 Good evening and welcome. I'm Diane Meyerhoff host for tonight's candidate forum for state representative in Chittenden district 3 Jericho Underhill and district 4 1 in Charlotte tonight show is being aired live on channel 17 and streamed live on the channel 17 website We welcome your comments and questions. Please join the conversation at 8 6 2 3 9 6 6 Candidates joining me tonight are the three Democratic incumbents George Till and Trevor squirrel from Chittenden 3 and Mike Yantachka from Chittenden 4 1. Thank you all so much for coming The candidates are running unopposed so we're going to conduct the forum more of a forum than as a debate However, each candidate will make an opening statement and then we'll discuss topics of interest to voters So George tell us why you're running and what qualifies you for the position. What are your priorities as we come into the next session? Thank you I've Been in the legislature now for five terms ten years and although I've had you know some real successes along the way there are Some priorities that I have that really haven't gotten across the finish line yet And I really want to continue on and press for those in particular the things that that I'm really interested in this year is Raising the smoking age to 21 and the problem of adverse childhood experiences or aces in Vermont and How that impacts our health care? spending our schools our social services and our corrections departments as well as our economy and In addition We need to have an excise tax on electronic cigarettes I want to push once again for primary enforcement of our seatbelt law and paid family leave is It is a big priority for me again this year So that's that's why I want to be there. The second reason I like to be there is a Lot of times the discussion is very negative about Vermont and I'd like to Emphasize that there are a lot of very good things about Vermont You know Vermont has is rated by wallet hub as being the Best state in the country to have a baby We are one of the safest states either number one or number two depending on which poll you look at We have Some of the best public schools Again wallet hubs it calls our schools the fifth best in the in the country the opportunity index says that Vermont is The best state to be born in and we have a low unemployment rate And so there you have a very low infant death rate. We have a relatively low Maternal mortality rate. There are just so many good things about Vermont and I think the negative things are often overstated The issue around our you know the taxes in Vermont and those sort of things I think there's a lot of opinion about that but sometimes the facts don't exactly line up with with a lot of what's said so That's that's why I'm running again. Okay. Sounds like an ambitious agenda. Thank you George Trevor Well, thank you for having me I'm the newbie of the three here. I'll be going into my second term Thoroughly enjoyed my first term challenging interesting learned a lot I've always Felt that serving your community is a very important thing to do I moved to under hail in 2000 and I've been there for 18 years now I got involved in more of a local community in terms of the conservation commission I ended up chairing the conservation commission and also ended up Being a member on the planning commission and chairing in the planning commission at one time I was chairing both at the same time and I don't recommend that to anybody So obviously I have a strong interest in environmental issues and I carry that over into into the state house I always had an interest in in running As a legislator, but didn't know if the opportunity would present itself and the opportunity did present itself two years ago when incumbent Bill Frank retired after 12 years and I Saw that as my opportunity to see what it was like to campaign and politic and and become a part of the legislature and I was fortunate to win and I got my choice to be on a natural resources committee So I got to delve into the both issues that are probably closest to me Which are water quality solid waste and also issues around forest fragmentation Great, thanks so much Trevor appreciate it Mike. Tell us yes, Mike and Tajka and I represent Charlotte and part of Heinsberg. I've been in the legislature for eight years and You know, I'm there to work for values and opportunities to benefit all of our monitors I've served on a natural resource and energy committee for six years and then that committee was split up into two committees Well, actually the the responsibilities went to two different committees A new committee was created energy and technology committee, which I'm on and the natural resources part went to the committee that Trevor's on So my focus has been on the environment and renewable energy and I want to continue working for You know the Aspects the energy aspects and The committee also has responsibility for telecommunications and the IT infrastructure of the Vermont government so there's a lot of work to be done there not only with the energy issues, but also bringing broadband to Vermont or throughout Vermont and Making sure that our our computer systems are secure and Are the data that we have on Vermonters is secure as well so You know Vermont families need a healthy and healthy environment and so we need clean air and clean water and That's an essential