 Good afternoon, everyone. First of all, I want to congratulate the UVM men's basketball team on winning the conference championship and making the NCAA tournament. Reminders, we'll be watching this Thursday as you take on Arkansas and I know you'll make us proud, so good luck. We're going to wrap up today at 1 o'clock, so I'll only offer a few short remarks before turning it over to Dr. Levine. First, I just got off the phone with other governors and White House officials and here's what we heard. Dr. Walensky reported that hospitalizations continue to go down nationally, just like here in Vermont, while we're down today at 12, which includes both those admitted because of COVID and those who found out they have it after being admitted for other reasons. They've been in contact with their counterparts in Europe, where some places are seeing an uptick, which is not unexpected. We'll see numbers go up and down for quite some time. Dr. Fauci discussed the VA-2 variant, which seems to be a bit more transmissible, but he also said it does not appear to be any more severe and it does not have any more immune evasion than the original Omicron strain. Again, he said we might see an uptick as a country in a few weeks. We're usually lagging behind the UK a bit, which will be manageable. He said that there has been more cases in Europe, but IECU numbers are flat, which is encouraging. Jeff Zeint said they are cutting distribution of monoclonals to states by 30 percent beginning next week because Congress did not authorize additional funding. Fortunately, here in Vermont, we have a good supply right now, so we should be set at least in the meantime. Next, I know it's hard to believe, but this past week marked the two-year anniversary of the pandemic in Vermont. It was March 13, 2020, when I declared a state of emergency. Shut down schools, close businesses, and told people to stay home, stay safe. Since that day, we've watched as Vermonters have stepped up, gone above and beyond, and as a result, we've led the way throughout these past two years. That willingness to do the right thing has positioned us well as we move into a new phase of our response to this virus, learning how to live with and manage COVID because we know we will not fully go away. But even as Vermont continues to lead the nation, it's still important to pause and reflect on the toll it's taken. Saturday, March 19th, we'll mark the two-year anniversary of our first confirmed COVID death in Vermont. I'll be ordering the U.S. and Vermont flags to have staff to honor the memories of those we've lost. Even though we're transitioning to a new phase as a country and COVID isn't having the same effect on our daily lives as it once did, we can't forget what we've gone through. And because of the tools we now have and the knowledge we've gained, we won't need to relive the experience of the past 24 months. We can continue our transition to endemic and continue making progress as we've seen in over the last few weeks. With that, I'll now turn it over to Dr. Levine. Thanks, Governor. And in my brief comments today, I'm going to continue on that theme of the progress that we're going to be making. Because it has been about two years since the pandemic became a reality for most of us in Vermont. During that time, we lived with a variety of emotions, anxiety, isolation, some illness and for some loss and many, many other hardships. Some communities have undoubtedly been impacted more than others. We cannot forget these experiences and we need to use the lessons learned as we move forward with our recovery as a state. We've also made huge strides in public health with the development of highly effective vaccines, easy access to testing, and new treatments that are saving lives. Even though the virus has not gone away, these advancements are important to keeping us all safe and healthier. Which is why we're finding a balance between vigilance around the virus and living with fewer disruptions to our lives due to COVID. Both while trying to get back to overall better physical and mental health. I'll briefly summarize the updates made yesterday to public health guidance now that we face lower risks of COVID-19. I want to emphasize that the virus is still here and frankly will be with us to some extent for some time to come. So following these recommendations is still critical to protecting yourself and others. If you test positive, you will need to isolate for five days. If you're a close contact, you do not need to quarantine, but you should get tested if you're not vaccinated or not up to date on your vaccines. Any close contact should get tested if they develop symptoms, of course, regardless of vaccination status. Consider your own circumstances and risk in deciding if you want to take additional precautions, including about wearing a mask around others while indoors. It's also important for you to know if you are at higher risk for severe illness from COVID-19 to help inform the decisions you make about risk. And continue to respect the decisions and needs of others around you about wearing a mask as we move through this time of transition. From the youngest to the oldest, each of us have differing reasons for the choices we make, so again, please be accepting. I also want to acknowledge how important it is to not let our guard down with this virus. We will continue our public health monitoring and surveillance efforts here in Vermont and remain aware of national and international developments regarding new strains, vaccine guidance, and treatments. In the meantime, keep your masks around and hold on to your rapid tests. Know that if the situation changes, we will be prepared to change with it. Now, I've also spoken about