 We've got Brandon King with the Department of Liquor and Lottery. We've got David Chair, our General Counsel. We've got one, two, three, four, five members of the public. And we've got Lindsay Wells who helps oversee the medical program. Great. And then we also have Stephanie Smith at the meeting as well. I think everyone had a chance to review the minutes from the meeting on Monday, September 13th. Any questions or edits or comments with the minutes before we approve them? Mark, did you have anything? No. No, go ahead. Okay, I'm getting the motion to approve the minutes. Then we'll move on to the pretty old agenda we've got. After you today, we're going to take things a lot more, though, from the agenda that I sent. Motion to approve the minutes from Monday, the 13th. Anyone? Tom, I'll make the motion, but abstain from voting because I have not gotten through them yet. Okay, we have a motion out there. Anyone want to vote on it? Actually, any thoughts? Actually, if you had a chance to review them. Tom, let's just move on. We can ask again at the end. I don't know if she's got the way for a second. Yeah, we can approve the next meeting as well. Let's just table them and we'll look to approve them on Monday. Okay. We have some guests and we've got a lot to get through. We're going to deviate a little bit from the agenda that I sent out and hopefully give us some time for Tim Wessel and maybe some others to join us. But to begin with, one of the four items that I'd listed on the priority list was seed to sale and the tracking and software programs that are out there in other states. And I believe you're already using Trace in Vermont as well. And Kyle, I think you had some information to guest that can provide the subcommittee with some more information. Yeah, Todd Bailey is with us. He's the interim CEO of Trace Vermont. And I'll let Carrie give an overview and introduce Todd. I haven't had the pleasure of meeting Todd myself at this point in time. I would like to just remind the subcommittee. I know last meeting we did hear from at least one or two committee members about their thoughts on seed to sale tracking broadly. And just a reminder that it's in our legislator, our authorizing legislation right now. The board has to move on seed to sale tracking. So I'd like to make sure we're just we're being productive with our time and avoiding the pitfalls of that conversation and just looking at what services are available in Vermont and getting an overview there. And then further discussing the pros and cons of other systems, depending on what happens with the conversation today for future meetings. So without further more talking on my end, Carrie, I'm going to turn it over to you as the head of the Farm Division at the Agency of Agriculture. I know that you have an extensive relationship with some of the features that Trace does. And I'll let you lead into introducing to Todd. Very good, Kyle. If you don't mind, I see Stephanie's here. If Stephanie wasn't here, I walked you through what we do with Trace. But Stephanie has worked with them extensively to develop the sort of licensing and registration piece. And if you don't mind me. That's fine. Yeah, whoever's best position. Thank you, Stephanie. Yeah, thanks. I didn't know you're going to be here. But since you are, it's perfect. I was, I was lurking, but so surprised. Yes. So the Agency of Agriculture is using the Trace platform. We call the registration compliance system database. Using that system to register our folks within the agency. We are able, or applicants, generally you can actually see kind of the timestamp for how long it takes for someone to register. And it doesn't take a whole bunch of time and it takes, you know, five minutes for our staff to actually improve registrations. And, but, you know, this is limited. This is like, we're just mapping areas where cultivation is happening. We are documenting the location where processing occurs. We capture information regarding acres or square feet if it's indoor. GPS coordinates. We are also able to export reports based on locations. So towns, counties, and so forth. So we can find people pretty easily when we get a question or concern regarding cultivation in a particular town. We have a relationship with the, and I don't remember what the acronym stands for, but it's thick. And they do our credit for processing. However, I know that's probably not going to be available to growers in the cannabis market, but we can do cash sheets. We capture tons of data points using the Trace system. We are working with Trace to develop our tracking system for crops. So from harvest lot to process lot, as well as shipping those crops out of state and not applicable to this conversation. But it's what we're working on. We have the ability for designating user access to the system. So that people can actually go in and check it out, but don't have ability to make changes. And that's primarily within our business arm of the Agency of Agriculture. So user-based commissions. Let's see here, what else do we have? Well, we're working on that. And then we're also working on the tracking from harvest lot to process lot to shelf. So that's what we do. I'm sure Todd Bailey could probably talk more about the system. I just gave a really, really high level of what we're working on. Thank you, Stephanie. I appreciate you for being here and your willingness to give us that in-depth overview. Yeah, sure. Thanks. I appreciate it. And let me just take a step back if I could. I am currently filling a void