 Looks like you're all very cheerful and raring to go The we we're going to be working on our ag proposal for the covert Fun today and We have eb flurry with us from the agency To give us a little overview on I believe Whatever you want to give us an overview on I believe it it's going to be on how you put your program together and how it's supposed to help our our struggling Dairy people and if you could If you could fill us in maybe The million that's going to the processors We haven't talked a whole lot about the cheese makers and the processors in that portion So if you could fill us in a little on How that's supposed to work and be administered? It would be most helpful. I think for the committee So Good morning and welcome Thank you, Bobby and and and to the rest of the senate ag committee I actually prepared a testimony that I would like to just read as a as an update of what's going on for Our farming in our processing community in the dairy side That I've had coming to me My role at the agency in dealing with regulating both of those those groups I have direct contact with Numerous farmers and our processors of all shapes and sizes And it hits on just the importance of of the bill and everything that you're you all are investing so much time in and trying to get right So I would like to just read that testimony and then I'm happy to answer whatever questions or things you have And if I don't know the answers I can can get them for you all or get the right people to speak to you all about that and Linda I sent you The testimony that I'm going to read if you wanted to email that out or post it online So I sent that a few minutes before it started But to introduce myself again I'm eb flurry and serve as a dairy section chief at the vermont agency agriculture food and markets And since covet 19 first took hold of our world our dairy section team Has been on the front lines helping to keep our dairy food supply safe and available for all consumers COVID-19 has impacted many sectors in our state But the impact of dairy farmers and processors has been particularly severe as they rack up increasing losses Continue to operate and are unable to mitigate their expenses In vermont our dairy farms make up over 80 percent of vermont's farmland and contribute three million dollars in cash circulation each day in vermont Dairy accounts for 70 percent of vermont's agricultural sales With over 1.3 billion dollars in dairy products and byproduct sales each year Out of this 1.3 billion dollars in annual sales Artisan cheese makers account for the largest amount for one product category. It's 650 million This number exceeds the direct sales value of fluid milk by over 50 percent Overall dairy generates 2.2 billion dollars in economic activity in vermont each year Due to covet 19 I cannot easily explain how grave the situation is for our farmers and processors But many are clinging to a thread Since march 1st, we have lost 17 dairy farms including 14 farms. We lost in just the last month This equates to two percent of total dairy farms in vermont Those farms consisted of four SFOs eight CFSOs and five MFOs We are in a time of unprecedented crisis and our largest agricultural sector is confronting its greatest risk in decades Beyond our dairy farmers covet 19 devastated one market our value-added dairy processors There's been the shining light of our dairy industry for many years Our vermont dairy processors produce world-renowned cheese butter yogurt and ice cream And many of their markets disappeared overnight The vermont cheese council released a survey showing that cheese makers lost 25 to 90 of their markets based Because of the pandemic Our processors are broadly experiencing this market drop Which is also contributing to the rapid milk price declines for our farmers The vermont cheese council has estimated that over 10 million dollars worth of lost sales occurred in april alone Cheese makers are responding by selling off cattle or entire herds or not purchasing milk from neighboring farms to meet the loss in market demand Long term this will cause cheese makers to be under smaller cash flows with businesses that were already on narrow budget constraints For each cheese maker reducing milk Processing levels will result in less cheese being put away The trickle down effect is less cheese to sell and reduce cash flow for the future If sales continue to remain at this level of loss through the rest of this year Cheese makers will have to cut employees downsize operations and currently 10 percent are looking to possibly close their doors permanently The market trend impacting cheese makers can also be felt across all our dairy processors and is playing a large part In the price suffering our dairy farmers are facing approximately 54 of the licensed dairy processors in the state Register at the smallest level of production at 500 pounds or less of milk processed daily These processors create the majority of our diverse dairy products in the marketplace They also include some cheese processors that pay grass-based dairy farmers $30 a hundred weight or more for non-organic milk These processors allow small dairy farms to not only survive but thrive 31 of our processors are in the range of 500 pounds to 10 000 pounds of milk processed daily In the last four categories of processors combined for approximately 15 of our dairy processors Vermont's dairy processors are a hard-earned success story And their many small operations make huge economic impacts in their rural communities Their diversity in size and high quality nutritious products created with Vermont milk provides a steady and reliable food supply For all Vermonters to have access to be food secure Without these processors our milk will leave the state in larger quantities and make Vermont more reliant on large supply chains To bring in food for our citizens These operations also provide needed employment in our rural communities During COVID-19 Vermont's dairy processors have done all they can to protect their employees health and safety and to maintain our critical food supply Our dairy processors have created a culture that many other states have tried to imitate None are able to replicate the artisan dairy community that define defines Vermont dairy I see individuals moving from other states to Vermont to become part of this unique community Just last year we had a father and daughter team move from massachusetts to start a goat dairy and cheese processing facility They uprooted their families to make new routes and invest in Vermont I myself sought out Vermont and its dairy landscape to make my permanent roots and invest in a dairy culture that I believe in Our dairy farmers are floundering from a 26 price drop caused by the pandemic Many of our processors lost their markets are coping with additional expenses and need to pivot adapt and begin distributing into new markets Our processors will play an integral part in the future of Vermont agriculture Our farmers need processors to turn their milk into products that consumers will purchase and establish And newly developed marketplaces This adaptability includes additional costs for new equipment necessary to package final products differently to be shipped directly to consumers As the dairy section chief and someone who regularly works with dairy farmers and processors I have a close-up view of the pandemic's impact on dairy The economic freefall is unprecedented in my experience and I am extremely concerned that without assistance Many of our farmers and processors will not survive this public health and economic crisis The news from our farms is partially evidenced by our 17 farm failures is grim Vermont relies on dairy for its open lands rural economic output and jobs and in many ways its unique character and way of life I encourage you to give due consideration to support Vermont's dairy farms and award-winning dairy processors of cheese butter yogurt and ice cream I thank you for your time and consideration of the current state of Vermont's largest agricultural sector And i'm happy to take any questions that you all may have Yeah, well, thank you, eb that's Quite a report you just gave us I I heard that we'd lost some farms, but 17 is Quite a quite a number Could you tell us again? I I was trying to keep up with you, but I didn't Write down the the different categories that we lost of the 17 Yep. Um, so of the 17 and this is from march 1st four were were small farms Eight were certified small farms in five were were medium farms so four eight and five and five yes, sir so, um No, uh, no large farms, but we did lose some medium farms Yeah um We're really seeing in the in the pandemic that the the smallest processors and and farmers are the ones that are the most vulnerable Yeah, and it's very concerning rose Yeah, thanks bobby and thanks eb uh I it's sort of to pick up on this small farm large farm processor Conversation, I mean based on your testimony and the farms going out and also what we've heard from testimony from dairy farmers It seems like the impact has been greater at the small end of the operation small medium rather than the large end for both processors and for farm dairy farmers Obviously the large processors and farmers have been impacted, but because their businesses tend to be More Stable or whatever. I don't know their right word, but they they don't seem to be as directly vulnerable is that is that my um accurate I know you have to be careful I will everyone is very vulnerable at this point What the reason why I believe and this is my personal opinion that we're seeing The impacts on the smaller scale is that they have less resources to try to spread this cost loss um I do personally believe that our large farms and our large processors are hurting just the same It's just that they have more resources to try to spread this If something is not done quickly for all Sizes shapes and sizes of our farms and our processors. We're going to start losing large operations as well um, I think it's just Like with a lot of things that occur A lot of the times the the trend starts with the smaller sizes and it starts working its way up And I do believe that if action isn't taken to help all of our processors and all of our farms regardless of their size We're going to start seeing trends of like the the mfo size or our larger processors starting to starting to chip away as well um Is very concerning at this point You know, we have probably I don't know for sure we haven't but I think we have As a committee fewer resources to work with than the governor's proposal I don't think we have 50 million dollars on the table is my impression So we have to figure out. How do we target that? Whatever money we have 30 million or whatever we have to the most effective You know place and so trying to figure out how do we help? All farms because we also have an interest in helping non-dairy farms And that wasn't part of the the governor's package and the agency's package How do we help all processors farms and and farmers? And farm workers and all all the people affected most effectively with a smaller pot of money So that's that's the conundrum that I keep running around in my head. And how do we make that work? So if the most vulnerable at this point are the small medium, maybe that's where our focus needs to be But I I hear you about down the road. It's going to spread up as well. So Just thinking out loud here and I and I mentioned some of the the market numbers and the amount of The amount of impact that dairy has on our economy and I just mentioned that for perspective of I'm not saying that other industries have not been impacted But I do think the governor's proposal was looking at the amount That vermont dairy's industry what it what it is in size compared to other agricultural industries in the state and part of dairy being so vulnerable, especially on the farm side is The four or five years of very reduced prices that we have Our dairy farmers of any size Have not had a good year in the past four years And so they came this was supposed to be the year where we were going to start getting back to a closer price Of what it actually cost to produce this. So our farmers Went into this pandemic already strapped financially and that goes for any size farmed and so now this pandemic has has hit and There are not resources for them to try to survive this And this downturn that dairy has has been in For the past four years Um, it's not the same trend that is seen across other food sectors and farm sectors I'm not saying that those sectors are not struggling and I'm not trying to say that That their issues aren't valid But there is a bigger story behind dairy as to part of why the situation is so dire And as secretary tubits has mentioned like this money was looked at to as survival And that's how I view it with the communications. I've had with our farmers and processors like right now We are in a survival mode to try to get through the summer and into the fall and hoping that markets will return But for dairy, this is legitimately Surviving in the identity of of our of our agricultural economy Um, anything else Ruth? I'm good for now Um, do you do you have the figures on the top of your head about? Um, like the different farm groups. We've got them broken out into four sizes um And uh, do you have anything that you could tell us about the percentage of our total milk? where Where it comes from