changes coming to our approach to testing. As demand for testing goes down and PCR results are often not quick enough with a highly transmissible variant. Rapid take-home tests, on the other hand, help you take action quickly if you test positive, isolating, telling close contacts, and accessing treatment if you're at high risk. We will now begin offering appointments for these types of tests at many of our health department test sites. Starting tomorrow, when you make your appointment, you will have the option to pick up a rapid take-home test of the antigen type or a lamp test. The lamp test is similar to PCR but can be done at home. PCR will still be offered for those who need it for now. For example, for a child under two or if you need a result letter for travel. Look for information on our website starting tomorrow. We will also update our testing recommendations for Vermonters. When there is less virus in our communities, there is less of a chance that you might be infected and don't know it. This means we don't need to test as often such as around social gatherings. Testing is still available to all, but we only recommend testing in specific situations when the risk is highest. If you have symptoms of COVID-19 or you are a true close contact and are not vaccinated or up to date on your vaccines. As always, we'll continue to urge Vermonters to get vaccinated and stay up to date on their vaccines. We know from almost a year's worth of experience with vaccinations in Vermont and from data coming in from around the world about Delta, Omicron and the BA2 sub variant that vaccination is still the most powerful tool we have to protect against the most serious outcomes of COVID-19. I'll turn to the doctor. Thank you, Dr. Levine. I'll now open it up to questions. I'm hoping it up without any restrictions. There was no conversation on the White House call about that subject, but I have heard that the restrictions may be lifted soon, but nothing confirmed at this point. But it wouldn't be in the U.S. I mean, this is the Canadians that have to decide this. So as we're kind of turning the corner here, you know, I mean, it feels like we've been here before when we get 80% last summer and we lifted masks and I think there's... What should Vermonters' expectations be? I guess going forward, you know, in terms of how to deal with the virus, how to live with it, just having that mental preparedness, what should people's expectations be? Yeah. I mean, I don't think we should be afraid of the virus. We've learned so much over the last two years. We have a lot of tools in the toolbox. Dr. Levine mentioned the most powerful tool is being fully vaccinated and we should continue to strive to do that. I mean, there's still opportunity. If you haven't been vaccinated yet, you still should because we don't know what strain, what variant is coming in the future. We just know that there are going to be new variants and new strains. Again, what we've seen with the Omicron is that it's less severe and the BA2 variant of the Omicron is less severe as well. So that's all good news and having the being fully vaccinated has proven to reduce the severity from the impacts of COVID. So again, we have a lot of tools. We should just manage this just like we would anything else. We've seen this with the flu as well over the years that we have upticks of flu, but we have vaccination periods as well. So I think this is what we should expect in the years to come. It'll be treated much like the flu. Dr. Levine, maybe have Dr. Levine to add to that. I guess the main punchline would be there are no certainties. However, one can look at science and look at data and make some modest predictions. And right now, the modest prediction is that this is the right time to make the changes that we're making. This is a time the population in a sense deserves to be able to try to move forward because we perceive it is safe enough for everyone to do that. Just like you referred to, there was a time we saw last summer that things didn't work out for as long a time as anyone would have hoped for. No matter who you ask in the world, no matter what authority, you're not going to find someone who can predict the next variant to the moment. And promise you that you'll have months and months of this kind of more relaxed stance that we're taking now. And just looking around the world, by the way, you know, we look at China. We look at Hong Kong. Those are countries that are having significant increases. They kind of started with a zero COVID kind of policy, which with the more transmissible variants just doesn't really stand a chance, unfortunately, against the virus. And they have very particular situations where they have an inferior vaccine. They have a population that at least in Hong Kong is more distrustful of the government, so hasn't embraced the vaccine with the amount of vigor that people would have hoped. Then we have countries, as the governor is referring to like in Europe, that are seemingly having some element of prolongation of this Omicron phase with the BA2 variant. I can tell you that we have found the BA2 variant in Vermont and in the United States. It doesn't seem to be as large a proportion of cases as the original Omicron BA1 variant has proven to be. Most of what we think about that is instead of producing an additional surge, it's just going to drag things on a little. So the tail of that epidemic curve is going to be prolonged because BA2 will keep it alive as opposed to it will cause a huge new issue with it. So that's kind of what we've encountered. A little different topic. How exciting is it for you to meet and greet the crew of USS Vermont tomorrow? And how important is it for Vermont itself? Yeah, I