 This afternoon, as we look to expand our workforce, my administration is focused on helping current Vermonters enter the workforce with licensing reciprocity for our service men and women, return ship opportunities for older Vermonters who want to continue working here, access to post-secondary training and retraining, including adult technical education and more. We also need to attract more young professionals and families to the state. Last week, I was excited to announce a new initiative from our Department of Tourism and Marketing that illustrated how our agencies and departments are thinking outside the box to attract more people to Vermont. This week, I am pleased to be joined by the Vermont State Colleges leadership team to announce their own Outside the Box initiative. For years, I have highlighted the role our colleges and universities can play to help us keep more young people here with tens of thousands of students attending these schools every year. Vermont State Colleges Welcome Home program, which Chancellor Spalding will detail in a moment, is exactly the kind of thing we need to attract former students back to the state. With the second oldest population in the country, in one of the few states expected to see our working age population decline by more than 10% over the next decade, we all must work together to change that trajectory. So I truly appreciate the creativity of the Vermont State Colleges with this initiative. Every little bit can help as we focus on expanding our workforce. Given the scope of challenge, we can leave no stone unturned when it comes to opportunities to keep and retain more young folks to enter our schools and hopefully stay right here in Vermont after graduation. So with that, I'd like to turn it over now to Chancellor Spalding to detail their new program. Thank you very much, Governor. Thank you. We really appreciate your leadership. The Vermont State Colleges system has a mission statement and it starts with for the benefit of Vermont, not for the benefit of the institutions or the presidents or the Chancellor or even our Board of Trustees. And I'm glad to have the chair of our Board of Trustees here with us today, Churchill Hines. But our mission is for the benefit of Vermont. And we support the governor's efforts to deal with the demographics that are facing not only Vermont, not only Maine and New Hampshire, but many rural parts of this country by trying to entice people that might have started as Vermonters and left to come home. And that's what this initiative is about. People might be surprised to know that roughly half of the students that are graduating from high school and going on to college go out of state. The good news is many of them decide to come home. But for those students that actually establish a residency in some other state, when they come home under current policy, they have to read domicile, reestablish a residency in Vermont for a full year before they qualify for in-state tuition. And what this effort is, is to make it easier for former Vermonters to come back home and go at the in-state rates without having to spend a year establishing your residency. This fall, I had a communication from a mother in Rutland County whose daughter had gone to high school in Vermont, moved out of state, got married, and then they wanted to come back to husband and wife and go to, in this case, to Castleton. And she was going to have to pay out-of-state tuition for a year. And that was enough to tip the decision to not go to Castleton. And I can tell you, I hear it on a fairly regular basis where people are now established in some other state, want to come back to Vermont. But paying that out-of-state tuition is enough of a differential that prevents them from coming home to Vermont, studying in Vermont, and then hopefully setting up residency and staying there, staying here. So this effort is very simple. It's not, by itself, going to change the day or the future, but small things together. And the Governor, Governor, I remember in your budget address you mentioned, one of the things we were going to do was focus on those that have an affinity for Vermont, those that either were from Vermont and left or those that come to college here from out-of-state and, you know, that really have a reason to love the state as much as we do. And we need to make it easier for them. So I'm very pleased that our Board of Trustees agreed with the recommendation that we ought to change our in-state tuition policy so that those students that graduate from Vermont, graduate from high school as Vermonters. So they don't have to actually graduate from a Vermont high school. They graduate from Vermont, graduate from high school, earn a high school diploma or an equivalency from anywhere when they or their parents or guardians or residents can come back and get in-state tuition as long as they set up shop for one day when they enroll. So we're hoping that it will, in a small way, make a difference over time. We don't anticipate, you know, a real run on the bank here that if we could get a dozen or a couple dozen people in the first year or so, that would be a victory and in combination with the other efforts that the Governor has put in place, put Vermont in a better position to deal with the demographic challenges that are out there. In the policy, it does read that this is effective for high school students that graduate after graduated or earn a diploma or an equivalency after January 1, 2015. The intention there was just that we really don't know who's already in the pipeline going way back. So we wanted to give a