 We got a good amount done yesterday, but today I was thinking most of you would look at these little drafts that Jim has done. I showed you guys the draft on a waiting study yesterday. He's done a rewrite on the gender language. And then on 226, which we passed out yesterday, the bargaining, he's prepared an amendment to strikeout section 6 and 7 because we put them in the bill thinking we would alter them and then we didn't. So 6 and 7 have no changes, but we say they are amended to read and they are not, in fact, amended. So this just strikes both of those out, so the bill will be shorter. No change otherwise. The other thing is, Andy reminded me that this was his bill and so I asked him to report it because the one that we govern in his language, but that's where we put the healthcare line. So he's going to report these from our floor. When you go to that distance, we're going to work it out with him. The question I have too, are we going to do with 224 anything with the literacy pieces or dyslexia we're waiting for the house to send over? Waiting for the house. So they're going to send a separate bill. Because I got a few people reached out and I'm like, would you join the 224? I think the house is sending us something. It's like a perfect storm of misinformation that we don't have any control over because Genie's system insists that we have to use the existing title for the bill. It's not her system. The system that Genie is forced to use is we cannot change the title and then the house is working on it and it's gotten everybody all stood up on structured literacy and we chose as the only vehicle one related to structured literacy. So it looks like both committees are madly working on that subject and obviously they're not doing anything. So I'm just apologizing but I've already written a couple of letters like that where I'm just like, sorry I know it's confusing from home but we're not doing anything to across the country. Yeah, that makes sense. What did you see? I'm sorry, I just didn't mean to strong you guys. Did you see the Scotland passed this legislation to make it all, yeah, all out to everybody, every female in the country. So that's like a state law now. It's Scotland. It's bigger than Vermont. No, it's smaller than Texas. Bigger than a bread pass here. You're saying for all schools? Every female in the country. I had to go out to college where it was like that's on the all national select team. So that's like the all state of Pennsylvania. Sorry. No, we get it. Let's just have a quick discussion about Cory's bill. Academic athlete. Is this something you want? It's just a blank piece of paper that came out of it in front of it. Okay, use something. Jeannie, where is the stuff on the... It's 321. Did you see the random one? We could. I think we have a 5 out of 10. 328 out of 10. Do we have a full bill? Yes. Are you going to do that? I like to better because I have my app and color different colors. That's not a lie. It means when I was taking notes, I didn't like the green. I did like... Now I'm sitting here like, no, I didn't get the green better. I'm looking for a different color. If you have something that's very important to you, that is editing that don't like green. So what would wait for Jim's? Jim's coming? Jim's. I was just going to check in with the committee about where people are on the student-athlete compensation bill. Because if the committee likes it, we can add it to the miscellaneous bill. I know there was some sentiment that we should wait. Yeah, I mean that's what I thought were all the overwhelming things. The testimony was that there's going to be an NCAA meeting in January and that they were proposing some rules, rule changes, and that Division 1, 2, and 3 all asked us to wait. Well, Division 1 didn't sponge. Division 2 didn't. But Norwich did. The guy who did say he was, I don't expect him to actually do anything. So that's my only concern of the January pieces, that they even said, yeah, we had these proposals, but like anything, they get tabled. And so we'll withdraw out. Well, I mean you did bring up the point of putting pressure on the NCAA if we use any kind of language. And so I don't know if I just did that. Actually, no, so there you go. Did that answer your question? Jim, I was here for the testimony. I'm not really sure. I did talk with Skyler, Nash, who were at another event and we talked for about 15 minutes about it. It makes a very convincing case. Is he the student athlete we heard from? Yeah, so he was the one person that we heard from that was pretty clear that he wanted us to move forward and everybody to move forward. I think the most compelling thing for me in the testimony we heard was that there are what the other student athlete who was in here described, and I think this is more than just her description as, that 2% athletes really want it to happen. And the 98% want to go through this process with the NCAA to make sure that it treats them fairly. Because it's a boon for football, men's, and to a lesser extent women's basketball and hockey in some places and baseball in some places. But other than that, because those athletes could probably make a lot of money on their name, image and lightness. But the rest of the athletes for the most part with a few individual exceptions would not necessarily benefit. There are some gender equity issues. They're definitely divisional issues with Division 1, 2, and 3. But I don't have an understanding why it's not fair to them. So Dick Schuyler, he would make more money. He would make a lot more money. Understood. But why should he not have the right to do that? Why does somebody who's really good at something and advertisers want them, why is it unfair to somebody who's not as... So depending on how the rules are