part of what Vermont is so I want to continue to have that Education issues Every child deserves an excellent Public education system so that they can Become productive citizens and Develop their to their full potential So we need to continue supporting that and we all need access to affordable health care Safe communities to raise our kids and economic opportunities so that if you're working 40 hours a week you earn enough money to To live on that For food clothing and shelter. So that's why I want to serve another two years Lots of lots of lots of topics to talk about you all have some areas of specialty. That's great So let's start I'll start with health care since a number of you brought it up And I know this is a particular topic for you George. Yes, so I'm lots of great ideas But you know, how do we limit the the spending what the cost is for folks who who have to go out there and find insurance? well You know as the only physician in the legislature for the past 10 years I have a little bit of a unique perspective But the real Essence of limiting the cost is getting serious about prevention and using other policies to help with with Preventing health problems The things that are so obvious As things like the tobacco policy Right, so so what do we spend a year on tobacco related diseases? We spend about 348 million dollars a year on tobacco related and illnesses just in Vermont Smokers die on average 10 years earlier than others It counts for about one in five deaths nationally So it is it's a it's still a huge problem. We've made some progress We are in very high risk at very high risk of losing that progress with the whole e-cigarette things but one of the things that virtually cost nothing and has been Proven in multiple places now to significantly reduce smoking is raising the smoking age to 21 It really matters it really matters it really matters because if you don't start smoking before you're 21 You're probably never gonna start smoking And when you raise the smoking age to 21 that means the 18 to 20 year olds can't buy the cigarettes Is that really true? Yes, and they really not get them. Well, if you're enforcing properly But we know that that's the group who provides 90% of the cigarettes to younger younger people We also know that The earlier you start the earlier you try nicotine the more likely you are to be Addicted it takes less to get you addicted and it's much harder to stop So raising the age to 21, you know, it started as a movement in one town down in in, Massachusetts and That town is a Boston suburb and they raised the age to 21 Here we hear people would just go across the border to buy it in New Hampshire But guess what they didn't even go across the town line down there in just a few years their smoking rate was 50% below the surrounding towns 50% below and that was the single Intervention was raising the smoking age. So we know it works. It's been done in multiple states now We've passed it in the house. The house gets it. It came to a very close vote in the Senate. Sadly There were a couple of people who would shock you that they voted against it, but they did and and so it It didn't pass but we're going to give it a go again Because if you want to control your health care costs, this is no hanging fruit $348 million if you got your smoking rate in half, that's a huge amount of money There are and there are other examples of that same kind of thing where if we get serious about prevention and we know what accounts for What causes 25% of cancers 25% of heart disease? You know a wide range of diseases and we know how to reduce that Do you do folks agree as well? Were you in support of this this change in the yeah? I think we also need to tax e-cigarettes the same as we do Nic team delivery devices, so it's just another way of Cigarette it is No, no, I mean I agree pull hardly we need to put an excise tax. Just hope we do regular They are only currently taxed with the sales tax, but we need to put a hefty Well an excise tax on them at the distributor level Because we know that there are two groups that are most price sensitive with things like tobacco and e-cigarettes and that's the younger people and That's people of lower income and those are both groups that we absolutely need to target If we're gonna if we're gonna reduce our health care costs the e-cigarettes are every bit as addictive They do not really help people stop smoking It's that you know it turns out that What it does is have people smoking two different things and there's just no evidence that in the long run it reduces health risks by Smoking may in fact make it worse, but it's gonna take time to prove that they kind of snuck in Before we were ready for them. It sounds like and the utilization is exploding in the teenagers Which is why I say we are about to start losing the war and cigarettes. They're much more expensive than Cigarettes and You know over time people will morph it's clear that people who use e-cigarettes smoke more Regular cigarettes and smoke longer So don't start. No, don't start and those are things we need to do to control health care costs Yeah, let's switch because you folks both talked about water quality and environment Talk about some things we can do. I know people here are very concerned about Lake Champlain We're hearing it all the time. We've got algae blooms and