for Trace in the CEO role because one of the co-founders, Josh Decatur, had moved on. So they're currently is an ongoing search for a new CEO. I've been working with the company since its inception. So at the time, I was most familiar with the inner workings and everything that the company does. So I agreed to just step into that role in a very short-term basis in order to keep everything moving forward as they conducted that search. And in part, that's because of the other role that I want to make everyone aware of. I am a partner in a public affairs firm in Vermont, Lee, and I'm public affairs. I served as the president of government affairs for our firm for a number of years and represented Trace in the state of Vermont as their lobbyist. So when my relationship started with Trace, I was representing them on the government affairs side and have been doing that work, like I said, from the time that the company was founded and it become very familiar with the company. So this role that I'm filling now is very much something that I'm just going to step in and try to help them out as they do this full search. And I just wanted to make everybody aware of that circumstance, most notably my role at Lee and I. So that was clear for every committee member, subcommittee member and person in attendance. And I think, you know, I've been tracking this conversation some I don't live in Vermont any longer. I still partner with the firm that I mentioned earlier Lee and I public affairs, but I live in Philadelphia. So I have been tracking this conversation from a distance. So pardon me if there are some details though that I that I have missed in regards to your current dialogue around track and trace. As Stephanie mentioned, a lot of the features that are currently being implemented and currently being developed in parallel with the HEM program. They are similar features and functions that can easily be adapted to a rec program. I think it's really important for everybody to really kind of understand the origins of trace and how we got to where we are. The co-founders Josh Cater and Al Winfelack were very much focused on both the HEM side of the cannabis industry, also the marijuana side of the cannabis industry, most specifically based on their backgrounds of working for or grow operations as technical developers on the craft cultivator, the small business. It was with that in mind that they kind of developed the theory around how track and trace would work through their particular features. And that was designed to be simple, affordable, easy because what we were seeing in the industry was these very large companies that had created a system for track and trace for regulators. That was very complicated, very burdensome, very expensive, most of them requiring RFID chips to do tracking at the individual plant basis. And so what our philosophy was on track and trace was how do we make this much easier while still getting all the relevant data for regulators, whether that be wanting to track and trace and ensure that diversion was not occurring or if it was quality control, what lab results might be. And that can be done at an individual plant basis through a QR code, which is much less expensive than an RFID chip, actually costing the grower nothing in most instances, depending on the size of the operation, but can still provide all of the data that would be required for a thorough track and trace system for state regulators. And I think the way that we really like to talk about what we do is to think about this as if you were mailing a package from Montpelier to Brattleboro, and that package needs to be tracked from the place of origin to the place of delivery, but had to stop at every post office along the way, how would you track what happened when it stopped at each of those post offices? So if you thought about Montpelier, the origin would be in the seed, we would track that seed, and we would start this process. And then as the package made its way south to say Berlin, that was where you were harvesting. We would track what was your harvest yield, and we would be able to show that data to regulators through a dashboard that is actually applicable right now, and you could take a look at some degree with the hemp track and trace system that's currently in place in the state of Vermont. As it made its way further, it would be going to the lab. It would track that ship to the lab, what those test results were. And again, that regulator would have a dashboard that they could open up and take a look at and have all of the relevant data that they need, or that the regulators have decided was the priority for the program. And then you just think about that through the next phases of track and trace, through that supply chain. And every stop that it makes, this simple solution is you are taking out of your phone, you have an app, you scan that QR code and all of the relevant data at that point in time, whether it be for extraction, for lab data, for flower sale, for retail, whatever the case may be, you simply scan that QR code and all of that data is going to be available to the regulators, the industry, whatever the small businesses that is actually holding the product at that time. The consumer could see that data as well. So when we think about trace, we're thinking very much in the same way that our competitors work on track and trace. The names that probably everybody knows, Metrix, M-J Freeway, Biotrack THC, similar, but with a very specific focus on cannabis and most notably small