written, if they're written for those 2% of athletes to benefit, it may actually not benefit the rest of the athletes depending on how things move forward with the rules. Well, I think it commercializes the whole experience that the other student athletes said that she really appreciated the culture of collegiate athletics that was not like professional sports. And she was great with the whole experience that was ruined when, or at least, Tina did by having this commercial aspect. And the athletic directors that testified, all testified asking for us to wait from each of the 3 divisions, saying that there were a lot of concerns specifically for Division 3 and also potentially Division 2 about inequities because they right now don't do recruiting and don't do scholarships for the athletes. And this would say, oh, you know, this wealthy donor could offer $50,000 to this car dealership that then could invite the star basketball player to assign autographs and have that be sort of an incentive for that basketball player to come to the school. And that just skirts around the Division 3 rules in a way that the athletic directors feel really uncomfortable. I already have with that, too, that the athletic directors don't have a problem with is that the school sells a sponsorship to that team, to that local car dealership. The kids still gotta go sign autographs at the car dealership and don't make any money because that's what happens now. Right, I mean, money is in the system that's just being exclusively... What I like about our bill is it just says they can make money off their likeness and it doesn't go into effect until 2023. So I think it does put that pressure on the NCAA to be like California uses the one effect until 2023. It does that same thing. It's the NCAA time to move it along. Basically, you know, our bill would become, hopefully, they would figure it out at that point. What I suggested to Corey as a sort of interim measure is that we either do the resolution, which you know the Senate doesn't always like, but a Senate resolution urging the NCAA to act or just a letter from our committee or even joint if the House wants to join on urging them to act, saying we've taken testimony, we want them to act, figure this out and if they don't act then we would be moving the direction of state law. Just as a... I would have a hard time supporting it right now. My one college in my district has asked that we not move forward right now because it's division three and they're very concerned. Well, I like the resolution better than the letter. So obviously we don't have Andy today, but we can see where we go on it. I can see since both plays, either having it in with the date that goes out and could be pulled back or altered. And I can also see a resolution where you're essentially trying to pressure. I'm not sure how much pressure or resolutions produce. Well, I think it would help our NCAA people who go into this process to say, look we have this resolution from our Senate saying they want us to move and we better get our tails in motion. A UVM student is on, what is it, the student athletic, the SAC, Student Athletic Committee for the NCAA. She's one of 30 students nationwide in division one who's on this committee and they are the student voice in all the policy making division of the NCAA. So she's a really good vehicle. Her test, I'm going here because she testified she was great, she was a field hockey player. She's a vehicle to get our message to the NCAA along with our athletic directors. It dawns on me, I don't know the rule, like we're past committee drafting date and we're past bill drafting date deadline. Can you even write a resolution now? I think you can, resolutions are different. Yeah, there's one that our committee may do just got drafted. Yeah, I don't think they have a deadline. Okay, well, not sure where you land on the resolution idea. I mean, whatever we do to move the policy, I think we're going to have to the bill because I think they're very clear NCAA is going to table in. NCAA is not going to do it until 10 or 15 states finally do something in SAC. It's kind of like when we do those bills on like incondescent light bulbs and when we did one and it was like we joined 16 other states, finally the manufacturers are like fine, we won't make them anymore. It's kind of one of those things. Can you speak to Dave Wach? He's coming in on Tuesday after a break. After a break? Okay. And he had a few things he'd like to share with us. And is he basically passed or wait? He was not passed, he was against it. And he was against, even in the future. Last time I spoke to him, but I hadn't talked to him now and probably a good week and a half or so. Okay. So 25 states have bills now? Do we have them? Most are like a national standard like ours. Florida is doing a bill that allowed them to go beyond that. So eventually, when you get to like 2010 states, Congress will also have to act too because they're not going to want different Theoretically. But it looks like New Hampshire, New York, Massachusetts all have bills than us in the region. Well, I don't think it's a bad idea to think about a resolution if we've had negative testimony to that extent. And Dave Wach has been in opposition. But if mostly the opposition is timing and if mostly the idea behind it is to push the NCAA if the resolution would work. Because no one was opposed to paying the students that came. They just wanted to wait. Did you guys read the thing that the student back, I'm sorry I can't remember her name, the Union Field Hockey Player student sent us? She sent it to me and I asked her if she'd sent it to all of you. I didn't get it. Oh really? Okay, I can forward it to all of you. But she sent a link to the letter from the SAC committee that