Beaches in Burlington have been closed a lot lately, which I assume has other issues connected to that But tell us what your ideas are for that. Well There there are two elements to it, right? We've had an ongoing conversation with the Environmental Protections Agency Over nutrient loading in the waters of the state of Vermont, and that's not just Lake Champlain It's like member make all the Connecticut River watersheds and even the North Hudson watersheds and Over time there was an agreement made for a total maximum daily load for phosphorus Loading in Lake Champlain. Okay, out of that came X-64 which was passed in 2015, which is the Water Quality Act if you will for Vermont Where look at all the different sectors that contribute not just in Lake Champlain, but those other watersheds I just talked about and from that The treasurer state treasurer was tasked with looking at What it would cost to meet the requirements under the EPA and meeting some of the requirements under X-64 and It was determined that we probably need over and above what we already get for funding from various sources About 25 million dollars each year for the next 20 years And in a sense the total bill with all the revenue sources is about 2 billion dollars over 20 years So our big struggle and one of the things we keep working on in our committee for over the last couple of years is where we come out with the long-term funding to do this work, okay, and When the EPA gave us a report card this past year, they I think they worked on I think they identified 28 areas That we were supposed to be working on 25 of them were passed if you will and To being worked on and one not a pass and the biggie long-term funding and There's been an over-alliance in this administration On the capital fund which has bonded money to help support that work or fill that hole That's not sustainable over time And we need to figure out how we're going to come up with with that long-term funding We have some money that comes from the property transfer tax, which is about four million dollars a year that goes toward the queen water fund There's some additional monies that are going to move towards clean water funding called the sheets Which is the money tied up with bottle deposits and things like that right now the distributors If they don't reimburse they get to keep that money. We're going to take that money and direct that towards water quality And then we have capital bond funding But it's filling in the rest of that and we're still not getting to 25 million We're already getting to about 18 or 19 million and that's what the agencies are talking about in terms of moving forward in physical year 2020 that's not enough and Relying on the capital funding is not going to do it over the long term either. We don't have an answer I was in a form last week question, you know, I mean we presented ideas and And representative Tillwood no doubt because being our ways of means we've actually submitted Ideas or multiple ideas about where we could raise those funds But I was in a forum last week where all the agency heads were present that are part of a water quality initiative and They're starting to realize that they have to come up with a long-term solution that status quo what they're doing is not going to work so so one of the big problems is that there's a reluctance to actually do anything to raise the money and Seems to be a theme I mean because there's no new taxes, right? so Think about this if you took the cost of one cup of coffee at Dunkin Donuts or Starbucks a month And a set and take take that two dollars a month and put it on every property. That's in Vermont You could raise what 20 million dollars and That would go pretty far in raising the 25 million dollars that that we need each year to do that You know, I'm willing to give up a cup of cup of coffee a month for this if it's going to help clean up the lake Polluters need to pay and who are the polluters? It's all of us 40% of the pollute of the phosphorous going into into the lake it comes from agriculture another 40% comes from our roads and our municipalities and Only 3% is actually coming from our wastewater treatment plants So, you know, we need to we need to everybody has to be in we had that saying all in right? Everybody in or whatever it was called we did acts 64 was it and We all have to be willing to contribute something in order to clean it up if I may just add a comment to represent a young chaka Tasha the one of the problems we have with with The federal clean water Act is the jurisdiction of the EPA and and dealing with this problem So if we don't come up the EPA has basically said to Vermont You've you come up with this idea and we'll work with you on that if we failed to do that The EPA could come in and tell us what we should do But the EPA only has jurisdiction over point source pollution not non point source pollution Why don't you explain the difference? Well stuff running off of farm fields is non point running off of off of roads Most of your point source pollution is wastewater as Representing Tasha was talking about and that's the least contributing factor now So if EPA comes back and says you will do to meet these requirements We're going to be spending a lot of money with very little benefit from that And that's a reality. This could very well happen. So let me let me let