little attitude and then going forward over time, it'll be more and more available to Vermonters that want to come home. So Governor, we support your efforts. I might say we also are totally supportive of your initiative to have National Guard members, Vermont Guard members qualify for free tuition. We support the way the bill is in the house with the University of Vermont and the State Colleges. Frankly, we're perfectly happy to have all colleges in Vermont participate in that. Either way, though, you know, that is another effort to try to keep people home in that case. So the Vermont State Colleges are pleased to be participating with that. And we're very happy to support your efforts with our welcome home tuition proposal. I'd love to just turn it over to the chair of our board for a little bit and then we can answer any questions if there are any. I know there are no other hot issues around here today. Well, this welcome home program does take a partial step towards solving one of the great conundrums of Vermonters. And that is how do you answer the question, are you a Vermonter? I can tell people that my mother was almost ready to have me when she moved across the state borders and they challenge my status as a Vermonter for the last 70 something years because of that. And I can say I can take you to six cemeteries and show you where my prior six generations are buried here. They say, nope, you're not a Vermonter. But for the purposes of paying tuition at the Vermont State Colleges now, we've adopted the principle that once a Vermonter, always a Vermonter. If you graduate from high school and you were domiciled in Vermont and you've left the state and you want to come back and start your college education, or if you want to restart your college education or take some graduate courses, you're going to be treated like a Vermonter and we won't ask where were you really born or any of those other questions that they posed when people ask the question that cocktail parties, are you a Vermonter? We've solved that issue at least for the purposes of the Vermont State Colleges and I think it's a triple win. It's a win for the Vermonters coming home. It's a win for the state of Vermont. And frankly, it's a win for the Vermont State Colleges too, because we only can fulfill our our mission for the benefit of Vermont one student at a time. And the more students we have, the better we are at fulfilling that mission. Thank you, Governor, for supporting us with that, we'd be happy to answer any questions you might have about this initiative. You say you're hoping for a dozen or two in the first year, the first couple of years, you know, it's really hard to get a real estimate of what might happen. We hear on occasion people say, Gee, I wanted to come, but I'm not going to pay that differential. So it's presumed that these people would would not come if not for yes. Yes. Yeah, small number. But you know, over time, we're we're going to we're going to promote it. And you know, it'll it'll be our contribution. And really, it just seems like the right thing to do. And it's not like you're writing off tuition money because you don't think you would have done that anyway. No, yeah. Is there a semester of in state or state? It's about 5,000 a semester. So it's about 10,000 a year. Well, we have marketing, marketing and admissions teams on all our campuses. We're actually hoping that maybe some of this might make the news. And, you know, when we are out going to college fairs and all the other ways that we talk to students and families, we're going to include this in our message is not in state tuition at Vermont State colleges and most instances more expensive than what residents here would be paying for out of state tuition in other states. Say it again. So let me just make sure. So isn't in state tuition for residents in Vermont at state colleges generally higher than what they would be paying to be out of state students somewhere else? I would say that's on occasion, but not not regularly. And it does highlight one of the issues that is starting to confront public higher education is the the collapse in the different the difference between out of state tuition and in state tuition, which is another issue, you know, that Vermont happens to have among the highest public college tuition in the country. And, you know, we need to be as competitive as we can. But, you know, it's the bigger problem, Pete, is if, you know, really we're trying to attract out of state students to come here paying out of state tuition compared to what they could get in their home states, or even with independence. It starts in the fall fall. Yeah. And did you say it was limited to after we're saying about January 1st? Yeah, for for people that earn their diploma or equivalency after January 1 2015. So we wanted to go back a few years and say to those students come on in, but we didn't want to go back 30 years. So we figured, okay, we're going to go back a few years and then have it work forward. It depends. It depends. And I know that's hard, but we have we have four different institutions within the system. And at some of them, it's looking pretty good. But it's still early in the process, you know, so it's not too early for people to apply. But it's early in the season for deposits. And at some of them, it looks, you know, for example, at a place like Castle and it looks quite favorable right now. But it's so early in the process. And we've upgraded some of our technology so we can process things faster. So it's hard to know whether the numbers are real, or just that we're getting people in