basically lays out the 98% student argument, which I find really compelling. You got an idea? You also got to remember that a lot of the students, a little 2%, also come from less means than some of the other athletes. When you look at their schools that they attended, I look at Ry School, most of the kids went to St. Lawrence, their parents and their division 3 athletes were just playing sports, but they were going to go to St. Lawrence, whether or not anyway. I think in the division 1 sports, especially basketball, baseball, football, for people that's their only opportunity to hire a teacher, to make money long term. When we talk equity and those other issues, I think some people are looking at it from perspective, but when they grow up on Cape Cod and went to Kent School with Olympic athletes, they're allowed to monetize their image all along, right? Yeah, so they weren't 3 years ago? Yeah, just recent. No, no, I mean in their life all along. Yeah. So from the time they start their career. Well, when does they accept money and they can never participate in NCAA? No, I'm just talking about Olympics. Right, but I'm saying if you're young and you still want to be a gymnast and you're an Olympian, you can't accept money because you're excluded from competing in NCAA. I'm just wondering, is the NCAA the only institution that enforces a ban on people monetizing their image? Because in our society, that's a that's how we all like to do this. Well, more or less Yeah, I mean in the Capitalist Society you've got a lawyer who puts ads on TV and says you know, I'm the DUI lawyer to call me out. It's like to say, especially with you know many African-American athletes we're going to make lots of money out of you and we're going to forbid you to tap into any other. But they don't, I mean like the division Jews and the freezers they don't take the money out of them. Well, now. Skyler was talking about if he started Skyler Nash basketball camp every summer in Vermont or in the region, that might get to be like a big deal, you know, where he could make $50,000 in the summer for $100,000. Yeah, and I think his testimony was very compelling. I mean he made the argument he comes from a working class background in Chicago and he can't get money to pay his plane tickets back and forth and things like that and the summer camp and one thing that he said that I thought was really compelling is the coaches can all do that, you know, summer basketball camp, but the students can't and that's an inequity between sort of labor and management and one that always bothered me was Kevin Snedin did one for an eye doctor I just remember a radio ad was I'm Kevin Snedin, the UVM hockey coach and I can see better because they did it's like nobody's there to watch you bro So I think we should do something, I was hesitant to do a law because I was asked by my person to wait and I think also if we wait and they don't do anything then we can do an even stronger bill that really is more prescriptive We could even mention that in the resolution. Yeah, because it would be you know, January is when they need to we have plenty of time assuming we're all here, whatever assuming one of us this year we'll do that Cory Cory, do you want to talk to Mike the chairman? Yeah, okay Great So no Jim Not yet She's dead already Thanks council They gave me the files, they all left I think they're voting Oh is it active 15? No They're voting a bill and they're voting a bill They may be voting a pre-K bill out You got to read the from Montegro story It's it's pretty clear lays out pretty clearly what they're doing You remember the testimony was it the year before it was before you guys Yeah, we did we did a session of testimony on pre-K and unraveling the dual oversight but also the question of the licensed educator is that going to put private providers out of business, should we expand it you know, we went back and forth and we created this language ultimately that died because what Sharp didn't get is ten million dollars for expanded pre-K but they've redone that work from scratch on their own and come up with a different solution than the one we have worked out in here So we'll have to go back to the drawing board and hear from witnesses of all sorts The whole case That's a pre-K student What they say I think it should be under the I'll bring my kid over here I want Barney I want Barney Barney Barney we have student avatar we're talking to Barney, I want to be Barney Barney I can't believe you're letting me watch Barney Barney's structure is bizarre but you know what Barney's taught him to clean up Okay, that's what he told us about Tell a Tubby Tell a Tubby, yeah Tell a Tubby is one of those shows that I can't I'm not going to say Although if you think about it we're kind of proto-fascism So there's a slug speaker and it's like pelican food and they all come out and you're like What is that? It's like Barney It's like Barney It's a Broadway show That's my father Oh really? He doesn't know how to Sesame Street There's a new Sesame Street show out on FTV It's called Finders They're the problem solvers You watched two episodes of The Same Things which was really annoying They're like three steps to solve the problem but it's the same thing with just the different problems Right? It's always that way like the door of the explorer It's the same show every time Blue's Clues Blue's Clues is great I like Blue's Clues The original Blue's Clues guy Yeah What was his name? I don't know They changed him out and the second guy just didn't do it So Sesame Street started when I was like 6% or 7% So I remember my school sent home a note to my parents that this was going to be a good show and I was starting on FTVS So my mother made me watch it But I was always rebelling in creative ways So