 You are live. Good morning. This is the Friday, the 5th, the February meeting of the House Appropriations Committee. This morning is part of general government. We have Ms. Susanna Davis and Susanna, would you, so that I don't make a mistake. What is the correct name of your office, please? Yeah, one of the yes, I'm Susanna Davis, Executive Director of Racial Equity for the State. There we go. Thank you. My chair and certainly myself want to extend to you thanks for your extremely difficult work and the great work that you are doing in preparation for this presentation this morning regarding your budget. But before we do, we have a new tradition. We try to go around the table and get it right. Sometimes we do, sometimes we don't. So typically Mary would say, Peter, you take first, so I will. Good morning, Ms. Davis, Peter Fagan, Rotland City. And then I come. Good morning, Susanna. I'm made of Townsend, South Burlington. And then there's Tristan Tolino of Brattleboro under normal circumstances. Okay, and that's Tristan and Marty Feltas from Lyndon. Good morning. Good morning, Dave. I'm Dave Yacoboni. I represent Elmore, Morristown, Woodbury and Worcester. Good morning, Susanna. Jim Harrison from Chittenden, Killington, Menden and Bridgewater. Hi, Susanna. I'm Robin Shai from Middlebury, welcome. I represent Bob Helm from Fairhaven, Castleton, Westhaven and Hoverton. And Kimberly Jessup, Middlesex and Eastmont Failure. Good morning. And then to my right would normally be, she is not here, our chair representative Hooper from Montpelier. So good morning and welcome. I haven't looked, I have not done my pre job yet and actually looked to find the documents. I presume that Theresa has got them on our website so that we can easily find them. And so that others can easily find them. So please begin. All right, thank you. So I'm gonna speak very briefly actually and very informally because this is a very simple line item. The governor's proposed budget includes an item for $250,000 to expand the work of the racial equity office. Of course, when we talk about the racial equity office we're just talking about me. So this would be a proposal to add money to the office so that we could hire staff and therefore be able to make ourselves unstoppable on equity work as a state. Of course I say that in jest but truth be told it's been a tremendous honor and a tremendous privilege for Vermont to have trusted me with this role in the last year and a half and it's been challenging but enjoyable work but perhaps more than anything it's necessary work and that's not something that I say alone out of a desire for job security. I say that because it's been said so many times and demonstrated so many times around the state. It was clear that there was a huge appetite for equity work even before I got here but after I got here six months later the pandemic hit and then a few months after that we watched another American murdered on camera by the government again and that ignited something nationally and across Vermont that created an absolute ground swell isn't even a strong enough word of desire and interest and motivation to pursue equity in corners that we had not even anticipated. So that really created an influx of interest and desire to move the needle tangibly on equity and I was very privileged to be involved in a lot of those efforts. They involved everything from small communities forming local coalitions to not-for-profit organizations seeking to do their work more equitably to for-profit corporations realizing hey we've got a racism problem and we need some training to state agencies saying how can we do more how can we double down on the good work we've been doing to federal partners and everything in between. So it's been excellent and some of the highlights of the work that we have done that I'm very proud of and I know this committee knows one in particular intimately that's the Economic Stimulus Equity Fund which was the fund that we created to provide a stimulus payment for people who had been excluded from CARES Act payments due to their or someone else's immigration status. I was very proud that the state enacted that fund and we're currently in the implementation phase. I think in the first week or two we had more than 1300 applicants and payments are already starting to go out. So that's been really critical. Another thing that I had been very proud of was that on the executive side we started using EIAs that's Equity Impact Assessment. This is effectively a very detailed questionnaire that's now required to accompany every budget and policy proposal that comes of the executive agencies. This equity impact assessment tool makes sure that the proposal has considered things like whether we've discussed or planned the proposal with the community. And if so, were those community members from diverse backgrounds? It asks the proposal in question is gonna have a disparate impact on any religious group, ethnic group, gender or sexual minority, et cetera. It asks questions like is it gonna have a regional impact? If it does, does that region have a disproportionately high number of people of color or people in marginalized groups, et cetera? So the EIA process is a little bit new to the state. I think this is the first full calendar year, the first full fiscal year that we're actually