 This is our Wednesday morning and our 8.30 meeting. Like to welcome Senator Campion with us, who's with us to present a proposed amendment, which he has to ask if we could deal with that on 6.58, I believe it is. So, Brian, would you like to present your amendment? Sure, thanks, Senator Starr and Bryn Hare from Lich Council is also here. I might have her sort of take you all through it, but in short, this is a follow-up from the last time I was in committee. You were very gracious to hear from me then. I appreciate your time for me now. This goes back. This is a revised study regarding humane treatment of dairy animals. I really appreciate all the outreach I received. Senator Collinmore sent me information. Our state veterinarian sent me information. Dr. Haas, some of her colleagues sent me information. And so what I've done here is I've revised the amendment ever so slightly. One of the key things I did get, or one of the things that I did eliminate, you'll see, I don't have the original, but there was a number four to things to look into. And this had to do with reproduction around humane treatment or reproduction methods. Dr. Haas and others just raised the question of why that was there. And so I thought for now, take it out. One of the reasons it was there was, in talking with some folks, it had to do with how bulls are treated when it comes to the reproduction process. In other words, actually what they have to experience in order to remove their semen during the process of, I don't know what you would, the term I'm looking for here, Bryn, you and I talked about it a little bit, maybe. During artificial insemination. During artificial insemination. Thank you, Dr. Hardy. So what I ended up doing is just having those three points that we talked about before. And again, this goes back to the follow-up from the work that all of you did on the floor and in your bill having to do with proper sheltering of animals. And that's the genesis of this idea. I feel it's very proactive looking at these issues. And hopefully we can get something on the books that can be a solution. Maybe we can get something on the books that can be a standard by which the state can follow. So I'll leave it at that. Bryn, do you have anything else to add? No, I think that that was a great summary. I would just point out that in this amendment, the agency is directed to consult with stakeholders that have expertise in the management of dairy animals. And I think it is very important to have the agency in their, in their in their work to develop some recommendations for the standing committees. And you can see that. At the, at the top of the page there. I see you, you still have a, Senator. Something about tethers and ties, stanchions and things like that. things that I have to say that was interesting to me during this whole process over the past week of after having been in your committee was to learn that livestock and poultry husbandry practice are specifically exempt from the requirements of the animal cruelty subchapter. So again this is I thought that was that was enlightening. I didn't come up in our last discussion. I'm sure that you all know that. And so again I think getting some of this information gathering it and getting it on the books is a worthwhile practice and a proactive practice. And I do believe that most Vermonters would agree that having some kind of standards there makes sense. Other questions Rose? I'm just wondering if Linda or somebody could email it to us because I don't I couldn't see the full text of the amendment and I don't think I have it I'm putting it on the website on the page right now. That's helpful. Thank you Linda. And I also just wanted to know so I just googled really quickly which you know can be dangerous but can be helpful. Humane treatment of dairy cows and it reminded me because one of the first things that came up is there there is a humane certification and we did some work on this last year you might recall Bobby and Brian and you know a lot of or I don't know how many actually in Vermont but I know some dairy operations are humanely certified and though there are standards in order to be certified humane and then you get a little sticker you can put on your cheese product or whatever it is you make and we did do some work on that last year and I'm just wondering if looking at those sort of standards is what might maybe helpful in your research. Thanks yeah one of the things that we did change in the language last week Senator Hardy it just mentioned that the Agency of Agriculture should do this on their own but this language actually asks to pull in a as Bryn mentioned a wider range of people a wider range of experts to have this conversation I think that would be a great group to have a you know to have a conversation with. The other person that might be helpful on this kind of thing animal rights and could be Barry Laundere I'm sure he's been in your committee before on different things he might be helpful and there might be other people worth hearing from in the industry. Yeah we've had Barry in several times and then the young lady from another group worked with us a lot last year and actually we got a letter we were one of the best states in the country I think for taking care of our animals and that's why when you came up with this Brian it kind of kind of threw me off because we have been really working a lot and and putting bills through to make sure that our animals are cared for properly and treated humanely and and you know have I mean we've talked about how our loose housing cows sleep on pillows even and what sleeps on pillows our loose housing cattle they have these big canvas filled mattresses like that they even sleep on for comfort so that you know they they live pretty pretty good but anyways are there other questions for Brian Brian Collamore thank you it's hard when there's two brands senator I'm just wondering I did send you and thank you for acknowledging that the five things that dairy farmers must do for their cows as part of the farm program and as we can remember when dairy farmers signed a contract with farm they're saying that they will do these things and two of them address the exact topics that you bring up in the amendment from 32 degrees to 73 degrees is what the so-called thermonutrile zone is and that's the range of temperatures between which the animal does not need to expend energy to stay warm or stay cool and so they suggest that they make sure that they're within that range also their third point was all age classes of animals have to have housing that allows for the ability to easily stand up lie down adopt normal resting postures and have visual contact with other cattle and then there's another one about the exercise all age classes of animals must have a method of daily exercise whether permitting if outdoors so to me it would seem that those already address a lot of what you have in your amendment and that dairy farmers are already doing that if they belong to the farm program so I yeah so it's a no I you raise a good question I think I'm not sure if if we what I think we can probably do better I think that's a start I do I think it's worthwhile putting something on the books I mean they I don't know the details of the contract that you reference that we sign I don't know it'd be interesting to see that contract or are they more guidelines but you know again I was I was surprised that we exempt our animal cruelty requirements to to this you know to dairy and to to and to poultry so again this this looks specifically at dairy I think it's you know I think most Vermonters and I agree with Senator star we've made a lot of progress in this state on animal cruelty issues I think humane treatment of animals is something Vermonters without a doubt want and so I think advancing this to a level where we start to put it in the books and have something to reference I think is is a good step other questions rose I'm just looking at the bill now or the amendment now that Linda posted it and I guess one concern I have is the timeline that with this report by December 1st 2020 we just gave the agency of Ag a whole pile of work to do getting the ag relief package out to farmers and I'm concerned about them being able to do this within that time frame so that that's one concern and again I just I'm I'm wondering if this research already exists and it's already been done by you know somebody else already in this UVM extension for example or like the humane society folks who do the humane certification and then Brian references what's already in our statute so I'm wondering if this is already these questions have already been answered and we might be able to rely on something that's already out there and also where is the reference that senator campion is referencing about the exemption language can you point me to that and so I can just look at it in the statutes sure I can