which size or or anything along, you know, those lines um I do not have that information Off the top of my head that would actually be a tricky number to come up with um Milk pounds are reported by a btu which is like for the for the co-ops or for processors It's it's a territory that they get milk from and it's a way that we identify Where the milk came from each farm for tracing and other things And those reports are given to us in lump sums monthly They're not broken out individually because that gets into proprietary information Because breaking out per farm to then break it out by farm size It gets into what people are actually being paid because it would be their exact pounds So we don't we do not track that we don't have data on every single farm on that It is lumped as a as a group by territory that we have pounds Yeah, because it seems like It's in our testimony I don't know if it was from the big farms or who it was from. I don't recall but it seems like the medium in large farms were reported dust like 85 percent of the of the total production and The small and small certifies were 15 percent, but I don't I don't know that's numbers in my head, but I don't know where it came from And if it's accurate or not, I I can't speak to it accurately. So yeah uh, other questions for eb Got chris ryan and anthony chris Thanks. Um, thank you eb. I wonder um, we've been We've been wrestling with how to Provide assistance and also recognize that a lot of uh farmers are interested in Some help whether it's sort of economic planning transition planning um You know, we kind of have these two realities coming at us where Where farmers directly say to us yes, we need that help and then we say well, let's Figure out how to help them while we provide grants and people say well, how dare you condition our grants So we're trying to be very sensitive here and and I think one of the Ideas that we've come up with is to just simply As farms are applying for grants Have a very short few questions so that We can understand, you know, yes, I'd like to talk to somebody about uh, business planning diversification planning Succession planning whatever there are a lot of dynamics going on in addition to the last many years And and we've heard from You know folks that that would be helpful and we don't want to make it sort of uh Us the legislature telling farms what they have to do, but we'd like to be able to better pair that up Are you in a position to help us craft that we're getting pretty close to where we're going to have to say You know the agency shall work with Vhtb to come up with a short survey or something like that I'm not convinced we should put the language of a survey into legislation Are you the right person? Would you be willing? Are you interested in helping us with that and it's again, it's just trying to Arrive at a list of say, okay. Here are the priorities here are people who are eager for this kind of input We know there's a lot more demand than we have resources although we're also looking at putting some Resources into vhtb and others that do some of this work with our farmers and partner with them But are you somebody that can help we could turn to in the agency to help? craft that kind of I think I think the best person would be diane bothfield. Um, there's a lot of stuff going on in my In my post with with regulatory and dealing with the businesses and the farms But our ag dev division is doing a lot and I know with the dairy innovation center Different things are being explored as well So I think diane would be the best person to tie in what you all are looking at to see like Is this something that the agency is trying to pursue already? Or is it something that could try to be expedited and be of order this process or not? diane would be the best person to speak to is whether Things are being duplicated or this is the route that we could approach this with so Yeah Thank you, uh, brian Thank you, buddy. So eb, um I'm very sympathetic to the situation with uh with all of our farmers and especially the dairy um, the proposal from the governor was for 50 million uh senator hardy's indicated that we May have received some information that it may or may not come close to that number When all is said and done, so are you aware of any other federal health? Uh, that that the dairy farmers in brahman and the dairy processors could take advantage of that We haven't heard about yet um for the dairy processors, um, it has seemed pretty limited other than you know the the ppp program There's been some things with food banks and stuff through usda um and The the food bank programs for processors a lot of it has to get into like what size of processor you are what products are you making? um, so it's kind of limited in my opinion when you look at our You know 54 of like our our smaller processors being the chunk of the processors in the state a lot of them It's not going to fit their business structure um, so little mixed on that end of things for processors on the farm side The ppp program was an option for them Miss recently usda announced Sign up not just for dairy farmers, but for vegetable farmers beef farmers commodity producers just a whole gamut um of showing losses and i'm not I haven't memorized what the the payment rates and what not are with that But usda did open up a program. I believe on may 26th for all sorts of commodity producers and also vegetable Fruit berry producers and things like that too and other than that those are the main things that i'm i'm aware of Thank you and don't I read something about you guys had a program going up to 25 000 dollars to help some farms you had Yep, and the the applications have have closed on that and our ag dev office is is working very diligently trying to get those um Get them ranked and get them to the board. Um, that would make decisions on on who gets funding for that yeah Anthony sure I appreciate your testimony I'm trying to think about ways that we could target assistance to smaller processors And i'm wondering when you talk about small processors Do we talk down to the level of on farm processors meaning a single farm that's maybe making cheese or whatever i'm wondering how you define How small are we talking? I think we want to talk about those folks. I just wonder if we can identify those folks and talk a little bit about what they're facing Yeah, so um those I um, I I usually just refer to them as as the farm stands because the Your your farmsteads excuse me the the true definition of farmstead is that you have your own animals and you're milking them and then you make your own product with them um and The large majority of our smallest processors, which is 500 pounds or less a day 54 of our Vermont producers are in that window So we we have some farms that only have Three to six cows six to twelve goats and they make their living off of that and it's very impressive yeah So you could help you can we can identify those folks obviously Yep, they're on your list. Yep And will they will they have losses great enough to capture much money eb Like The little plan that we put together uh those little guys um Would get you know 12 12 or 13 14 thousand dollars they they'd hit that okay, wouldn't they? um, it depends on um how they were selling their product so I spoke with um Marty Mundy at the Vermont cheese council yesterday and she's been working diligently on keeping accurate surveys and data from their from their constituents and there There's a group that if they predominantly just sold at farmers markets um, they had their their livestock based on coming and freshing and making this product for the farmers market season And so some of them aren't sure yet how bad their losses are going to be through the summer For the any that we're selling retail or to restaurants directly Absolutely, they will be able to show losses. So some of it really gets into the nitty gritty of What was their market? Who were they selling to? um, but for any of the processors and I mean this goes for dairy farms too, um, but In following the cdc guidelines and our governor's orders, I mean everyone's had to invest in ppe and having to look at um for some farmstead operations if they have employees from off the farm like Some processing facilities are running two separate crews. So if that someone becomes sick They have one crew that can still work and instead of everyone working at once Now this facility has higher electric bills higher utility bills because instead of Operating at 12 hours a day now the electricity and all these things needed to manufacture and process Is now at 20 hours a day or more and so it really depends on How these facilities have addressed what works for them to protect them and their staff from covet 19 um Anthony Just to follow up a little bit down that line seems like we're talking about two things One is the increased expense of what you just talked about The other thing is loss of markets, correct? I mean, yes Because I was a little surprised when you said well if you're selling to supermarkets And all you're really going to show loss because that my assumption had been supermarkets You'd still be selling to them whereas farmers markets were closed down for a while So can you talk a little bit about that? So um, a lot of them Depending on what they were selling retail for our artisan cheese makers The big distribution hub for cheese really goes through new york city And so a lot of our cheeses to get into different Artisan cheese shops across the country or a specialty cheese shelf at a supermarket store um They lost their way to get distributed when new york city first started with their issues um For those that are selling directly to the farmers market our farmers market season started A week late basically um And so the actual season and the timing of things with covet in vermont for those selling just locally They may have only missed one week of sales and what we don't know yet is as the summer continues is if their sales will actually Be what they were in the past or if they will be reduced So we're kind of waiting and seeing on that. I mean because even though farmers markets are open again I mean I drove past the farm went to a farmers market the other last saturday and there was not very many people there There's a whole different scene obviously Yeah, for obvious reasons but I could see how the sales would not be as great plus they Yeah, they've lost a lot of vendors totally completely the farmers markets Just people are not showing up either as vendors or as customers Yeah, and that's what we're really concerned about Especially as we move through the summer if we hit the reality that the farmers markets aren't being visited or the reality One of the difficult things with artisan cheese is that it it is It is artwork on your plate and it is amazingly tasty And it does cost more than your your typical brands your Generic brands or things you may get at the store and with people losing their jobs Or fearful of what will come tomorrow people are pinching pennies and saving and that's really hurt any of these High end value added products people are really watching what they're spending money on and maybe they used to get Uh, a delicious aged cheddar or a camembert or a brie and now Nope, I'm not getting this fancy cheese because I'm worried if if I will be able to pay my bills next week And that's one of the Things that we're seeing Seems like a lot of the artisan cheese says the soft ones particularly are more uh Yep more likely to spoil. Yep. The soft cheeses have a very strict window aging wise when they are right They need to go and and even just a few days pass that ripening when you open it as a customer It's not going to smell the same the the texture may not be the same And so you're you're you have a very limited window when it needs to go and then when it's bad it's it's bad Um, your aged alpine hard cheeses have a much longer Shelf life and can age longer It'll it could dependent on the cheese improve the flavor of it and we do have a fair amount of cheesemakers that are trying to shift Um into making more alpine cheeses right now Just so that it can kind of be It's kind of money put away in the bank You know you make the wheel and it can age for six months or it could age for 18 months And so it's kind of insurance being put away if they have room Um to store it which is another issue that we're running into of our cheesemakers is that if the product isn't moving at the rate They're used to it as they're running out of room in their caves for aging Can I just one more? This is kind of specific, but I've heard that jester hill sold their cows I'm just wondering are you really worth anything bad going on there? Is it just Typical of what's going on everywhere? Um, I believe meteo referenced it as point blankly It was stopped trying to stop the bleeding um, they their markets like many others um Went away overnight and you can't keep producing At the same amount if you don't have the market to sell it to so that was a very difficult decision for them to make Um to preserve their business And so they did that to cut the volume of cheese that they would be making because of the markets They lost and it was That was a a gorgeous registered Herford breed and and they had to sell them Yeah, it was their ash year heard That they could make special cheese from Um, and they couldn't make the cheese any longer because they