the door and through the process quicker. But you know, I mean, I would say, as the governor said, just just, I don't, I shouldn't go on too long here because there are other issues. But you can go on as long as you want. But there are 25% fewer seniors in high school in 2017 than there were in 2007, 25% fewer. And, you know, that is a challenge that rural areas of the country are facing all over. And so are we. You know, what we need to recognize is that in order to remain vibrant and vital and accessible for our students, we need to look at what the realities are and make adjustments so that we can continue to provide what students need. And, you know, over the last several years, enrollment has gone down pretty much across the board in the state colleges. Some have leveled off this year. Vermont Technical College had a level, if not a slight increase. So it's it's it's hard to say it is uniform across the entire system. But, you know, the demographics are real. And, you know, then you've also got a situation where on your western border, you can go tuition free to any one of the soon universities up to 120,000 of family income. So there are issues like that that we have to confront. It's as far as I'm concerned, it provides opportunities for us to actually think about being creative. And that's partially what this policy is. What about how much of an actual tuition difference was this new program made for? Well, if somebody the difference between out of state tuition and in state tuition is about $10,000, maybe of $10,500, but rounded to $10,000. So if somebody was going to come in and have to read domicile for you and pay out of state tuition is $10,000. Did you decide that it was redone with all that? Thank you. Did you decide that it was time for a new education, Secretary? No. What happened was Rebecca had decided that it was time for her. This was her decision. And we value what she's given to the state over the last four years, what she's done for our cabinet. I valued her as a team member and she just decided it was time to move on. What reasons did she give you? She just thought it was best for her to leave at this time. It was a personal decision and she made it. Well, there's a process for that. I will be naming an interim secretary, but there's a process with the State Board of Education. They will forward names is somewhat like the judicial nominating procedure. And they will be submitting names and then I will be doing the interviewing and then we'll go from there. How long might that take? It depends on how long, how far they search. And again, it depends on what what their process is. It's something that they will conduct themselves. I'm not sure that it will have a huge impact on Act 46. I think that at this point in time, Rebecca was integral in passing Act 46 and implementing Act 46 and is well on its way. And we have a great team. She's she has a great team behind her at the State State Board of Education as well as in the agency itself. And we'll continue along that path. Were you seeing eye to eye with Secretary Holcomb on policy? I believe we had a great working relationship. We've and again, I want to commend her for her last four years and two years, almost the second year with me. And I thought we had a great working relationship. That wasn't quite the question. Were you seeing eye to eye on policy? I believe that she understood my vision. And we were moving forward in that regard and and still are. Did she raise objections with you, though, about say, your cross-continent ideas? Well, we always have discussions about policy. But when we have those conversations, we come out as one voice and we continue to do that throughout the process. So did she voice objections? I would just say that we've always had discussions. I've always been open to having discussions with my cabinet members. I believe in a team philosophy where we all get together. We voice our opinions. But at the end of the day, when when it's all done, we come out with one voice and we've done that. Do you think she decided it was time to move on because she didn't buy into your policies? I think it was just a personal decision for her. She just had been doing this for four years and it was time for her to move on to other endeavors and look for other opportunities. You know, after being in business for three decades, nothing surprises me anymore. So you expect the unexpected and it was just a time for her to move on. Under Act 46, the statewide proposal is for any further mergers. It's due from the secretary by June 1st. So if you hire somebody are you concerned that that might be too short of a time period for that person to get up to speed and propose that document? Well, again, she has a very strong team at the agency of education as well as a good board, a state board. We will continue in that in that regard. So I don't believe that this will slow down the process whatsoever. When did you find out that she would be leaving? It was at the end of last week. Looking at the Public Safety Commissioner about what I'm not being looking to the investigation and the claims of an arrest? I have spoken to the commissioner. There was an investigation, an internal investigation done in 2014 as a result of the complaint brought forth by Brady Tonzing. And as I understand it, there was nothing after the investigation. They it was inconclusive. There was nothing there. So at this point in time, Commissioner Anderson will be releasing a statement and will be answering questions in that regard. So I'll leave that the rest of it up to him. But but I did speak to him and it