send I can send Linda the link that she can post on your website if you like yeah I don't know if we well I mean that's fine or you can just tell me so I can look it up quickly on our online statute sure I'll get it to you in just a moment great thanks friend I just respond to senator hardy sure yeah I just wanted to say I'm fine with pushing with the timeline concern and putting that out you know giving additional time I think that's fair I do agree that there a lot of this is probably research and ideas that are out there in other states other societies if you will by societies I'm referencing more like organizations the humane society folks like that and that's why we put in there you know hopefully folks can consider broad a range of partners just to get at this issue rather than just just the agency yeah Brian column or thank you senator so I know one thing senator campion the co-op won't pick up the milk of the farmer unless those contracts are signed and if you like I'm sure we could find a copy of the contract so you could take a look at because you mentioned you didn't know what was in it on yeah no I didn't know that it was an actual contract again I think you know I think a contract is is good I think it's a good start again I'm looking to move this that's not law I understand that it's a relationship but I think it's time to take a step here and actually advance a bill that has something that starts to put some guidelines in statute around what constitutes a humane treatment for dairy and continue that conversation in other words perhaps expand on what that contract looks like I'm not an expert and I think if the agency of agriculture were to pull folks together they may indeed come back and it might mirror what's in that contract or after having spoken to other stakeholders they might expand what humane treatment is if there any other questions from the committee if if not Brian thanks for your time and you will we'll we'll consider it when we get the whole committee on and thank you thanks so much and if you need anything else for me just just let me know yeah thank you I did send the link to the committee through the chat just to let you know it's 13 BSA 351 B subdivision three makes that exemption yeah thank you Brian thank you so anyways well when Chris and Anthony get on we you know sometime through the rest of this week we'll we'll review that that proposal and go from there Michael unless it Mike as commissioner Sniders with us and so good morning Commissioner and welcome to our our Zoom meeting we we wanted to have you in to talk a little bit about forestry issues and and where you know where they fit into this COVID-19 relief package and if there are things that you're suggesting because you know we we deal with part of the forestry stuff and have done pretty well as our committee has worked with you but we haven't heard a whole lot from you in regards to how they're doing and and if there was something where they can apply for for grants or if you were suggesting anything that we might be able to do to help those folks and if they need help well that's fantastic thank you senator star and all of you for your interest in the chance to come talk about it we the short of it is I guess I would just kind of go back to the very beginning of the COVID emergency relatively quickly forestry logging and certain jobs related to the production of certain kinds of products were deemed essential which was really great in the sense that it was represented an understanding of the importance of particularly certain wood products in packaging and medical supplies paper that were needed and also in short supply and recognize just the importance of forestry to the state as essential on the other hand it didn't kind of just take care of everything because not all elements of the supply chain were deemed essential and even those who were found it difficult to operate given the precautions needed the costs associated uncertainties etc and gaps in that supply chain whether it was suppliers or purchasers of products so it's complicated and the upshot is there there are we've been hearing from we did a lot of outreach and we've been hearing from folks we're talking about everyone from loggers foresters truckers primary manufacturing processing saw mills firewood producers etc and Sam and our team in particular have done an awful lot of outreach and compiled a lot of this input and what's unfortunate is whereas in the beginning we thought that they would just be able to plug into the kinds of relief packages that were being established through commerce that's been established for agriculture but they really don't they're just different the way the the that economy works and those businesses it's not really applicable so we've been working more recently I think Michael Grady may actually know this by now but I just heard from representative conquest in the house and the appropriations committee they've asked us for some we signaled through Caroline Partridge that we'd kind of like to move for something and and then they followed up with hey we heard about this what do you have so we're kind of we've outlined a very broad in broad strokes what the needs are happy to share that with you and are trying to kind of conceive of for their purposes a way to a program for similar to a grant type program to these businesses on the forest side that we're trying to kind of put the finishing touches on this morning and share with them as what's been indicated to us as the house leadership is interested in seeing some sort of additional package specifically designed for forest economy businesses I'm trying to be relatively complete here in concise but the point is there's significant need we're happy to describe that to you and right now we're working on trying to have something of more customized approach that would work one example being the 75% loss in revenues would mean that there's just basically no one's gonna qualify no one's left at that point and so we're trying to create something that could work and get assistance to folks immediately with debt service cash flow folks are in some of the stories we're hearing is it's pretty rough so that's where we're at with that trying to make a quick attempt to create something that could give relief in a direct way so Michael I heard from a Mr. Taff from Charleston that's you know it's a median size I would say forest harvesting outfit and he said that you know it's been really really rough that some jobs he was on or has where you go in and you have to remove the junk wood or the low grade wood to get to the real good wood and you have to kind of take it all out at once some mills are shut down so the low grade wood can move but then you've got these good logs that need to go to a specialized mill they aren't taking the good stuff and you can't have it sitting in a pile for months because it'll crack and I mean it's just rough so it sounds like you're on top of that part of it but where where and how much money have you where's the money coming from Senate appropriate house appropriations in their second tier economic bill is that where it's coming from where I believe it would be coming from it's there they've my understanding through representative conquest and representative Townsend who's our budget rep there that the speaker has indicated a willingness to include in the order of five million dollars for this and have asked for us to work with those representatives to kind of frame it up we've got a very sort of general statement of how and Sam is on the line here I think senator if we allow Sam to join he may have even I know as I was waiting to join you he was on the line with others so could we invite Sam in here and maybe he could put some the lake give the latest on the thinking here that the idea is that by the end of the day I think they're hoping to get actually her Michael O'Grady's name mentioned as like giving him something to draft into form that could be used for CRF relief funding for this specific application so I don't know if Michael has actually heard anything yet he may be able to speak to this better given his work with them on that how they're approaching it Sam may be able to give a little bit further on where we stand now but that's that's what we're trying to do a short order is give them something to include in what I is that right Mike is it's it's tier two that they're working on well and you Sam you can get on that are you there Sam I think he's left you Michael he might be on the he might be he's on your screen as I think he may be actually on the phone with some house members actually as we speak I know we Carolyn parts back in as well so I don't know if Michael am I am I coming this up is this can you shed any light on where they're at with this all I really know right now is that they have five million they want to pass it through an existing grant program so