me chime in just a bit the EPA has set mid 2019 as the time by which we need to tell them what our long-term source is yet all of last Year two years the administration came in time and time again and said we don't need to identify a source now We don't need a funding source now There are a lot of a lot of thoughts about different funding sources. There were proposals about different funding sources, you know Ideally in taxing you want a nexus. You want some connection between what you're charging and And and the purpose, you know that one of the suggestions that came from the Natural Resources Committee was Rooms tax a surcharge on rooms. It is an issue in terms of Our tourism if our lake is awful our tourism is going to tank if we lose the Vermont brand By being obviously polluted that the tourism is going to get down the hill And so, you know, I see a nexus there a lot of other people Didn't seem to see a nexus there. What you know, what makes the most intuitive sense to most of us I think was an impervious surface charge So the whole state is being mapped for what's How much is impervious because that's where the water runs from and so you could conceivably look at each parcel What amount is impervious and charge of tax based on that? That makes the most sense. The problem is that a it's going to be very expensive to set it up Mb it has to be constantly updated because things are constantly changing. So it's not only a setup expense But it's an ongoing expense. So the next proxy for that that is has been suggested is just a parcel fee so rather than based on the actual physical Setup of the parcel that just parcels pay equally and there are people who think that that isn't okay Nobody is wildly enthusiastic about that but but people Point out that well, but some parcels like forest lands actually reduce the runoff and yet We're going to charge them too. So it's a little bit messy and it's all more complicated by the fact that the administration keeps Insisting we don't need to identify more and the last point I would make is yeah We're using a lot of bonding money and who's going to pay that back. It's not us. It's our kids And we're pushing this off onto our kids. We've created the pollution for profits and whatnot, but we're going to Push this off onto our kids to pay for and that's just not right and tell me I know some of the towns have I think it's per parcel fees or it's impervious surface fees that goes into their wastewater and storm water, right? So is this is this sort of a similar thing to that and they've been successful in figuring out those issues of impervious versus Pervious and kind of keeping track and does it make more sense at a town level than they're called storm water utilities Yeah, and I think we have four of them right now And they have been successful and they take that money and reinvest that into storm water mitigation and work like that restoration work And then the dilemma is that if we do move forward with some statewide program Where do they fit into that since you're already doing it? I think I heard that at one of the forums We had a chat about that yeah, but obviously I mean they are kind of at the forefront at least in Vermont Right of trying to deal with some of those issues around their own raising funds for wastewater I mean it's just everyone's trying to raise funds for the things that are important right to all of us So okay interesting So let's sound we talked we touched a little bit on on agriculture as part of this this runoff and such Let's talk a little bit about remaining dairy farms in Vermont not a whole lot left You know, is this an important issue for us? And what can we do? I'm changing economy You know, but where do we go from here? And is this one of yours? Well, it's not one of mine, but my my thoughts on that or that Dairy farmers right now are really being stressed because of the low price that they're getting for the milk It costs them about sixteen dollars a hundred weight in order to break even and they're only getting 12 to 14 dollars per hundred weight right now a couple years ago. They were getting eighteen Dollars per hundred weight, which was a really good year for them It Not exactly sure how the prices are set, but I know that that they're pretty much dependent on what the Co-ops that they're selling the milk to are giving them for it and and I don't know how those prices are set when we go to the supermarket. We're paying Three to four dollars per gallon of milk. That's not what the farmers are getting So I Don't know how we deal with that the farm bill did not pass in Congress and that was That was legislation at the federal level that would have helped farmers dairy farmers so Yeah, we're losing farms not a good thing a lot of farms still are turning to beef cattle, I Know at least one form in Charlotte that converted from dairy to beef and Again that I'm not sure exactly how they're marketing that but but I'm hoping they're doing well as a result They're still in business. They're still in business right now. Yeah Well, I do anything I would add to that is that it certainly there's there's a group We've had a lot of conversation about we need to move away from conventional dairy farms to more like organic or beef More specialized But it also begs the question because when you have a conversation about what it would take