She said You sit in front of the television So I turned myself upside down in the chair I was in the chair and she came out of the kitchen and she looked at me and she was like He just went back in the kitchen It was great Not the best adventure I've got these markers Since I'm showing them off But it's got paper that the mark only works on a certain paper So it's like you can draw on the wall with it Nothing Wow It's probably got a PFAS in it Don't let it be There's probably something wrong But it still looks like a miracle Jim DeMarrer We decided to tentatively craft a resolution around the compensation bill instead of dropping it in here as a part of this bill So do you know is there any deadline on resolutions? I don't know I said I might return a question And then I was wondering were you able to You and I talked earlier today about that rewrite of the gender Let's take a look at that What did they just load out today? Yeah They were out of the literacy bill Oh, didn't they? If we take that out in human services and literacy is now out And literacy is mostly grants Mostly grants Is there any mandatory screening or anything? There's very statute in place between nine and three that require screening Is that what we're doing? Yeah I think it's phase one through three And then after screening at four years old and beyond if you had trouble I think there's a problem with compliance with that So rather than do a new lawsuit and the same thing I'm just trying to get people to comply with this Yeah So it'll Well, I assume it'll come over to us that the money committees aren't shy about killing their bills Yeah, we said $800,000 of appropriation Yeah Okay Okay, so this So sorry for the record Jim Debra on this console, we are looking at draft 5.1 of what is essentially your miscellaneous bill SC24 I have 4.1 Do you want to put it away? Yeah, that's what I have Yeah, that does not have the language that is served with that score Is this 4.1 type of 4.1 Yeah I'm sorry, I thought that was something Okay So you're working from 5.1 Yeah, the 5.1 type of 9.1 is there We'll have to wait Is it in color Jim? We'll put it in as well as well as the changes to Act 273 But I'm not really ready to go through that with you because I've been writing my own and I need to get a sped timeline before you all go through with that Good to have it in though, so we don't forget Yeah And what a place for No, I did send it to the copy room and this is what I got to show you I had gotten copies of No, I had 4.1 Where? I'll go see Excuse me Act 23 So you got that bill 273? Yeah, I haven't had a chance to look at it, I just printed it out I'll look at it and do it When What time, when is it for you Okay Alright I will probably look at it and work on it on Sunday and I'll be in touch about email The line numbers, yeah that'd be great I don't know why when I print them They won't do the line numbers but yeah that'd be good I know I'm printing it for my phone, so that may be fine And then the amendment to this bill about the health policy about that and then I need to talk to a lot of people before I get back to you but we can talk about both of those next week Okay, thank you I was impressed with how fast you were He's too fast I don't have time to look at these right now I was talking to my head I went down and I was like Yeah I don't know if that is wise I need to get back to that Well, I mean in that case and at that point I'm going to scout my regime you know like Okay So we'll just Can I ask you since did Bobby talk to you about 273 Yeah that seems fine You don't need it to come here I just didn't want any problem on the floor with people going hey because it does a fact title No I understand but you know it seems more properly like a money committee and ag Yeah we're trying to keep it focused on local foods and the vehicle is school lunches basically and I think this committee would now Yeah there's nothing in it that I think you guys would have a problem with and Bobby's trying to get the money from the ag sort of piece of appropriations rather than education so I think that's helpful too But he's understandably gun-shy because he had Chris Graham like tangled over every bill for the last whatever for four years You look surprised Please come in and brighten our room Hi everybody We're just hanging out We're just doing that too it's as if you know we were classless dismissed we just had to discuss all sorts of things ag issues It's like the day before Christmas vacation at school where your teacher shows you Shrek Yeah nice work on your library bill We talk about blues clips Thank you, not a single question That's because we all know in our hearts it's all true That's true, yeah I tried to lull you into thinking It's our draft Oh I'm too big There's a draft It's a quiet moment We're actually working Okay, enjoy I hear these people would come around We're amazing Okay So Do I discuss the one change on the menstrual hygiene products? Yeah So on page 8 on line 15 It's now released This is a majority of bathroom issues So it says in our school district and improved defense school shall make menstrual hygiene products available at no cost in a majority of gender neutral bathrooms and bathrooms designated females that are generally used by females in any of grades 5 through 12 in any school within the districts or under the jurisdiction of the board Yeah I think that gets it What do you think? Yeah that's a little complicated That's what I was thinking I was like I understand It's such a simple thing Put tampons in the bathroom But this is Ledge Council's style Like I was No, not just Jim All of Ledge Council They correct me if I'm wrong but this is what Brinhair and others say in because I'm always like I would break that into either two sentences