using it. But so far, it's been handled with great success. I'm very proud of all of the agencies who have been doing them very thoroughly and very softly. And this is something that helps everybody because it helps to ensure that our proposals are well thought out, that we mitigate unintended consequences and that we maximize the benefits and equitably distribute benefits and burdens of all of our policy and budget acts. So that's another thing that we're very proud of. Some of the other things include something that I've been working on that's kind of dear to my heart. It's not off the ground yet. But I think for this year, one of the focuses that I would like to have is to have more municipal and local involvement on equity. And the reason for that is that I find so often that people from a town in Vermont will contact me and say, hey, we're looking to do a thing on equity and can you help us? And I'll say, sure, but are you aware that this town, this town and this other town have also been doing that? And they'll say, no, we didn't know that. And being able to connect towns who think they're going it alone is so valuable. And so one project that due to limited staffing, we hadn't been able to move just yet, but that I'm really excited to do is to create kind of a pilot program that would allow for that kind of deep engagement, and now it's just between us and individual towns, but between towns and cities. So I've realized that I'm rambling a little bit. I'm gonna get back to the point here and let you know what are some of the things that additional staff could help us do. I'm only gonna mention three main things, but I can assure you it's gonna be monumentally impactful. One of the big things is laws of physics. Before the pandemic, if there was a one o'clock in Burlington and a three o'clock in Bennington, I couldn't be at ghost. I had to choose. These days, we do virtual meetings, and so I find myself bouncing around from one to the other, which has been tremendously useful, but still it is very often the case that I'm trying to do the math on how many minutes can I spend in this meeting before I have to jump to the next one that overlaps and then also go to this one that I'm required to attend by law. I regularly interact with 17 committees. I formally sit on nine of them and I serve as liaison between two of them. And so additional staff, of course, is gonna help this office have a presence in all those places, not just those that we're required to be in by law, but also those that would really benefit from having an equity lens there. Another way that this would be useful is we'll have dedicated staff who can perform data analysis. Right now, of course, I rely on a lot of assistance from sister agencies and they've been very generous with their staff and with their time in helping with things like deep dives into data. But of course, we, and this is not just the executive also through the legislature, we've expanded the instances in which we wanna collect race data and as we should, but that also means that we need more eyes and more hands handling those data. So having additional staff who can really be dedicated and focus on the equity aspects of our data is gonna be really important. And then of course, another aspect of it is outreach and training. So as you all know, the enabling statute that created my position requires that I develop and conduct trainings for all state agencies. And that's perhaps my favorite part of the job because I like to talk. So, you know, I get paid to do that. But I think one assumption that folks make is that, you know, you go, you do the rounds and you do one training per agency and then that's it. And trained, nobody's racist. We're all done here. And truth be told, we just have scores and scores of data that show that human learning happens best when it's in smaller chunks, when it's repeated, when it's practiced and when it's consistent. And when it comes to equity, I could be here a lifetime and there would never be enough time to say everything there is to say, right? You can't cram 400 years plus of policy and social events into a couple of two-hour sessions, right? So not only do we do trainings for state agencies that are very sector-specific and tailored to their needs, but I've also done trainings for town councils and I think right after this meeting, I'm going and doing something for the RDCs and for committees and pretty much anyone who asked me, right? So having additional staff who can help with that education and outreach means that we'll be able again to have more opportunities to train and retrain to offer advanced level and intermediate level training and to really be able to do not only more sessions, but to have multiple people doing these sessions. I have a particular presentation style. It works for me, but at the end of the day, I need people to hear it. And sometimes you hear it from me and sometimes you might hear it better from somebody else. So having not just diversity in the content of what you're teaching, but also diversity in who the trainers are can sometimes be a critical difference. So for those and so many more reasons, that's what we're looking at when it comes to additional staff at the office. Thank you for listening to all of that. Well, thank you. You've really put a lot on the