had no market So they got rid of their They're registered ash years like That's what I Think I heard yes the ash years so at least by this being held up I mean we're we're about three or four weeks late. Um, you know Getting getting any help out the door Well, but it also gives those small guys More time to count their losses. So it You know instead of having march april in may now they've got you know, they've got Well, they would have had march april may now they've got march april may And now we're in june. They should have all the expenses from May in so it might It might help by having a full three months of losses Then not being able to count may in what um, what the agency was was exploring um as as As higher ups in our agency are trying to figure out just exactly We're trying to game plan for how this is going to work with whatever decisions you all make is that One one topic is and I believe this was mentioned when steve collier was was testifying I believe last year last week Was that if people didn't max out on on the payments that that there would be another round later in the summer Because we don't know what the summer is going to hold And so it was people could turn in their expenses. And if it's not maxed out To date that there would be another potential round, which I think is a great idea because we are We are absolutely in in my opinion. We're in a survival mode like we need to get things out immediately to our dairy industry But we also don't know what the summer holds And so there may be depending on business structures people that will cap out immediately But there may be others that it will be later in the summer until The issues really start piling up and having that ability to Allow people to come back And if they haven't maxed out on the amount and be able to then receive the rest of it if they have those losses I think is a good approach personally Yeah rose Yeah, I just want to say um, you know, we've been working on this for over a month And so I don't feel like our committee has been dragging our feet We were waiting to hear from the agency and we just heard from you last week on the Last last winch to hear think of yeah, so so I just you know want to say we've been trying We've been working hard to try to come up with a plan and you know, I appreciate the fact that Your plan or they not yours personally But the agency's plan is sort of based on what we were working on at least the dairy part of it But I also wanted, you know, my impression and Our chair may know more about this but Is that we'll be giving you know We'll be appropriating some of the the federal money now and holding on to some of it for later in when we come back In august september To be able to respond to whatever the situation across the board is then so I think that's one of the reasons Why we'll have a smaller Pot of money at this time and then we'll see and if dairy and or whatever is Still in crisis or is it more crisis then we would have a second crack at the bat Or the ball or whatever it is Or there may be other industries or other problems that we need to deal with at that point So I think that's one of the reasons why we're not going to have that full 50 million agents That's very accurate roots and and uh, you know, we all have bosses in this game You know like you have a boss we have a boss everybody has bosses and And that that sort of is a plan that if we spend all of our money now And and there's no money in the fall and we still Need money We're really going to be in trouble and uh, you know the our folks think that we should Hang on to a little of that and have possibly refund this program in the fall to To come back in or to have at least have money to come back with and help out in the fall but anyways There are other questions for you be If michael, do you have anything that do you want to get cleared up or squirt? No So I I guess we're all set and thank you very much for your testimony. It was very good and helpful and Hopefully we'll we'll all Be able to get something moving here Yeah, either late this week or early next week and preferably late this week We get this over to the house and And move on so with that, uh, thanks again and Stay healthy. Yep. Thank you all for your time and and and thank you for your service to the state Thank you, so anyways, um, uh Where um It's all dumped in our lap to to get this figured out michael sent out a redraft of of the bill yesterday, I believe it was and so We could run through those changes But the big issues in in the draft are all those zeros that we've got to we've got to fill in And I've been fooling with those numbers But uh, you know, I haven't I haven't cut them loose to you guys But we can talk about the numbers and see what what you folks think is after we get To the numbers and if If any of you have questions, I think wind is going to put the The draft up on the screen Uh, or if you have your own draft or your own computer, uh, you You uh, michael will run through the changes that he's made Uh from our previous discussion and we'll go from there There any other suggestions from the committee? No, no michael, uh Uh, we're I guess ready to go and um You've got changes you can tell us where they are. I've got my copy here and we kind of follow along I'll have the copy on the screen in just one moment Okay So I'm just going to talk generally about the changes and then go Kind of section by section So you had asked that the Dairy processing the dairy processors be Treated the same as the ag producers that were not milk producers. So dairy processors were Included in the administration's proposal with milk producers You asked that the dairy producers dairy processors Be separated out and put the other ag producers. So Now there's a section for milk producers and there's a section for ag producers who are not milk farmers Dairy processors custom slaughterhouses Not custom slaughterhouses commercial processors and farmers markets Um, so those are the two big programs now one for dairy farmers slash milk producers One for pretty much everyone else You also asked that the two programs be based on the economic harm Concept that the administration had proposed. So I'll be frank. I just stole From the administration that that language and the concepts that they built around it Um, so this bill is kind of cooperative theft So that that that's kind of the two big changes in the The milk producer and ag processing section well, didn't Didn't the administration have them separated anyways, they had like 40 million for dairy farmers and 10 million for the processors So it was the same program but different funding amounts for the different types of eligible participants So now you have instead of Milk producers and dairy processors being in the same program Milk producers are in one program all other ag producers and processors are in the other program Yeah All right, so if you move down On page one you get to section one This is that dairy farmer assistance program The main New definition is on page two line nine And that's the definition of economic harm Meaning a milk producer that really should just say a milk producers expense Lost revenue or both related to 2020 COVID-19 public health emergency And so that is what they will be reimbursed for the economic harm That they suffered due to COVID Included now as a definition of goat goat or sheep dairy farm You still have the definition of good standing. I don't believe the agency likes this concept But I left it in because it was something that you had as a committee. It's specifically requested Previously So you can go on to page three Now Michael Ryan Michael, do you know what the agency's issue is with the fact that um They don't like that good standing phrase I think they believe that all farms are suffering economically Regardless of their compliance with the water quality standards and they would prefer that all farms Be eligible for this program And that they will deal with those farms that are not in good standing through their general enforcement authority And as I recall there were only three farms that were not in good standing That's correct But that it depends, you know, what What do we call good standing or or not good standing and you know, if it's If it's because they're arguing over a rule or or something that's You know, I can see where you can get in an argument with a regulator but I would think I would hope there would have to be very severe before they would classify you as Bad standing or not in good standing. Do we do we under know anything about that Michael? So you're correct senator star the the what constitutes Not in good standing is is a very significant Determination It means that there's no active enforcement violation that was reached a violent Final order that means that that basically the that the farm has Not been complying with an enforcement Action by the agency Is not cooperating with the agency doesn't have a schedule of compliance, etc And it also means that they're not in compliance with the terms of a current grant agreement for contracts with the agency So when you get your finance or financial assistance from the agency, you're supposed to Follow those terms of that agreement And some farms don't do that And then the agency has to expend a lot of time and resources to to try to either get the money back Or to get the farm into compliance so it is um It is not just because there's a disagreement about how to go forward with remediation or a remedy it's Significantly down the enforcement path where a farmer is not complying with the agencies yeah Well, I I got a question mark on that particular item, but we'll we'll come back to it if you all need me Okay So you can go out of page three by an 18 subsection b Michael i'm sorry Yes me It's a little hard to tell who's sorry. Anyway, this is anthony um I just want to be clear that we're talking about giving the support to Operating farms. I'm wondering about the farms that went out of business in the last month. Do they are they just out of the picture? One of the current eligibility requirements is that they're currently um producing milk That's what I thought Yeah So we're on line 18 michael Yep, you're on you're on page three line 18. This is where the program's established It would provide financial assistance to milk producers that have suffered economic harm So those losses or expenses due to covet 19 In vermont and in order to qualify I just referenced that they had to be currently producing milk They had to be in good standing and they have to accurately demonstrate to the secretary economic harm That occurred or accrued honor after march 1 2020 and before december 30th 2020 I don't really get to december 30th 2020 date. That's why it's highlighted There's other provisions in the bill that says Basically that all the money needs to be spent by november 1st Um And so I I I'd want to check with the agency about whether that's december 30th day should be changed Yeah, that That there is there is one reason why they might have that in there And it is because later in the bill It says if you don't qualify for the maximum award right away that you can reapply later Um But There's that november 1st deadline where things have to revert back to the agency For redistribution and and I need to get to some clarity with the agency on that language What line is the november 1st on michael? um it is uh several pages into the bill Oh, okay. It's not where we are then No, it's on page eight line eight. Yeah, because um, yeah Michael question It's about the economic harm um, and You know expenses and revenue losses they And have revenue loss compared to it. It's the question of compared to what um, and what You can still have a a business can still lose revenue and make a profit at the same time And i'm not suggesting that dairy farmers are probably making a profit during all of this, but there's some for example this Cheese processors some of them may still be making a profit the larger ones because they've ramped up production in other areas but they still have revenue losses in some areas And expenses in some areas, but over the whole the net is that they are still um in the black so Is the definition doesn't seem to address that potential? well, the that's that I was just going to come to that point um in Sub division c they have to accurately demonstrate to the secretary economic harm for milk producers The agency has been discussing setting the context for that being um, the difference between the january Milk price, which I believe and the chair can correct me, but I believe it was about 18 dollars and 25 cents Versus what they are getting Currently, so there you have the context for loss for a milk producer But that is not currently in the bill It wasn't in the administration's proposal either but it is something that committee could contemplate for inclusion here for the next program for the ag producers dairy processors custom slaughterhouses you have that same issue how to gauge the lost revenue, but The last meeting you had you said for that program you didn't want the applicant to have a net profit From this period So that that is a condition that's added in to that second program I don't know how a milk producer would have a net profit. Um Right and that's what I said. I think I don't think it's necessarily applicable to the Milk producers, but it is to the other Section, so I'm glad you've