonna go into a recession here? I mean, if it doesn't seem as though Vermont would be immune from the financial problems that are gonna work back to the rest of the country. Yeah, we're definitely not immune to the financial situation. The rest of the country is facing. We're facing it here. That was why we put that $400 million economic package out there because I do believe there's going to be some rough times ahead. We just have to prepare for that. And we have to do all we can to leverage all the assets we have in any way possible to prevent as much of what we're anticipating as possible. So yeah, this could have an effect on us as well, and it will. So we're, go ahead. Do you think we're in any better position to weather a recession now than we were last time around? Like if I don't know if the state learned any lessons from it or are we just in any way different? Because it took us a really long time to recover from the last one. Yeah. In fact, we still hadn't in some way. Yeah, again, we're going to have to do things differently. I think that we have to be aware that we're not on an island, that we do need the rest of the states in Quebec in particular in Canada, looking forward to them, to the border opening back up there. That could be a great deal to us here in the states in a number of different ways in Vermont in particular. So we built up our reserves. Good news there. We did over the last three years some of the initiatives that we put into place. The first couple of years, no new taxes and fees. We had surpluses on the bottom line. We were on a course to have a surplus this year, which got us through, in some respects, fiscal year 20, which is going to end in a few days next week. So we're OK to that point. It's just the next two or three years ahead. So the reserves we put into place, the initiatives that we've outlined, we're just going to have to become very creative and be objective and do all we can to make sure that we, again, leverage all the assets we have to weather this next storm. All right, thanks. If you don't mind, could I just also ask Dr. Lagina a question? Sure. It seems to us, though, that others say people get their COVID-19 test results back a lot faster than they do here in Vermont, where from what I can tell, it takes a couple days. Is there any reason for that? Or is that observation even correct? Yeah, thank you. That observation is correct for some people. And so if it's correct for some people, that's important to us. I'm hoping it's not correct for the majority of people who have COVID-19 tests, but one of the points that the testing task force that has been, I think, a couple of weeks now working together to remedy is this issue of rapidity of finding out test results. The reality is a positive test result is generally found out very quickly within 48 hours and usually within 24. It's those people who want to receive confirmation that not hearing is truly a negative result that are sometimes waiting days. So that's a big issue. One thing that we've done to remedy that is that it turns out what the number of pop-ups we've been doing and the number of Vermonters who have wanted to be tested, there are so many negative results that come in on a given day, because obviously we're doing well over 1,000 tests a day and the majority of them are negatives, thank goodness, that we need to expand an entire bank of people to call results in a more rapid fashion. So we're implementing that to make sure that we can try to catch up and be as fast as possible in this process. But your question is right. Call center? What's that? You mean like you're setting up a call, you're making a call center? You're setting up a call center? Yes. And bringing in employees who don't have contact tracing as their main job, because those employees have to focus obviously on those tasks at hand. We can't rely on just sending a letter as the bottom line. We've sent the letter because you need to have a documentation of your result, but that can often prove to be too many days gone by for the comfort of the person who wants to know that they're truly negative, or for their not just comfort, but pragmatically if they're trying to get out of quarantine on day seven, if they need a result so they can proceed on with a procedure of some sort, what have you. So we're well aware of this and working very constructively. All righty, thanks for lunch. Courtney, local 22. Governor, particularly about travel, as we're letting more travelers in, we're seeing neighboring states like New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, increasing quarantine orders. Are you at all concerned with travelers coming from hot spot states? And how exactly are travelers being monitored when they come into the Green Mountain State? Well, actually we've had our quarantine policy in place since the very beginning. There, those other three states you mentioned are just implementing theirs. Ours have been in place. 14 to eight quarantine period has been there from the start. So yes, we're concerned about those hotspots. In fact, the states that we even outlined where we're allowing them to come in different counties within the state that meet our threshold. So that's the key point here. We have a 400 person per million active COVID case count that we want to adhere to. So I feel comfortable with our policy. We've been doing it from the very start and we'll continue to do so. Ours is probably a little stricter than theirs at this point. Okay. And one more thing with early voting starting today in Vermont, can you touch on, do you think the new process of mailing voting will be successful? Well, I'm still, actually it's interesting. Still waiting for the bill, the urgent elections bill that they had implemented or talked about in the past a while ago. We haven't seen it yet. So I think that voting by mail is safe. I think people should do that if they can. And so we'll see, but I don't, I don't know what the Secretary of State is doing at this point. I'm assuming that he's implemented the vote by mail for the November election, but I don't think he had ever intended to have vote by mail mandatory vote by mail for the primary. Okay, thank you. A-free, WCAS? My question is for Commissioner Harrington. We're just hearing that there have been some delays and unemployment benefits this week. One viewer mentioned to us that theirs was five days late. Just wondering if there have been any delays and it's so why? Thanks for the question. I'm not aware of any systemic delays in the system. You know, we continue to work through issues on various claims, but those are relatively unique to any one particular claim. It can happen for a variety of reasons. So I'm happy to check with my team and follow up if there was some issue that delayed a bulk amount of payments from being processed, but I'm not aware of anything at this time. Avery, was that to- Okay, thank you. Was that more than one person or multiple people who had contacted your station? We just have one viewer at this point. Okay. If you have a question about that, give either the Labor Department a call or give us a call at 828-3333 and we'll try and track that down. Yeah, I would say Avery, certainly, if you wanted to also send me the person, we can certainly follow