to move to a more Organic practices or that and not specifically organic, but natural more natural processes Where's the market for all of that and and I think that's The market's not quite there either for everyone to move in that direction I agree with with what's been said, but the the only thing I would the only things I would add are number one the I don't have very many positive things to say about the administration in Washington, but the one little piece of the the trade deal is going to make make for more milk exports to Canada and that's a good thing for Vermont That's that that's one thing in the other pieces I think it partly is going to it's going to take a commitment on the part of Vermonters in general to do more pay more for local and organic stuff grown Here in Vermont and it's going to be a little more costly But but I think that's the going to have to happen to save the farms and it's happening somewhat already Very successful farm in in my community Jericho Settler's farm See them a lot of farmers markets. We see them at the market at the hospital every week Lots of you know, I mean lots of of good things happening. There are lots of innovative thinking So it's possible I'm sorry, and if you move in that direction to you're also having a positive a more positive impact on the environment And these large conventional dairy farms. I think that's important also and the non-dairy farms we are seeing a growth in those and There's still a small part of the agricultural economy, but but they're growing yeah, so Let's um, let's talk. I think the segues climate change climate change. All right And it's actually kind of funny because the question that that I have is how can Vermont turn climate change to its advantage And the only thing I could think about is you know being out on my bikini in January for some reason That's what comes to mind So I just love the way they worded that because you know, how do you turn that to your advantage? But I'm curious to know what you have to say and I also want to throw in something that Mike you talked about which was energy too because I know that's not on here And I think that's something at least for me those are those are connected Yeah, the two are tied together very closely. Why don't you start us off? So so first of all Climate change Can be looked at in a way that Provides an opportunity to increase jobs. It could be a boom to the economy We created with renewable energy our renewable energy policy has helped to create 19,000 jobs in Vermont since 2011 and We've also got an awful lot of homes and businesses that need To improve their weatherization We need to do some investment though Where we our plan our goal was to have 80,000 homes weatherized low-income family homes weatherized By 2020 we're way behind the curve on that. We are nowhere near getting that done That that's funded by the grocery seed stacks, which is like at this point three quarters of a cent three quarters of a percent on the price of Oil that's brought into the state and Passed on to the consumer of course so in a way that's a little bit of a carbon tax, but it's a very tiny one We have to get off fossil fuels that's the only way we're gonna impact climate change Transportation and heating sectors are the two biggest components of greenhouse gas emissions Instead of going down which was the intent Greenhouse gas emissions actually went up and it's primarily due to the transportation and heating sectors Cars are becoming more fit vehicles are becoming more efficient But at the same time warm vehicle miles are being driven and that's one of the reasons so How do we get people to change on the on the other hand the electricity our electricity sector? It's becoming cleaner and cleaner because we've got the renewable energy standard that utilities are working to and so What we need to do is we need to transition our transportation and heating from fossil fuels to electricity cleaner electricity and How do we do that? That's a big question So you could do that either by mandate nobody likes mandates you could do that by market forces So what does that mean? Well? Raise the price of fossil fuels and Use the money you collect from that to help incentivize transitioning to electricity to clean energy so more electric vehicles heat pumps for the home and business and those types of those types of things so I Was on a ad hoc group of legislators that put together a plan called the Essex plan Which would have put a graduated increase gradually increasing? price on carbon pollution price per gallon of fossil fuel and Use those revenues the plan in the Essex plan was to use those revenues to reduce your electricity bill for both businesses and for individuals 4 cent per gallon tax would raise about 30 million dollars a year if we take 10% of that 3 million dollars a year and we took that and put it into the Same fund that is used for weatherization. We could increase the number of houses that are Insulated better so that they don't use as much fuel to heat so it provides there are economic opportunities for all Vermonters If we are willing to make the investment and address climate change But we have to be willing to We have to be willing to do it. We just can't wish this problem away It seems to be the theme and any issues that we're talking about tonight. We can't wish them away