mean, that's our namesake. And looking forward to meeting some of the crew members. And it's again, a sense of pride for Vermont to have USS Vermont and the crew here. And I know they take a lot of pride in that as well. So really very much looking forward to it. Statehouse topics, if I could. The House, it looks like they'll be considering legislation that would ban certain school mascots that are deemed discriminatory. Would you support such a measure? I have to see what it looks like to be honest with you. I know that there were involved there. Secretary of Education is involved in the discussion. So we'll just have to see what the final version looks like. House, I believe, is also moving along with the clean heat standard, switching over to fuel credits and a marketplace for fuel dealers. Is that going to be enough? And what is your thinking on that? Well, let's put aside the policy for a minute. And from what I understand, the direction they're going is to have the PUC make a lot of those decisions and to abdicate their authority, I guess, and give it to the PUC to make those decisions. So once again, as you might imagine, I'm opposed to having the PUC be the final destination of that decision-making. I think it should come back regardless of what, how you feel about the clean heat standard. Whatever the PUC does, it needs to come back from there through the legislative process for a final sign-off. Again, they can abdicate their authority, but I get a vote too, and the executive branch needs to be involved. So we have to make sure that a regulatory body like the PUC, who isn't really elected and isn't really beholding to anyone, does what we want them to do. And if they take a position that's going to be counter to the affordability of Vermont and some of what we're seeing at that point, then we, again, we owe it to Vermonters to either vote that up or down. It's been a few weeks since lifting the masks in schools. A lot of talk about the social concern when the masks were on and not being able to read emotions. Have you heard, you know, of reprieve over the past few weeks? Are we getting the results, you know, anticipated from lifting the masks? Yeah, I mean, again, I'm just hearing anecdotally like everyone else and from some of our staff members with kids. And generally, I think it's been well received. And I think kids are getting acclimated to seeing their friends again after two years of not seeing their faces. So I think it's been good for kids at this point. And again, it's not as though we know there's going to be cases in the future. But I think for the emotional stability of kids and the uplifting of seeing their friends again and their reactions and their emotions, I think it's all good. Anything you want to add to that? Starting with Wilson ring AP. Hi, everybody. I hope you I've got a bit of a scratching connection today. I hope you can hear me. All right. Just one question, Governor. In one of the coronavirus relief funds, Vermont got a lot of money for federal emergency rental assistance. And now it's my understanding. Vermont is having to give back. I think it's a 30 in their neighborhood of $30 million because it wasn't used so that money can be given to other states. What do you make of that? Yeah, there was a fairly strict parameters around the use of the money, which made it problematic. So I can get you a better answer from the experts. But basically from my understanding, that was that was the problem. Just the very strict parameters and and we weren't able to utilize it as much as we had hoped. I think you think that has left people who could have used it in dire straits? Well, we use a lot of money. I mean, in some respects, we in that category, we received the small state minimum, which gave us an incredible amount of money. So that may be part of the reasoning for the lack of use of the full amount of money. But again, it's the strict parameters around the money usage that was we could have used it if we could have had more flexibility. Okay. Thank you very much. I'll have somebody reach out to you about that. I'll have a Mr. Hanford give you a call. Okay. Thanks. Greg Lamarall, the County Courier. Good morning, Governor. I think you're out the hook. I think those questions for Dr. Levine just wanted to touch base on the the lamp tests that you mentioned. If someone were to pick up a lamp test and do it at home, are they getting everything to be able to process that at home or do they then need to bring that lamp test somewhere to get processed? And what's the timeline on something like that? I believe it's a test kit that they would be getting. So they would be able to take the test home and get a result. Okay. Appreciate it. That's all for me. Thank you. Greg, I've actually I've taken one of the lamp test myself and it's interesting to utilize and and very easy, but it does give you those instantaneous results that they're very accurate. So I have two governor and I can I can say you're right. Yeah. Lisa Loomis, the Vali reporter. Hello, I'm sure you said we're not continuing to monitor the wastewater in its municipalities that have wastewater treatment systems. I was looking on the PB website and wastewater plant and Franklin County has seen a significant increase in COVID in its system over the last 15 days from February 20th up to March 10th. And in Burlington, these plants will show in a similar increase over a similar time period. Will you continue to monitor that and have you are these times alarming at all as the BA1 and BA2 variants are spreading? Yeah, first first question, I guess, is will we be utilizing this in the future? And absolutely, we've we proved that it's been very effective. In fact, we're expanding it. I think