table. We've got a couple of questions. This is Representative Harrison's budget. So even though his hand up went first, but his hand was up first, I'm gonna call on Representative Shy first and we'll go to Representative Harrison afterwards. So Representative Shy. Thank you. I didn't know I got to cut in line there. Sorry, Jim. Thanks, Suzanna. I know you are doing Yeoman's work here. It's pretty amazing what one person has been able to accomplish. And I think it's great that there's a recommendation to expand the work. I'm intrigued by one of the things you said around supporting the more municipal and local involvement. And I know my town in Middlebury has been working to address this. I don't know if they've been in touch with you or not, but at any rate they are trying to do some work around racism in Middlebury. And I'm just wondering if there's an opportunity to collaborate or work with the Vermont League of Cities and Towns as a way to get to all 251 of them, whether that's happening or not. Yes, the short answer is yes, absolutely. We've actually already had several conversations with the LCT about this. The LCT has already created an equity committee and has demonstrated that they're also really committed to doing this work. And so it really is a matter of just finding a natural way to make a partnership and to amplify the work that we're already doing. Yeah, great, great. Thanks. Representative Harrison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess I was waiting here thinking that you'll ask me over again. So I saw Representative Feltas just as you, just as I was calling on you. So I thought on that. I'm sure you did. Susanna, thank you for joining us today. We did a kind of an overview of the agency of administration budget earlier. And I think there is widespread support. I have two questions. One directly related to the budget and the process here. And the other more of a general question and choice of words and what does it mean? On the budget question, I think there was a bill introduced this week that would add two new positions to your department. And then we have separately the budget request to add two new positions. Any comment as to whether the legislation's necessary to have a freestanding bill or whether we just put two new positions in the budget? You know, Representative, I wish that I had a detailed answer for you comparing the two. Unfortunately, I don't because I haven't looked closely enough at the new legislation yet to identify the differences or the overlap. So if I may, I would like to study that more and then get back to the committee with a good answer. Yeah. It may even be a short form bill. So there may not be a lot of details to, or whether it's just people wanted the statement of support out there. I don't know. And I'm not going to try to speculate, I guess. But one of the things you said at the beginning and I'm curious as to why you frame it this way or try to better understand. And I think you said something similar in our anti-bias training a few weeks ago in that horrific event in Minnesota. You said the government murdered George Floyd. And it was an awful, awful situation. But we're all part of the government here. And I know we're not Minnesota, but if an incident happens, did we do that? I mean, I'm trying to better understand the choice of words here. Yeah. So again, I know that's more of a policy issue. I'm just trying to better understand for myself and for others perhaps. Absolutely. Thank you for the question. So yes, I almost always refer to it as a person being murdered on camera by the government because I think that we only think of things in those terms when we're looking at other countries. I think Americans are very willing to accept the thought of government overreach, corruption and brutality when we're looking at other nations. But we tend to euphemize things when they happen here. We use exculpatory language. Like we say officer involved shooting, or we say the weapon was discharged and the suspect was struck. And this is a way that we not only cloud the actual event, but we also absolve ourselves of responsibility in that way. And one of the biggest things that I try to impart to people is that equity work is everyone's work. And I don't just mean everyone in state government. And I don't just mean everyone in local government and federal government. I mean every single body, because at the end of the day government is only a collection of people, right? So every individual really does have a hand in it. And so in the same way when we have government actors who commit overreach or corruption or brutality or other no-no's, it really is very much a collective responsibility to do something about it. And so I do frame it in that way. I recognize that it is very charged, but when we look at the number of civilian death in the United States and we see the disparity and we think about all of the children and mothers and loved ones who will never see those people again, I don't know any other way to frame it. And I don't know any other way to get people attention than to call it what it is in those gruesome terms because it's a gruesome thing. And so that's why I say it that way. And I appreciate the question and I hope that I hope I've answered it. Well, thank you. I guess I would choose different words, but