up with that one person as the governor said. So, you know, if it's an issue that's not getting resolved, we'll make sure it gets handled. Okay, I just wanted to make sure that it wasn't a larger systemic issue as well. Thank you. Thank you. Kevin, seven days? Governor, thanks for taking the call. Can you hear me all right? Yeah, good morning, Kevin. Good morning. It's a bit of a multi-part question, but it involves the county by county distinction. Last time you announced this measure, there were maybe 55 counties. Could we get that number now at some point? And then a follow-up to that is, there seems to be some shading in the Vermont map. And does that suggest that there are still some counties in Vermont presently that would not allow people to travel here if they were in another state? And can you explain that? Yeah, I'll let Commissioner Peachek handle that. Yeah, thanks for that question. So there are about 500 counties that are subject now to the quarantine and about 260 of those are green counties eligible for travel into Vermont. As we said, about 19 million people live in those 260 counties. So that is the answer to the first question. As to the second, we did update the map to include the same type of gradation in terms of under 400, 400 to 800 and over 800 just for clarity and information so people can see that. But the travel policy doesn't apply to Vermont. So it doesn't matter if a county's over that threshold if you're considering going out of Vermont or someone's coming into Vermont. As we've mentioned in the past, we're using those for surveillance measures to more closely monitor Vermont. And this active case count is really a proxy for risk. That is easy for us to sort of monitor and to communicate but we're looking at those other four metrics much more closely with much more data. So I guess does that seem internally inconsistent to anyone that someone from Franklin County could do a day trip or travel within the state and not have to say what county they're from or whether they're quarantined or not, whereas somebody from out of the state is held to those requirements? So the reason that we don't believe that it's sort of counter is that we really have a good sense of what's going on in our state and a much greater degree than we do in all the states around us. So we're familiar with the outbreak in Manuski and Burlington, familiar with the one in Rutland. And we can say with greater confidence and we can't with any of the states around us that those are limited to outbreaks or clusters and not broader community transmission, which we certainly cannot say in the states around us. So that's why that distinction is important. Okay, if that makes sense. And then the last question is just isn't contact tracing become infinitely harder if you now have to track people from 260 counties in various other states? And does that give you pause in any way or do you think you've got that under control? So I'll let Dr. Levine answer that question. All right, thank you for your question. Contact tracing is complex. So let's put that on the table first. And it does require an empathetic person who gives an individual time and allows them to process what's going on with their own condition as well as who do they come into contact with. But with regard to the greater 260 counties, generally my assumption is a person would be leaving Vermont and going back to the county they came from as opposed to staying in Vermont. If they're staying in Vermont and have been contact traced and they're gonna quarantine in Vermont, that would be handled by our health department. If they're identified as a contact by our health department that they're already in their home state, our health department would do just what it's doing down in Ruffin County right now, which is work closely with the Joining Health Department and their department would be responsible for pursuing that contact tracing further. It kind of all depends on where the person was at the time and who they were in contact with at the time they knew they were contact. Is that clear? Okay, it is, thanks very much. I think it also is a great segue to making sure that everyone knows and let's put some perspective on this. We have the fourth lowest number of cases in the nation right now and we have been consistently, Montana is the lowest, Alaska, Hawaii, and then Vermont. So we have a lot to be proud of, a lot to be thankful for and we remain committed to staying in that top five. Excellent, thank you, Governor. All right, Chris Newport Daily Express. Chris Roy, Newport Daily Express. Star six to unmute Chris. All right, we'll move to Wilson at the AP. Hey, as always, happy Friday. Thanks for the opportunity. I have a couple of questions here. I'm really interested in the slide that Mike had about the small states, watching those small states for a long time and have been curious what's going on with them. What do you see as any kind, you could probably add Wyoming to that one too. What do you see as any common themes, if any, to what's been happening here? And then my second question is, I guess it's for Dr. Levine, but with all this good news you were relatively speaking that we've been looking at for a while, what would be a red flag or what could be something that would happen that would really give you cause for concern as you started to see new cases new, who knows what conditions. I guess that's my condition, that's the question. So anyway, thank you. Yeah, I'll let Commissioner Peachock answer first. I think Wyoming is actually number five in the nation. Yes, so Wilson, thanks for that question. And we have the slide up here for those watching. But you can see, as we pointed out that, there are three really key similarities. One is that the peaks, the timing of the peaks were all relatively consistent. If you looked at the peaks around New England, I mean, you would see a very different trajectory, Maine and New Hampshire have a very different trajectory than Vermont does. But then you see that the peaks were also relatively mild. This is somewhere between 30 to 70 cases at their peak, depending on these four states. And then you saw sustained low growth sort of during the period of time when folks were either reopening their economy or people were staying at home, whether under order or just under concern for their health. So those are definitely the similarities. And then more recently, when you see these outbreaks occurring, it's a very similar story. If you scan their media, you see that they're experiencing outbreaks at work sites, at nursing homes, long-term care facilities, family living arrangements, that they're dealing with these very similar types of outbreaks and clusters that are occurring. And they are working to keep those contained and under control. So that is also a similarity as these states that had really low case growth. So they have a high degree of the population that is still vulnerable to getting the virus. As they start to reopen their economy, these outbreaks are just sort of bound to happen. But again, the important thing is to make sure that contact tracing, the testing and the isolation policies are there. Okay, good for that. Thank you very much. That's a good answer. Now it's my turn. So, you're kind of