the federal government has an interest in expanding it as well because we can monitor what's happening throughout the state. Second of that again, what we've been doing and we've said this all along is, you know, the case numbers, of course, are an indicator, but that's not what we're watching. That's not the metric we watch. The metric we watch is the hospitalizations. But and particularly the hospitalizations for those who have COVID and are going or admitted because of COVID not because they just happen to have COVID as they're admitted for something else. So again, we'll continue to watch the hospitalizations. The ICU numbers again are coming down significantly. And on the White House call today, they talked a lot about that. And and they said that they're seeing this across the country, which bodes well for for all of us. And it and it shows that the severity two things, the severity of the variant at this point in time, whether it's be a one or be a two is less significant than other strains, but also that vaccines are having a positive effect on that. And and and the the results are less severe conditions at the Levine right now. I believe we have seven sites in Vermont that will be doing the wastewater surveillance, not all of them up and running just yet. And there's been an infusion of CDC grant money, if you will, to to get this going. We're under the understanding that there actually can be more communities. And so we're we've been made aware of that and we'll be working with other communities around the state to see if they are interested. Keep in mind as opposed to the daily case count where it's, you know, X number of cases per day or X number of people in the hospital per day. This is viral copies per liter of wastewater and it's a very different measurement system. And there's not a lot of standardization around that for people to understand exactly what level means what. But if you think about it, there are many things that are in our environment, some of which we measure some of which we don't, but there's always a baseline level. And I suspect we're going to see that happen with this virus and then we're going to need to just watch as you pointed out trends and see if the trends are going in one way or the other and if they have some new meaning to them. Even the trends in the Burlington water where there was an increase and there was more B.A. to we have not been seeing any impact of that in terms of case rates around the state soaring even in Chittenden County or hospitalization rates at all being impacted if anything they're going the opposite direction. And we haven't had a death in Vermont, one death in the last week which is very gratifying and reassuring news at this point in time. So we're all kind of learning how to use this measurement together as a state and as a nation and we'll keep you apprised because there are really I think some tricks to understanding the data and concerns about really just watching the trends and not allowing the population to get too excited at certain times because a certain number of viral copies per liter doesn't have the same impact as it may on what happens in the hospitals and in deaths in Vermont. Thank you for that detailed explanation. A quick follow-up about vaccines for you Dr. Levine. I received emails from people who had a J&J shot and then a Moderna and they are concerned that they are not properly or fully protected and I think I've asked this question before for someone who had two J&J shots and not an mRNA vaccine. Do people who had J&J and a Moderna need a third shot? There's not a clear guidance for that at this point in time that I can tell you that I'm aware of people who have gotten a third shot in that setting but the reality is they've gotten that extra shot if they're not immunocompromised they in theory can stop there until any further guidance comes out. And if they wanted a third shot could they get one? Well we're finding that they have gotten one is all I can tell you whether it were whether it was from a healthcare provider or elsewhere and it can be the interpretation of their risk level too in terms of their immune system. Okay that's it for me thank you very much. Lisa I'm in that category of receiving a J&J first and then Moderna as a second the booster and I have not had the third shot at this point in time but I'll be waiting for guidance and when it's time to do so I'll have a third shot if and when that happens. I'm waiting for the CDC to provide that information to me. Got it. Thank you very much. Guy Page from On Daily Chronicle. Now being voted on in the House as you speak it would require that 50% of total land area in Vermont be conserved protected or otherwise never be developed. Have you seen this bill and what do you think of it especially regarding Vermont housing needs? I have not seen H606 but I'll put that on my list of reading for tonight because it sounds as though it could have an impact on housing but I just don't know what it what it does. It follows a UN recommendation that by 2050 50% of all areas in the world but also Vermont doing its share. So you're talking about the US House? No no I'm talking about the Vermont House. This is a bill that Amy Sheldon sponsored and was voted out of House natural resources. Okay. It requires that 50% of Vermont land would be conserved protected or just not developed. I have not seen that yet but but I'll definitely look into it. Thank you. Also I understand and I apologize that this question is not even up but that Pfizer is now recommending a fourth dose for COVID-19 and what is your position on that and what if anything would be the state's involvement in facilitating a fourth shot? You know I saw the same thing from