 Good morning, everybody. I'm Tim Berglund, the chair of the House Energy and Technology Committee. It is Friday, May 21st. It is our 1030th hearing. We actually hadn't posted this hearing with a much advanced notice. And I think the floor is going to be in and out today as we work on kind of final budget things and some, a few final bills that we've got to get done. I wanted the opportunity for our committee to meet what's probably going to be the last time for this session. And actually just to talk about a few different things, primarily some of the artificial intelligence things that we've looked at in recent months, I think we started taking testimony on those two bills and just the issue generally, probably late March. So we looked at that over the course of maybe a half dozen hearings or so. And I know that there's interest on several members of our committee to do some work on that legislatively. And my ambition is that we do do work on that in January. And I'm hopeful that we will be able to pass a bill in January. In recent weeks, I have been having kind of off-camera conversations with Representative Sims and Representative Rogers, just about this topic generally. And they have been very helpful in finding people to come testify and scheduling things. And we've had some, I think we had one conversation informally with a couple of folks at ADS. This was probably back in April now, but it was just helpful in helping me put together some of the discussion we've had in committee. And actually, I sent members an email at about 20 after 10 this morning. And I included in there a half dozen questions, again, that were just meant to prompt conversation. And I don't expect us to have a real deep conversation on this topic this morning. But I know that Representative Sims and Representative Rogers are interested in doing some work on this topic in the off-session. And I think it would be helpful to give a little feedback. We don't have to stick to these questions. But, you know, these are kind of high-level prompts for the conversation. What I would also say is there is no pride of authorship here. I know that Lucy and Catherine are eager and happy to work with any committee members who want to work on this topic in the off-session. So I intend to stay in touch with them here and there just to hear what they're working on, working our way towards a piece of legislation that our committee can react to in January. But I would encourage any and all committee members who would like to do some more work on this to touch base with Catherine and Lucy because I know, as I said, they're interested in pushing this forward in our off-session. So one of the things that I want to have us have us spend our time on today is I've got a few other things as well. But I don't want to let the session end without thinking about some of these things. So, since this is a public hearing, I'm going to read some of these questions because they haven't been posted to our website. There were two bills that are on our wall right now, H263, which more deals with the artificial intelligence inventory, H410, which is more focused on setting up an artificial intelligence commission that would work to guide state government on policies and issues related to artificial intelligence. And as I said, I'd sent members some questions, should we be working toward one bill or keeping these two bills separate? That's something that has come up occasionally in recent weeks and months in our committee. The second question was ADS had suggested including flexibility in creating the inventory to account for unexpectedly difficult tasks and or withholding information that causes a security concern to disclose. H263 was very specific on inventory requirements. How prescriptive do we want to be in that bill? And then a third question was ADS suggested keeping the inventories and nuts and bolts presentation of where we are now, moving the pieces that have to do with ethical judgment making over to the committee's jurisdiction. I'm not sure if that was very quick, but committee thoughts on that and do we generally agree. Next question, what's the vision for the inventory going forward? Should this be something that we add a request for feedback from ADS on whether and how frequently it should be updated? Where should the AI commission be housed? ACCD, ADS somewhere else? You might recall that the commission, the task force that we'd set up a few years ago, I believe was housed in ACCD. And finally, are there any other comments on the makeup or duties of the commission? Economic development as part of the commission's charge. That was something that we heard some testimony on that there is a burgeoning industry in the state of Vermont that deals in these areas. Yeah, and those were meant to be prompts more than anything that, you know, we don't have to stick to those particular questions, but I'd be interested in feedback, particularly as we think about these issues in the obsession. So, Laura. Great. I would love to see us. I'd love to see us kind of go go big with one bill. And break it apart if we need to. The other thing that I would just like to encourage us to think about as we're doing this is we're going to learn a lot. I think we're learning that, you know, there's not a lot of, there aren't a lot of paths to follow in consideration of either of these. So I would, I don't, you know, I'm kind of torn. I don't know if we actually want to keep it as specific the inventory, as we have it to kind of see what comes out of the woodwork and reaction to that, or, you know, if we want to go, if we want to go I guess my inclination might be to be more specific and just see, you know, what is the shape of interest in this discussion. I mean, I don't even feel like we have a good grasp on that, like what is who's going to be interested in this. Right. So, and then, I don't, I don't really know where this AI Commission should be housed, you know, in, I don't