I appreciate your perspective. Thank you. Representative Feltas, you're still muted. Find it sooner or later. Technology is wonderful, especially when it works. Okay, all right, there we go, sorry. Yes, thank you very much, Ms. Davis, for being here. I was intrigued by your comment regarding the equity impact assessment that each agency needed to complete as part of their budget preparation, it sounds as if that's the case. Could we get a copy of that form that they fill out? I would be very curious about that, not the filled out form, but just the form that they are asked to fill out. I would be curious about the questions that are on there and how they are being probed to examine their own activities to learn about themselves and to also screen their budget requirements. I think that would be a very interesting document to see if we could have a copy of that. You sure can, Representative, absolutely. We actually did a webinar when we first rolled them out that was open to all SOV staff so that folks could get a walkthrough of each section of the form, ask their questions, express any concerns, et cetera. And that webinar was recorded and it's available for SOV staff to revisit at any time. We also had a slide deck that I think folks sound useful. And I believe that there are a number of legislators who sit on the social equity caucus who have been working on creating a similar tool. And I've also shared it with them. So if that tool is introduced to you in the coming weeks or months, then it will also at least have been informed, I think, by what we have in the executive agencies. But yes, absolutely. I can floor that alone. Representative Chesa. Thank you. Thank you, Representative Fulton. Thank you. Hi, Suzanna. So I listened with interest about how you do trainings because I have been to good trainings and bad trainings and makes all the difference how they're specialized. And so when I'm thinking about the two new positions, I heard all of the attendance for all the boards and then the data and then the training. And I'm wondering because you seek to personalize the training, which I think is critical too, have you thought about those two positions in terms of how you would break out those three, what I'm seeing is the three buckets of responsibility? For example, if I had to do trainings with a whole bunch of different age groups and schools, which I've had to do, I sometimes might have different trainers. And so I'm wondering about consultants. So you have a roster of individuals across the state when we get all back in person who can do that sort of work. And then you would perhaps take those positions and focus them more on the other buckets, on the data or on the equity lands across government. I'm just wondering more about those internal dedication of resources, how you're thinking about them. Yeah, thank you for the question. While that's not fully, fully set yet, the vision that I've had to this point is that one staff person would be focused more on policy and data. That person would do things like help agencies come into or remain in compliance with either state or federal or other policy. That person would be a data specialist and would be able to be qualified to review, analyze and present data and other related tasks. And then the other staff person would be more education and outreach oriented. That is gonna be useful now, but it will especially be useful if and when we go back to in-person convenings around the state, being able to have a physical presence in different regions of the state. So I do see one person as being more geared toward presentation and education and training than the other. Although I think one thing we all kind of get in Vermont is that everyone, you gotta be a team player and you may have to step in and do something once in a while because we're small teams. So that being said, I do very much see myself participating still in all of those activities, particularly in the training, but of course it allows for different levels. For example, I might cover more intermediate and advanced level trainings and I might have that staff person cover the more basic trainings that tend to be more commonly requested, et cetera. To your point about having a roster of additional people who can do trainings, I'm a big fan of train the trainer when we've identified good potential trainers. Because you can teach anyone material, but teaching pedagogy sometimes is really unique to the person. So we are, for example, working on an RFP to have an outside consultants come in and help us redesign our new hire training on implicit bias. And I'm sure there are gonna be other opportunities for more train the trainer models or to have additional people doing these. But for now, I think with respect to trainings that come out of this office specifically, I would envision one staff member and me both handling that load. And then one staff member doing more policy and data and also me having that load. And then at some point, someone's gonna check the email. And attend all the meetings, right. And then if I could pivot just Peter to another question is the uptake for the equity stimulus payments. Do you expect we'll get there in terms of that full dollar amount that was allocated or have you not had enough time? It sounds like that's just starting to get