appears there was an internal investigation done. What does that entail? Did they want to reach out to authorities in China? I don't know the specifics of the investigation. A better question for Commissioner Anderson, and he will be releasing a statement on this. Well, I don't know. You know what I what I'm right. I think what I'm looking forward to is is maybe some more information. I know that Russell Barr has said that there's information there that he's going to be bringing forth. If there is credible evidence there, as I'm sure I'm sure Commissioner Anderson will reiterate will will move forward. Again, I think that will I'll let Commissioner Anderson respond in terms of what's been done already. And whether that's conclusive, notwithstanding whatever Russell Barr might do from now forward. Are you satisfied the state has done enough to settle this matter? Well, again, when I reached out to Commissioner Anderson, he said that an investigation had been done an internal investigation. And so I would have to assume that it was thorough. But I would let him answer that. It was thorough. But what was the outcome of that investigation? Again, there was no, no evidence of wrongdoing at that point in time that I understand. I think it's going to be within the next few days. He is he is preparing that as we speak. That there was some, there was some, yeah, there was some activity in China. Yes. It was as a result of the complaint brought forward by Brady Tonsi in 2014, I believe. I think it was a complaint, but but maybe it was a maybe it was a public records request, but I thought it was a complaint. You know, this is from my standpoint. This is my second year now, 14, 15 months into office. I believe this is in retirement. This is someone that's decided to move on and do something else. I don't know. So we've had any other secretaries leave. So I don't have anything to base it on. She said what she's going to do. She's leaving us for another job. I don't, I don't know at this point. She didn't mention that to me. So a lot of a lot of folks here today still counting on you to make 55 bill away. And they think a good reason is it might impact some state businesses, particularly, particularly related to the magazine. Right. They're going to be disappointed again. Well, here's what I think is happening as we speak. I believe there are negotiations going on in the house right now in terms of trying to do whatever they can. To protect businesses in Vermont. And I believe that those those conversations are ongoing. We'll see what the outcome is of that. They'll have the debate on the floor. Amendments will be proposed and we'll see whether they pass or not. At that point, whether it passes the house, then it will, if it does exceeds, it will go to the to the Senate at that point. But you haven't found any reason to back away from your sort of conditional support. Well, again, you know, my priority as we staked out last week was to see the other two bills pass. S 2 21 and H 4 22. That was my priority. And and then in regards to S 55. This is something there are many pieces of that bill that I'm in agreement with. And so I would hope that they will do whatever they can to make sure that we protect any businesses in the Vermont and make sure that it makes sense to Vermonters. No, I mean, they've highlighted and this has been an ongoing conversation over the last few days, in particular, the magazine provision. And so I know they're working through it. And I know there will be amendments again being offered this afternoon. So we'll see whether they pass or they don't. But do you share that concern? Well, if they're highlighted, I think many share that concern on both sides of the aisle, as I understand it. So I'm I'm confident that they will come to some agreement and come to some conclusion in terms of an amendment and then we'll see if the full house will respond to that. But I would have to think that they will they will take a look and they're working feverishly on that. So businesses, if businesses are protected, you don't have a problem with the magazine capacity limit? You know, I state this out again, I think it was last week when I made mention of the fact that when some had advocated for a ban on assault weapons that I said that it didn't make much sense to me that those were just it was the same caliber as many of the semi automatic deer rifles we use in the state 223s or 308s. And it looks aggressive and it looks. But the assault weapon itself is tough to define. So the only thing really that was the major difference between the two is the magazine size. So they've they've came to the conclusion that they wanted a limit on the magazine size. And we've had this spirited conversation very polarizing on both sides, very emotional. But I'm proud of both sides for the way they've reacted thus far and the way they treat each other has been has been admirable. So we'll continue to try and do this for Montway and and we'll get through this. That's a pretty broad stake off area, though. For a simple question of whether you support that issue. Can you say if you support the concept of limiting magazines? Well, again, it wasn't my highest priority. My highest priority is the action plan that I that I issued as well as those two bills as 221 and H 422. Those were my highest priorities. I think going from 18 to 21 makes sense with with the provisions that I'd ask for that being if you're in the in the military, you can buy it 18. If you're in law enforcement, you can buy it 18. Or if you've had a a safety course, a certified safety course like I had an NRA course like