think it's 80. Well, I don't know. I don't know. I will mention something. And I would ask Catherine and Lucy to make sure my memory is correct here. As I said, we'd had kind of an off camera and on camera. We had ADS in here a couple of weeks ago to talk about this issue. So I got an email from, I think it was from Mark at ADS, but basically saying that, you know, my sense was that they are ready and willing to go on an inventory, and that they have, you know, some very, this sounds doable was the feedback I was getting from him. My concern that I had a month ago was, well, what kind of can of worms are we opening here is this going to even be able to be accomplished. And I thought we got some very positive feedback from him being an email saying we can do this. I think the direction would be helpful, but it's yet, yeah, and throughout other agencies. You know, and I worry less about economic development being part of the commission's charge and more about understanding, you know, just understanding more about the effects on society and what it is that we should be watching for and regulating. I think that this, this is going to continue to evolve and, you know, entrepreneurs are going to continue to to develop AI, you know, without, without our assistance, you know, I mean, I think so, so I'm less concerned in terms of economic development, good to know how our, how our businesses are using it, but you know, I feel like this is a public a public, public safety public privacy issue. Largely. So I think that's all I have to say right now. Okay, but but I will bookmark on that last point you made. I think we've acknowledged the different points in this discussion in recent months that exactly that point that quite possibly this bill in these issues they dip into the Commerce Committee they dip into the Judiciary Committee and and there may be others as well that we want to keep keep on the radar representative Yes, I'll piggyback on top of ours comment, especially the last one. I think Adam sent around link to or at least a reference to the 60 minutes program last Sunday where they were talking about a facial recognition system and how it because of reliance solely on the computer. I wound up identifying people incorrectly, and they're getting arrested and held and everything else even though they had nothing to do with the particular particular crime. So, one thing that I would like to see is an emphasis. When we do an inventory of the state systems. What what systems are we using that rely solely on our computer output to make a decision that materially affects people. And ensure that we always have human review of that particular decision. So whether it's facial recognition whether it's determination of somebody getting benefits or anything else I think I think it's necessary to include a human element in there to review the output. Make sure that you know whatever the computer decided isn't a glitch. And the other thing is, I think we should. I think the commission should be tasked with creating ethical guidelines for commercial development. And I don't think we can go much further than that because we don't really have control over private enterprise. I'm not sure how much how much farther we could actually exert influence on that, but I think we should definitely state where we think the ethical limits are. And I would say in that last point Mike I can't remember who the witness was but I had never thought of regulation this way but I thought it was an interesting context. And the witness had had mentioned that one of the precursors to regulation and government action is oftentimes kind of setting these ethical guidelines and frameworks for how to think about this stuff. And in the future that might might evolve into some more direct government action but that was something that was an interesting concept as to what the work of the commission. If we set up a commission that you know sets up some of some ethical guidelines so Lucy and then Catherine. I was, I was going to say if you know I'm sorry a little bit further. If we have the ethical guidelines. I don't think I don't think government interference wouldn't necessarily be required, unless we see a violation of those guidelines that is serious enough for us to react to it so. In that case, you know we see, we see that happening in terms of use of force and police departments and things like that. We reacted by two to violations of what we think is proper. And it's set up numerous new restrictions as a result. Lucy and then Catherine. Yeah, I pretty much agree with everything. Lauren Mike's comments and I particularly I've been kind of thinking about the economic development piece a little bit and it might be nice to get a little some some feedback from the Commerce and Economic Development Committee, because I do feel strongly that that's not my area of expertise but wondering if at this point it's not quite the right time to be thinking about that side of things and maybe kind of watching as things develop, whether there's a role for us later on but you know at this point in time it seems like kind of this train is coming whether we encourage it or not so that was just that was just a thought and then I, I'm leaning. I've been putting quite a bit of thought into where the Commission should live. And at this point I'm leaning towards agency of digital services if they'll if they'll have it. And I think I might have said this before but the reason for me is, you know, in talking with agency and digital of digital services about what it is and is not appropriate for them to be doing with the AI inventory, and you know hearing loud and clear from them, we can tell you the technology we have, we are not set up and don't have the training or expertise to make any ethical decisions here. I think for me that really that I was, I was appreciative of them kind of just laying that out but to me that kind of emphasize that it could be really positive to have