addressed it there and we may want to be more specific about what we mean by loss because just also for the You know viewing public that we're not, you know providing Assistance to businesses that are booming right now Okay Um, should I move on? Yeah so For economic harm won't be compensable if if the farm or the milk producer Have that loss Covered by insurance or other federal grant Then you get to the administration. It's going to be administered by the agency a bag The secretary shall create application forms that that and it should say milk producers Shall utilize when applying for a loop relief Secretary shall provide awards based on the amount of economic harm incurred So it may not be the maximum amount when they first supply Um application shall be processed and first come first serve But the secretary needs to determine that the application is administratively complete includes all required proof of economic harm and then you come to as the chair noted one of the Unanswered questions the dollar amounts. What will be the maximum awards? For the various categories of milk producing farms And you'll see that that is Great out highlighted as something for you to review Brian Thank you, mr. Chair. So if i'm understanding this michael We're going to fill in the zeros at some point and there will be an appropriation But from my reading of this the secretary would then be the person that decides Who gets what in essence is that true? Yeah, the secretary will determine whether a milk producer demonstrated a loss or an expense Yeah So the the milk producer applies In that application they have to provide all required proof of economic harm, which is loss or expense And that's what they would then get compensated for Up to the maximum amount That you set Um under subsection d thank you yeah, and and I I guess we can go through the bill and then we'll come back and Play you know try to figure out these numbers. So they're equitable and in fair and Against what we've got to spend what we have to spend rather Yeah, so you're on continue michael sure sure So the the maximum grant is going to be based upon the farm type known to the secretary as of march 1st 2020 um So if you were a medium farm on march 1st You qualify as a for that that maximum amount if you were a small farm You qualify for that amount um Then you get some just basically the processing issues um Once the milk producer completes the application demonstrates the economic harm secretary promptly issues the payment um There's a condition here if there's only a certain amount of funds And there's a significant demand because of the economic loss um The secretary has a right to only pay up to out what what he or she has to expend um And then whenever a milk producer has not demonstrated economic harm This is the ability for them to put in an addendum to say Well, they haven't demonstrated the maximum amount of economic harm. They then Um issue an addendum That will allow them to come back at a later time to show additional economic harm and to get A further payment if funds are available Well, I'm wondering I'm wondering in there If if there should be some way that the secretary could transfer funds save Because it's all going to be in one kitty But if if there's farms that haven't received anything And there's still some money left in Lower categories or wherever Why the secretary can't expend all those funds In a fashion where everybody would get someone So, uh Is there any way to word something like that so that That we aren't sitting on A few million dollars and some people haven't gotten their money I didn't think we Had put the money in buckets. I thought we just sort of capped the words In buckets if that makes sense So at at the end if there's still money In in the big bucket in a farm in september as lost Can show additional loss they could reapply toward getting some of that money that's still left in the bucket So i'm kj Line seven subsection b There's already a provision for unexpended funds If any funds are not expended by november 1st 2020 They revert to the agency of ag for ongoing financial assistance To farmers who can demonstrate economic harm Encouraged for march 1 2020 through december 30 of 2020. That's at december 30th date I was talking about in the beginning That's the only reason that I can see why december 30th is included in the definition of economic harm And I just need to clarify that with the agency. So there's already a provision that if something's unexpended Then the agency is Be going to be able to to use that to to go out to those farmers that demonstrate economic harm well That date should be moved up because I think the legislature From what I've heard as of december 30th or Prior to just prior to that if there's any um Covet money left. It's going to get transferred into the ui account, which is permissible To do so we don't lose any of this federal money I right so that that that is why I want to talk to the agency about why they have december 30th I don't know how a farm's going to show That loss on december 28th um right and and So if you move that date back as you were referencing chair I think You give that farm the ability to show real economic harm and not jeopardize the state losing That money reverting it back to the treasury or or losing the ability to put it into ui um, so I I think ultimately there's probably going to be a Clause in one of these bills that said any Unexpended cares that money is going to go into ui yes so um That's why I need to talk to the agency. You need to be really careful about that date To make the money available Yeah, I would think december 1st would be about his or november 30th They should have to have that all in so we're sure that the money's going to get You know because they're going to have to power with the applications and in any of that so Yeah, you The committee you think we should back that up or let michael talk with the secretary What's your pleasure Brian Thank you, bud. Well, uh, if the secretary had a specific reason Maybe he should talk to the secretary. Otherwise, I agree. You can't you're not going to be able to turn around that money In 24 or 48 hours. It just it doesn't make any sense But maybe there's another reason that we don't know of I don't know Yeah, so go ahead and check with anson or steve Michael and and if you need you know if we need just move that date back to You know the 1st of december or november 30th or Some logical date so that they can manage to get the money out And then we still have time to transfer the money To a safe place Okay, well, steve just emailed me and said he was using the december 30th date to track the language in the In the cares act About having it be spent by by 12 By december 30th. I still I still think you're gonna have that issue of it being spent So there has to be spent by the recipient um As well as by the state so well also Yeah, I just uh that Given that we're gonna have less money in this program than the 40 million that Or we're likely going to have less than the 40 million. I think it's going to just be spent like It's going to be going like hotcakes and be done by september 1st if we get this bill passed in the next few weeks because The it's not going to none of the pain will probably match what What the quote unquote economic harm is because there's just not we just don't have enough money to to do that so I'm not as concerned. I think it's going to be spent but but I do think we should move the dates Sooner to give more flexibility and then I would assume there's some kind of consistent language that We'll be putting in every single money bill to say that if it's not expended by this time that reverts to the ui fund Right and I need to I haven't talked to damien or steve prine about what that date's going to be and it may just be you move the date until that date That it all has to be spent Prior to that that time brain so that no money is lost to ui Yeah, so you'll check that out. We'll go from there. Okay, we'll do And I I'm not I'm not criticizing the agency for using that date. I understand now I just wanted to raise it because I knew some of the timing issues were going to be With the ui provision it was going to be a little difficult Yeah, um, should I move on? Sure So I think that really brings you To page seven line eight And this is the question about what penalty Would you want to assess to a person who submits false or misleading information? In your original draft bills, you were assessing an administrative penalty To be assessed by the secretary under their general administrative penalty authority, which is $1,000 for discrete offenses and up to 15 or 20 thousand dollars total The agency in their proposal Wants to be able to issue civil administrative and or criminal enforcement Under the agency of agriculture's authority or under criminal authority and title 13 And that's that's the first question for you. Do you want criminal enforcement or Boss information that's provided in this application Um, and then there's what if you do if you want that criminal That's about what should it be There's an imprisonment provision in here. I don't know if you want imprisonment if these are all questions that I don't think you've addressed before Well, and is this the agency's language that just came up on the screen? Yes, it is Yeah Well, I I don't know why we need I mean, it sounds pretty harsh, but There there are going to be some large payments paid out Well, that's what that's what I was just going to say one of the rationales is that you have potential fraud that Otherwise would be criminal Um In the state because of the amount Yeah, and and does this limit That to the larger amounts or No, it does not Is there some way to do that so that the penalty would would follow say the size of the In fraction Well, I I need this The title 13 provisions are and what could What a producer could be Prosecuted for will depend on the specific terms and conditions of of those crimes And some of those crimes are based on dollar amount value so To an extent you already have You already have a thresholds built in and the default thresholds in title 13 um But otherwise no, there's no If it's over $50,000 Brogillian application. It's a crime if it's under it's still A civil or administrative that that is not in here, right? Well, what do you guys think should we put that in there? Brian I would just hate to Have a small farm Make a mistake in an application Not maliciously and then we're throwing them in jail I just there there is there is a menswear requirement It has to be that they willfully knowingly or recklessly submitted the false information Yeah, we have an awful lot of lawyers Around all Michael that Are looking for work Well, I think that I mean I I agree with senator column or that it seems a little excessive to me. Um, I I think I'm comfortable with an administrative Do it at but and Michael you said that under title 13 there may be just sort of a blanket thing Anyway, that is applicable. Is that true? That's actual applicable anyway without us having to No, it's the the blankets under title six and that that's the agency's general administrative enforcement authority Under title 13 there are crimes. That's that's where all the crimes are defined, right? That's what I mean, but so if you're Isn't there a crime for willingly willfully knowingly and recklessly submitting false information to the state that's just Uh, you that that is Yes, there there is but what you're saying here is What the penalty will be if you just say that the penalty Providing false or misleading information is an administrative penalty Then you basically said that the title 13 provisions don't apply Oh, I see. I see what you mean Well, I also think this underscores why we would want to include the in good standing language in our bill You know, it's kind of interesting that the agency put this in but then it's uncomfortable the in good standing. I think But uh I don't good good standing you you won't even get to an application Right, you won't have the ability to provide false or misleading information if you're Not in good standing, right, right. That's why I think we should have it in our bill We should they should have to be in good standing to even be able to apply But I don't know this seems a little harsh, but I'm not sure Yeah, it's pretty Pretty stiff, but if you're going to give you know somebody a hundred grand or 125 grand um, and they're You know, they're up against the wall with no money. No food. Uh cows that need to be fed they Might put something a little misleading in their application. I don't know but um, I would hope not but You know, they're hurrying and Well, we'll throw this in and that'll help bring the thing up But I like that You know that imprisonment and all that stuff you know I I again, I I don't really want to criticize the agency here. I think they probably just took that five year um provision from from a title 13 crime um, but that that Kind of speaks to a larger issue that the judiciary committees have been looking at The penalty awards or or requirements in statute are very inconsistent um, and the the example I use is that Involuntary manslaughter has a maximum imprisonment of of two to three years Whereas if you impede a livestock inspector, you're subject to the same penalties for homicide, which is life imprisonment so you you've got some Significant disparities in penalty