asking me the question of what makes me lose sleep at night. But the fact of the matter is, I really want to begin the answer to the question to just call out all of the teams in the Department of Health and across state government that have made testing and contact tracing successful to the degree that they are right now. Because it is so reassuring to know that we're doing the, not the mandated but the recommended, even above the recommended level of testing of our state and that we have the capacity to do all of the contact tracing. Because that has to be a given to feel good about things. The things I would feel bad about are the things that Commissioner Pichak portrays on his slides every Friday. But I would probably feel not so bad about the hospitalization rates and the ICU beds because when you're worrying about those, you're way too late. You've missed the ball. And it's a really serious situation. It's kind of what's happening in Arizona, unfortunately now and to some degree in Texas. I worry about the much more early things which are on this slide, one, two and three. Because they really do help us understand when the viral activity in the population is increasing. What I don't worry about is having a Winooski for only an outbreak, having a Fairhaven outbreak, having a cluster in Brattleboro. That is what we've tried to message pretty broadly is our new normal because the virus isn't going anywhere. It's here to stay and we just need to work away and through time until there's a vaccine. So I don't worry about those things. I worry if we didn't have the testing capacity to fully identify what's within those outbreaks. And if we didn't have the contact tracing capacity to fully identify who's at risk and who's at risk of putting other people at risk so that we do the right thing early on and make sure that no one else is at any risk for a more widespread community transmission. Sound good? Great, thank you very much. Tim from Business Magazine. Governor, I'm gonna back up a little bit on the Global Warming Solutions Act. Because there's a lot of concern out there about it, whether it will pass, what it will mean. The Senate passed its version of the bill without the million dollar funding, but it was pretty overwhelming in both the House and the Senate. And I think the listeners would be interested in whether you would veto the bill as you know it, either the House or the Senate version, frankly. And what is your general impression about it too? It seems like they have an overwhelming majority that would override a veto at this point. I just wanna get you a better sense of what you're thinking about at this point. Yeah, again, Tim, without knowing all the intricate details of the bill, we had, as you know, concerns along the way. We were making some grounds, some headway. I think Secretary Moore had communicated that to both the House and the Senate and again, I thought we were making some ground, but I don't know what was included in the end. Some of the threat of suing the state, putting the state at financial risk in the not too distant future was of concern to me as well as having the resources to do everything they wanted us to do as an administration that's concerning, especially when we're facing these budget deficits and so forth and we're going to have to tighten our belt. So, those areas remain for me, you know, I believe global warming is real. I do believe we have to change the way we do business where we've adopted many measures and proposed many to do just that and we'll continue to have to advocate for that. But again, I can't comment on the bills and whether I veto without seeing the details. We'll see, you know, we'll see again, we'll see what happens today, whether the House agrees with the changes or not and puts it back over or passes it and then or whether it comes back in August or not. I'm just not sure. I was also curious as to whether a bill was basically veto-approved, just Jen philosophically in your partners whether that was added whether you veto any bill that not. Well, again, I think I've stated this over the last year and a half that do have a veto-approved majority in the House and the Senate. Six Republicans out of 30 in the Senate, I think it's 43 in the House out of 150. So they have the numbers. So I had said consistently that they can do pretty much anything they want to do regardless of what I want and they've done a few of those. So, you know, we have to play the cards with DELT and it doesn't prevent me from taking action or vetoing something that I don't think is in the best interest of Vermont. I'll continue to do that if I think it's necessary but I have to accept reality at the same time. All right, great, thank you. Pete Hirschfeld, BPR. Thanks, Rebecca. Governor, the legislature has landed on a yield bill that would see the EDG fund end next year in the red by a projected $104 million, I believe. Are you amenable to an ED funding plan that would rely on deficit spending to solve the short-term revenue crisis of the education fund? Yeah, it's an interesting question, something that we've been talking internally about. If there was one fund where we could deficit spend, it's probably the ED fund. So I'm open to at least considering that, I would like to see us do everything we can to reduce the costs because we know we don't want to have taxpayers be burdened by this tremendous increase in revenue needed for the ED fund. So we'll have to see, again, I haven't spoken directly with the finance department or the Secretary of Education on this issue but I'm not saying no. Thank you. Guy Page. Hello, Governor, two questions today. When will our Home Health Agency's personal care attendance be allowed to resume routine visits to do housework, cooking meals, et cetera, for homebound Vermonters? I'm going to ask Secretary Smith the answer that that is a concern and it's a point that many have made and we want to get back to as near normal as possible in that regard. Secretary Smith. Guy, we don't have a time schedule right now but we're looking at how to sort of return to the new normal. So the only thing I can say right now is as soon as possible, at the same time we want to make sure we have the protections in place that we need to as we move forward but the only thing I can tell you is as soon as possible. Okay, thank you. Governor, regarding the new AOT policy on not removing most roadside messaging out of concern for racial sensitivity, will highway workers also be needing and touch other comments, opinion comments such as maybe all lives matter, blue lives matter, unborn black lives matter, what can you tell us about that? Yeah, we're providing, you know, we want to make sure that we use common sense and are sensitive the times we're living in at this point. This was, this happened last week as a result, I think you're aware in Jamaica. There was, there was some etchings on the bridge with chalk actually and the agency as they should has been part of their guidance, removed that almost immediately. But insensitivity to what we see across the country, we think at this point in time, just to be using common sense, allow the districts to let people express some of this, their frustration and some of their viewpoints in that regard. It'll be a case