businesses in the cannabis industry. So that's really what makes trace different and more unique, I think, than some of the other options that are currently available. I just want to touch back real quick because I think it will be really relevant to the REC market when it's up and operating with something that Stephanie Smith referenced, which was the mapping tool. Because I think we're all hoping that in Vermont there's a very robust craft cultivator community, a very small business community in the cannabis industry. One of the features that trace developed for the hemp industry is a mapping feature where you simply go on the Google Maps, you click the quadrants for where the hemp is going to be grown. You click on another data point where the entrance to the farm would be located, for instance. So the regulators need to have access to that hemp field. So this is the area in that field where they could drive in. And that map feature is also something that's unique for trace and that we can create that map for craft cultivators if there's going to be a grow operation, whether it's a physical structure or an outdoor grow. If that is going to be allowed, you would be able to go in and create this map very simply and have regulators understand exactly where that grow operation is occurring for purposes of either showing up on site to do regulatory checks or if public safety needs to go for whatever reason or any other instance where you would need to check that particular operation. I'll pause there in case there are any questions or someone wants to weigh in. Stephanie, I see your hands up. Feel free. No, I just wanted to add within the hemp system that we're building associated with the tracking and tracing of the harvest lot through process lot is that you can only transfer that lot internally in the state to someone that's registered within the program. So there's that kind of added layer of protection until it becomes a product that meets that THC requirement. We're talking about hemp, but we also have the ability to transfer that flower, that harvest out of state to other growers. But within our state, we're tracking who's registered and who's receiving that. So just to add that is the security level that a tracking trace system like trace puts in place so that you know at every given point where there's a drop off and pickup that the ownership of that particular product, whatever phase that it may be in is then verified by the entities making the transfer and the regulators can see that transfer has taken place. So you'll be able to look at a system and very easily identify where is this cannabis now and where is it in the process of making it from seed to shell. Todd, is it worth mentioning that sort of the blockchain piece? Yeah, I mean, I think, sorry, Kerry, was there more? That's important for this crowd or not, but it is something that you need. Yeah, so when trace was originally founded, it was based on the Ethereum blockchain as an additional layer of security and it may be or may not be something that the state of Vermont wants to implement for the WREC program as well. Obviously, we've heard a lot about blockchain and practical uses for blockchain. C to sale tracking is one of the most practical because the data is less likely to be corrupted. So anytime that any blockchain data is altered or edited in any way, that data isn't erased like can happen in some traditional databases. You can actually see the alteration of that data. So if there was a mistake and somebody went back and changed something, you're going to see all of that live. It is more expensive to do it that way and we are very much appreciative of the fact that there's also a cost component to implementing a seed to sale tracking solution for the state of Vermont, for the craft cultivators and for the MSOs. So it is an option that we can develop on the blockchain if it is something that folks were interested in for that additional layer of security. It is not something that has to be done or can is mandatory for the trace product to function well. We have it set up so that we can create a system that as I mentioned is really simplistic in the sense of do the regulators want craft cultivators to continue to, as is commonplace for one of the other states, track at the individual plant basis and require every grower regardless of size to track at every plant basis. Trace can handle that tracking through the QR codes system. If the regulators decide, hey, you know what, some of these operations are very small. There's not going to be that large of an operation that we need to worry too much about all of the little details at the plant level. We can just do this as a lot or batch based tracking. Trace has been set up to do that. As you may recall, you know, the impetus of trace was to really help the small farmer. And so we created the system as a way and the way that it works with hemp, it's lots of batches. It's not an individual plant that would be impossible for some of the larger growers and the resources that are needed to grow hemp. So what we do is we are going to be able to track at the lot or batch base and we can implement a system just as easily for the rec program at that lot or batch base, depending on the regulatory provisions and the regulators preference. But if you also then decide, hey, you know what, we really think that we're going to go with a system like the other states are currently implementing and we want it at the plant level regardless of size. We have that capability as well