amounts throughout the statute and One of the things that the judiciary committees have been talking about is like breaking down um penalties based on either amounts or severity previous convictions So so you have opportunity here and it's something that you hadn't talked about And I just wanted to put it in front of you because the agency has a Has a different proposal and I just wanted you to be aware of it Yeah, well, maybe um Maybe you should have a conversation with Steve Okay, and try to get this down so it makes sense so it The the penalties fit the crime and and not just You know Okay Maybe Yeah, so you're not on the screen Chris. Oh, but I am okay. Um Michael this surely is coming up for other business Grant programs and and generally around our carers money getting out the door And so it would seem to me Logical that we don't have each Committee coming up with their own Penalty, you know provisions now potentially the ad grants are a bit bigger than Restaurant grants or whatever, but we ought to have some consistent framework. And so I'm wondering If we could ask you Michael to check in with Others who are helping economic development and others and maybe we would do the same at a chairs meeting or something It just strikes me. We ought to have a consistent approach here Sure. And and there are Large grants and some of the other the restart grant is I think it's up to 250 000 dollars. So um I think That's it's a good point. Yeah, that's a good suggestion Okay, should I move on? Yeah Um, so that basically brings you to the end of the program And then you get the appropriation I can't remember who referenced that that the Money pot was the same But the word pot was different Actually the way that the the pots are set up in in the draft in front of you the the money pot is separate to There's two separate appropriations for the two separate programs There would be whatever amount you appropriate for the milk producer program We already talked about the reversion language Um, and so that would be section two is what appropriation you want for the milk producer assistance program? Um What uh page is that michael page eight line one? Oh, so this this is your total appropriation for the milk producer program. I think I think I think we're gonna have to put a number in there and Um, I don't know if we make it work out, but the the number The number I've fooled with is For the dairy part of this And the farm part is 21 793 750 21 million seven 93 750 That's a oddly specific number. How did you come to that? You want to round it up or I work the numbers backwards in okay, okay, that's what I want So you start out with you know trying to be fair to the farmers and and so they You know, so we get the right amount to the right groups or somewhat and and then you multiply it all out separately by the numbers and That I don't know if that number is going to be good or not, but we leave that open And come back to it once we get to playing You know figuring the numbers Go on do that Yeah, bobby. Did you get a a total number from Jane or whomever uh for the ag package that were that we have Plus hopefully a separate number for the food security Yeah, you were you were right with your projected number earlier the 30. Yeah, that's what I thought. Yeah So I have a breakdown too, but um That I've been fooling with for the different programs But maybe we can go through the full bill and then talk about the numbers and then back up. Yeah I like your number mr. Chair. Let's just leave that one in there for a minute That was that was good max You leave it there, but I've got it. I've got it pretty secure I want to know how many how many pennies out of the 1.25 billion that is Uh, that would be um 21 would be $21 If you've got 1,250 million And we're taking 21 um or If you take the full amount 30 bucks out of the total amount, so We aren't getting it. We aren't getting a lot. I'll tell you it sounds like a lot, but In the grand scheme of things The governor at least gave us $50 Okay, should I move on? Yes So If you move down on page 8 line 12, this is now the ag producer processor systems program It had previously just been about those agricultural producers that were not milk producers But it now includes um commercial processors. You'll see that on page 8 line 18 Those are people who process livestock or poultry products for Commercial use On page 9 and it includes commercial slaughterhouses It includes dairy processors, which the administration had Combined with the milk producers It has that definition of economic harm. We already discussed how are you going to gauge loss For dairy processors and commercial slaughterhouses because you don't have that That federally set milk price like the milk producers do You have a broad definition of eligible applicant that brings in all of the different eligible Entities under a universal definition Yep, your economic harm definition on lines 11 through 13. Yeah, it's got my producer. Yeah. Yeah Yeah, okay um Then you have a definitional farmers market And Someone asked last week how many farmers markets there are i ask the agency if they register farmers markets, they don't There is a farmers market association that know for runs know for a list about 55 people 55 events Or or markets, but there's some duplication there say a summer market versus a winter market So I would say the numbers between 50 and 60 Then you have that definition of good standing and whether or not you wanted to apply to this program as well And then you have the establishment of the program So it would provide eligible applicants so Agricultural producers that aren't milk producers Dairy processors commercial slaughterhouses commercial processors of farmers markets direct relief grant payment to offset economic harm occurred to Encouraged due to the COVID-19 public health emergency you have that they have to be currently operating They have to be in good standing and they have to accurately demonstrate to the secretary of economic harm That occurred between march 1st 2020 and december 30 2020 again that december 30 2020 date should change Yeah The key difference for This program is on page 11 9 through 11 The eligible applicant shall not receive an award under the section if the applicant had a net business profit between march 1st 2020 and july 1 2020 I didn't know when to send the set the the back end date You know the the july date Should it be later in the summer? Should it be Before the applicant, I don't know when you want to send sets that that that end date for when they have to show an economic harm You even if if you leave this state in uh, usually Uh, you know say the end of june, you aren't going to really get everything tallied up Until probably mid july for the first six months say um So I I don't know you could move that out a little further. I would think so I wanted to flag it for you. I used july 1 because it's a fiscal year date but I I wanted to flag that I don't really know what the appropriate end date is for that period well I've moved that out to september so The one thing about moving it to september. I I agree. I think it should be moved but that also would imply that These guys couldn't get their money until in the fall Which may be problematic for them because you can always say well You didn't have a profit for the first three months, but you might have a profit a huge profit on the back end and then it would compensate you for your losses, so So It's tricky because we want them to be able to get this money on the sooner side Well We're already the part way through june now Move it to august Yeah, maybe august 1st is a good Yeah, yeah, and then michael I did want to ask you that you have um In on wage 11 lines, I think it's four and five Economic harm is not compensable under the section if the same expenses have been or will be covered by insurance or another federal grant Is that same language in the the Farmer part of it. It is it is. Okay, great. Thanks Um Then you get to administration. It's it's largely the same if not exactly the same as what you have for the milk producers um Then on page 12 You get to the maximum award remember when you were were talking about the administration Proposal for dairy processors. It was based on the amount of of milk that they processed which was Sinked to their milk handler their their Yeah, their milk handler license You don't really have that kind of breakdown for Commercial slaughterhouses commercial processors farmers markets, etc So I don't know how you want to set the maximum award under this program um so yeah But the what the administration have in there did they even take that into consideration? Well remember the administration only had dairy processors Getting the award that and they had it based on houndage of milk processed Which was effectively what their milk handler license is the the license fee is based on You you don't have a You don't have a similar Framework to work off of for for the other eligible applicants No, because there's uh besides slaughter there's others Right, there there is some frameworks for that for the ag producers who are not milk producers And I can get that to you the agency has some of that but It's it's not there for to my knowledge for commercial slaughterhouses and commercial processors What mr. Chair? Yeah, I wonder if we could ask Michael that all of the the dollar amount decisions flow from one another and so I wonder if We could just get them on one page You know just under the headline of what they are and And that way when we turn once we once we have sort of settled on the arenas we want to address we could Just back and go back and fill in numbers, you know To we because we have sort of We have uh As I think if we have our overall number now we we're working with 30 million Buckets and then within the buckets. We want to say how much is the maximum grant And even in there there's some subcategory so It's tricky as we keep running into these blanks to think about them uh individually and it would help me if we could Turn our attention when we want when we get there When we have the framework then we would all at once fill in all of the numbers I don't know if that makes sense to anybody else, but Well, you know if you want to talk about slaughter facilities You know, I've been fooling around with the beef stuff and They're out they're out anywhere from three to six months on getting a date when you can take your animal and to be uh to be slaughter You know I I really wonder about If they've even had any type of a loss. I think it's great to have them in here In case they have but Even the little guys the they're doing Just a few animals are out, you know months For hogs and In chickens and the whole nine yards that they've been Crazy busy but anyways Yeah Sorry, so hard to see you all in these tiny little boxes. Um, but On the screen now, but Chris is yeah, he bumped me. Um Well, I I agree I think that probably some of the slaughterhouses are doing better than they have ever been doing But some of the beef producers are not doing as well. I talked to one who had You know a loss in april of Almost 30 000 loss. He's a beef producer So and part of it is because he can't get his animals to the facilities because they're all They're all full but i'm wondering I I think chris is right having it all in one place would be helpful and bobby It sounds like you've done you've worked some numbers and i'm happy to work some numbers And maybe if each of us puts together a little table Then we can compare notes tomorrow I'm happy to do that and send it out and say hey, this could work Um, I love messing around with numbers, but I also wonder after ebes testimony and also the complications with Putting everybody in the same bucket If we might want to have a separate program for dairy processors and then we could base it out on the amount of milk processed and then a separate program for non-dairy of everybody else That is based on different criteria. Um for amounts Just throwing that out there. I know it makes more work Another thing and then we have three programs instead of two programs, but I do think famous water facilities in there and other farmers in there just in case they have losses is really helpful because there may be facilities That had a significant expenses that they didn't get covered too. So Anyway, just throwing that out there Well, it would be good if if we had numbers You know, wherever they are or whatever they are to You know and and figure it all out at the same time Uh, I think that way we could be equitable To an extent if we see them all on the same Same page Anybody want to talk on my phone? No I kind of do All right, uh, so anyways If you want to any of you want to pull with the different numbers for the different categories We We'll keep working through the bill and and then we'll have a Try to get them to michael or somewhere is where we can analyze them all at the same time But but I I can put the other that one pager It won't won't be hard Okay I think it would be good to see those numbers all on page to be able to take a look at them a little The idea of pulling the process of dairy processors out and keeping them in separately. It's not necessarily a bad idea I don't want us to fall down the path of Giving people awarding grants based on how big they are though, you know, it's because you process more milk You're going to get more money I'd rather see us