they're thinking working lands and they are been talking to you about what the criteria and the eligible expenses would be that's really all I know I think some want to make it tier one and some want to make it tier two but I don't think they've made that decision yet I go in to their committee at two to talk about S 351 and to talk about adding this to 351 right thanks Mike and so you know what we're what we're looking at is the same kind of an approach fixed costs that these businesses have particularly many of them are idled right now for some of the reasons you describe senator star so helping them with those fixed costs to make it through to you know avoid foreclosure bankruptcy shutting down sending people home that's what we're trying to do is weather the storm because they have direct COVID related impacts on their business disruption and this would be funding to help them meet those fixed costs will design the eligibility categories with the with the representatives and that's the basic idea here is to provide that kind of emergency relief for the disruption shutdowns and gaps in in production so that they can you know hopefully bridge to a better future with some some recovered markets and activity so have have you I'll get to catch your rules have you been helping any of your logger people get you a UI or UP a so they've been getting taking in a little money to at least eat with yep we were pretty active right off in engaging with ACCD on their guidance and all and we sort of compiled all the various resources information PPP unemployment you know what's possible what's available and then connecting people with you know experts who could help them through it so we've done webinars we've built a whole website sort of a very similar kind of approach just like taking what are the issues what are your problems and then trying to help people find solutions been heavily engaged in that and trying to just hold it together and it kind of coaching people and helping them find what they need and some have made have had access to that kind of relief and I think it's helped some and but it's a mixed bag out there they don't have the same kind of flows of revenues and so it's just been a challenge to a little bit of a round a square peg and a round hole when we first were just trying to slam them in to to fit into the categories that were developed for other businesses where it just doesn't work yeah but but yeah and doing that kind of engagement yeah thank you Rose you're me yeah I yeah I'm here hey Michael good to see you thank you good morning I guess I mean I think this is true for a lot of businesses they're trying to be sort of shoehorned into a general program and they don't necessarily fit which but anyway I'm just still not quite sure I understand the disruption if if logging and wood products businesses have been able to have been able to operate I'm I'm trying to understand me besides the sort of general chaos of the of the the crisis where is the bottleneck is it it's not in the it's not in the woods it's in the processing is that right yeah well yes and no I mean it is part I think the way to say it is that just because they could meaning sort of legally or established as essential didn't mean they should or actually could or in fact did so many of them though it was nice to hear that they were deemed essential it just didn't have the wherewithal either because of a disruption upstream in the supply chain or downstream in their in their ability to market or just the costs of actually operating under the COVID precautions or with folks just a shortage of workers for one reason or another those various reasons meant that though they could legally technically be allowed to work they didn't work and that's that resulted in in the bottleneck the jams and the shortages at it okay I guess I just would one request is that when you're putting together the package is that it includes the provisions about economic harm that are the same provisions that are in that the agriculture just so that you know they have to show that they have had economic harm as related to COVID to because there probably are some that were able to continue operations and did just fine and then others that were not able to and had economic harm so right yep and I'm no expert yet but I'm learning about the requirements and clearly we have to stay within those those sideboards for all of this which are is challenging because you know there's a lot of needs and lots of people would say we could benefit but they just don't qualify and we get that and I think we agree we want to make it legit we want to get it to where it needs to go and but it needs to be qualifying for sure yeah great thanks how many to put on a number on it how many loads do you think a day we're going into J main the plant that blew up I don't know I mean it's big as I say it's it's about half of all the wood that's harvested in Vermont annually heads there were used to go there when did this happen yeah this was unrelated but certainly now exacerbating things massive explosion at a digester facility in J main the pixel plant which is now offline and with significant reverberations back through the supply chain and we're pretty much the farthest away significant contributor Vermont is and and among the first to be told sorry we can't take your wood which you've heard from us before about the other plant closures previously that we've kind of weathered and danced around and been trying to prop everyone up but this is a real setback in which was you know not directly related but certainly has implications and Sam could tell you probably are even more devastating problematic than the direct COVID Sam is smiling faces joined here Sam we're just asking about the general update on the forest side of economy and COVID impacts and we got right into our discussions with house appropriations and the request for us to help build a program for applying some CARES Act relief money to forest economy businesses is there anything and I indicated that you were probably on the line with others on that very subject anything I think I basically covered it but other questions from the committee or anything that we could get Sam to address more specifically I don't know if Sam's on can you hear Sam yes senator I'm here wasn't that plant in J that was around what the first part of man that that blew up April 15th was the day that explosion yeah and if you go on Google you can see pictures of of that actually happening because it was it was all over Google I think it was great video of it there is the actual explosion captured on YouTube yeah there was a truck driver with his dash cam waiting in line to unload his truck and captured the whole explosion I don't recommend playing the video at the vestibule at church it's narrated by main pulp truck drivers who were quite excited and upset with what was going on so yeah you you can watch it just not have the voice yeah so that mail was taking 1250 tractor-trail loads of pulpwood a week and that mark it evaporated that moment and they also had pardon 1250 center star was asking how many loads was going in there yeah they and they also had 13,000 approximately 13,14,000 tractor-trail loads of wood stockpiled there that was winter harvested wood they're a huge huge mill and that month that pulp is now being put back out onto the market because that mill is estimated to be down for anywhere 18 even if they rebuild it'll be possibly 18 months and so they're moving that pulp into an already oversupplied market generally look at New England and that mill procured pine pulpwood from I-89 all the way to the coast of Maine into Quebec Southern New England and that market is gone and now international paper and Ticonderoga is has warehouses full of printing paper for offices schools institutions they have stopped buying pulpwood there is no market for pine pulpwood from the western Adirondacks to eastern Maine no major market there are smaller markets but the impact is severe I don't know if Commissioner Snyder went into some of the details of what I've been talking with logging contractors some of the interviews that I've been hearing but we're here you know I'm talking to people that are seeing anywhere from a $15,000 a month revenue decrease on a small two-person logging operation up to our major mechanized operations that are seeing hundreds of thousands of dollars a month lost revenue right now and they can't work because our forests are diverse they may make 10 or 12 different products from different species off each log job and if six of those markets are unavailable they can't implement the management plan they can't go just cut certain trees and only take parts of those trees to certain markets so the markets are seizing up and the mills that do have a market for products are unable to get them because the loggers can't cut the rest of the wood that has to go with