by case basis guy. I mean, it's not going to be a perfect solution here and it may not be forever in some respects. We want to protect our infrastructure as well. We have a obligation, a duty to do that. But again, let's just use some common sense if it's using chalk on some concrete or on a street or so forth, I think that that should be acceptable as long as they adhere to. It's not inflammatory, it's not grotesque and so forth. There's some guidelines that you probably have the letter from our chief engineer, Wayne Simmons, that lays those four criteria out. It's not across the board. You can do anything you want. But it also talked about not just chalk but painting, using paint being that being now permitted which strikes me as a lot more permanent than chalk. Yeah, you know, it's interesting. I lived in Washington County here in this region for all of my life thus far. And over the last 25 years, I've gone through from Route 12 from Northfield into Montpelier and there's been closed Vermont Yankee on the trestle there for at least 20 years. So it's not, as though this is a new policy in some respects, I don't know why we haven't covered that up but it seems as though, you know, we're gonna have to, there's gonna be some give and take. I don't want people to just feel that they can go out and cover everything up in every area but just use a little common sense at this point and be sensitive to what the country is going through and the need to have this conversation. This is something, have you had conversations at your administration with the organizers of these rallies about what's acceptable and what's not? Has there been any sort of discussions directly with them? There's been engagement, public safety, I think does a really good job. The state police have done a great job in trying to connect with the organizers of any of these events to make sure that we know what's happening, what's acceptable, what's not, trying to be sensitive to their needs but at the same time trying to keep everyone safe. I think we've been successful thus far. I mean, I've been very proud of everyone for the way that they've treated each other, respected civility, let the people exercise their First Amendment rights at the same time keeping everyone safe. So we've been fortunate here in Vermont and I hope we continue to do that. But it's going to take a lot of us working together and listening to one another and just be sensitive to that. So again, I think we've handled it pretty well and I hope we continue to do so. All right, we're gonna move to Kat at WCAX. Hey, I have a quick clarification with Fairhaven and then a question I'm gonna ask about the travel map. Fairhaven, of the dozen cases, two are Vermonters. I'm looking at the chart of tests positive from the 23rd. Did those other 10 New York positive tests end up showing up in our Vermont test positive data from earlier this week? It was my understanding from my questioning last time that the New York resident test would not be counted in our numbers and I wanna make sure we frame this correctly. Right, so on the day that you commented to our knowledge, they were cases that were in Vermont. Now that we have clarification, they will not show up as Vermont cases. Okay, the virus data that we're seeing in the South and West, if given what we know about that, if people have family events planned with guests that are gonna be flying into Vermont or they themselves need to travel outside of Vermont, not within driving distance and then come back, should people assume that for the rest of the summer, if you're going to travel by plane, you will need to quarantine? I think that would be the best assumption at this point in time until we develop other policies. But as we've seen with outbreaks and the spikes that we're seeing throughout the country, I think it would be best if everyone just conditioned themselves to the fact that we may have to quarantine if you're flying into the state. And then is that travel map about as large as it's gonna get for this summer? Cause as you know, there's only so far you can reasonably drive to come get into Vermont. So I'm kind of wondering how that map is gonna look this summer and what businesses to take note of if they are in the travel and hospitality industry. Yeah, at this point, you know, I can't see it expanding too much more because that's about a 10 hour drive, 10 one day drive for most of those locations. So I'm not sure that we'll see a lot of change there. The only other thing that we might take a look at is other states. Let's say you're coming from Montana, let's say, and you're coming to Vermont and you have an RV and you're not stopping at anything along the way other than just to rest and get to Vermont. We might make allowances for something like that. But we're just contemplating that concept at this point. All right, so keep your heels for road trips. I think it's just stay in this 10 hour range I think it's probably 10 hour at this point are thereabouts depending on how fast you drive. But staying in this region would be the best approach right now. Thank you. Greg, the county courier. Greg, the county courier. We'll go to Mike, the Islander. Thanks for back Dr. Levine. I think there was some people were sort of interested that the other day you said a statistician was making the calls as far as whether reminders are provided for all of the information protect themselves like identifying facilities with positive stats. One or in the name of the statistician that you referred to by in what is their official title or what they do at the health department. Hi, Mike, I hope you're not directly quoting me because I have no recollection of saying anything of the sort. Well, you said in response, I thought to the fair even thing that you weren't identifying the facility based on statistician saying that people would be able to figure out who... Oh, okay. Yeah. Yeah. I might have. Yeah. Correct. You do it. I'm not pretending that now. Okay. Yeah. I'll say it differently because I was not referring to a statistician. I was referring to the fact that we have a health surveillance arm that has epidemiologists and statisticians as part of it. And their data analysis shows us when a number is too small to announce it in any way that could betray the confidential and privileged health information of the individuals involved. So it's not that a person is making the call. It is they are giving us the information we need so that we know that if we take that information and provide it to the public, we're betraying the confidentiality of that information and the privileged nature for that set of individuals. So same reason why we had the discussion with you earlier about how many cases there are in a particular town. It all has to do with really statistical analysis and understanding of how that translates into a real person's life. Well, let me just, I want to follow up on that, but just a point of clarification on Fair Haven. So you didn't want to say that there were people going in and out and employees doing so contact just to clarify. So the postal service has made no deliveries. Coca-Cola hasn't gone in to fill any soda machine. Food vendors don't go in to fill their machine. UPS, FedEx not making deliveries. No