through our unique QR code system of tracking. Thank you, Todd. I'm going to ask Stephanie. I know you said that a majority, you mentioned to me and I think to the sustainability committee earlier today that a majority of your hemp registrants are planning on a half an acre or less. So there's a lot of small cultivators that are in the trace system. You may or may not know this. It's part of our authorizing legislation. We're tasked with making accommodations for small craft cultivators. So I think it sounds really great that Trace has that focus bringing to it from a sea to sail tracking perspective because I think the board was interested in whether or not, you know, would it make sense to do any exemptions from sea to sail tracking for small cultivators, but I'm sensing that if this were a direction that the subcommittee and the board went, that it might all be, you know, gravy from that perspective. Stephanie, I didn't know if you had any thoughts for, you know, what you're seeing from your license holders on using Trace and then I'd love to get Ashley's perspective if she's willing to share if she has any thoughts before we take this in the cultivation route. One more, I mean, you know, just based on our experience, it was moving from the legacy folks that because we had a program before using paper based applications and moving to a database like that transition was difficult. So my only thing that I want to share with the board is have a system before you start issuing licenses because that transition can be difficult just from an experience standpoint. But that has nothing to do with Trace, that's just a recommendation. The one thing that I wanted to add relative to using the system as well is that when we get to a point where we're robustly enforcing our rules, the information that we collect, that we expect to collect once we launch that portion of the development of the application with Trace, we will be able to, we will get all the information we need in order to make those determinations. We'll have labels, we'll be able to label reviews, we'll know where the crop was grown, we'll know where it's processed. All that information is being collected within the system. So I wanted to add that as well because I know that there is interest in generally being able to stand up a Vermont craft brand relative to cannabis, similar to what we're trying to do in the HEP program. And then just general experiences, despite a little bit of frustration for the transition, understandably because you're being forced to do something different from paper to a database and computer-based applications. Generally, again, quick, folks can get in there and register fairly quickly. But I would be interested in hearing from Ashley. Yes, please. Ashley, do you have any thoughts? Hi guys. So this is maybe a stupid question, but given the current nature of where things are set for actual licensed cultivars in Vermont, where are their seeds coming from? Are we saying we're starting this trace at the plant, right? Like actually it's being grown, it's happening, then we're starting the process. Where are they getting the seeds to begin with? These are coming from Vermont called to start with. Am I asking a stupid question here? No, Ashley, my understanding is they could be or they could be from clones, and then after you get your business running, you can create your own seeds. So it could be from your own kind of life. So step one is there is a nursery being created and people are given licenses for nurseries to start these plants. Then once that's underway, then we're distributing these plants and then we're taking the trace from there. And this is Carrie in mind. The nursery generating the clones could also log in to trace currently, create the QR code that moves with it throughout the system. So you know what I'm saying? That makes more sense to me. And then is that, from your perspective, Kyle, is that what you think is going to suffice? Is that enough of a level of tracking starting there? Well, I'd love to hear the board's, excuse me, the subcommittees thoughts on that I think as we wait seem to fail. Okay, that's where I feel like there's going to be a large stumbling block of getting these small cultivars up off the ground in competition with anybody who's already doing, you know, in door grows for MSOs. Is there going to be any ability to, you know, have some kind of partnership with those guys who are already underway and doing this type of cloning to begin with? I just feel like it's going to put the small guys at a disadvantage to getting this out there running. Todd, if you have a response to that, that would be great. Thank you, Ashley. These are the issues I think that we need to tease out here. Recognizing that we're, again, we have to move on to see the sales tracking platform. Recognizing what that means for small cultivators and how we can take those missteps that might inevitably play out in real time and do account as much as we can now on the planting stage. But Todd, feel free to answer. Yeah, I just want to add from a technical perspective, obviously not weighing in specifically on which regulation you all determine is the best way to proceed. From a trace perspective on tracking the plant, regardless of what phase that plant is in its growth, whether it be the seed or clone or a somewhat even mature plant, you'll be able to create a data point within the trace system to initiate a track from any point in that plant's process. So if you were to decide, say, look, some of the