that job so it's a I don't want to cover I don't want to duplicate ground if the commissioner already did but I'm glad to have happy to answer questions or you say it senator Pearson has joined us and has a question morning Chris morning everybody sorry I was in with the pro tem that sounds like Leigh going to talk to the president every time you try to get him every yeah right I'd love to be with you but I've been on this important call with the president but he'd have photos to prove it I got we heard the other day that stores are struggling with the plastic bag band and they cannot order paper bags and somebody had said that those are very hard to come by right now and someone had I sort of joked I think it was with this committee that we ought to put some working lands money into getting a paper bag production up and running and someone said well we used to have one I can't remember where they're at but our is the are you guys exploring sort of market development ideas I mean we've had toilet paper shortages that it's just I don't think we typically think of producing those things in New England but are we trying to and can you just talk about that generally and then specifically is there market and making paper bags go for it Sam okay so thank you for that Senator Pearson and hello the so the the markets that remain are largely based on what they call brown paper or packaging paper your your the the pulp mills in Maine that after the major collapse in 2015 and 2016 they pivoted to making the things that like a grease proof bags for dog food home delivery food takeout your your Amazon packaging cereal boxes those kinds of heavier duty paper away from newsprint and magazine and catalog paper and things like that so that shift is occurring in the region that is that our wood is going to supply now and that's that's those are the what the representatives from those companies are telling me as they see a very bright future as you pointed out that there's a need for these kind of things they see a bright future there every single mill owner we've talked to across the entire region is very concerned about the supply chain that they can they may weather this storm in terms of the mill themselves but the logging and trucking capacity to supply them is very much at risk right now if we go a long period of time without them being able to cover their major capital expenses so in terms to directly answer your question about whether or not we're exploring that here i think we're open to anything we've been talking about it any market we can create that is involves less transportation using more lower grade wood that doesn't have the you know the high quality building or furniture type value is great but these you know a pulp mill would take you know modern pulp mill is going to take hundreds of millions of dollars to build and they're the newest pulp mill in main i think was built in the 1980s paper mill and even some of the talk that we've heard around like the type of the size of investment that has to occur around that even the supply chain in the northeast us there are times where i hear people saying that they think that it's they're not sure that there's enough wood you know for what for what they're building in other countries other continents for paper mills and things like that that's why some of these companies are investing on other continents is they can park a mill right in the middle of some huge tract of forest land that that has millions of tons available in a short distance it doesn't mean we can't find something or do something but it's uh it's been a challenge there's a lot of people have been working on trying to do something with this and we would love to but it's a matter of how do we i think where everybody's in uh i think that's what we've also been thinking about that what are the durable what are the essential goods in our economy that we could produce here that create more durability in an event of another pandemic or or emergency um and i i don't know where we could where or how we could start a conversation of anything of that scale to produce that kind of product that's why the wood the wood energy is that is essentially the first place that people turn because it eats all types of different species and different in a diverse type of shape and form and it's a year you know energy is is generally being consumed 24 hours a day around the clock versus a consumer product that that may have seasonal peaks and demands but according to uh mark mcdonnell santa mcdonnell uh to make to make energy from wood we i mean he he went on with large numbers uh well chris you said on the committee uh but we had to subsidize the right gate power output by according to mark i think he mentioned hundreds of millions of dollars over a 10-year period it's about five million a year i think is that what we remember 10 million a year something like this i think it was 10 and and so that isn't a very good use of our wood uh if if that's the case uh for for producing energy um unless you can capture all the excess heat and utilize the whole thing like maybe burlington does so sam uh have you been have you been dealing with house appropriations uh commissioner snyder and i have been in conversations with uh that committee just yeah and so i guess you know the five million that they're putting into working land your folks would qualify for some of that stuff and then if they put other money in um in house approach um that will come over to us at the tail end of this week of the first part of next week to to push through and i'm sure um you know we would do everything we could to to help out let's softly here we uh i'd comment we appreciate you know i think some of you know i was here at the very beginning of the creation of the working lands initiative big supporter and proud of it we're just and and grateful that folks want to put stuff there we would just we've indicated that that's owing to the nature of that grant program and its structure and how it works and the requirements we're going to need something more deft and direct and that's why we're working on this i don't want to necessarily pull away from that but the the priority here would be get to this emergency relief um through a different channel i just want to be clear that that's what our request has been about yeah that and i think that's good because five million is like you know a drop of water in a cup uh you know it doesn't go far with your with the losses that you've mentioned bruce uh you had a question yeah i just have a comment and then a question for uh commit the commissioner um i we do have to be careful if a lot of this disruption is because of the explosion um and not because of the see uh the virus that we define it well to make sure it qualifies for crf money and i'm sure uh our trusted lawyer will be on top of that but um just just something i was thinking of to make sure that you know we separate those out because i think there could be problems down the line and we don't want to have to pull back money from people who get it for sure i would just say just to be clear we get that completely entirely and we're only going there to provide that added context it's background it's related but right it's not you can't make a you know for recovery from that it's separate and we we'd certainly get that yeah okay and then the other thing i wanted to ask you about since you're here um commissioner is our favorite topic of the forest carbon sequestration working group um and s 280 um i'm hoping we can still hang on to at least some pieces of that and i realize getting you positions in this climate is not going to happen but wondering if you think there's anything in that bill that we could still um hang on to maintain to keep the sort of conversation going and the the wheels rolling especially given the progress that was made this spring with the major investment up in the northern part of the state for the cold hollow program project um so just wanted to hear your thoughts and where you're at at this point with all of that um i'd hate to have our our good work go to waste right and um so yes i i uh been thinking a lot about this and um you know it was a it was tough in february before covid uh we were okay this is good stuff we want to head in this direction there's real potential for whatever new generation we think that's one of the main reasons for doing it among others um i'd said we're gonna our report suggests we do a bunch of things i've pledged that we're already working on those things um without legislation but um to actually move towards enrollment developing a project assisting municipalities as per your bill um everything beyond the basics of putting out good and modern helpful information everything beyond that is an additional lift that was going to be difficult in february without some capacity being added which you contemplated thank you um and as you