underway so it might be difficult to predict. But I'll be curious if there might be funds left over because that raises the question then should they be redirected towards some of the other needs that you're seeing versus SWEP that whole discussion how funds are kept or not within a particular department or office. Yeah, thank you. It's difficult to predict, I think at this stage the $5 million that had been allocated represented the highest end of our estimates of who would qualify in the state. So we already started off with a strong possibility that there might be surplus unused funds from that pool. I think that we've already reached more than a fifth of the number of people we thought could be, we've reached more than a fifth of that total possible number of people. And I think applications are open through March 31st. So we've anticipated that there would likely be kind of a first wave of people and then a second wave of people who were watching and waiting to make sure that this wasn't a trap by the state because trust has to be built with communities and that takes time. So I do anticipate that as this first round of checks goes out that we will likely experience a second wave of people who were waiting to see whether this was legit. That said, are we gonna reach the full 4,000 estimate? I think it's probably unlikely. I think it's probably unlikely, but a conversation that was had very briefly last time around that I think is worth consideration is whether in the interest of parity, whether the state wants to consider repurposing those unused funds toward a second round since Congress did also authorize a second round of stimulus. That's again, that's something for you all to determine in your judgment, but I could see that being a proposed use for any unused funds here. Great, thank you. So, Cezanne, I'd like to ask a question. You started down the path towards answering it. In any relationship that is tempted to be built, gotta start with, you know, to build trust, somebody has to extend a hand. Somebody's gotta be the first to make a move and that's kind of also the way that I looked at these equity payments is that we're reaching out to folks that frankly, they feed us, period. It's just, it's that simple, you know? And we need to build trust and it's okay to be the first to say, we're here and we wanna be your partner, we wanna be, we want you to be our neighbor and we want you to be a part of our lives, it's okay. So how do you feel that's going? You know, with the folks that have stepped forward and applied for this, are we just beginning to maybe make a difference? It's possible and I think that a huge part of this has been working with community organizations who already are on the ground who have deep contact with the populations we're looking at. These are folks who are vouching for the state and putting their own reputations on the line with those communities saying you can trust this program. And so we've relied very heavily on their historical trust building with the community. So I think that said, it's helping, I think it's helping us to strengthen our relationships with those groups and in turn, that will also help us to strengthen our relationship with the actual individuals in the community because this is one out of many steps that we need to take to demonstrate that we're not here to be enforcers of DC's ever-changing policies. You're part of our community, you're part of our economy, you're part of our state and we're gonna treat you as such. And I think that we are making headway but it's gonna be a long time I think before, before we can measure that. Good, well, thank you for that. Kimberly, is your hand just still up from before? Oh, it was, but actually I do have another thought if there's room. It also seems like a lot of times change comes at the top and it comes with recruiting and it comes with where recruitment is being done and who's not being included in the potential pool of applicants. We just see that all across the country, look at the composition of boards, look at the composition of high-level cabinet seats, we can go on and on. And I'm wondering if that's at all been a discussion about in the administration about how recruitment is done and how we might see diversity in the upper echelons of Vermont state government. Yes, so thank you for the question. Recruitment is huge and I would probably venture to say that retention is even more important in Vermont because what we're finding is that we're able to attract and we're able to garner interest from people from historically marginalized groups, but it's that we're not keeping folks. And for example, the latest, the fiscal 20 workforce report was released a couple of weeks ago, which did show some disappointing numbers in terms of turnover rate between SOV staff of dominant groups and SOV staff of color. It showed that we are hiring far fewer applicants of color than the applicants we're receiving. It shows that we're paying them less on average for their work. It shows that they tend to be concentrated in sort of the same cluster of job titles. They are, we are almost completely absent from high-level supervisory managerial positions. And as you mentioned, executive leadership could probably stand to be more ethnically diverse. I will say there's a lot of gender diversity