I had when I was a youth hunter, then I think that's okay. You should be able to buy it 18 as well. Those were the the highest of priorities. The magazine, if it was in there and and they I'm hoping that they will find ways to make sure that we protect businesses in the state of Vermont that that I would find my way to agreeing with that. But we'll see what the details do matter. And I I know I've said that before, but those small details matter. And I just want to make sure that we're moving in the right direction. When you say businesses, do you mean specifically manufacturers or are you also thinking of gunshots? I'm thinking manufacturers. And so if you could find your way to supporting that case, what's the logic behind it? In your view, why why do you want to pass the magazine to concern you? Well, again, a 30 round, 30 round magazine is much different than a 10 round magazine. It's just, again, when I look at the differences between an assault weapon and a semi-automatic deer rifle, the major difference, I mean, there's a lot of other appearance issues, but there's a lot of other issues with the suppression and so forth. But the main difference, the caliber is the same. It's just it's just really the magazine size. So instead of people trying to find a way to to ban assault weapons, which I don't agree with, the magazine size means seems to me to be the difference between the two. But you think it would make a difference in terms of public safety for those higher capacity magazines to be restricted? Well, you know, I think there's a big difference between a 30 round clip and a 10 round clip. Well, I don't think it would disagree that there's a difference. But from a policy perspective, why make that change? Because I think that having the capacity of a 30 round clip versus a 10 round clip is drastic. It's it's, you know, three times the size. So you can, you can do a lot of the image and with that extra size, I believe. What do you say to your supporters who may not be too keen on your current stance? Yeah, I, you know, I fully appreciate that. And, and it's not lost on me that I disappointed many of my supporters. I understand that. I mean, I was where they were about a month ago before the incident in Fairhaven. So after reading the affidavit and seeing that this, we aren't so special here in Vermont, we aren't insulated from this violence. It's seemed to take over our country that, that I have an obligation. Again, it's a it's a tremendous responsibility as governor to make sure that you protect the citizens of the state. So this isn't an easy decision for me to make. But I have to look at it broadly and ask myself, do some soul searching and ask myself, am I doing, are we doing everything we can to protect our kids? And the answer for me at that point in time was no. So I established the action plan we're taking, we're assessing the schools, looking forward to that plan coming back, that assessment coming back to me over the next week or so. And then with the $5 million worth of school grants, we'll implement that and, and try and do whatever we can, as well as establish the task force that I think will be necessary as we move forward to, to look at how do we make sure our communities, how do we make sure our schools are safe? And we'll take additional measures as a result of that. So, you know, I hope that they will take the time to read the affidavit and to understand that this does not, does not take away their Second Amendment rights. I believe I'm, I'm a believer in the Second Amendment. I'm a proponent of the Second Amendment. And I don't believe in anything that, that I propose in any way takes away their rights to bear arms. This big over the top job, but where does this rank this last month, month and a half, ten years so far? Well, again, yeah, this is this ranks up in one of the top, top five, certainly. And anytime that you're faced with, with something or an horrific event that could have taken place, because in my mind, after reading the affidavit, it wasn't a question of if, it was a question of which day. And with, with the threat being so real, the plan that this young man had, had developed over quite a long period of time, that went undetected by, by many that nobody knew it was happening, but he'd been known for months. And, and again, even during the interview, he is saying that this might not happen this week or next month or next year, but it's going to happen. So he is still planning this out. So again, this, this led me to the conclusion that we have to do more. And then it doesn't stop. It's not just about guns. This is about, about the underlying violence. And we're going to have to work at this. This isn't, there's no single answer to this, but we have to channel this energy to, to take a look at what the root of the violence is. I think we all have a role to play, even our youth who have been so active in, in this, and I applaud them for that, but I would like them to, to turn this energy into construction as well. They can do more in terms of how they treat each other, how they treat each other in schools. How do we treat each other on social media? I mean, we all have a role to play in this. So I think this is a teaching moment for us as a state, us as a country, and we should take advantage of it. I haven't checked, to be honest, I think. How many magazines do these guys own? Yeah, I don't, I don't know. I'll have to check. I don't know. Maybe, and I'm thinking in one of my pistols maybe. And the other concerns, if you do have one, if it would be difficult to enforce, what was said before? Well, again, just