say now since covid that's just becomes even more of a problem so um we have staffer engaged they're eager we want to try to do this but we're in a hiring freeze a spending freeze we're looking at massive general fund cuts our forestry division is basically all general fund um whereas i have some room with special funding and and sort of grow your own kind of mentality and other aspects through the park system for example to make some moves i really am boxed up here and we're gonna have to we're already starting to in kind of an austerity mode we're we're reshifting um you know putting people on only mission critical core work uh so i'm really struggling with the idea how do we assign people this it really comes down to um that that we we are intrigued by the prospects think it's good a good thing to move towards but it's significant work and if we can find a way to add capacity we want to do it but i'm short of that i'm sticking with my we still want to move in this direction i'd rather not have be charged with a study it has to report back and the stuff on assisting municipalities i don't know that you meant it this way but it really says that we have to help towns develop projects that would be a massive undertaking if they asked um so again i'm trying to be clear here that i don't want to just dump on this and say no we want to move in this direction but i really have to be legitimate about those capacity needs which are just exacerbated now that's that's the bottom line so we can continue to work towards this short of any kind of capacity being added um i've got a similar issue with the trails act 250 thing that's being contemplated this is terrible timing for a lot of way in a lot of ways that um want to move in this direction but it's a significant lift and can't really justify doing so in any bigger way without additional funding that said i managed to pull together through a limited service position with a relationship with a national organization that's funded us i've hired a climate forester a phd ecologist from uvm she's fantastic and she's i've already got her on this and we want to move in this direction i've added on my own capacity for climate adaptation in our shop um i offer that senator as just a measure of good faith that i'm moving in this direction doing everything i can internally but with limitations on hiring and no money and shortfalls expected i think that's just that's where this lands i'll keep moving in this direction but i'd rather not be saddled with too much of a mandate without commensurate added capacity so is that is that something michael that you know some of us will be back and some of us won't depending on the election but it would be i think Ruth it would be good for you know if michael could keep in mind that we'd like to get an update say january you know sometime in january to how he's making out with with what he's doing and give us an update and if things have turned around uh somewhat uh you know there might be uh ample room in the budget in a next year to uh or after we get back in january to add something if we can in all and uh move forward that way yeah i mean i i totally appreciate commissioner your situation with the budget and austerity and the positions and all that i i definitely get that and there was no way i was contemplating this the bill as it was drafted in the situation that it was then and i am happy to hear that you've hired a climate forester and that she may be able to do some of this work and it sounds like you hired her using some outside funds or private funds and that was one of the things i'm sure you've been contacted by the same people i have that there may be you know interest from outside organizations and helping you fund this type of work and so you know making sure that we're taking advantage of those opportunities and if there's anything any language that is necessary to help you take advantage of those opportunities um that's what i'd be interested in doing knowing that you can't do it with your current situation but giving you the flexibility and the sort of backing to say that this is something you can go out and find resources to do if you have the capacity to do so thank you i appreciate that yes and in fact you know the nature conservancy nationally has a big push with amazon to to do some climate and carbon projects pilots uh tnc vermont has been you know as you know has been encouraging this and supporting this and participated in the our working group through jim i went right to them and said okay you guys want me to do this uh you know where the pickle were and i got one word for you you know and they were like hey can you push this i said i got a word one word for you amazon get me some of that scratch and uh i think they're actually looking into it so right i went to american forests cooked up this arrangement for a limited service funding right before covet got the approval because i'm not sure i would get approval for that position now um so jumped on it and that's not the first trick time i've used that trick and i'll do it again um using everything i can to build our capacity if there's something to your point like if i can think of a way that you could be helpful with language to authorize that or encourage that or maybe even direct it i'm happy to share that with you i mean i i'm doing it through my auspices now um we'll continue to do so and um looking at other grant funding um and um i i just think given the interest out there that that's only fair right that some of these folks who are pushing for it but if they've got connections to resources that i don't care where it comes from i just need the capacity we'll pursue it okay there are there are other questions for michael chris um commissioner i'm not familiar enough with the economics of the carbon markets but while we're talking about and lamenting all of the more traditional um markets and and opportunities for forest products drying up wouldn't we actually say that the carbon idea is potentially one of the few growing areas in the state as a way to generate income from our forests and protect them you know unlike well and protect them and protect the large tracks um i guess i'm just wondering if if it would if it's fair first of all and valuable to consider this not sort of as some weird fringy climate thing but an actual source of income and and essentially a new kind of market for our forest owners and if we looked at it that way does the economics justify maybe looking at it that way and could that be a way that we might help build some capacity that's a great question i would say and hope senator hardy would back me on this that's kind of how we approached it in the working group was it's you know it's not fringy climate thing it but it is fringy it's not it's not terribly extant right now in our state or any state so it is relatively new it's somewhat untested there's a lot of uncertainties there's huge costs up front which i'll describe so we are seeing it not as some fringe thing but that as another component of economic viability for forest land ownership in the state that's why indeed we want to pursue it i don't think any of us is under the impression that it's a replacement for our traditional working forest economy i think it's augmenting complementary and we need both and in fact for most of the demographics of ownership in this state folks are going to want to have enrollments in carbon projects that allow them to still engage in good stewardship locally in the production of local forest products because there's continued adding there so i think we want both and i want to be clear that we're not seeing it as this fringy thing i think if we're in fact more plug-and-play ready i'd be begging you guys to help me get this done right now because of its ability to augment you know and support in other ways of flagging forest economy like it's just that it's not ready it is stuff we have to develop we have to overcome costs and that's those are the issues now so i don't want to back burner it i'm just saying it's not the immediate thing that we drop everything and do because it will it won't have the return immediately and we have some more pressing needs does that make sense where i just think it's both i don't i want to be clear we don't see it as a fringe climate thing it's very logical it's just that it's it's not like accessible to us just yet it's going to take time and it takes work to get there um well i appreciate that and i'm i want to figure out a solution so it takes work and time to get there but i'm not hearing that we're doing that and so are we and i but i respect that you're saying you're not putting it on the back burner what is it like if if we were in a uh if if i was the commissioner and i said to a knowledgeable staffer that was you what's it going to take for us to have this to the next level so we can provide this source of reliable income