Trevor your thoughts. Well, I would just add that and I can't think of who the firm is right now But we just passed legislation last year that allocated about a hundred thousand maybe 120,000 To do a study on carbon pricing and look at some different options one of them is the Essex plan The other one is a Western climate initiative and please correct me if I get any wrong you're the expert And that's more of a cap and trade That's actually a number of states and also Quebec is part of that and I listen to a presentation of their program a Number of well more than a number of months ago now But I was very impressed with that and there's about three or four maybe five items that this research firm is looking at and Is to present a report back to us? Do you recall when in January I believe it is I can't think of a name of the firm at this point The initials RFT comes to mind But they are we had a forum last week where various stakeholders and the public could come to a forum and and talk about what They wanted to make sure that the direction they were taken was what the public was looking for Did that happen that happened last weekend? I thought was prepositive The thing another point is that I just wanted to make the point that we can't do it ourselves of Vermont by itself is not going to do this and there are a number of Approaches we can use to to do this to help people transition from fossil fuels, but we're working with other states There's a group of us that are working with legislators in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine, New York and even Montana Oregon, Washington to Kind of put a national focus on Pricing carbon pollution Well, I think Michael just stole the point that I would have made and that is that if Vermont stopped producing co2 it wouldn't change the Trajectory of global warming And we can't do this alone and we have to be very careful that we don't Hinder our ourselves Economically this needs to be a regional thing and it's you know That's why the importance of working with legislators from from other places. This needs to be a minimum regional given what's happened nationally It it's it's very frightening right now and and I you know clearly what we can do here by ourselves is is Completely inadequate so so it is going to take a group of state States together to do it because it's certainly not coming out of Washington and it sounds like that's happening at least that's some level now It's happening at some level actually we have a very successful Regional initiative called the greenhouse gas initiative regional greenhouse gas initiative Reggie and what that is that pertains to the electric sector and the the trade in clean What do you call it clean energy credits or renewable energy credits? and the amount of carbon that's reduced by changing over changing on electric utilities over to renewable energy are traded among the states and That provides actually quite a bit of money and for Vermont utilities saving us More than four hundred million dollars over the years that that's been in effect Electricers how or how are the electric utilities doing in terms of moving toward 100% renewable that sounds like what the goal is yes Yeah, the goal is 90% renewable by 2050 The utilities are doing very well Burlington Electric is 100% So is Washington Electric co-op from on electric co-op is getting there and So is Green Mountain power or a Green Mountain power right now. It's about 60% Renewable and is it is it hard to make that move from 60? I mean 60 to 90 sounds like a lot. I don't I don't know Well, is that reasonable in how many years a lot of a lot of it is an accounting because it's based on renewable energy credits and You can have more renewable energy right now Let's see starting in 2017 There was a an increase in the percentage of renewable energy that you had that the utilities had to Be at each year and it increases each year So if they're actually if they've actually got renewable energy credits in excess of that they can sell those excess renewable energy credits to Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, whatever and and They would get some money for that which would offset the amount of The charges that we have to pay for electricity, so That's been a successful program. It's only till electricity There's talk about actually extending a transportation That would be a huge impact. Yes, what it sounds like because transportation is such a big user, right? Interesting is that moving along the legislature Well, it's something that's being talked about that's that's about where we're at right now talking Yeah Because of that it really also is going to take governors from Multiple states to to be on board with it to leadership That's what this is all about in the end. Yes It's someone it's willing to walk to walk. Yeah, or you know get out in front. Yeah. Yeah I'm so we have a few minutes left. Let's talk. We've really we've covered a lot of topics here Thank you all for for being so so game. I'm let's talk a little bit about education I'm you know concerned. How do we maintain the quality of education at the same time when we have just declining? school-age populations I'm Trevor, why don't we start with you? Whoa, oh we could start with somebody else Because of his background, so that's right. So yeah, I spent, you know 15 years on the