Pfizer and I haven't seen or heard from the CDC or FDA in terms of whether that's advised or not. I think the reality is that there's going to be a series of boosters so to speak in the future much like the flu trying to chase that variant that is becoming prevalent at that point in time. So I don't think we should be shocked that there's going to be another vaccine available whether it's the third or fourth dose or just a yearly dose. I just don't know but but again I'm sure the CDC and FDA are looking at that at this point in time. Dr. Levine. These boosters will carry the same sort of mandate either employer or workplace or state government mandate that you've seen from that. This is Dr. Levine. Let me go back to the first part of the question. It shouldn't shock us that the manufacturers are collecting data over time about the performance of their vaccine and the mounting of further antibody response in people who get further doses but they don't set the national policy about how this plays out. So until the advisory panel to the FDA and the advisory panel to the CDC who deal with vaccine policy weigh in, right now the word we're getting from most of them is sure boosters will probably be necessary at some time in the future but this may not be the time. And so this could be you know a year after the time you got your previous booster. No one is indicating that we need to have something sooner. And again without the pressure if you will of a variant strain that would require a major change in vaccine policy we're not going to see that happen right now. And the vaccines as we've said here many times against Omicron have been phenomenal with regard to protection against the most serious outcomes. And that is indeed the goal. So there has been no need as we've navigated the Omicron portion of the pandemic to add yet another booster into the mix. So but if it becomes necessary will there be the same level of mandated vaccine for your job as we think? I think it's premature to determine that at this point in time if we believe that COVID is going to become the next flu so to speak endemically then I would assume we do treat it the same. Now there are some organizations some hospitals and so forth health care facilities that require that their employees have a flu shot. And I think that's within their ability to do so but a widespread mandate is not something that I would foresee unless something unforeseen happens. So we'll just have to cross that bridge when it comes but we're nowhere near making that decision at this point. Thank you. Greg Siketic, Bennington Banner. Thank you and good afternoon Governor. This might be a question for you or for Dr. Levine or for Secretary French. But given that we are making masks optional in schools and given that we know the COVID-19 vaccines have been proven safe and effective how and when will a decision be made on whether there will be a COVID vaccination requirement for the 2022-23 school year? Dr. Levine. So at this point in time we've been really heartened by the uptake of the age five to 11 vaccine. It didn't all happen at once. It's been happening gradually over time but where I believe last time I looked still leading the nation in the uptake there and that's the way things have worked in Vermont pretty much throughout our vaccine campaign. The issue is should a school system mandate that? We have an Immunization Advisory Council that did just meet about a month ago. Most of that was more of an operational and organizational meeting and there are several members of that council that were not there because they need to have replacements appointed. So that will meet again in the future and I'm sure this will be an issue that it talks about and then they will provide advice as per their title to myself as commissioner of health and to the Department of Health and then in turn we will provide that advice to the rest of state government. So right now there's no contemplation of doing that and I'm not aware around the country if that's been a very active issue either in other school districts. Thank you. That's my question. Erin Botanko, BT Digger. I have a question. I noticed Scott that you mentioned that the monoclonal antibodies are getting reduced because of lack of funding. I've also heard that the federal government is pulling funding for uninsured people to cover their testing, treatment and vaccination. I believe how will this affect uninsured for monitors? Is there any kind of state intervention that would make a difference here or are uninsured for monitors really going to lose that assistance? Botanko, I think I'm going to refer that to either Dr. Levine or maybe Mr. Pichek. You want to try that, Dr. Levine? I can start. My only comment is I have not heard what you've heard. So, you know, I have heard because of the governor's call today what you heard about the monoclonal which, by the way, won't impact any Vermonter. We have adequate supply of that at this point in time. But I've not heard about the second point you made. Commissioner Pichek, have you heard anything to that degree either? No, Dr. Levine, not on the uninsured population. On the uninsured population are bullets in a regulation that requires coverage and no out-of-pocket will remain in place for some time still. But I haven't heard of that on the uninsured side. This is just per NPR they tweeted recently. The White House's warning will have to wind out a program to test, treat, and vaccinate uninsured people for COVID because the administration has run out of money for the program which Congress failed to include in funding legislation. So it could seem connected with the monoclonal issue that you mentioned as well. I think, I think, Erin, on the call