for our owners what do i need for to to have this sort of up and running in a year do i need one staffer do i need five people is it just simply not possible in that time frame because of other factors i'm trying to understand how we can do a little more than keeping on the back burner recognizing that you're not asking for this but if just so that i understand yeah i appreciate it and and others help help me out here i i think what we found with our study group was there's there are real possibilities for public lands uh particularly to serve there's two kinds there's like the investment in the public lands to get ours enrolled that can form both a model and and help plow the way for private lands and also serve as an anchor for the aggregation of the small private lands that so there's public lands i think we're a little closer to being ready to go pursue one we need so what we need is a couple of bodies to focus on that i would say um and whether and it's just unknown because it's so untested could we be up and running in a year i doubt that because of the nature of the protocols and the steps that have to be taken but maybe within two as i understand it and that would allow us to do this sort of pilot of a of a public project that helps kind of break down barriers demonstrated etc the real money here is in getting the private enrollments to support family ownership and that's farther out uh and was contemplated as coming sort of on the heels of us establishing a public lands thing whether it's on state lands or municipal lands that could serve as the aggregators etc so i think what what i'm reflecting here my inability to give you is just a sort of straight up answer is that's kind of why we keep saying both the committee the study group and now roose bill sorry senator hardy's bill would say you know the secretary will report on back on you know the feasibility on state lands and if so shall engage uh we we found that there's just a lot of complications we got to get to that next level that's what i mean by it's not like available as a retail thing you just go say hey we want in check some boxes and now what we're up and running there's an enormous amount of protocol that goes into these things which is good for the vigor the rigor that we need about double counting and all the other greenwashing and uh because of those complexities though it takes time and that's what we would need the people for and i guess the point i'm trying to make is that even if we did just prioritize it and do it now it doesn't end in anything it's not like a thing we can plug into we have to create it and then it's a market you have to have buyers for the credits we have to market them and so there's just not something that's sort of ready for us just to step in we have to create our end of it and then we have to hope and and be active about getting buyers and actually closing the deal out there is that helpful at all yeah i i i get tired of the answer but it's fair answer that it's more complicated than that part of it let me let me just my last question is is there an advantage to being out in front you said nobody's quite figured this out and i believe that because it's an emerging market but uh is it something that we can you know let michigan figure out and then piggyback on them or or would we be wise to be early both this is tricky because i think we what we found with some of our experts was that at other states that get out in in front um they all crashed and burned they wasted money they got nowhere there's a couple of things now so i think that that said i think it's the time is now for us to lead and that's what we want to do is be out in front be among the we have a better marketing plan i think possibility of the vermont brand if you will we've talked about is we want to leverage that because we think that our carbon will be more charismatic than new york's carbon uh people will want our carbon right uh our story is better that's part of this building of this thing i sense that senator hardy wanted to say something here yeah yeah really thanks bobby and thanks michael um i think that my understanding from our conversations and the many hours i put writing that damn report um uh is that uh for the state lands a lot of the work that needs to be done that you and your staff need to do michael it's doing a lot of uh research into uh what state lands would be appropriate and feasible for this type of program so it's a lot of research into the legal aspects and then the scientific aspects and the use of the lands um to make sure that we're getting the right public lands to put in the program but once that's done then i then the next step is to do the protocols for the actual carbon project itself development that's right the first step is clearly something that you and your staff have to do because it's state lands and you're the department that oversees those state lands and then the second step is something that could be done by somebody you pay to contract with to do that work and so my thought is that second step is where the private money could come in to you know have somebody donate those services or pay for those services in order to get the the carbon project portion of the project done and then the marketing i don't think the marketing is going to be that hard but because with the state land the benefit is that if we do this work now down the road a few years we will actually have a good chunk of change like money revenue coming in from our state forests that would support your department and your operations and your work and that that i think right now given the situation with state revenues and the economy is a really good thing to be investing in so i guess my question is how can we help you support you to do that first part of the work so then we can get private money to help you do the second part of the work so then we can get the project up and running and then you know market it in in two years this year if we were going to do all of it soup to nuts we'd need the i'm sorry center no that's okay i just i'm just trying to figure out how we don't lose this momentum and and how do we get you to do the resources you need to do that first part right it went and so i think the soup to nuts for us to kind of take it on and ensure that there's continuity it goes all the way from the first phase as you mentioned all the way through to implement protocols implementation and marketing that's a bigger ask for the initial piece just to help us get through the sorting through the legalities what's available what isn't where does it make sense um i think that's that's closer to the analyst that you propose that's what we need because i think that person needs to be feeding into that next those next phases not have it be separate um and uh so i think that's kind of what we need is if we if we could just put somebody to this um to um because they are connected the the the development of the project has to and the needs for that have to be informed by the analysis of the landscape abilities and vice versa so we want i would think it's at minimum it's it's that capacity to help us start on this do all of that stuff um uh on the first phase as you describe it on the state lens i don't think that has to be all that all that difficult to be honest with you that's the relatively easy part and frankly we did uh beckon and jane did some of that and reported on it to the to the committee we have sort of the rough bits of that uh that led to uh what what about this and what about that so uh i think that's that's that's the most hopeful thing is is that and i don't know if anything could be shaken out of all this to to to do that but that's what we would need now i think is just to sign someone that that way someone's accountable to pushing this stuff forward getting it done as opposed to asking people who already have a whole purview to add something and fit it in here and there um which is not likely um the part private partners public partnership that we imagined as one of i think the most exciting recommendations we made from the work group was to establish that this idea that instead of i mean just having money to go that private philanthropy say to support us just hiring a developer that's one way what we were imagining was cutting out that developer and using the expertise in our staff existing and other professionals and also folks like tnc vermont and their in middlebury their experience now to build that brain trust to help us cut out that middle person to drive it down have a sort of a vermont approach to this that's that would be cheaper and then kind of create that capacity in state that was one of my favorite recommendations that we made it's in your bill that we would the secretary would report back on that i don't want to lose that and i think so how do we move that forward would be i think is the most creative and smart thing to do