make sure that we maintain a focus on some of the smaller processors As tricky as that may be that's my biggest concern is that those smaller guys actually get the support They need to keep going Yeah, I agree anthony and I I think we should weight it toward the small end for sure and put a cap on the large end At least my feeling Okay, so you want full of that one pager michael sure So my one question is you have gotten specific funding requests from some of the programs or projects in here um For example vatb said they need 192 thousand dollars for the viability That they would be viability services. They would be providing Do you want that on the one pager as well? Do you want everything on the one pager just the things you need to make decisions about? I think we're gonna keep track of all the beans. Uh, it should be on the page. Yeah, all right, we'll do Yeah, I agree I I think we're being short changed with with the overall number personally You know, I think the 30s a little while Yeah, the the challenge is We I think agree that it's smart to hold some of the money back in case You know, it's hard to predict what september looks like and it's hard to predict Whether or not the feds will let us use money to to help with school funding and stuff like that and we can't have Can't have it all sadly. No, we can't spend it all now. That wouldn't be wise at all and so but I don't want to do more I don't want to have to retain more from ag than the other parts of state government are retaining from their sections But anyways, let's move on Okay, I think the the language about processing applications and assistance payments and And the penalty provisions They're all the similar not the same for the the milk producers So you can skip over them the issues that you've identified for the milk producers are the same For this language That brings you to page 14 section 4. This is just what appropriation amount you want to have for The ag producer and processor program that will go on the one pager Then you come to the farm worker retention program The I want to bring up for you an issue that came up in US treasury issued a frequently asked question document last week And it may It may influence your decision they issued it on may 28th Yeah, that's a little shaky to do I think So there were questions that were posed to treasury about whether or not There could be payroll benefits programs And generally they said No that that workforce bonuses are not allowed, but hazard pay may be allowed And they just said that hazard pay means additional pay for performing hazardous duty or work involving physical hardship In each case that is related to covid-19 And then they further said that the employee must have Substantially dedicated to mitigating or responding to the covid-19 public health emergency So I am not sure that the way that I have drafted this program right now Beats those criteria It's going to be a stretch of the imagination. I would think unless you can Unless you can rewrite our You know this section to to fill in here because Yeah Yeah, that's going to be hard to cover They say they did say that hazard pay was okay The FAQs that you sent out and yeah Page six The question is the guidance includes workforce bonuses as an example of ineligible expenses provides that hazard pay Would be eligible if otherwise determined to be a necessary expense Is there a specific definition of hazard? That says hazard pay means additional pay for performing hazardous duty or work Involving physical hardship in each case that is related to covid-19 So that that would cover our Our essential workers bill that would answer that question that the house is all Debating right now, but it I I don't know that bill well enough to answer that question but potentially And then it also could potentially The food service workers bill or provision that we were talking about for the school food service workers If we were to do something like that because they were Directly responding to yes, and and I I would go to page seven of the frequently asked question document Where the question was may payments from the fund be used to cover across the board hazard pay for employees working during a state emergency And the answer was no The guidance says that funding may be used to meet payroll expenses That it says for public safety public health public health care human services and similar employees whose services are substantially dedicated to mitigating A responding to the covid-19 public health and I think food service employees fit underneath that I think those school workers were Substantially dedicated to make mitigating or responding to the public I think the school nutrition workers have a better argument that they qualify for hazard pay Especially since the demand For their program and the demand on their time and what they had to do In response was different from their everyday duties right, but they didn't work They didn't work with children all I mean I don't know about in other towns, but you know our food service people worked in the kitchen with With their normal employees Uh that they'd been working with making you know, they're they're bad meals to ship on the school bus Uh, they didn't even go to the houses with the food. They had boxes little cooler boxes usually by a mailbox or Uh set it on the porch or something so they didn't even the ones that delivered it didn't have direct contact with With people They were responding directly to the covid crisis and doing a job that was different and in in a lot of school districts they used paraprofessionals not just the regular food service workers to add because they needed to add capacity to both deliver and package and prepare the food but I mean, this is a tangent, but it does seem to me that the guidance would cover them, but I understand that The way that this farm worker thing is drafted right now it would not Fit into that box And that if we were to do it, we would have to use general fund money Yeah, I think that that would probably be your safest alternative To use general fund money. Yeah, well, we'd probably get shot as a committee if we suggested that We aren't getting hazardous pay to go before the squad Chris you had a question. Well, I wonder if Mike I look It's not worth printing A document that calls on general fund dollars. It's just not I don't want to set our friends up for disappointment down the the hall. I really don't I doesn't seem genuine to me so General dollars. I mean if people want to do that, we can talk about it, but I does not seem like a smart strategy I wonder Michael if farm workers had to take on extra hours because Not everybody could work because of health risks, etc Would that be a way of maybe not covering the whole universe but um Better, you know giving us a shot at at federal dollars um I I can I can think about that. There's also a A little subgroup of pledge council and jfo employees that are looking at At these questions when they come up and kind of opining whether or not they think they're Qualifying or not I can I could put that in front of them as well He did you guys want to take a five minute break and We'll just leave everything on like it is and we'll just Take a five minute break to get water or whatever and come back That's fine. I mean, I do have to jump off at 11 30. The pro tem has called me into a meeting. So just an fya Yeah, well time we're getting short change. I'll be glad to He'll hear that you guys are Yeah, brian Brian and I both have another meeting to go to a new We have to be in another meeting it before before noon Well, maybe we should just go for the next 15 minutes and then just add earlier something Well, I gotta see a minute about a horse. Oh, sorry, brian Okay, five minutes Okay Michael, can I ask your question? sure Was the original amount in this farm worker section 500,000? I noticed it's not 600 it was so originally there was The the way that the eligibility was set up it would have it would have been a little bit A smaller group But now with with farm worker retention And it being anyone that didn't qualify for CARES Act stimulus That would bring in people like dependents like 18 19 year old Adults that were living at home. They didn't qualify for CARES Act. So We thought that the the appropriation might need to be expanded a little bit to deal with that Yeah, I was just trying to remember. I thought it was originally a hundred thousand dollars less Yeah, it was Which section was that brian? the migrant workers Originally was 500,000 and now I see in the bill the revision here at 600 So Michael was just explaining why it went up by a hundred Yeah, I don't think we're gonna be able to do them anyways, but yeah It was just a question. Yeah, yeah The So you guys have got another meeting at noon We do there's an amendment on the floor that's coming up this afternoon and they wanted to Have the government operations committee look at it first Yeah the You were kind of outnumbered in a committee on that thing yesterday Well, that's a familiar position for me bobby Yeah Well, I mean I pulled around with the election since I was 21 years old and I was the moderator And boy, I'm skeptical of that sending votes out and No I mean when my when my brother told me his wife had been dead for over a year Well, it was the second year and when the ballots came down there in florida there was linda right on She got her ballot tried along with his and I mean, that's not good anyways That's a that's another battle another story and we'll See if that works out well or not That's where that's where anthony and I have to go at noon Yeah Yeah Ruth should be are you with us ruth? um Well, we can get started that michael uh where we left off and We're on page 15 I think you can skip to page 21 if you want to skip over the farm worker retention program Well, that's um Good, uh, we'll tell ruth that missing uh being absent didn't help her cause um So that takes you to page 21 line 18 section seven Yeah, and uh, you had had in your bill you wanted, uh Occupational safety Information available to farms. Uh, you wanted the secretary of agriculture to produce it the secretary of agriculture said that bossha already Produces that information So this section now requires the secretary of ag After consultation with bossha and the department of labor To post on the agency of ag's website educational material Um related available from bossha Related to farm worker health and safety including bossha's recommended best practices for preventative measures Um to address the threat to health and safety posed by covet 19 And then the secretary of ag shall post the english and spanish language versions which apparently bossha has Uh, and then provide links or references on how to obtain the material from bossha and other languages And there's no appropriation needed for that, correct? Uh, it just basically would use part of the service time of a full-time employee at the agency of agriculture I think that could be assumed into the agency's budget Yeah, thank you Shall I move on? Yeah Section eight is an appropriation to vatb $192,000 from the corona virus relief fund to provide business financial and mental health assistance Farmers who suffer losses or expenses due to business interruptions caused by covet 19 public health emergency Consulting shall include information and assistance with accessing federal and state covet relief funds Access to additional markets diversification of income streams access to mental health services Another assistance farmers may require to address or recover from business interruption caused by the covet 19 public health emergency Yeah, I ran that language by Ella Jen That language is fine. Now. We'll just have that 192 on our list. Yes. Yes. Yeah um Then that brings you to section nine, which is The meals on wheels section So you wanted to um provide some additional appropriation to meals on wheels to meet the additional demand or cost That they were experiencing and getting uh food assistance to vulnerable populations So this would provide in addition to any other funds that are appropriated to dale and fiscal year 2021 for providing nutritious nutrition services to older brahmanners or other vulnerable populations A dollar amount from the corona virus relief fund to dale for distribution to the area agencies on aging And those that's the entity that that coordinates meals on wheels and provides services For use prior to december 30th to pay for expenses incurred in delivering food To older brahmanners and other vulnerable populations and compliance with public health or social distancing requirements Implemented in in response to the covet 19 public health emergency but that particular section I mean that should be coming out of health and welfare's portion of covet money and going to dale I would think and I don't I don't know where we came up with that to put it into our ag bill, but I I think that with us being limited with funds. I think I mean, I haven't got I haven't got strong feelings about keeping this in the bill Very well, I I can't remember who it was. I think it may have been senator hardy when this was discussed She said that you should be clear with the appropriations committee or leadership that this shouldn't come out of the ag bucket That this should come out of Another bucket And that's that's what I believe what she said Yeah, thanks, Michael. I was I was under the impression that