non-employees have entered the facility over the last whatever it is week or so. Photo copy or repair people haven't gotten in to fix it or just install it or anything like that. You can confirm that no single person has entered other than employees. I wouldn't want to confirm that completely for you because I'm not down there and haven't seen with my own eyes, but we've appropriately identified those who need to be isolated and quarantined and those who can still be present at the facility. Okay, and to follow what you said about the Fair Haven facility and the numbers. Obviously you've talked about Bronx and Health and Rehab, the Venetian School, Birchwood, each of the correctional centers. I mean, there was this section talking about an inmate from Florida that was admitted with COVID, that would be pretty easy to figure out. You know, registers and public records. You know, the Venetian Veterans Home, there was just one case. You talked about the Veterans Home. And one reader is wondering if the health department will identify any Vermont restaurant that might have a group of employees past positive. Or will you withhold that from Vermonters, one class of Fair Haven facility? So potential diners are left in the dark and you're not gonna let them make a fully conscious decision about wanting to enter a restaurant. Yeah, so I'll restate what I said at the outset of this conversation today, which is if we find through contact tracing that an individual is at risk, the health department will contact them. If the risk occurred in a public setting where people could have been put at risk and could not otherwise be found, the health department would make a public announcement. So you may recall over the years, there have been foodborne illness outbreaks at various places that people could go and purchase food at. And generally, we make that known if we cannot possibly trace every person who might have been there and might be at risk. So our goal is always, number one goal, protect and promote the health of all Vermonters. So if that goal is our overarching beam that we're heading towards and we can't assure ourselves we've done that, we will make the kinds of announcements that we need to make to protect public health. You understand that some taxpayers rather make their own decisions rather than the old government added trust up? I mean, do you understand that there are people telling us that they want full information disclosed and not pick and choose what the health department may think that the public ought to know? I guess you're informing me of that right now. But at the same time, I would know that many individuals would not want information made known that involves them. And they need to be protected just as well. Again, we've never asked for any name. We've asked for facilities. You've given out facilities for whether it's correctional centers to health and rehab, whatever. So you pick and choose and I think that's the frustration of Vermonters is that it's not consistent with the health department. Yeah, well, I'll just argue back with the numbers game that I was talking about earlier, we need to be conscious of the times when individual health information could be conveyed or even groups of people, their information that could put them at some risk. I'll leave it at that. Secretary Smith wants to give you an extra comment. Yeah, I just wanted to come to the defense of Dr. Levine here. I've seen a vast majority of Vermonters respond to this virus with compassion really to sort of help their neighbors. And we have not let this virus divide us. In fact, in many cases, this virus has strongly united us. There have been few instances, some that I have called out from this podium where some wish to label or stigmatize those that through no fault of their own have contracted the virus. And we have rejected outright making any suggestions in terms of, and I've seen this and I've called this out at this podium, those that we have suggested for isolation, voluntary isolation. There have been some that said they should wear special uniforms or designated symbols, highlighting the fact that they have COVID. And for those rare cases, those are just rare cases. Let me just say this. We realize we have an obligation while protecting, to protect the general public. And we take that obligation very, very serious at the health department. And I'm very proud of what the health department has done. We are very careful, very careful to avoid stigmatizing individuals or groups of individuals. That has been the desire that has been in place since this virus has started. Whether we're talking isolation facilities, whether we're talking Winooski, whether we're talking anywhere in Vermont. You ask us to be transparent and we are trying to be as transparent as possible through this entire, and we have, by the way, through this entire pandemic. What would just, let me finish, Mike. Let me finish, Mike. Let me finish. Sir. But don't, please don't ask us to expand transparency at the expense of the point where we expose the identities of people or groups of people that have contracted the virus through no fall of their own. And anyone could be in that situation. So we gotta ask ourselves, would we like to have our information exposed where it would be very easy to be exposed in these particular cases? And in this case, the likelihood of identifying individuals or a group of individuals is likely in our estimation. So I just wanted to sort of set the table on this so that you and others could understand that we believe in transparency, that we believe in making sure that we have our obligation of protecting the health of Vermonters. But at the same time, we've gotta protect making sure the identities of individuals or groups of individuals. No, and I salute you for your transparency and things like that. But I, and I certainly, I'm not aware who's trying to stigmatize anybody. It's more about education. Thank you. Erin, V.T. Digger? Ah, Rebecca, this is Greg from the County Courier. I wasn't able to unmute myself before Mike. Can I jump in? Sure, go ahead. Hi, Governor and Dr. Levine. I first just wanted a clarification from a reader that wants to know are the rules the same for bars and restaurants and are they the same for private bars and public bars? So private bars being like BFW and American and Asians. Yeah, I believe so, Greg. But Secretary Curley, are you on the line? I am on the line. Yes, the rules are the same whether you are public or private. Okay, and in bar or restaurant, it's the same? Yes, the guidelines are all on the ACV website. I think that, I don't know whether you're driving or if there are some that say bars are entirely closed. Bars are not necessarily entirely closed. It's important to look at the guidelines. We've given a path forward for bars to open with some guidelines against these people safe and healthy. So, but yes, the rules are the same whether you're public or private. Okay, and then I just wanted to follow up Dr. Levine on Wednesday. I asked you how long it would take to become a presumptive recovered case. But if they weren't being currently tracked and you weren't really sure if it was like two weeks, 15 days, 30 days, I was supposed to get a follow-up and I haven't heard from anyone. Now