cultivators have semi-mature or even mature plants as this program launches already, how are we going to track that? There is going to be some requirement of actual physical data input into the system. But once that data is included into the trace system for tracking, it'll all be attached to that QR code. So from that point forward, it'll always live with those plants or with that batch. So as you theorize on what system is going to be best for the state of Vermont and craft cultivators, I think the important part of this is that I want you all to understand that regardless of when you let craft cultivators enter the system, enter the market regardless of where their plants are, trace will have the capability of tracking it from that point and even backdating some of the data on the origins of that plant moving forward so that you'll always have a clear picture still in year one of where your product is coming from and what is making up the cannabis industry in the state of Vermont. I've got another question for you, Todd. The supply chain, I'm looking at, okay, now it's being ready to be harvested, now it's going to be trimmed, now it's going to be processed, now it's going to be tested, are these checkpoints? Like maybe can you walk me through what you've done before seed to sale? Like how often are tests occurring? How often is there a checkpoint? What information do you get at every step of that? Rather than it's just going from, you know, growing to the shelf, like can you just walk me through how many times it gets tested and at what points you can look and get that code and get the certain information you're looking for? The reality of that answer is really whatever the regulators decide, if regulators decide they want to do a test every two weeks no matter what the face of the plant is in, then we would have all that data and it would be a new data point. In the traditional sense it's really, what we're really talking about is either seed or clone, at some point testing, some point hardest in testing again, processing which may include extraction or secondary products depending on what the program allows, edibles and so on and so forth, flower, shipment and transfer to the retail dispensary. Again, another question of structure for you all to decide, it really truly will not influence trace's capabilities of delivering a tracking trace system. Is it a farmer's market? Is it a farm stand? Is it a physical location? We will be able to have all of that data track at every transfer regardless of how many points there are and what you decide each point is along the supply chain. And Todd, knowing the Vermont landscape and how it currently sits, who, if you don't mind, what do you think is a good option for testing? We have a handful here in the state, if that be us, if we're going to be outsourcing any of the testing, are we going to be allowed to implement from other state facilities? Are we thinking that our current processors are going to become a testing facility? Do we know that yet? Are we thinking about that yet? Because without that, this is really a fuel effort. Ashley, I think Kerry's prompted to answer that question. We do have a lab testing and product safety committee. Kerry's spearheading that committee that's looking at our existing hemp lab standards and also pulling from other jurisdictions to see what they're doing. Kerry, I would ask if you could keep your answer short so we can keep this rolling because the hour is getting away from us. Yep, no problem. Ashley, one of the issues we're trying to tackle is sort of subsidizing testing for small growers. So what would a private-public partnership look like with a lab? So we could have state inspectors collecting samples but running it through a commercial lab without excess fees going to the growers because if you look at the suite of tests, it's important that it get tested for consumer protection but to put all the financial liability on the growers for that test I think testing is untenable. So we're banging our heads together to develop a model that testing is the foundation of a consumer protection program but trying to alleviate some of the financial responsibility of the growers and we're not final on that proposal yet and as soon as it is, I'll share with you. I appreciate that because it's already so expensive just like batch to batch. It's already, in my opinion, I think it's astronomically expensive and obviously that's just because there's so few testing entities that are credible enough to give us those different contaminants and consumer safety we're looking for. Yep, I agree and that cost for testing needs to be shared over the entire licensed regulated community and not just placed on the growers and it would be an innovative model for the country but it doesn't really exist here yet. We're banging our heads together, like I said, and trying to come up with something that works. Carrie, it's actually a good segue into talking about cultivation but before we do that, Todd, thank you so much for your time. I appreciate you being here. You're welcome to stay on the rest of the call. Hold on one second, Tom. And then Todd, I know what would be helpful for I think the subcommittee on the board and I don't want to put you on the spot now but if you can get information to us on what you think something like this would cost the state of Vermont and the cannabis control board and I recognize that that probably depends on different functionalities that we would want as a board but understanding what resources