but in other forms of diversity, but we could stand to do a lot more in that vein. And that's just state government, right? That doesn't even get at local or organizations or companies. So the short answer is yes to everything that you said. It's hugely important. We are having conversations about that. We have been, and I also wanna point out that I think yesterday, the racial equity task force report was publicly posted and in it contain, in it are several recommendations about how we can get more inclusion and more diversity in boards, commissions, state employees and on the bench as well. Great, yeah, because I just know that I sit on judicial nominating board and we've done training there and there's Judge College and there's, it's anyway, it's a big issue and I'm glad you're there and I appreciate the work you do. Thank you, Representative. Well, Susanna, I don't see any more questions popping up. I will say this, a journey starts with the first step and we did the right thing by hiring the right person for the right job and just listening to everything that you try to do every day, I would think you probably wish you could clone yourself 100 times over and figure out how you could make all of these things and just the mental agility that you have to have to go from one meeting and one concept, although it's in an overarching concept of racial equity, to another meeting and another concept is just, is amazing. So thank you for your work. We will get there and you can help lead us there. So I do appreciate it. Have a great day. Thank you all. Thank you very much. So committee, what I'd like to do is just, just talk a little bit, we're due on the floor at 930, but I'd just like to talk a little bit about what to expect coming up and this is off the cuff. So if Maria could also pop up because our new members have never gone through what we do when we do markup and just how quickly it can fly and what Maria would need to be able, Maria is obviously our liaison to the office that puts the bill together. So it, how she manages to keep up with us and honest to God, I don't know, but she does. And so we will be starting. Teresa, have you got any estimate? Are we looking maybe last week of February at markup? Yes. Okay. We'll be done with testimony the week of the 15th. There we go. So, and even the tail end of the week of the 15th, if there are, if we have slots of time when we don't have anything planned, we may start markup at that point in time. And what we do is we just start right at the top of the B section, you know, the number section and we start down through. So if, and it's okay, if you're not ready yet, just say I'm not ready, please skip and we'll move past it. If you are ready and you go through it and there are additional questions, that's okay. You know, we'll figure it out, we'll stand by and we'll work it from there. And then also make sure that you bring language into the play when there is language because we can't close language or Mary may opt to just, let's just go through the numbers first and then we'll do the language later separately. Maria, can you add to this conversation, please? Well, no, I think that's good what you just said. It's also, you know, you go through the budget first time and a lot of questions get flagged. And so then, you know, there's an opportunity to follow up and get the answers for the committee members. And of course I can help with that. I am happy to track down whatever information you need or else to create a document that will take whatever the issue is and try to break it down in a way that is easily communicated to the committee and also floor members. So yeah, I mean, my observation is that sometimes it can feel stressful for members. I mean, I'm not a member so really I don't know but my observation is it can feel stressful. We wanna try to make it as easy and comfortable as possible. So if you have questions that you want me to help you with just let me know so that when it comes your time to present the budget, you have some information that you can provide to the committee. And I do wanna say yes, it always feels stressful because you think you've gotta be spot on 100% accurate the very first time you do it, you don't. Right. There will almost always be an additional question. What we're trying to avoid is the I wonder questions. I wonder what, you know, how this program is working. So we're not, if it's relevant to making a decision on the funds that are going into the appropriation that is a great question. If it's relevant to you trying to find out how some program is going, that's a better question to be taken offline. We just, we may not, we might have the time, but usually we don't. Kimberly, I'm gonna put you on the spot and ask you since you are relatively new to the closing process, just your thoughts here. Yeah, I appreciate. I think one thing we've done a great job this time around is an amazing orientation those two weeks. One helpful thing is to perhaps go back over those notes so that the jargon and the acronyms are refreshed a bit. We have Zoom to review, which is really great. Like yesterday, you saw the DCF budget has quite a lot of moving parts. One of the ways that I might try to make sure my notes are accurate is to re-listen to that. And then the web report is really important and I think