we were going to do two bills. Sorry chris That we're going to do two bills one was going to be the ag relief bill and one was going to be food security bill and that the food security bill would not be part of the 30 million or whatever we get for ag but that would be shared among a bunch of committees the health and welfare education economic development And we would sort of all be on board with wanting to provide funding for food security So, um recall I spoke to senator liens about this and She was glad to hear that we were going to give it a start And we all thought that it was important to have a food A bunch of the food related stuff in one place whether or not it's in this bill. I I don't have strong feelings But for sure it should not come out of the 30 million. I mean, I think Yeah, that we're all saying that so I don't know where we get that I don't know if that means it shouldn't be in this bill Or or if you want to work through appropriations or or with senator lines directly We could also just send her this language what I told her was we were looking into it We didn't want to step on toes, but we wanted to make sure that This was thought through and she was grateful and we just kind of agreed to talk again. So Tell me what I think I come out of the 30 million clearly. I think she's going to be putting together some health care Stuff and and yeah, this should get she should deal with this I think Yeah, I say send it over to health and welfare Well, I would I don't mind sending it over to health and welfare, but I agree that and I certainly agree It shouldn't come out of the 30 million we're talking about I just want to really make sure that it does happen. It doesn't get lost in the shuffle somewhere I mean, obviously access to food is a big big big part of the problem we're facing and It is part of the agricultural system. I understand why it shouldn't be in this bill But I think that's behooves us to make sure that it happens somewhere Yeah, I agree and there was also the piece on the the school food meals That was similar, you know that we were going to have it all in one place. So there was a basically a food bill But but across a bunch of committees Yeah, that's the next section I think So Michael will will hold this up and And we'll make arrangement sometime along to shift this to health and welfare Okay Let's leave it in here now because we're all agreeing that we want to make sure it happens. Is that sound fair but but You know explore how either we get money in or we ship these sections out Yes Okay, should I move on? Yeah well Linda, could you post the other language that I sent this morning? so Remember when I told you I was going to draft the school nutrition Language I said I was just going to take a shot at it, but I would need to talk to rosie I didn't talk to rosie until either monday or late monday and so she recommended that I Rework some of these proposals And that's what I did Um, and so For the summer meals program She indicated that I don't need to create this whole big new grant program like I did in the the original bill That I really just need to increase the money that's appropriated To the agency of education for distribution to summer meal sponsors to assist In the payment of costs that they are that are incurred in order to comply with COVID-19 public health precautions where it will accommodate increased participation in the program due to COVID So no big crazy grant program necessary for summer meals just an additional appropriation to address those additional costs And then Going on into section of the new section 11 Um, I don't know I emailed it to all of you Michael does it say alternative nutrition programs? It's on now alternative school. Yeah, that's it This just falls into to me a similar bucket of Is this coming out of our our 30 million or not? I would hope not but We want to also make sure it happens. So Uh, I guess it's on the same list. I don't know if you have thoughts on that senator hardy or senator star Well it I don't know where does that money come from At the present time does that come out of it doesn't come out of the ag agency's budget I don't believe No, it's the agency of ed Yeah, and Ruth have you guys talked at all about this in education But I I told education similar to what the conversation chris had with jenny I told my committee that we were working on something and that once I had language I would share it with them I I still think we should just do a separate bill that includes all the food stuff And then we can have each committee that's reg that has a piece of it Take a look at that bill, but that we have you know, then we have four committees who are all committed to This food stuff goes forward and it wouldn't be taken out of ag It wouldn't be taken out of anybody's pot. It would be a food pot. I mean I don't get to make these decisions, but that's what I would do Um, and then we're all on board with it and I'll have a sort of reason to want to see it go forward It I guess the only book that guy'd offer is More bills means more chance for problems so If we can get the money from other pots into this bill Then there's some wisdom to pushing it all at once, but That you know, I'm not picky about it. I just We're struggling to see bills advance at some level. So Particularly the house is struggling because of their numbers to just function. So Uh, I I think there is an argument For having it all in one bill Okay, that's fair. I defer to you as long as we just make sure it happens and I think put piecing it out might be make Make it less viable Well, the only thing is our word We're stuck with as far as I know the 30 million and and every Million that we give away to you know, don't use for dairy and processing and and that is a you know money that we Don't have to deal with Brian Thank you, Bobby. I guess I'm going the other way on this. Um I mean, I think I think we all agree that both the school program and the Meals on Wheels is a good Thing to do But I've learned over the years mostly from the chair of this committee That if you have two committees that are both solidly behind something you have a better chance of pushing it to the finish line So I would be hopeful that the senate Committee on Health and welfare would take the Meals on Wheels part knowing that the five of us would support whatever they have in their bill Because it would include that and the same thing here if if the education committee is going to advance anything Legislatively I would put the summer meals program in their bill and again Senator bruce would know at that point that he's got five People that would support his situation. I just I think it's important that we get 10 people pulling the thing the same way and not five Well, you've got to be able to count in this game that we're in and That's the best way i've ever known to count is get other committees involved and and uh get them on board and And then back them up and help them I'm all for a broad coalition The health and welfare committee is also dealing with a umpteen hundred million dollar hospital relief bill And the ed committee's got to deal with the ed fund and the colleges and childcare so Let's all can we all agree that we're going to figure out a strategy as long the That we don't want it coming out of the ag bucket of money And we want these to go forward and we'll figure out Where the best You know that we got to be protective of our of our allotment of money And I just under normal times absolutely you would just say here's some ideas. We hope you'll do this I just am not super confident that it will happen if we Jettison this so i'd like to reserve the chance to Either get confirmation it will happen somewhere else Or as long as the money is not coming out of our bucket Figure out if we maybe are smart to do it here Well, I'd love to do it if they'd give us an extra few million dollars without question. Absolutely I'd be more than happy to do it because it really needs to be done but um Yeah, I I'm sure that education And health and welfare's number Is going to be much greater than our number to start with and seems like They'd have more leeway Uh to to do more with a large pot of money Than a small pot of money And I understand that the issues we face politically and whatnot, but it's hard for me to imagine the senate Saying no to a package of anti-hunger programs at this time at this time and given this situation where it's just hard to imagine It not moving forward. I couldn't wait. I couldn't imagine the arguments that are going to be made on the floor As to why we shouldn't fund hunger programs. That's right. I think you know, we've got an advantage there to be given the emergency issue that we're dealing with Okay, so chris we're all I think pretty much in agreement that we either get more money Or we help the other committees with their proposals and add this in and Support them on the senate floor to achieve the goal Yeah, okay Senator hardy and I will we'll bounce back to the respective committees and and does that make sense. We'll check back in Yeah, sounds good Yeah I'm sorry, go ahead michael. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt No, I I just wanted to make it clear. I'm not against either Initiative I just didn't want to have a bill coming out of senate ag that said here's what we think and oh by the way You guys are going to pay for it. We're not I just didn't You know what I mean? I didn't think that was A good idea. Y'all know you don't care about feeding kids, right? Yeah, starve them suckers Yeah, and don't educate them either Uh, no, no, I push comes to shove. We'll we'll take care of the kids and the old folks Uh, okay, michael So i'm leaving i'm leaving them in the the bill for now Yeah okay So the the next program would be a grant program run by aoe but it's to provide grants to school food authorities for equipment that they may need to implement covet 19 public health precautions and to address an increased demand so it Will do you can go on to page two You'll see uh money would be appropriated to the agency of ed from the coronavirus relief fund To award grants to school food authorities for costs of point of sale equipment packaging equipment or other equipment Uh required in order to comply with covet 19 public health precautions when providing school nutrition services. So next year Food school lunches are going to be provided in the classroom in order to comply with social distancing requirements, they won't be in the cafeteria So schools are going to need to buy packaging equipment and point of sale equipment For their students in order to be able to to provide the necessary services And so this is it would be an equipment Grant for a grant for that type of equipment Um, it would be administered by the agency of ed And then you'll see that they the awards would be Available to a school food authority that demonstrates the need per equipment due to the coveted public health emergency for Expenditures for equipment that they already incurred between march 1 2020 and november 30th 2020 due to the covet 19 public health emergency So if they've already spent to buy this equipment due to covet 19, um, they are not ineligible. They can still Um receive a payment for that See that that should be hard with the other bills on going ahead Well, right. I think the the remainder of the sections in the bill are all those types of sections. They're all about, um, Uh, an either a nutrition program Um school nutrition programs for the uh appropriation to the remand food bank So should I talk with bill ruth in regards to this stuff because You know This should be going to to the education I mean if you'd like to I I already talked to the committee and they were just and I think they're supportive of us working on it and then having them take a look at it and I I just um, I I don't know exactly what the right strategy is I just don't want this to get lost and right now in the education committee. We don't have a big COVID relief bill like we do here in the ag committee So should we should we kind of go through this then and Shape it up so that if we do send it to To fill in education, that'll be pretty much right Yeah, I think that would be helpful bobby Well, we may as well We've got 45 minutes left. We may as well run through this and michael and and um And try to shape it up or see if it needs any additional work Okay What what are you you said a point of sale? Yeah equipment is that like Sometimes in a restaurant when you pay with a credit card they bring over the little thing right to your table and you Is that what we're talking about? right, so Most kids have a code That they that they use in order to access their their um school food accounts or whatever So They're gonna need to have something like that Portable that they can take around to the different classes. So when lunches are delivered The kid can code in their code and and So that's what I thought did rosa give you a crude number for that? No, she did not See I think I can't help but think mr. Chair that uh We're gonna spend 11 million dollars on some little computer system. So everyone can punch in their code Or we'll spend 18 million dollars and just feed them all On your school lunches. This is a dumb That whole deal's a dumb idea. Why don't they stagger the lunch periods most in our schools? our lunch Our lunch is provided in the school gym Well, you let a hundred