would be needed from us to potentially move in this direction would be helpful. Yeah, that's no problem. If I could just make a couple more quick points. I just, I didn't talk about the integration between the market and the state regulators and I just want to make sure everybody understands that API, super easy plug-in, transfer the data doesn't mean that cultivators or businesses have to use trace. They can use any inventory tracking system that they prefer and I just wanted to make sure everybody's aware of that because I don't want anyone to leave with the impression that people are going to be captured by trace if trace is the solution. I'm happy to kind of do that request and look at it. It does really depend a lot on features and a lot of it is also I would ask a question back to keep in consideration that our competitors all use an RFID chip system and they pass that expense on to the cultivators, on to the businesses and so that doesn't often get captured in what the overall cost is to the state. It does capture what the price tag is for the state of Vermont government but not the overall cost of the program but I'm happy to work through some of that and then one, just one last small point. Stephanie mentioned BIC that is also a client of my firm so I just want to make it perfectly clear that's Vermont Information Consortium that processes all the credit cards and just want to make sure everybody has that information. Thank you, Todd. Tom, were you trying to jump in there? Yeah, I apologize, I know we've only got nine minutes left and we still have cultivation and enforceability. I actually have probably four or five questions just going through and developing seed-to-sale regulations for Todd but I'm just trying to figure out, I mean it's not about testing it's about seed-to-sale specifically. I don't know if they'd be more productive if I just had that conversation with Todd and everyone wanted the benefit of kind of the questions I had more about seed-to-sale and then the program in general. I'll leave it up to you. If you can do it quick, how about, are we going to have any public comments? No. All right, I think I just bought us nine minutes time so why don't you go ahead and ask your questions quickly while we have Todd and then I do want to talk to Carrie about cultivation get information about how his division handles pesticides because I know that feeds into testing and that feeds into a lot of costs that Ashley had mentioned earlier before we talked about enforcement and I think one of the things I want to scope here and I think I wish that Ingrid and Tim were here to hear me say this and for the benefit of the subcommittee what other information do subcommittees feel like they need in order to make an educated up or down vote on whether or not the Board should consider moving forward with a relationship through an MOE or something else with the Agency of Agriculture to help us on cultivation enforcement and compliance. So, go for it, Todd. Okay, thanks Todd. I appreciate you staying on just a little bit. I mean, the first one is you really addressed I was going to ask about the API but just overall the process ultimately is still based on data entry and then how trace interacts with the API and how open that is because when Ashley was asking how does this get started ultimately it's going to be up to the license holder to enter that data in first I'm not a software engineer by any means but to an extent it is garbage in garbage out and I'm looking at the veracity of the system and the verification that the Board is ultimately going to need but can you just comment on that and how the data entry from the license holders and from these retailers will maybe interact with that API and how open that process can be to the Board? Yeah, so I think on the question of transparency and openness it was full transparency the Board and regulators were able to see everything essentially so we want to make sure that the system and again part of the beauty of the blockchain even though this may not be a blockchain system is more openness because the security around it is tighter you can be more open with your data so this would be a completely transparent system where the regulators would look at everything it would all be on your dashboard and so yes you are correct garbage in garbage out they're part of the way that the tracking systems will work is really dependent upon individual plant tracking or batch or lock tracking right so if we take the batch or lock tracking system what we're going to be dependent upon are trends that are created over longer periods of time right so you're going to have to rely on if this individual had 250 square feet of grow operation what was their yield and what was produced and how does that compare from year after year but also against other people that are growing at the same level or even a little slightly larger you know 500 it's double what's their yield why are these differences you'll be able to examine that much more closely and understand whether or not this was a data entry problem or was this a grow technique so there might be question from regulators why did the 500 square foot operation have 4 times the yield that the 250 square foot operation had you're going to want to look at that and that's going to lead to questions and you'll better understand was the data wrong was the lighting system poor you'll have questions and regulators will be able to get to the bottom of that but to the root of your comment yes you're absolutely