the commission housed at ADS because I think it would be good to have the people who understand the technology, and the people who have the expertise in understanding the ethics of the technology together in one place. So, I guess those are the kind of reflections I've been having. I'm just appreciating this this conversation and agree with much of what is said and that the sort of first focus of the commission can be setting this ethical guidelines framework and then that probably, you know, might lead to future policy work. One of the other things that commission is asked to do is to produce reports on educational opportunities and business growth opportunities. I was also wondering whether we might want to consider adding to that list of a future of work issues I think we've heard from a number of our colleagues about how work is changing. And I appreciated the owner of Faraday's sort of call that we not just be the horse and buggy folks I call all changes bad, but sort of embrace that this is change that is happening, and that, you know, probably folks have to sit on tolls, you know, to take change and you know using automation for that is a really good thing but how do we help train and create future, you know high quality work opportunities for folks so I'd love to you know maybe think about how the commission is as strategic as possible in the reports that it produces and again sort of agree that the focus should be on those ethical guidelines. That's it I'm wondering whether there are some additional actions we might want the commission to take immediately. What I'm thinking about is procurement policies and again I don't know whether that lives within ADS, although I think I heard ADS saying we're happy to sort of host this but we want to be maybe informed and guided by a commission that has broader expertise and sort of live on this work and so wonder whether we might want to think about the commission, helping inform a set of procurement policies for the state for when it, you know chooses to procure software that has AI technology, and maybe one last thing I would add. I'm curious whether there might be an immediate legislative piece around transparency of when AI systems are used and whether that's something that could be within the purview of state government is that we sort of require that when decisions and maybe it's only for the kind of high stakes algorithms around Liberty finances and livelihood but you know when an AI decision making system automated decision making system is making the decision based on someone's livelihood, you know, should we consider kind of really in the short term requiring at least some transparency around that. Yeah, just thoughts I wanted to share. Yeah, now that's a good one and I heard some of that in in Mike's comments as well that you know that that there needs to be a threshold. In addition to policies there needs to be a threshold when people's livelihoods when when people's kind of personal well being is being is being affected by these things. Okay. Great. That's helpful to me. I've been taking notes here on people's thoughts. So again, my, you know Lucy and Catherine have reached out to me with great interest in working on this in the off session, and, you know, maybe we'll touch base a few times. And just, you know, to kind of continue this conversation and I would welcome and encourage members who are interested in also kind of doing a deep dive on this to reach out to them to, you know, kind of coordinate some work on this. So, so thank you for that that this was helpful for me just kind of been bringing my kind of centering me on this and kind of thinking about what's got to be done and again I've told you my ambitions as committee chair which is I would like to pass a piece of legislation on this in the community. And I think it's very, very, very important. Because I would like to see the, the judiciary committee and the commerce committee, perhaps take a peek at this and, and one other thing that I think hadn't been flagged but I want to flag is the potential for, you know, if we do a commission, it's really ought to be a modest appropriation to support that work and so ultimately this may potentially wind up in the appropriations committee, which is another reason I would like to kind of accelerate this work to get in the front of the line, so to speak, as the appropriations committee starts their work in late, late January on the budget. Catherine is your hand still up from before. Okay, Mike and then Laura. I'm interested in what kind of work during the summer. Lucy and Catherine might be undertaking my mind might be interested. Okay, well then, as I said I would encourage you to reach out to him. Laura and then Sally. I'm interested but I cued in Mr chair on the judiciary and commerce aspects of your comments. And I'm wondering if we have talked with anyone on those committees. I'm just to maybe have them kind of toggle along on that summer fall. So you know what I will do on our committee's behalf and whatever where I will reach out to the chairs of those committees so I will reach out to Maxine grad and to, to Mike and see, you know, as those things have crossed their plates. I don't know if AI ever wound up any place and go well must have this. If the task force was an ACCD a few years ago. I'm guessing that there was someone in that committee who may have looked under the hood so let me reach out. Let me reach out to them. And if there are members who have a particular interest, I'll come back to you all. So that's a great suggestion. My comment is also just that I would be interested in looking for the tasks are in everything so Lucy and Catherine put my name down. Awesome. Okay, I'm making a note. It's not even a to do list it's like a to do binder that I have going here. Yeah, Mr chair need some time off this summer. Long year and a half. Goodness, great. Okay, well thank you for that discussion. You know a couple other things that