that you've had a chance to look that up, do you know how people are being presumptively cleared or recovered? I don't have that information for you but I will get it to you hopefully before we're done here today. Okay, thank you. And another quick follow-up on Wednesday. I also talked about how it would be a whole lot more informative for Vermonters to know the current cases per county. I had a reader reach out to me and informed me that in Massachusetts, and I did actually look this up to make sure the reader was correct, in Massachusetts the government's putting out town by town data on number of tests that test grade per 1,000 residents and what percentage of them is positive in addition to how many people are believed to be current cases. When can Vermonters start expecting that kind of transparency on a town by town basis? Again, the numbers are gonna be somewhat small for many towns. I will task my department with trying to answer those questions, okay? It's not in an effort to not be transparent but I'm not sure how meaningful some of the data might be. Well, I think it would be meaningful to know that in Inesburg we had 20 people get tested over three months versus 150 and just to preempt the statement that population numbers are too small. Massachusetts is doing this with towns and municipalities that are down a few hundred. So if they're able to put out information on how many tests have been out in town of several hundred people, I would think that we should be able to know how many people have been tested in St. Albans or Swan or Inesburg. Thank you, we'll get back to you on that. Appreciate it, thank you. Hope to hear from you for more Monday. Have a great weekend. Erin, BT Digger? In the weekly report about COVID-19 cases, I noticed that for the first time I believe the state has released data about healthcare workers that shows that one in five for workers with COVID-19 were healthcare workers, well over a hundred people. It's the six hospitalizations as well. I was wondering what Vermont kind of takes out of that data just in general and also specifically is the state feel like it was adequately protecting workers in terms of PPE and other protocols during the worst of the epidemic? Yes. Maybe we'll have a repeat of the question. Secretary Smith didn't hear it. But I'm wondering, Erin, if you, is this abnormal? Have you looked at other states to see if this is abnormal in terms of the, is it a higher percentage than other states? Well, the truth report about that is that states don't consistently release that data. Massachusetts does a lot of data entry. Could you repeat the question? Here's my take a look. Sorry. I think the question, part of me if I'm wrong, Erin, but I think the question was one in five cases were healthcare workers. Do we have any insight as to why they might have, or do we consider that a high percentage and why might that happen? Is that correct? Yes. Also just, it says, you know, Scott and Lubeen feel like healthcare workers were adequately protected with PPE and other measures. And this is part of the crisis. You know, I will say, and I'll let Dr. Lubeen or Secretary Smith answer as well, but first of all, I think that we have a number of healthcare providers who are interacting with the most vulnerable all the time, those impacted by the coronavirus and those who could be. So they're always on the front line. So it would, from my standpoint, it would make sense, from a common sense standpoint that they would be more vulnerable. We recognize that. I believe we've done a lot in terms of making sure that they're protected with PPEs. We've struggled, like other states, in trying to provide that, but we kept up and prioritized that to make sure that those frontline workers did have what they needed. But it has been a struggle, admittedly. The other aspect is we have a high percentage, I believe, a high percentage of workers, employees in the healthcare industry in Vermont as well. So if you look at the spectrum of the number of people in that industry, it's going to be high as well. Secretary, Commissioner Lubeen? I don't have a lot to add to that. I'll have to make sure we understand the definition of healthcare worker being quite broad because we're testing so many of them right now. And fortunately, we're finding, as we go into different kinds of facilities, not a lot of the staff that interact with patients to be affected by COVID. The, even the correctional facilities where we had one outbreak, we actually have found, very hardeningly, most people were testing negative at those facilities. So I'm realizing we have, in the course of a week, you said we had in the 50s in the last week. So, and which surprised me that that many would be healthcare workers, to be honest, because at least our... I, what, there was a 50 in the last week. The statistics that I have are one in five for modern COVID-19, our healthcare workers, and that it seems to be between 100 and 200 total. That was, sorry. Yeah, no, no, but that's what I was just thinking. If there were 50s in the last week and one in five of them are COVID, that's still 10 people, which seemed a little surprising. One to 200 out of our 1400 cases still seems like a lot, considering what people in the healthcare industry tell me. But maybe that isn't so high when I look at it in that ratio. It certainly would not be due to lack of PPE because I know that people are here to that very, very strictly. We've had months go by now where we have adequate PPE for the healthcare workforce, so I wouldn't expect that number to be growing or be impacted by PPE at this point in time. So certainly that part of your question is easier to answer. Yeah, I also wanted to know because you were talking about facilities that it says 35% of healthcare workers with COVID-19 are associated with an outbreak. I don't know whether I would call that high or low because I don't have comparative data. I just found that during the press conference call, but it does seem like some of these do appear to be tied to facilitating outbreaks. Yeah, and the other part of this is that we are mandatorily testing more healthcare workers now. So many of them, even if they have no symptoms, maybe asymptomatic, maybe testing positive, like a certain percentage of the general population will be testing positive as well. Because when we look at healthcare facility outbreaks, beyond the two nursing homes from the very beginning of the pandemic in Vermont, we actually have not had a lot of healthcare facilities that have had issues. So that's why I'm so surprised. So do you know how many of those healthcare workers that have tested positive were at nursing homes specifically? I mean, I know it mentions 35% outbreaks, but. Yes, so I remember from early on, with the two nursing homes that had the biggest outbreaks, there's probably 100 healthcare workers in that group alone. And I can get back with a precise number, but we've been tracking that all along. So that number already accounts for a big percentage of the ones that you've mentioned. Wait, so are you saying 100 healthcare workers worked in those facilities, or 100 healthcare workers tested positive? Tested positive in those facilities. Oh, okay, okay, yeah. And that's why we had tremendous concerns