right you're going to be dependent upon that initial data entry point especially because the way that the features will work and what we're very very close to wrapping up if Stephanie's still on she might have a better sense than even I do of exactly where we are it's like a lab feature for instance you send it off it's tested the test is going to automatically be linked to the QR code it's not going to be something where someone sits in the lab and then types in that it's just going to spit it out this is the result there it is so that's going to be great data in and great data out and we're trying to build a system to have a function that way as much as possible thanks and then Todd I'll just combine this my second question and I guess three or four parts but I mean what I'm seeing from other states and how other CBCIL software has failed and I mean you're looking at mostly delays for whatever reason either slow connections or it sounds like there's a lot of issues with just slow updates and slow verbal outs then obviously in every industries it has this problem but security breaches so I'm sure I don't know to what level you've experienced that hopefully not from on at all but could you just comment on maybe how often you've had to experience updates or getting updates out to the license holders or the state government's connection troubleshooting problems and security breaches yeah so on security breaches nothing to my knowledge and so some of my hesitation is a little bit I'm also not a software developer I'm not a tech expert and so some of these I may want to defer to our CTO Chris Babcock and give you a more thorough answer because I don't want to dive into something and mislead you on that information exactly how that works I will say this and I think in full transparency Trace was a startup it is a startup and we won the Vermont contract for Hamptrack and Trace we were the first in the nation to have a Hamptrack and Trace system and a contract awarded for that system we had road bumps out of the gate there's no denying it it happened and some of that was bugs and doing the updates and getting that done and in the time since we've been in operation Rob Chris Babcock on the CTO and I feel like he's cleaned up that quite a bit on the technical front in regard to the numbers of bugs and how they've been resolved and what they are I don't want to get into that more deeply because I may misrepresent what the situation is because I am not a technical expert so I will be happy to pass this question along to Chris and get you all a more thorough answer I would suggest just answering those questions at a future meeting we'd get a 15-20 minute demonstration because pictures worth a thousand words and some actually questions I think will be addressed if you were able to show what the current software capabilities or future capabilities are proposed to be that would be great we would love to have that opportunity to do that and I think that we can demonstrate thoroughly and address a lot of the questions that we're raising, Tom through that process because I think that this is an issue in the industry I mean Massachusetts just as we put out in RFI to replace their vendor with two years remaining on the contract because a lot of the issues that you just raised so when a state is threatening to terminate a contract two years early you know there are problems and there are a lot Next time I'd love to get you back with your team to get a demonstration we can figure out scheduling for that not in the final 10 minutes of this conversation I have just for comment here as a regulator and moving towards track and trace as a consumer protection component of a program as opposed to a diversion prevention component of the program I think tracking by lot so say a nursery does cut 100 clones enters that into the system there's a QR code generated if that information follows 50 clones went to Elmore Mountain sorry I'll get it so those QR codes separate but they all trade back to the original law or to the original nursery that cut and sold those clones so the system was designed to track whole lots but also separating partial lots and where those all went to so you know nursery gave me cuts of 1000 clones and 110 different growers all trackable through the QR code you just create sub-lock, split them up and track them neatly and tightly as if it was a thousand in one group and in my head sort of every pesticide application gets added to that law under the QR code so a consumer buying a product in the market place in Colorado they call the pesticides used on a label this would get tracked through a tracking trace system so every pesticide application is recorded on that when it was harvest harvest where it gets processed it's information tracking and information also for not only regulatory component but also a marketing component and consumer awareness which was pitched to us in the HEP program we're not completely there yet and some of that's attributable to sort of COVID lockdown and slow down but Steph and I can both lead to the registration piece and we'll leave it to Tom and his crew to talk about the capabilities of the tracking trace Carrie can I just ask you one quick question I don't know if my eyes are playing tricks on me or if this was something that I've just kind of been hearing but are we requiring processors to be eyes so certified? Processors, no Okay, great but I'm gonna let Steph answer there are some we are encouraging labs to be ISO or moving towards the ISO third party