that I wanted to mention to Mike is your hand up from before for it is but I want to I want to make one more comment and please go ahead. If a number of us are planning to get together we've got to worry about a quorum of our committee. And we wouldn't want to have five people meeting without some public notice. Let me also reach out to the speaker on that and see what we can do. And we can get groups of two. Right. Do that. Subcommittee. I don't know the answer to that I think it's an important concern. But let me ask, let me ask about that. I would say, Mr chair that my interest is in kind of keeping along with the education aspect so you know as there are things that are being read or or things to kind of keep along with that. Well, and that that's another possible angle that you know this work group could could do is is maybe each particular meeting is focusing on a particular topic that maybe one or two folks don't, you know, are less interested in and wouldn't wouldn't join that discussion. So that might be another way to handle. Let me just check in with the speaker on that. I mean, I'll tell you in the off session in previous years. I don't know. Yeah, I've definitely met with large groups of legislators to talk about a particular piece of legislation. And I can't recall if there are issues around corn things there. So, I, I'm going to say that that is going to end our kind of formal policy stuff for today. I did want to take a few minutes as a committee. And again acknowledging this is probably the last time we're going to meet this session. And I know Matthew's camera is not on but to express a heartfelt thank you to Matthew for the work you've done to kind of keep us in gear. And, you know, in some ways I feel bad that we haven't had the opportunity to, and this actually goes for Sally and Catherine as well as new members of the legislature, but, but importantly for Matthew that we haven't had an opportunity to sit in the same room and work together and I feel like the, the job of committee assistant that Matthew has had to do, he has had to kind of make up as he's gone along, there is no playbook to how to do this. And so, just in so many ways. And, you know, I've probably worked more closely with Matthew than anybody on the committee just in terms of, you know, getting all the organizational things around the committee done, and Matthew you have done an extraordinary job, I am so appreciative of the work you've done just kind of keeping our committee on the rails, so to speak. And, you know, one of the, you know, there are a handful of committee assistants who have been in the legislature, probably, I don't know if it's for decades but for a long time. And, you know, I don't know if it's a career path that people consider, it's pretty hard to make a living on five months a year work, but somehow I'm hopeful. I think the opportunity avails itself that you'll be back with us next year, because you've done awesome work, and I'm hopeful we're going to be working in person, and then we'll be able to get a chance to sit in the same room with you. And hopefully it's not that room, but at any rate, I just again wanted to formally and publicly thank you for incredible work this year. So, yay. On a less formal note. I wasn't sure I was going to bring this up but Laura and Avram and I, as we were waiting in a zoom room I can't remember when it was Monday or Tuesday night this week on the conference committee. I made a note and I mentioned them there's something I've got to bring up to the committee. So, it's a little inside joke that my family has been playing this year, and I'll just share it with you now. So, my, my, I have two teenage boys who are, you know, have really odd sense of humor, and we were talking last fall after we had adjourned and they'd watch some of the YouTube video and they were like dad you look like you're a hostage, you look like you're being held hostage you know kind of doing these committee zoom things and, and we got laughing about that. And we were talking about when there's a hostage video. What, you know what the hostage does to kind of signal to people in the public that you know that they're being held hostage and that anything they're saying is not actually to be taken seriously. What we came down to in there. They also laugh about how, how badly I dress, but the dare of me wearing the exact same tie and jacket and shirt every day of the session which I'm hopeful today is the last day, which I have actually accomplished if you'll go back and look that I have worn the exact same time and jacket. Actually, I have a couple of different white shirts so this is not the exact same shirt. The other part of that bet that came up was then acknowledging how ridiculous I looked in the same thing every day. Will anyone actually bring it up that dad you are wearing the exact same tie and jacket every. And I said no nobody's going to be people are too polite and they're like, Are you kidding me people have got to call out. So nobody's done it nobody's called out but I've worn the exact same time. Very specific order. Yeah, I thought there were rules that we had to do this. If you were a G, you know, I know I'm new. So anyway, the cat is out of the bag. You don't have your hand. I, yeah, I got to admit that I've relegated myself only a couple of shirts. Usually it's the same tie. And one thing I told my wife also made the comment should be wearing the same thing every day. I said, you know, I don't know. I don't think guys notice what people are wearing, but women might and I don't know whether they'd make a comment but I certainly wouldn't notice what other people are wearing every day. Well, I also I will chime in and say I absolutely did not notice but would have fully endorsed it had I noticed. And yeah, I think I excitedly anticipate the time in our society when women can also do that and have nobody notice. Exactly. Not at all. Well, I had to share that way. I almost broke that