this morning with the White House almost every issue that came up, the thread throughout was that Congress didn't appropriate enough money for us to continue. So they definitely are advocating for the funding to be re-implemented by Congress. So I think that we're going to continue to hear. I don't think it's run out yet, but they want to make sure that they catch this wave, so to speak, and make sure that it's put back into place. But I noticed that with almost every single question was ended with Congress didn't fund the appropriate amount of money to continue. Okay. Well, I guess we'll have to see. Thank you. Thanks. Tim McQuiston from our business magazine. Good afternoon, Governor. There's a lot of workforce issues this week. The job numbers were, as you know, revised and released on Monday. Today is Equal Day Day. Vermont, although it has the, leads the nation in the differential where women are still paid on average $4,600 less than men. And also yesterday, Vail announced that it's increasing minimum wage to $20 an hour. And there are significant employer here in Vermont that amounts no on a chemo and, of course, still mountain. You talked about strategic ways to increase the labor force and other things. Would it be strategic to increase the minimum wage generally in Vermont instead of letting market forces play out over time as a way to bring people into the state, make it a leader not only in the minimum wage, but also by doing that, it would also help women generally. Yeah, now I still believe that supply and demand is the best policy in terms of wage growth. I mean, we've seen it over the last year or two. We have a lack of workers. We have an overabundance of jobs and that has resulted in higher wages. And I still believe that's the right approach. I thought my hats off to, I think, Vail sees the handwriting on the wall. They need more employees. So they're raising their minimum wage as a result. So that proves to me that it works. Any concerns you'll see that for one company the workers themselves will sort of cherry pick on who's paying more. And of course, the ski areas are not that far from each other. Is there any other strategic way other than letting supply and demand play out to increase the labor forces to about 26,000 workers just here in Vermont in the last three years? Well, we could provide more housing, affordable housing for the missing middle of those that the working, the work workforce. And some of those initiatives we put into place as you probably have reported on and written about the Budget Adjustment Act that we asked for money, more money for housing immediately was not included. So we're going to have to wait until July at this point for those to come into play. So if I believe housing is critical to workforce development, that's, I don't think anybody's coming to Vermont because of the minimum wage or lack thereof or whatever. I think it's the quality of life, but they have an opportunity, but as well, they need housing in order to stay. And we continue to see and I continue to hear from people who either are considering coming or are not considering to stay. And the reasoning behind that is, is because of the lack of affordable, decent affordable housing for that middle income, the workforce. All right, great. Thank you, Governor. Andrew McGregor following record. Yes. Thank you. Good afternoon. Governor Scott. In his opening remarks, Mark Levine mentioned for monitors should hold on to masks and rapid tests to be prepared for if and likely when conditions will shift and will need to return to their use. I'm curious at the state level, without getting too deep into the weeds, what capacity and programs and preparations will the state keep in place for pandemic response versus, you know, what, what do you envision further unwinding and rolling up and have the things to change? Well, I'm not sure that we have to unwind a whole lot at this point. We didn't have any, we provided guidelines in a lot of respects with the masking in schools, for instance, but we didn't have any mandates after the state of emergency lapsed. And so I don't, I mean, we'll still keep all the tools in the toolbox. We just make sure that they're all sharp, right? We want to make sure that we have everything available, that we're preparing for whatever happens in the future. We've learned a lot over the last two years and again, just keeping all of those tools that we have viable. And things like making sure that we have an inventory of masks and gloves and things that we were in short supply of in the initial stages of the pandemic. And I guess part of what I was looking for was the dedication of state-specific resources. You know, the state had a hand in building up testing centers, distribution of tests, you know, filling in health care workers shortages with National Guard troops. You know, are there any programs of that ilk that you envision needing to hold on to or now that it's been done and sort of it's understood how to accomplish it, you don't really need to keep something in place. You can just reconstitute it if and when it's necessary. Yeah, again, we are in a continuing evolution of improvement. So we continue to look at what worked, what didn't. And you're talking really about systems and you're talking about people. We were able to utilize people from different areas, from different departments and agencies and so forth to come together with the National Guard or all the people involved. I mean, that was part of our success. And I don't think they get enough credit, in some respects, our state employees from the health department to those in the warehouse and distribution of tests and masks and vaccines and so forth. I mean, that was a day