certification just for that extra level of accountability but that hasn't been discussed for processors I don't want to move too deep into the program Stephanie if you can be quick that would be great because we only have seven minutes left I have nothing to add Carrie you did touch a little bit on pesticide usage and how something like that could be incorporated into seeded cell tracking so I'm using that as our jump off transitional point for you to kind of it's hard to talk about what you can do from a cultivation perspective from the agency of agriculture in seven minutes but I'd love for you to take your best shot So right now we do have one head inspector and we do have potentially five or six other field inspectors I have an open position and Mike does have exclusively but the other folks are trained to do pesticide inspections nursery inspections all the other components that would be required in a cannabis program so they have expertise in that arena already the pesticide inspection worker protection piece because of the pesticide use as well as nursery currently expertise in that arena not knowing the size of the industry it's hard to make a prediction but I think we're getting close to coming up with knowing what that dies is so I would be able to better give you an idea about how many more inspectors it would take in order to be able to support the program Yeah that would be great I know we've talked about that previously I think what would be helpful over the course of the next couple meetings is for the subcommittee to think what else and I know and we should communicate this to the subcommittee members that are not here Ingrid and Tim we've heard at multiple meetings about the agency of agriculture's capabilities when it comes to compliance and enforcement what else they feel like they need to see in order to give a comfortable recommendation to the board on whether or not we should move in that direction so I think we can brand I don't know I'm thinking out loud what's the best way to get that information do you think to the other subcommittee members that might not be here with us today for them to feel comfortable I mean I think the best way would be in some sort of written format if we can do a summary that we can just provide to all of the advisory committee so that they can all review it and take it into account during their own work on their own subcommittees that would be easiest I don't want to play a whole bunch more work on people that I agree and I do know for the subcommittees reference we do a department of liquor and lottery in the room and I think somebody from liquor and lottery will be willing to come and talk to the committee next week about their capability think of a presentation and then hopefully do a similar on yes no vote on whether or not it makes sense for the board to pursue an MOU with the department of liquor department right or division department department to help us on the retail end of enforcement here so hoping next week that this subcommittee can start to give the board some direction and we can start moving down the priority list I know that in the last market structure meeting a lot of concerns around security so Tom maybe it might make sense to bump that up our priority list yeah I was there for that I heard it and it is surrounded around a lot of the cash management and banking as well which is on the list and I want an opportunity to kind of answer Siobhan but I think we'll be mostly cash management so I'm with you understanding so I'm hopeful next week we can start checking off some boxes here get the ball rolling at the board at the board level for consideration and start moving down because I think security cash management that was a big part of it but also just physical security at different license types that they're exploring in that committee like the limited use what was it limited to something for like the general store model farm gate model and what different security will look like depending on a license type yeah I don't know if you heard my comment there before that limited use buffer zones are also within this committee that's going to that's going to conflict with it's going to be a challenge great the only thing Tom I'd ask of you and your colleagues at NACB that might help facilitate some more some more you know some more progress next week is on local ordinances and fees I know Tim wasn't able to join us here and I really want to get his perspective on certain things what might be helpful is if you could help the subcommittee dig up some some model ordinances from other dealing states that have a legalized market what are other localities doing at that you know municipal or county level and I recognize we're going to have to take something whatever we can do right size it to what Vermont does and how we do it here but having some point of reference for those model ordinances will certainly be helpful to the extent that you Mark and Gina and whoever else at NACB might be able to dig up some stuff for us yep I'm just starting that process awesome thank you I think that's it Ashley any further thoughts no I like the direction we're headed I feel like we actually have a focus here I'm excited the two presentations both retracing the grant license so I'm excited to see that to really get a better idea of how we're going to do this yeah we're trying to get it all get it all moving next week so Tom I think we can we can move to a journey so move we'll see you all on Monday that's right thanks everyone thanks everybody