and that's that's going to that would also just that's that's more capacity i just think that's the best way to get to what we're all talking about is how do we actually do something instead of just studying the heck out of it forever um yeah maybe just keeping that language michael and i'm just looking for a language right now to keep this alive so that it doesn't get followed by the wayside in the chaos of everything else that's going on so maybe that's the you know that's the language that we put in there that just says hey you know work on establishing this partnership something that that keeps this alive right well i buy that and i accept that and how about going back to senator star's suggestion maybe what you turn the language is is a call for us to come back in january to report on a couple specific things like where do we stand on this state lands analysis hold my feet to the fire if you will i accept that um where do you stand what did you do on what did you do without any capacity the best you could on this outreach and providing information because that was the number one so report back on where just a status report what did you do to get the word out blah blah blah what have you what's the report up back on your assessment of state lands um and any any news or or what's next or what's needed perhaps we make the ask then for um next steps enrollment and in particular the public private partnership creation thing just you know kind of a big on reports and i know you guys aren't either and we've done a lot of it here but it's a way to keep it rolling um and recognizes the reality that we're not only yeah even if you guys somehow magically got me some capacity it's still going to be a challenge given what we're dealing with right now so i think it's so it is fair and reasonable to say we're serious about this commissioner come back and tell us where we stand we're giving you a little bit of breathing room because of covid but um what does that sound like that does that get check the boxes you need yeah chris maybe we add uh just you know any updated potential uh for for forced revenue at force owners you know if if the market's involved another year what are we seeing i i'd like i think there's going to be an economic case someday when we get to say here's you know bobby always talks about his seventy five thousand dollar grant position that brought in over a million dollars it's going to be like that there's going to be an equation and one day it's going to tip and then no one will fight us on this so just some metric there uh michael or grady if we could add that i think that'd be valuable i don't want it to be on risk but just flag that yep kind of a status on the market conditions what's what where it's trending what it's looking like um what's possible yeah and something like any update on so that if there is you know i just don't want us to miss the economics here neither well michael michael or grady's been with us so um he's heard what we talked about and um maybe michael or grady um you could put something together to cover those three or four issues and with the report back to the uh both committees i would expect natural resources as well as us uh you know sometime in january do you want a reporter do you just want the commissioner to come in and testify well have the commissioner come in and testify in regards to the issues that we just talked about is that the thing you'd put in a bill or is that just a letter that we would put together from our committee to the commissioner uh how would that work you've done it both ways in the past i think the commissioner has been directed to come in and testify before and other committees um he's i don't know why but he's never refused to come in so so can you those i heard i'm i'm balancing things on my end and i heard senator pierce and say um you know that the economics of of far sequestration um current uh basically activities ongoing across the country and the economics of it uh and whether um worthwhile for vermont farisland owners to pursue is is that what you're looking for or do you want more than that no we wanted more than that i think um i don't root did you or or michael schneider you want to repeat what you're yes as i understand it uh so it's it's that it's senator pierce's request for kind of a market conditions status report update of where it stands where it's trending right but in addition it was what have you done with this uh with the what did we call it ruth the uh education and outreach campaign of providing information to vermont landowners about the possibilities etc so a report on education and outreach on carbon market possibilities for vermont landowners a report back on the status of our evaluation of enrolling the suitability and eligibility of certain state lands in in offset markets and so outreach state lands um public private partnership and then a report on the status and needs for developing the public private partnership for uh as a you know vermont model of uh approaching project development with a public private partnership yeah michael it's just basically s2 ad the things that are asked for in there but just a sort of skinny down testimony from the commissioner sure just so i think there are four things basically sealed language from okay we could um with the committee want to stick that in the bill someplace or just do a letter to michael it would be more official if it was in the bill but we aren't really what do you think michael michael's uh or grady uh well you you have the opportunity to do to do both you haven't passed the 656 amendment out of committee yet it would not be difficult to add this to that amendment um my only remaining question is when would you want the testimony to be delivered well probably uh mid uh mid january i would think uh would that work for you michael schneider yes senator thanks i i think that's fine and fair um and uh you know and i guess i'd just say i appreciate having the actual bill language at two things i appreciate michael grady suggesting that it could be just testimony i would prefer that frankly than another report because that could get out of control so testimony but uh a requirement in in the bill um you know i want to keep this thing going i could get hit by a bus who knows what happens in november so um having to you might have to work as that's right that's right so i would suggest putting it in your bill uh with simple language that requires me to come back and report on these topics but not a legislative report if i could avoid it please yeah i agree i think that works no that's a that would be a page report we agreed the shorter the better yeah one page one page michael schneider okay um so uh is that fine with you right you're good that satisfies me i just want to keep the fire burning i don't want that report to be worthless and we put a lot of work in time and struggle into it and i think it's a worthwhile thing for true for the state and for forest donors so this is this is helpful given the circumstances well thank you i really appreciate a the interest and the sincerity in it and that what you see what this is potential here but also recognizing that just the realities and trying to find a way to keep it alive but not overwhelming and uh that you're seem to be accepting i'm not trying to avoid anything here i actually want to get to success and and i think that's how i appreciate the conversation and the approach here and we'll do our level best and because i do i also think man this could really be a game changer for for us with regard to our tariffs of public lands but also for over months and anything we can do to empower forest land ownership is something we should definitely do and this is in that category yeah well i want to thank uh commissioner you and deputy commissioner lincoln uh for spending uh this time with us um so i think we you know made some positive moves here to keep this issue alive and well and and i don't know michael michael grady can send you a copy of once we get it put together he gets it put together and send you a copy of it and but we need uh we need to vote this bill uh i would i hope tomorrow or friday morning um if we possibly can and so um we'll try to get you a copy and oh hey sam you want called uh taff up there in charleston tell him how you're progressing with the probes on that money for loggers absolutely yeah appreciate that seeing you called him to call me uh maybe you can call him well well work pardon commission it worked it worked and we like that well we usually try to help if we can yeah so anyways thanks to both of you uh and uh we'll uh hopefully we'll survive all this and and uh we'll get a good report in january great and on that senator uh on the first part of our conversation so we'll you're we greatly appreciate you all of your interest in asking these questions and wanting to know what's going on and i in as much