about making sure that those facilities had a stream of workers to substitute in, if you will, for those who had to be isolated or quarantined. Yeah, yeah. Is that going to affect how the Department of Health handles nursing home outbreaks if they wanna occur again? Oh, it's already affected that. Since that was so early in the game, that the number of initiatives that have occurred is tremendous. There's testing of all new admissions, not the time of admission, and if they're negative, testing them over a two-week period, every three days or so. There's quarantining of all new admissions at the time, so that if they are incubating infection, they're not out in the general population of the nursing home. There's testing of people who have frequent visits to the community, like dialysis patients, on a regular basis. And there are, being put into play now, new testing protocols for the staff and the residents of those facilities as part of the restart process to enable them to begin to think about ways that they might ease up on some of the restrictiveness of visitation and of residents gathering together in group settings. So there's a tremendous amount that's happened as a result of that. All right, thank you. Hopefully, quick question for Smith. Are there any updates on the prisoner outbreak? Well, sorry, the prisoners are tested positive. Has there been any more positive into the last five? Yeah, Secretary Smith. Erin, here's where we are, where we stand today. We tested Chittenden Regional Correctional Facility on Wednesday. All the completed tests were negative. We did have two inmates that refused testing. There, they were placed in isolation for 14 days. Those are isolation facilities, medical facilities, not anything else. We had some staff, nine remaining staff that need to be tested. They were either on leave or they requested to have their test done by their primary care doctor. Any, just so everybody knows, any staff that were not tested during this round or are waiting results from the primary care provider will not be allowed back into the facility until they have proof of a negative test. We have some new information this morning that I can report about the positive tests that we reported on Wednesday at Northwest. As you recall, that individual was tested on the 19th. It was returned negative on the 20th. On the 22nd, he was tested again and it came back positive. On the 23rd, he was tested again and it came back negative. The inmate is still in quarantine contact tracing is underway on staff and inmates. Just again to, I gave you a lot on Wednesday. I just wanna give you some updates. All staff and inmates at Marble Valley Regional Correctional Facility were tested last Saturday. They're gonna, all those tests came back negative. The staff and inmates will be tested again on Monday, June 29th. And then beginning on June 6th, the Vermont Department of Corrections and the Department of Health will be doing mass testing of one facility each week. First up will be Northwest State Correctional Facility. So that is the update that I've got for you Erin. Hi, Mr. Branch. Joe, the Barton Chronicle. I understand that the decision to keep the border between the U.S. and Canada closed is, at least nominally, decision by both countries. But at present, do you have any information about which side of the border is more eager to keep it from reopening and where the border to be reopened? Parts of the back, how many townships would fall under the 400 limit for active cases per million? And would we possibly see a large number of people being able to come to Vermont from Canada if border were open? The first part of the question, I had no idea other than it was mutually agreed upon. So I think both sides have come to the conclusion it was a good idea to continue to have the border closed. I watch the Quebec numbers as well as some of the regional numbers and they're getting much, much better as well. I've asked the Commissioner Pichek to keep track of that in anticipation of the opening of the border so that we can do the same thing that we're doing here. I don't know if they call them counties there or their writings or what they are, but whatever designation they have, we wanna use the same methodology. And I believe though that when I'm looking at the Quebec numbers, they're looking a lot better similar to other regions in the Northeast. So I would anticipate most of Quebec would be opened back up and beyond that. I'm not sure. Commissioner Pichek, is there anything you can add? What else do you got? Nothing that Commissioner Pichek can add at this point. But we are anticipating when that does open that we'll be able to release that data. Okay, thank you very much. Elizabeth Hewitt, VT-Duder. Hi, so thank you regional hockey camp and JP that's been going on earlier this week, mostly involving folks from out of state. I'm wondering if the state is monitoring whether there's adherence to social guidelines of the campers and their families and if you've had any complaints about this. I might refer to Secretary Curley or Commissioner Shirling on this in terms of complaints. I hasn't risen to my level at this point in time. Yes. I'll go ahead. I'll go ahead. Go ahead, Lindsay. I was just gonna say that we have not received any complaints at the agency of commerce. They are able to operate overnight camps based on the camp guidelines that are on our website. And to my knowledge, things are going okay but I haven't heard anything for the contrary. Commissioner Shirling. Great. So I'm answering, Governor, I haven't heard anything about that location. Okay, thank you. And if I can follow up very quickly, I have a logistical question. Would the expansive travel reason, as you mentioned earlier, Governor, when these spaces are up to 10 hours, they're not the way, which is farther than once it realistically drives without stopping for very pissed up. What are the guidelines for folks that are traveling by personal car when they're making stops and they have to make a couple on the way? Yeah, I would say, and I'll let others weigh in on this but understanding that people are going to have to stop for fuel and food and so forth. But to maintain the same guidelines that we are asking Vermonters to adhere to now, individually, maintain some social or physical distance, wash your hands a lot, wear a mask whenever you go into a location. Just adhere to those common sense measures and I think you'll get here safely. Anything else, Commissioner Levine? The only ad addition would be that's probably a great time to bring sanitizer with you because there's so many unpredictable things that might happen when you stop and you may have already washed your hands and then you're pumping gas, so have the sanitizer available. Steve, any carry TV? Hello, can you hear me? I can. Great, I wanted to a quick thank you to the administration for holding these conferences to WCAX for running them live. It's a public service in the highest degree and WCAX media is growing up on the web so quickly. I've got a quick question for Dr. Levine. I would add, Chip, 22 and 44, as well as WPTZ to that list, they're both here and putting it up live as well. Yeah, I don't see them being broadcast anyways. Well, I think, I believe they are, but