fitting together all of the pieces, the bill language, which is what we'll go through, but realize that it's backed up by the other parts and having realizing how they fit together is important. And I guess I would just echo, I have a budget that tends to be one of the last ones to close as you heard yesterday. There's any number of issues from how do we get, 2,000 people housed soon to whatever else. So some of them, but I have also sections of the budget which are pretty straightforward without changes. So as soon as you have parts that you think are straightforward, you can try to knock those off. And then that gives you a little bit more time to focus on all the moving more complicated parts and gives you a sense of how to accomplish something even if the mountain is still very high in front of you. That's a good point, that's a good point. So if there are any questions right now, as far as what's going on, let's put them on the table and see if we can get them answered or just answer them here, I see you Dave. And we'll just begin to work our way through. It's not just a content questions, but process questions as well. Dave. And thank you, Peter. It may seem unorthodox or awkward, but it's okay if you said, Dave, I know you have, I'm using this as an example, you have the mental health budget or a diva budget or whatever, I want to move that we reduce it by X because I feel strongly I wanna do something in a different area. And that's fair game, we have the conversation. It might be appropriate to give me a heads up before you entered it in full committee play, but that doesn't happen often, but it could and no ill will, it's part of the process. Good point, good point. And Dave and I, and not to that point, but also Dave and I have collaborated on some other things and we've discussed some aspects, nursing scholarships come to mind that we've worked on and then we wanted to lose one or the other of us presented in committee. So, Jim and then Marty. Yeah, do we start with at some point trying to figure out what the bottom line is and then, I mean, that tells you a lot. I mean, if we accept the same bottom line that the administration is, then it might be moving some things back and forth, but if we start with a bottom line that for whatever reason is lower or higher, that makes a difference too. So I'm just, do we accept that the administration's target bottom line or do we start with our own? Well, I'm gonna ask Maria to jump in here, but I'm gonna briefly say that what we will do, we don't start with that, we actually start by walking through the numbers and at some point not time while we are doing that, JFO will come in with a, this is where we are. It typically, and Maria, I'll let you, I shouldn't be saying this because you're gonna say it better, but there's updates. And so on those two words, I'll let Maria take it. Okay, so what you're referring to is what we call the box document. So like the box that we work within. And so we're putting that together now. It takes a while to sort of unravel everything that's in the budget. And so we have a revenue section and then we have an expenditure section. So in the revenues, there's cases where, if you do this tax credit, this is how much it's gonna cost. If you don't do it, this is how much money, you freeze up for other things. We go through different scenarios like that. And then the committee is able to take a look at that and get a general idea of what we're really talking about as far as decisions that need to be made by the committee. And we're all the administration and our office, and you, I'm sorry, we all work with the same revenue forecast. The difference is just how we construe it, the decisions that are made on how to use that money. So yes, that's what we call the box document. And I talked to Steve Klein about it yesterday. And we're just in the beginning stages of putting that together because there's been a lot of focus on the budget adjustment and now we're pivoting to the budget. So you will see that. And one of the things, yeah, one of the things I'm gonna add to that discussion and I said that revenue is moving because we heard yesterday that FEMA is gonna backfill to 100% the expenditures that were made on the, I think it was the GA side. And I did some quick math and we're talking well more than 10, probably more than $15 million. So of CRF funds that have come back to us. So we could actually, once again, free up some of our normal funds by doing the swap with CRF again. So there are some things here that are making our job and JFO's job to be able to tell us what's available, a head scratcher and I'll leave it at that. Marty and then Robin. Well, just in addition to, I think what perhaps Jim was maybe referring to as well is if there are any decisions made in the Ways and Means Committee regarding new taxes or new fees that would have an impact perhaps on a 22 revenue or it might be pushed off to a later year. But nevertheless, we would need to watch what Ways and Means is doing if indeed it's likely to impact a 22 revenue, which would then we need to have more money to spend or decide to not spend it and do something else with a ticket and reserves or wherever. That's one thing, but the other question I had is, well, number one, when do we expect responses back from committees regarding