as we might have something happening through house appropriations uh i assume you know that means that you'll get a crack of it down the hall um and that you have what again what i'm getting at is when it comes to you guys if we manage to get something to stick there when it comes your turn to weigh in on that i just want to make sure sam and i have given you what you need to be able to evaluate and we hope support such an interest if you need anything or have questions let us know i've sent linda a basic summary of what we shared with that committee on the certain some of it's a recap of what we tried to describe for you in words this morning you have a short a handful of bullets that i asked linda to share with you that give you a basic snapshot of what's going on out there and what we're trying to do with this release but if you need i'm sorry is appreciate the interest in the support if you need anything to really support the funding uh and our approach to it let us know we'd be happy to share and explain and answer questions yeah thank you very much and you know we're pretty good supporters of the forest industry uh so stay healthy and um we'll be in touch thank you thanks everybody well thanks thanks guys good to see you center star i have to leave linda was asking about if we're meeting at nine tomorrow yeah if you want to we could start earlier if if you want to is it mess you up chris it usually doesn't but it might as it did today so you want to do nine we have i mean i i'm guessing if michael can send us whatever the latest draft will be if we've we've only just added a little bit right well plus i've got this dairy stuff that you guys have got to get tuned into it it uh michael can send you copies of that but i want you to kind of keep it to yourselves and tell we have a chance as a committee to chat about it well if michael could send it to us today then i'm hopeful we could vote on it tomorrow and be done but i'd be it would be nice if we could uh root yeah i just i agree it would be nice if we could vote on it tomorrow and if we have the language i feel like we can do that um the the one thing though that came up in the interim here was that question about the um uh good standing and that whole email yeah but we gotta we've got a way to fix that okay because i did get the list from diane about there are four farms that are not in good standing with the agency of ag but if it's expanded out that's not what our intention was so i didn't know what to respond to diane i thought it'd be better coming from the whole committee but so i just wanted to wait and see what you thought bobby no michael's got a pitch to that we've done it before another legislation and i think uh michael's got figured out where y'all michael you want a comment on that maybe i should jump off because i got to get on that other zoom call but michael you could explain that to the committee sure uh you know the the questions is larger than just the ag assistance bill it's for any of these assistance programs that are going to be giving grants to individual businesses or or individuals um i mean the the theory and the conditions are conditions that run through pretty much every grant program in the state and many federal grant programs is that you don't award money to people that are in violation of the law um but here you have a different status or scenario it's not voluntary non-compliance it's it's people who can't pay their their tax bills because of of a significant impact to the economy so i'm testifying the house appropriations today at um 130 and i'm going to bring this issue up uh for them for all of the assistance programs and whether or not to not withstand the tax good standing and set off provisions that are in uh attachment c of administrative bulletin five that is what the feds did and that's what senator star was referring to for the economic stimulus package um the 1200 that people received under the cares act the feds not was stood there set off and tax reduction provisions in the internal revenue code you would just do something very similar um and uh it would probably be included in either an appropriations bill or um kind of a directive to to the administrations the secretary of administration that in awarding any grants for individual businesses or individuals under the crf that the provisions of administrative bulletin five related to uh set off and um good standing and payment of state taxes will not apply something like that okay so that would be just across the board for all programs including yeah yeah that program would just be the a good standing with the ag agency they would have that so those four farms okay yeah okay so that's not like good to me thank you you're welcome i i left one condition off in attachment c it's it's uh being in good standing with your child support um the feds did not waive that for the economic stimulus funds it would be a question for you i think that's probably more politically difficult to to waive than um the tax set off and tax reduction but i'll float that to the appropriations committees as well yeah and they're saying michael that's their call like they're gonna make this sweeping exemption for all the money is that right well i i don't see why it makes sense for one individual program versus another if you're a business that's had a 75 percent revenue loss um you're probably not paying your taxes you're probably not current on your sales tax or your room's meals and alcohol tax um so the question is shouldn't that apply across the board for any of these programs and i'm trying to ask that the answer to that is not something we have to ask it's answer it's going to be something that approves will add in one in a bill that will apply to all the cares money isn't that what you said yeah that that's that's what i would recommend i wouldn't i wouldn't try to put it in each individual bill it's really about directing secretary of administration not to enforce attachment c for those those provisions um which frankly the secretary has the ability to waive under administrative bullets in five but then you're just you're relying on the secretary's discretion in doing that so basically what you should do is you should if you want to do it you direct you say that that those provisions don't apply to individual grants or financial awards from crf it's it's it should be sweeping it should should go across the board yeah i agree i think this makes a sense as an approach and if it goes into the budget bill if that is that what you're thinking or another a different vehicle uh you know it it could go into any of the the bills but it should just go into one bill and apply to all all of the crf monies so do you think i should reply to diane should i just with anything saying or just let this happen through the legislative process i i think if you reply to diane and say that it's going to be pursued through the legislative process that's fine okay i mean the agency knows about these conditions it's it's not this is not a new condition they're they're been in place probably for about 18 year um i mean all of their grants that they administer now have to comply with that provision it's it's not something that it's not novel it's it's basic kind of financial policy you don't award to people that are in violation but this is a different scenario than intentional violation right okay thank you michael uh senator hardy i hope you will respond because i'd hate to learn that this is sort of getting jumbled up and being used as a way to uh take out our language which is very discreet in the ag relief bill uh so so it will be good for us to let diane know that the harder that she raised are likely to be addressed through a different process okay i will respond thank you guys yeah and we're meeting tomorrow at nine was that the decision tomorrow at nine yeah okay great thank you michael you'll send us the latest draft uh including bobby's language that just so we could read before uh when when do you imagine we could see that uh i could draft up the the forest carbon language right now um and send it to you probably before 11 before 11 it won't be proved by the editors by then uh they're backed up and it'll probably take overnight for them to prove anything um but uh you can have an untrue version by 11 what about a full copy of the whole bill well the full copy of the whole amendment or the full copy of the underlying bill well if we're going to vote it out tomorrow um it probably would be a good idea if we had what we're voting out sure so the amendment is not a strike ball it's it's just um four pages actually it's 11 pages now um of uh some minor changes to the feral pig language and then you're adding five new sections um to the end of the bill okay um so i i can send you 656 as a pass the house and then i i can send you the version of the of the um amendment that i'll have done five 11 great thank you market