or I would use m-dashes or something to have it not be one long That's what I mean Your style Criterion don't allow you to kind of break stuff up in that way I'm not sure why But you can't But I think there's no real confusion Brinhair Yeah I just want to add the next sentence Okay so in the Constellation School of Merse they decide which bathrooms But didn't we want to say that they can decide how to How to do it Well I think the bill is signing on that Which allows them to do it But it does say that we do want them to have access to menstrual hygiene products without the embarrassment So whether they use a basket with the products or a dispenser would be fine under the bill But I think if we if we are not silent on it we're going to involve ourselves in another definitional hunt One of my friends who has two teenage girls told me that she felt like she was the tampon fairy So that is another option They could use a tampon fairy So put that in the bill Well it's out to the school nurse as she wants to employ one Okay keep going We're going to skip through what's on the next page All of our special education is in 173 that we will look at in that Okay And then we go to the new section of the 14th And this is piece of section law We use gender balance I think it's 20 and 5 So you have 19 and 6 Yeah because the students just collected two men that leave us now So this reads The Board of Trustees of UVM Currently is composed of an overwhelming majority of men with 20 men and 5 women The Board of Trustees of the Vermont State Colleges currently has gender balance on its board The goal is to have the UVM Board achieve gender balance by 2025 and maintain it thereafter The UVM Board maintains gender balance Gender balance means for the UVM Board that the 25 member board is composed of 12 or 13 members or women or people who identify as women or non-binary and for the UVM Board that the 15 member board is composed of 7 or 8 members or women or people who identify as women or non-binary Sorry I remember we had a testimony that a non-binary person that was not the same thing as more of a caring project We need to take out more non-binary and we need to constrain women at the moment I think I would agree I think it would be wonderful if we had non-binary women on the board or non-binary people on the board but I think Yeah So we'll make that change Are we going to say then we're just going to put a period after Who are we? Identify Well I think you can say you can just say identify as women because I identify as a woman and So to be clear we're saying composed of 7 or 8 members who identify as women not who are women or people who identify as women Yeah I think who identifies women would cover it more completely without having two phrases So then we're saying that trans women would satisfy this And then I would go on to say given that the ADM and DSC boards have four categories of trustees which include those in the up there Four categories of thank you trustees I should include those appointed by the governor by the joint assembly and by representatives of the university as well as student trustees It is incumbent on the leadership of an executive branch to undertake efforts to further this on these boards Why don't we say it is all-zone incumbent Yeah It is all-zone incumbent Yeah And that says honor before January 31, 2021 and annually thereafter as part of their annual budget presentation to the joint assembly the ADM and DSC shall arrive at AMM The members of information on the gender opposition of the respective boards of trustees this information shall include the appointed entity initial appointment date and length of service and shall summarize recruitment and replacement strategies employed for recently expired and eminently expired in trustee positions Looks good to me So we don't call out life or self perpetuating Yeah Can we say they're called up here I don't want to use self perpetuating because that term isn't known So those are the folks who are and by representatives of the university Actually let's put by self perpetuating trustees there So it would say by the general assembly and by self perpetuating trustees as well as student trustees What did Jim just say? He said he said that people wouldn't know the term but I think probably many people would in the legislature but that's what the term of art is when they've been on the website Does that make sense to you? But I don't feel like they've been there's nothing there that says that they need to do something So why are we saying it's also coming on the legislature in the executive branches We could say at line 14 following where that term ends We could say the self perpetuating members of the UVM trustees can we shout them? Well I'd rather avoid that so we could say well or they should undertake efforts to say the whole order should undertake efforts to or shout or shout I want to avoid that and this whole thing is written to avoid that so what should we do? We'll They're self perpetuating trustees an obligation to address this imbalance in their choice of replacement trustees That's good. Do you get that? It's a good thing you're away With that change how does it look? That's okay We're not deciding except language only for UVM One second What's that? That's a good choice What was that Jim? Is that language only for UVM? Yes Yes because right now state colleges have a variety and we've said that we want them to maintain it and they also have to report it Yeah Ruth did you say something? I was just about to ask about there are student trustees on the state college board too I think there is So where do you want the language to go? The end of the end of the Okay Okay Well that's all I had for us to do today I appreciate everybody sticking around for a little more