out with with Avram and with Laura the other night I was like, yeah, I'm going to share this with the committee. Being let out of his confinements today. I thought your hostage look with the with the beard shave. I mean, you know, the beard. That was amazing. That was spectacular. Truly. Yeah, that was hostage life worthy. Yeah, I've still got some of those pictures so Catherine and Sally maybe you haven't seen those I had a beard kind of down to my, you know, it was down here, it was not pretty. It was, it was awesome. The other thing that I want to share with committee more on a serious note, although semi serious but the sentiment is serious, which is the, I don't even know how many there are I think there's 14 chairs meet every week and you know it's it's kind of a policy discussion it's kind of a. It's kind of a Kovac session. It's kind of a planning session. But, you know, also people talk about, you know, challenges that they have working in committee and in two senses, in one sense I would say that conversation has been foreign to me, and, and in one sense, it's actually been a great conversation and what's been kind of considering. It's not a lot but some committee chairs talk about challenges that they have in kind of working with their committee and how great this committee has been to work with. And it's not that we, you know, always agree on things but I think it's been an incredibly respectful committee, I think it's been a committee that asked really good questions people kind of show up ready to do work, and it's just been a great conversation to work with. And that's my kind of subjective view on that I will also say objectively feedback that I've gotten from either people who testify in our committee or other chairs, or other members of the legislature who come and share with us how impressed people are with our committee. And that personally makes me feel good. But I think you all should feel good as well that people look at this committee and think that's a committee that does good work that is prepared that is respectful I like going and I think we have a lot of time there. And, and I think we do do good work. And so I just want to share that great feedback that I've gotten and and share with you I think it's, you know, something we should all be proud of. So, and keep up the good work. So I want to share that publicly with you. I'll just say that that I'm looking forward to getting together at Catherine's in June, because I think it'd be great, just for all of us to get together in person. Really missing that. Yeah, yeah, I'm, I am so hopeful we can get together next year. And if we do, one of the things that I'm getting a sense for is that if we do meet in person. There's no way they're going to let us meet in a smaller committee room as we have so we might have that to might have that to look forward to. So, anyway, I just saw. Yeah, go ahead, Catherine. Yeah, really looking forward to hosting everyone. It's been such a strange situation to join the legislature in this year and have most of the interaction be you know through through the, the zoom tile so really looking forward to having you all I'll send directions and more details and probably next week, give a little bit of time to unplug that. Yeah. Maybe I'll just put in a plug I sent this out by email to the all house but really inspired by. I think Commissioner Snyder is testimony in our committee for Rygate around the forest economy and the challenges it faces. Red Wing caucus had him in to talk a little bit more depth with the caucus about some of the issues and a group of folks from Red Wing wanted to do more learning this summer and so if any of you all are interested in meeting in person it cool sites across Vermont this summer and learning more about the issues of the forest economy. Let me know if you haven't already. I will say as an aside on that. There are a couple of folks, one ledges one senator and two folks in the private kind of private sector who are trying to schedule. We're trying to schedule me as chair of this committee for a visit to the Rygate plant, which I've never been to. And if the opportunity arises, I'd be happy to, you know, to extend that invitation to people who would be interested in seeing that so, okay, well I will send that around if that's something that we're able to do. But that was going to be sometime this summer. I think I mentioned that as a suggestion for the rural economic, you know, working group. As well. Since it seems like we're winding down. You know, I just want to on behalf of the committee. I think there's probably unanimous consensus. Thank you to your leadership and guidance and sense of humor and poker face are really. They are extraordinary. Catherine and Sally, I mean, truly, you are lucky to have had Tim be your first chair and and thank you, Tim. Yeah, thank you for that. It's just a great group of people to work with. So looking forward to 20, I want to publicly say something too because obviously being new. And at the very beginning, everybody would say, well, usually we do, but not this year because it's going to be different. So I had no idea what to expect. And I feel so fortunate to have been assigned to this committee where, as you said, Mr. Chair, we don't always agree, but we've been able to talk respectfully and come up with a solution. And I'm just, as I said, I feel very fortunate to have been assigned to work with you all. Thank you, Sally. That's great to hear. So that's all I got for this morning. And this, as I said, this is probably the last time we're going to meet. So hope to, you know, for folks who can make it to Catherine's in a few weeks look forward to seeing you there. And a couple of things I'm going to check in and probably email folks on in terms of, you know, with the speaker in terms of how folks might be able to or not be able to work over the summer on some things and I'll get back to you on that. And that's it. Have a happy summer.