in, day out type of process. And we continually improved on that. So we have those systems, we have the plays in place. So we'll pull those out as needed. But we don't want to continue the program if it's not going to be utilized. But we know what works and we're prepared to use that if necessary. Okay, thank you very much. Joseph Gresser, the Barton Chronicle. We'll try Ed Barber, Newport Daily Express. Heather Jo, we got you, Ed. Hello. We got it, yep. There we go. Governor, I haven't talked to you in a while. We need to have a better game. I'm going to head up here. It helps on the way. So you're actually off the hook. Okay. Well, make, wait, before. I know a person who got a Moderna vaccine. They got the second vaccine. Can you hear me? We can. We hear you, Ed. Come on. Okay. They got the booster shot. And when they got the boosters, they had a medical reaction to it. Like Barton and Dr. Levina, what did you do if it suggested that they people forked shots? Okay, before he answers that, Ed, make sure you write an article about utilizing ARPA funding for broadband expansion as well as cell service, especially in the kingdom, which is some of the provisions we've asked for. And I'm not sure, you know, how the legislature is going to follow through on that. So keep their feet to the fire. Dr. Levina. Hi, Ed. So what I heard was they got the Moderna first dose. They got the Moderna second dose. And they had gotten an additional third dose and had a reaction after that third dose. And you're worried about if there's recommendation for a fourth dose, what do they do? So obviously every case is individual. It would be kind of important to know what happened after the third dose. Most of the reports are that the third dose is not more likely than the second dose to give anybody any significant kind of adverse effect or side effect. And the third dose is a lower dose than the first two doses were. Are you aware of exactly what happened? Ed, we can hear your ruffling papers so we know you're still there. Do you know what happened after the third dose? So, barring any new input, what I can tell you is that most of the more recent literature regarding getting another type of vaccine after the first two doses showed excellent results with regard to people being able to maintain the kind of immune status that they wanted to. So he could theoretically have a different vaccine substituted. But without really knowing any more details, it's going to be hard for me to give you any more advice than that. Obviously, hopefully the individual will discuss this with their own healthcare provider so they can put it in the context of benefits versus risks. But I think that is done. Hi, thanks. Taking a look at the vaccine dashboard, it seems like the age group of 18 to 29-year-olds still hasn't even reached 50% for booster shots. I'm curious, could you talk a little bit about what efforts are underway if any to continue to try to encourage that group of people to get shots? And do you have any concerns that that number stays that low, that that's going to cause long-term issues as we move toward this endemic phase? That age category has been a source of frustration for us from the very beginning. But I'll let Dr. Levine answer the rest of it. Interestingly, within that age category are college students. And I just got off my college call that I have every week with the Institutes of Higher Education in Vermont this morning. And we have a fair number of colleges that have a 97-plus percent rate of people completely vaccinated up-to-date with booster. And then a few of the smaller ones come in a little less than that. So those colleges did mandate it often, though not always, so that that's how they achieved that kind of a rate. I think if I can get into the mind of people in that age group, probably they're looking themselves at the fact that what's happened with the virus is it's evolved into this less virulent, but still very transmissible variant of Omicron. And many of them have, I guess, interpreted that as well. I'm probably not at high risk in my age group of getting a serious outcome, because that's true when you look at the data. And if I get the virus, I get the virus. And that's the attitude that they've taken. It doesn't mean it's the right attitude, but it is the one that they're entitled to and that they've taken. We still feel that, from an overall standpoint, they do want to reduce, they should want to reduce their risk of any serious outcome to the maximal point possible. And we know that immunity wanes significantly after just two doses in the mRNA series, and that the booster brings it right back to where it should be. And that goes on for weeks to months at a time. So I would still advise them to do that in the overall scheme of things, especially if they want to be prepared for something in the future that we don't even know about yet that could happen where they'd want to have the really best level of immunity possible. So we have tried to appeal to the audience in many ways in terms of providing indeed. We've gone to college campuses. We've gone to work sites of all sorts. We've held community-based clinics that are pretty accessible for anybody at the time. We've made pharmacies and other sites walk-in business so that you don't have to take the trouble to schedule an appointment and all of that. And we've done, you know, a lot of the work that we've done for the arts of the state, the barnstorming tours. So there's a whole bunch of ways we've tried to meet this age group where they are. But you've seen the results. I would like to think that those results would be worse if we hadn't done all the things I just said. So if we can look at it with the glass half full, maybe