what we've asked them to review? And then I see as part of this budget, at least the way it's presented right now is just the governor's $200 million of one-time funds. Many budgets are fairly standard, but I would see that there could be certainly discussion regarding that 200 million priorities. Is it better to spend money in VORAC or is it better to spend money on IT or is it better to spend money on all the other things that are there? So I would envision there would be discussion certainly based upon number one, what the committee say, but just within our group in terms of how we see priorities of those items and which ones we think might be the better long-term strategic investments for us. And I can see that being a big discussion within our group. I would, Marty, I think you've understated it. Actually, that would be the discussion in our group, I think so you're absolutely correct. Robin and then Dave, and then I think we need to go to the floor. Okay, I'm not exactly sure where to begin. This all feels kind of theoretical because I haven't lived through it and I've had individual conversations with current and former members about how they organize themselves. I don't know exactly what we're marking up, are we actually going to get a bill? I have a stylus on my finger, but I'm thinking I'm gonna do better with paper because I guess so frustrated with the others. And so would it be helpful if I got a PDF of the current web report for the FY22 that I could then write all over? I like writing all over things. I'm not sure what I need to be as informed and effective as I can. I can't see printing out every single budget, all of that. So I'm just trying to get a handle on my own box. I do not myself print out the ups and downs sheets. I do print out the budget document itself. I do print out the web report and I've already printed out the language. The question that I have for Maria is that with the FEMA things changing, we're gonna leave that web report until we make massive changes to it. Is that a good statement, Maria? So what we're doing right now in our office is taking all the governor's budget numbers. They come to us in a spreadsheet and we're inputting them in the web report. And I think that's been done. We just need to check it over. So we will have soon a web report that just has the governor's numbers. And then we populate it with your numbers after you've made that decision, but you can use that one for Markup. And we can talk about how to get you a hard copy because I agree, I mean, I'm pretty old school in that respect too. I just like writing notes on everything. And so that's for the numbers section. And then you have the language section that the governor gave you. Yeah, you're all set on that. I'm not worried about that. I printed that out. I love the numbers. And I just need to know when, and I have a print shop here too, so I could do that if it's not, unless it's hundreds of pages and it'll be better. No, it's not. It's not. So what I would need to know then, it would be helpful for me, Maria, is if you could just tell me when I can go get it printed. Okay, so let me circle back and find out what the status is of it. I know it was being put together this week and so it should be very soon, but... Okay, and then somebody can turn it into a PDF because I can't, I don't think I know how to do that from the... It seems like a whole lot of different pages. Yeah. Okay, thank you. Okay. Okay, thank you. Dave, and then we'll go to the floor. I think this is as much more Maria as the rest of us, but I believe we heard testimony saying that all of the governors received a letter either from CMS or the federal government speaking about the next F-map, so-called F-map bump and how the great likelihood it was coming. There are two more quarters out there. Surely you could count the next quarter that's not in the budget. Based on a letter like that, I would think. So I wouldn't overlook that. I'm not trying to invoke the thought of a waterfall. I don't wanna be admonished again. I'm only kidding. I, but it'd be better to at least put that on a spreadsheet, I would think, because it sounds imminent that we're gonna hear some of this. Thank you. You know, that's a really great point, Dave. I think that it would be helpful, at least helpful to me if we had in one of our boxes or the spreadsheet, whatever that says, proposed legislation and the results of that and the funds that should funnel to Vermont that are appropriatable. Is that a word? I don't know. And that way we will have that. And then the only question would be, does that need to be recognized by an e-board or not, by the e-board or not? And if it does, then we're not gonna be using it. But if it doesn't, then we can discuss it. So good. Okay, well good. Marnie, did you have a final or did you just not put your hand down? Okay, good. All right, so we are back at 11 o'clock. If the floor runs long, Teresa, I presume you and Mary will be getting together and figuring it out and going from there. We have a Department of Financial Regulation. Michael P. Chack is always great and- They're in at 10.15, according to my schedule. If you update that, I switched them last night just to give the floor a little more time. All right, thank you. So we are back at 11, and the floor runs early, grab a cup of coffee.