school board love and making budgets It's how I got into this mess in the first place You know I'm not so as worried about the quality of the education as I am about The equality and the equality of opportunities across different districts And and the the cost how we're going to fund it, you know when you When we go around knocking on doors, which we've all done over the last 10 years. I can see far and away the most Common complaint I get is about Property taxes and we have chosen to fund education through property taxes And that causes a bit of a problem Um, you know if you look at our taxes compared to other states and the joint fiscal office does this every year and the Tax foundation does this every year the one that's actually really Consistently very very high is our property taxes And you know, so We need to control the costs and there are a couple big initiatives around that one is school mergers Which I can say we did in chip in the east And it has paid real dividends But So that helps but then there's also this past year we we worked on Special education and how we deliver it and doing a very very different paradigm with special education Which I think is going to go a long way towards helping We contain that the costs and special education instead of the very regimented federal plan more Allowing the the school districts to manage more how how they do their special education So I think that that those are steps in the cost control I think I think that the the mergers are important for for opportunity You know in our district. We had six elementary schools, you know three of them Barely more than a mile from each other and and you know the the larger one had More programs that Our kids would have loved but we couldn't afford in our our little school You know the merger has allowed us to do things like that like foreign language in elementary school I mean that's tremendous But the mergers allowed us to do that and so, you know, it's it's the opportunities the the breadth of opportunities You know over and over again. We ranked as one of the the five or six best school systems in the in the Country and public school systems and that is a huge piece Attracting people to vermont, you know it's something we should be celebrating selling You know and making making fuss about well And you were the one who said that that you felt like there was too much negativity So that sounds like that's when we uh, we have although I I think I think we are known for that I mean I don't I don't I think we are that is out there that the education system here is good amongst other things But um mind did you want to add anything to that? No, I not really I We we're trying to support 30,000 fewer children with the same infrastructure pretty much that we had when you know 30,000 kids ago and uh, so therefore I'm not sure exactly whether I said that exactly right. We're 30,000 kids less. Yeah, and we got the same infrastructure and Of course the cost per student is going to be that's so since what 2010 2009 10 years 30,000 kids. Yeah, this is that big boom of Demographic is graying, you know vermont the vermont population is graying. We're part of it I am anyway And uh, so you know, uh, we need to attract younger families into vermont and one of the ways to do that is To make vermont more affordable. How do you do that? Well one way is to help Reduce the cost of child care and that's that's a big Negative when it comes to somebody that wants to move to vermont that has kids Because you've got to either have One per one parents staying at home or else if both parents are working and we have a lot of two two career families Uh, one of the parents is going to pay be paying a huge percentage of their income For child care and so that's some that's another thing where we have to invest in order to In order to make things better for all the monitors So, um That's my take on it. Okay, trevor would you like to add something? Well two things I guess One thing we have time for one thing Well, I just yeah, I There was a study that was recently while done in the last year or so of it looked at It has been a lot of conversation about we're spending too much money in our educational system And I think when you look at the sort of what I call the general educational piece of it People seem to think the research seems to show we're doing just about right and back to Representative till's comment about it's the special education piece in particular That's out of whack And that we need to get away from that regimented structure and provide more flexibility within the schools think block grants Let them decide how best to utilize those deaf funding streams. So that's the one thing I would add. Okay, great. Thank you Well gentlemen, thank you so much for joining. We're out of time. Thank you for joining me tonight. I appreciate it Went fast, right? I know we could have done another hour. You'll have to come back again Of course, of course, and I want to let everyone know don't forget you can vote now You can vote early at your town or city hall. I always forget to say that so I want to make sure I got that in there Or you can vote on election day Tuesday, november 6th And be sure to stay tuned to channel 17 because we're going to have lots more election coverage for you Thanks so much for joining us. Good night. Thanks. Thank you