that's a better approach. Lisa, the water very roundabout. Thanks. The first is about schools this week and how the mask requirements are dropped. And at the same time, it looks like schools are also dropping a lot of the communications that they've been doing around COVID cases as far as like spreading the word when there's cases to show in information with staff and families. I know the state is trying to dial back on the requirements for schools because they've been so overtaxed and they've had so much to do. But if a school sees an increase in cases if there's a spike, is there anything prohibiting schools from communicating that information to their school communities if that could be helpful to people? I know there's nothing really to say, there's nothing to say, but if they start seeing increases is there anything stopping them from sharing some of that information in order to help people understand if they've been exposed? The Secretary Boucher is on I don't believe there is, Lisa, but any provision preventing them from doing that but maybe Deputy Secretary Boucher can answer that further. Yes, hello, Governor, thank you. Hi, Lisa, the Governor's correct. There is nothing that's prohibiting schools or districts from getting those communications out. I think most schools, as we've talked about in an earlier question, have really been seeing and again I would say this, but I feel really have been seeing and focused on the fact that masks are coming off, kids are appreciative of that and I think that's where most of the attention has been this week across the board. But there is nothing that's prohibited to school from sort of communicating broader trends like that. Okay, good. I was just thinking in terms of if they start seeing cases popping up again and in a way that they think it would be useful for people to be aware and be cautious, etc. Should they, you know, they could resume some of that if there was reason to do that? I might just add that I think in the past, I mean over the last few decades, if there was an outbreak of anything in a school, whether it was flu or something of that nature they would communicate that to their kids and to parents. And I think we have to look at it somewhat similar to that. I mean that's what we're moving into. So they still have a, I think obligation to let students and parents know what's going on. Dr. Levine? And just one quick piggyback to that is the test at home program is still in existence. And so obviously schools are still in the position where they can distribute tests as needed to families who would like to take advantage of that still at this time. So there's nothing to preclude that from happening. And obviously schools are sometimes the ones who let people know, but I think kids let each other know and parents let each other know as well. So there'll be many ways for people to find out if there were cases. But again we are seeing markedly less cases in Vermont right now and the school is a reflection of the community. So I would presume that the schools are not seeing as many cases either. And that's a good point to your government as far as it being like any other illnesses that might be other to tell people about. One other question on a different topic here that's important in Waterbury is you know looking at how things are starting to shift back to some more normal. I'm wondering how the process is playing out right now with the state workforce and state workers returning to their offices of which we have a bunch here in Waterbury. People are eager to see state workers returning here during the daytime. I'm wondering how that's moving along. I might ask, is Secretary Clouser on? Yes, I'm here Governor. Maybe you could give an update on I know that we've encouraged people to come back to the workforce. Some are still working remotely. But maybe give us an update on that if you have anything. Sure. As the Governor said many workers do have a telework remote work plan. Those were worked on with their supervisors and signed and authorized back in November. The past several months folks have been utilizing more ad hoc remote work based on lots of different factors. Now that the Omicron surge has gone down, we are encouraging folks to come back to the office to their poor days which are days when many folks are in the office and it is part of what has been negotiated in many remote work plans. That being said, the remote work plans are different based on the programmatic needs. So some groups and divisions and departments may have plans that look like this. Some may not look like this. Some may not look like this. Some may not look like this. But you should start being in general remote workers returning to the office at least for poor days which are typically two to three days a week. Okay, great. Thank you very much. Okay. Ed, when you are making that call to your legislator, adding to the broadband issue, maybe help 25% of Vermonters, that is important to us. But as well, I wanted to remind everyone tonight at 6.30 on the state house steps, I will be joined by statewide office holders, lawmakers, faith leaders, members of the general public and more for a vigilant solidarity with the people of Ukraine. I will also be signing a bill dedicating more than $640,000 towards humanitarian efforts in Ukraine which equals $1 per Vermonter. Anyone is invited and I hope to see some of you there tonight. We will also have music from a Vermont youth orchestra quartet on the state house steps and hear from a representative from the organization receiving the aid funding. So again, we will be gathering at 6.30 with remarks after it should be over within an hour. So thank you all very much. We'll see you again next Tuesday.