maybe you don't get that channel up in the Northeast Kingdom. Yeah, I've got to move my antenna, I guess. A quick one for Dr. Levine and then for the governor. Dr. Levine, given the importance of hand washing and stuff like that with the availability of hot water, wouldn't it make sense to open the rest areas to have access to facilities with hot water? This is by far the biggest complaint I hear everybody out here is about the rest areas. Yeah, Steve, instead of Dr. Levine, I think he would agree that anytime we can provide ways that people can, you know, in a sanitary way, get to some of these locations would be good for all of us. We're trying, we're opening some of the rest areas as we speak. Secretary Young, do you have a report on that? Interesting governor, I just received an update from the commissioner of BGS that I should be getting a plan for reopening today. I would remind folks that when we did shut down the facilities, the buildings at the rest areas early on, we did make sure that we had at least a port-a-let at every facility and we have been very, very, I think judicious about checking them, keeping them clean and keeping them filled with sanitizer to the extent we could. So there are places to stop if the facilities themselves are not open and we're working on a plan to do that safely. Great, I've had complaints about the port-a-parties, not anything about them specifically, but that they just don't compare to hot water. And governor, regarding the graffiti thing, I'd like to tell you, you jumped to the message about Yankee on a train trestle, which is railroad property. I mean, obviously the railroads are not known for their maintenance these days, but regarding the email that went out, it said that the change in policy had specifically come from your office. And that having paint, you know, I mean, chalk is one thing, but having paint in the right of way, I believe you've got a motorcycle endorsement. I mean, when you hit paint with a motorcycle or even pedestrians and in the messages, I mean, if you talk about not censoring, it says the user's opportunity to advance the discussion rather than censoring it. I mean, what would be allowable? I mean, would somebody be able to paint something like Phil Scott as a blankity, blank, blank? I mean, who is the final arbiter and how far will this go? Yeah, I would say, first of all, in terms of the trestle, a lot of that is under the control and lease back to the railroads, at least half the state is. So it is under our control and we certainly could give guidance in that manner. I'm gonna read you the guidance so that everyone understands we hasn't read it yet. Steve has what it actually says. So this is the guidance. All signs that negatively affect roadway safety shall be removed regardless of content. Second, if a sign is not either profane, grotesque, advocates illegal activity or violence, it should be allowed to remain. Any mural or paint applied to a highway sign shall be removed regardless of content. For murals painted on bridges and walls, if a mural contains messages or images that are not either profane, grotesque, advocate illegal activity or violence, it should be allowed to remain. Any or all murals should be photographed prior to removal or painting over. If you, and this was addressed to the maintenance districts, if you or your staff have any questions on content and are not sure whether a sign or mural should be removed or encounter a situation not contemplated in the guidance, please send a picture to the chief engineer's office for assistance. End of story. Okay, but the signs and murals, obviously, but in the highway right of way, isn't that dangerous for motorcycles and wet track? We have, again, we haven't contemplated that on the highways or on the roadway surfaces themselves, but as a reminder, that's how we have all the pavement markings that are with paint in the middle of the highway on the edges and so forth. But I get your point. Some are more dangerous than others when there's water applied to them, especially on a motorcycle, but we paint them now. Okay, I appreciate you clarifying this. And we hope we can get the rest areas up. That's the biggest thing I'm hearing from everybody. Yeah, we know we're expanding the areas that we're accepting more people to come visit. So we know we want to be as welcoming as possible and those open just as quick as we possibly can. Great, thanks again. Okay. Thanks to everybody. All right, Riley, Burlington Free Press. My question is for the governor. So a number of colleges and universities around Vermont have recently announced that they plan to welcome students back to campus in the fall. Any two questions about that? The first is when you're planning to announce guidelines for those colleges and universities and the second is what conditions it would take to lock down or evacuate schools in the fall. We are going to, the guidance will be out in the next week or so. Deputy Secretary Brady is working on that in conjunction with the higher education community. So we'll have something out in the next week or so. So hopefully some of that guidance will spell out when that might be an issue. Anything, Dr. Levine, you'd like to add to that? No, we're very close. Yeah, we're getting closer to the guidance so you should see something again in the next week or two. Okay, thank you. Is that where information, pardon me, is that where information about what would necessitate evacuation or lock down would be fully outlined? Yes, I believe that the guidance will show that and certainly in communications with some of these universities and colleges will dictate when that happens because we want to anticipate anything of that nature. Great, thank you. Bridget, the Milton Independent, star six to eight. Hello, thank you very much. Go ahead. Hello, thank you very much for having me today. My question is regard to the hospitality industry. What guidelines or advice do you have for hospitality workers, people who own bed and breakfast, who share living or communal spaces with their visitors and people staying at their end? Yeah, again, those simple guidelines that we had laid out I think at here, almost every situation and trying to make sure that you're protecting yourselves and others, our physical separation is important. Clemenus hygiene is also important. Wash your hands a lot. I'm sure there's others in the guidance as well. Yeah, on the ACCD page that would give them other tips as well and to keep, again, keep their guests safe and keep themselves safe as well. Secretary Curley, is there anything I should add to that? No, Governor, you're right. There's information on the website and I will just say that we have a great communication stream going through with our commissioner of tourism and marketing and we find that the folks that are operating bed and breakfast or where they're more closely connected with guests, they definitely have a great desire to keep themselves safe and keep their guests safe. So we just same guidelines for everyone that they're on the website. Again, accd.vermont.gov. Okay, thank you very much. Have a great rest of your day. Thank you. That's everybody on the front. Great. Well, again, thank you very much. Have a safe weekend and we'll see you on Monday.