remember, as proposed, as proposed, and who knows what the end result will be, but this isn't taking anyone's magazines away. You are able to keep the magazines you own. So it doesn't take anything away from anyone. It precludes you from buying a cell in the state. Some were in uniform, speaking out against the spillage, you can go out and answer. I have not spoken to them in terms of this particular bill. I have sat down with some law enforcement in terms of S-221 and H-422. But I don't know if they were advocating for, I don't know what the results of that one, whether it was this bill. S-55. Yeah, I, yeah, I, they, they hadn't brought up anything. When I was meeting with them, they hadn't brought up anything about that bill. Do you have any concerns about the federal government's ask people about their citizenship on the census? Some people have been concerned about that. That it might lead to undercounting of undocumented populations, or people who are cautious about being asked about their citizenship? Yeah, obviously, I'm concerned whenever there's a registry of any sort. And I would include guns along with that. When we were, we passed S-79, we spoke a lot about a registry of some sort and our concerns about that. And we wanted to protect ourselves from that. And I mentioned during that time, not just my concerns aren't just about the fourth of the 10th amendment. They're about the second amendment too. So we've, we've taken steps here in the state to prevent that from happening. But I'm obviously, anytime we have registries of any sort, I'm concerned. You're still opposed to S-216? I'm sorry? Have you had a chance to read S-216? I did. I did. I still have the same conclusion. It is directing a fee. I think it's an overreach by the legislature in that regard. They not only, it wants you to come up with a parcel fee of some sort and then implement it. I think if they want to, if they want to move in that direction, just come up with a parcel fee themselves and, and you don't have to direct me to do it. You can, you can pass legislation that'll accomplish the same thing. Do you think the legislature should be, when you're telling them to build or you're telling them to build an anti-balance? Yeah. You're not asking them to allow it. Yeah. Yeah, that's, that came up quite a few months ago, maybe a year ago. I think it's, I think it's, it's a real delicate balance. I don't believe you, you should be telling someone that they can't come here to the state regardless of what their, their plans are. At the, at the same time, I don't know if, if the gentleman from Utah has been through our permit process, but it'll take some time for him to get through in that, in that regard. Do you personally oppose ideas at this point? No. I mean, let's see what he's, I mean, it's an idea he has. So let's see, let's see where he goes with it. Recommendations for the legislation have been really clear. You don't want to see a property tax increase or a property tax shift. No taxes or fees, right? But do you have ideas of how the legislature can meet that demand at this point in this session? Yeah, I think there's, there's many ways. As I said, if you can, if you can show me where you're, there's some cost containment in terms of education, we will find ways to buy that down and make sure that we don't raise taxes as a result. I'm concerned about some, like their budget bill, which was close, but they, they still use about four million dollars of the 30 million dollars that I'd like to give back. That was an inadvertent action due to the federal tax law change that we're collecting 30 million dollars more. I'd like to give it back before we spend it. But unfortunately, it appears that they've taken four million dollars of that to use it to support their budget. So I'm still very concerned about, about our ability in terms of affordability in this state. And I believe that there are ways that we can, we can come to conclusion, but we're going to, I'd like to see some cost containment ideas like the, as I said last week, the state health care contract I think is one approach that we could take. This V High Commission that we came up with. And, and, and as a result, they have said they thought it was a good idea as well. So let's, let's implement that. Well, last year it was 26 million. I don't know what it will be. I don't know what it would be at this point in time. But let's just say it's around that. And beyond that, do you have other ideas? Well, there's a special ed that they've been working on some. Let's put a price tag on that. Where, you know, when can we save the money, when and where and how? They've raised concerns about running a foul. OK. The city council has made it three to ask the Air Force to substitute a different airplane. Do you have any conversations of today on that issue? The mayor hasn't been clear on what he's going to do. But so this is not that good. Yeah, I haven't had any conversations with the mayor on this issue today or over the last week or so. But what would you like to do? I know what we as a state will do. We're going to welcome the F-35 to Vermont, look forward to it coming to Vermont. I think this is a good economic tool for us. And we're very fortunate to have them based here. So we should be adding more. Well, I don't think they're ignoring the vote. They they are sending a letter. I believe that's what I read that they were going to be sending a letter to the Secretary of the Air Force in this in this regard. So they should continue to do that. I'll continue to advocate for the F-35. Thank you very much. Appreciate you coming in.