kids into that gym you can keep them six feet apart And they could eat off their same trays They wouldn't be lugging food around so I'd be called and it gets to the classroom, but rose Yeah, I just want to say on this piece um I do want to caution you that they haven't made any decisions yet about how schools are gonna He'd you know do the their lunch periods In the fall I think there's a speculation that it will be done in the classroom in order to maintain social distancing But no decision has Definitely been made and I think it will also depend on the school. Some of the piney or schools may be able to Have their lunch programs run the same way because there just aren't that many kids But certainly the burlington schools are gonna have to rework their their If any of you have ever gone to lunch at burlington high school There's no way they can do it the same way because they're just so many kids So I think it depends on the school. So when I had a conversation with rosie about this piece michael um, it was I I thought it made more sense to hold off on this until the next Round of things until we know more about how schools are going to work In the fall because we just don't have enough information yet And I also think The the the term equipment might it's more like equipment and supplies because some of it is supplies for their packaging And some of it is equipment in order to package things Um, so this may be a little this part of it might be premature and maybe focusing on the summer stuff Um, is is a better way to go Whatever the committee wants just hold it in your back pocket because I think we might Need to come back to this once we have more idea of how schools are going to work in the fall Okay, so where do we food service? Where do we go next michael? So that would be on the alternative language Section 12. It's a it's a school food service worker retention benefit There's been some discussion about how the food service workers are Maybe kind of at a threshold where they may be leaving And the schools need them now for the summer meals program and going into the fall and that their Hazard pay benefit would help retain some of those school food service workers and so this is similar to Uh, what you've seen in a couple of other places where they're on page four of the Alternative document Line eight subsection c There would be established a school food service worker retention program to award eligible food service workers with the $500 Direct relief grant payment Uh, the agency of ed probably doesn't have the Um resources to administer it the program itself So you'll see on page four line 15 That they may implement the program either through block grants to school food authorities for awards to school food service workers We're by contracting with the public or private entity to conduct outreach process grant applications and deliver grant payments So the rest of it is kind of just administrative The agency has the ability to set the guidelines and set the application and what the process would be um, there are some limitations on Um, the can what a school district supervisory union or independent school should provide that they can't require any Eligible food service worker to pay an administrative fee Um in order to obtain the grant payment. They can't reduce the hourly compensation of the worker And That's basically it The payment would go to the food school authority. Um, who would then Uh Distribute to distribute it to the the worker within five days of receipt Um That's that's the program. I do want to mention two things. It would include Workers at school district supervisory unions and independent schools And it also includes In some schools they contract with providers Private companies to provide the school nutrition services Those workers would still likely be eligible There is an opportunity for The Because this would not be considered income from Underneath that contract the the school or the food service Authority could Negotiate with the private contractor In order to allow for payment of this benefit to those Those school workers who are operating under a contract Instead of working directly for the school Yep Discussion any questions on this? About You know, this is part of that whole educational piece. I would think right Ruth Yeah, oh, yeah, I mean definitely and I think that Uh, Michael putting in some language about Some if if that essential workers bill does actually ever pass the house Some of the the ones that work for the contract groups like the abbey group Would qualify for that essential worker bill So maybe some language that they can't have received those payments or UI payments or whatever that sort of standard. I think you had that in the Bill Yeah, and then also does it make sense to put dates in any, you know have been employed From march 1st through whatever. I don't I don't know if that makes sense or not, but it seems to me that You know, there are some food service workers who worked during the height of this Crisis and then some we want to make sure work this summer and next fall But I don't know if dates Defining who we're talking about Um that that's yeah, I understand your position. Um, I can add that into the definition of a food school food service worker if you would like And the third thing is about, uh Uh does this would this cover and do we want it to cover People who are the administrators of the program like the food service directors and things like that Or do we just want it to cover the frontline people? The frontline people are the ones that get paid you know If not minimum wage not too high above minimum wage that I would think the directors are Yeah, pretty well taken care of I would hope Yeah, I agree. I think it's I'm not confident these people are I mean, I don't know. Maybe we could just have an income threshold or something Yeah And then the final thing is is that like I said some of these this spring some of these workers were Paraprofessionals who were sort of brought into working in food service and they may not that may not be what their job was but I would think we would want to cover them too because they were brought into package and deliver and You know really worked there Worked a lot on food service even though that wasn't their job. So so in the definition of of school food service worker includes those Employees of the school who were repurposed from their normal duties in order to perform previously on budgeted food services I thought that we were working one of the other committees working on a bill to help municipalities and school workers You know in a separate bill from the one that we've already sent the house Thought there was a bill coming along that dealt with municipal and school employees And none of you have heard anything about that There is a bill that's a municipal funding bill 16 million dollars That I think goes to reimburse at least municipalities for some of the expenses of staff and whatnot that has been affected by the by the pandemic It's actually coming to the floor this afternoon. I think I'm not sure if there's a bill you're talking about but it might be But in there something for school Also school. I didn't see school in the bill that I'm thinking of but I could just missed it I don't I haven't heard of anything, but no, I don't know if Michael Yeah, Sorokin's committee is working on something economic development. Maybe I'm not sure Well, I guess we'll have to check that out Okay Bobby I have to jump off. What what is I always think we do, uh, you know, we could talk about this for weeks to come. What what is your target? Um, do you have one and and as tim coordinated with you or What's your thinking? well Yeah, if we if we go way back to when we started And we were going to do like the three the three payments to uh bobby's hotline If we go back and do the three payment deal, uh, you know, it was eight like eight million dollars a flat to well, if you You know, if we stay within that framework um, and we've got the I pulled with the numbers and That was like 28 million dollars. I think somewhere in the neighborhood Well, then they come out and tell us well, you know That it's not a good deal that you can only do You know 30 total and it has to include processors So you crack That all out and you go To two and a half. I kept fooling with the numbers If you go two and a half times What we started with It brings you to 21 the number I gave you earlier 21 seven seven nine three seven fifty Yeah I'm wondering when you expect to move the bill Oh, either Friday or Tuesday, I I mean We really got a because it's got to go to the house Yeah, no, I I understand that and I just wanted to understand the expectation. So and and they may They may be willing to take a portion of the bill And move it separately Without tying it to all the rest of Michael's Stuff And so I'd like to get it out Toward the end of the week Or friday or or first part of next week We may have to if we wanted to do it Tuesday we may have to work a bit on monday to try to get it finalized and And now You know, we'll have to talk about time and and all that but if we had 21 21 something already gone that leaves us only seven or eight for For the rest and And it's kind of tight So anyways We How do you think the the packs of the bill up to the food stuff Fell in the line. Is that pretty good? I think Michael did you have For the food bank somewhere you mentioned that but Yeah, you know one of the things I wanted to mention Which I've been thinking a lot about today when we talk about where the hunger stuff should go Is originally the idea was that the hunger stuff fit into our bill in part because we were doing things that affected hunger That also involved vermont food and vermont farmers things like the vermonters feeding vermonters program at the food bank and Cast crops the NOFA program whatnot And I think we've sort of moved away from that. I'm not saying we intentionally moved away from it But we are away from that idea I thought that we were going to combine hunger programs with programs that actually support vermont farmers So i'm not so sure that we've done that at this point I don't mean to throw a monkey wrench in things But I just think it's that's a connection that we had originally talked a lot about and now we're not talking about so much Yep, you're right We could we could embed that back into the food part of it Yeah, and that's it wouldn't be hard to fix to do it It's just it's got me thinking a lot about it today thinking about where to place the hunger programs They should be part of that because they should be supporting farmers as well There is a section in the bill In fact, I think it's the last section about the vermont food bank and there's 4.6 million dollars appropriated to We just didn't get to that today. That's correct. Uh, I talked to the food bank about their needs Um, and why they're having those needs and how they were related to kovat 19 So I wrote in a finding section to play out the rationale for it According to the food bank, there's been a increase in food insecurity of 46 Percent due to the lost employment business closure or significant business interruption caused by kovat 19 And that the operating costs Of the food bank and its partners have increased significantly in order to address the dramatic increase in food needs And that in order to meet the need of vermonters facing food insecurity of the food bank and its partners will need additional funds to purchase more food Provide sub grants to food shops and meal sites and fund additional personnel materials and supplies In addition, they need some money to navigate the usda's c-fat program to get the food assistance that that's available under that And specifically for distribution because they've been using the national guard for a lot of their distribution and that's not necessarily Going to continue And so accessing the federal funds will help the food bank ensure successful food distribution to vermonters needs And then you get to the appropriation that senator common more referenced in addition to any funds appropriated to the department of health in 21 for providing nutrition services to vermonters 4.6 is appropriated from the coroner relief fund to the department of health for distribution to the food bank Reuse prior to december 30, 2020 to pay the additional costs including costs of personnel food materials warehouse-based delivery services and equipment necessary to meet the increased food security needs of vermonters caused by the COVID-19 public health emergency That's good. I would like to see the vermonters feeding vermonters program mentioned in there somehow Because that's the one where they actually buy from vermont farmers not saying they don't get other stuff from vermont farmers, but vermonters feeding vermonters is the program that they've been they were lobbying us to push to support before we had to leave the building Um, right remember Uh I don't know enough about that program to to respond to the question Yeah, all I know about all I know is they say that basically it means the food bank is buying stuff directly from vermont farmers at market crisis So maybe instead of referencing the actual program anthony because it's unclear what the status of it is We say that some language about wanting them to buy Food at market prices from far from vermont farmers. Yeah, and then the other thing michael you know There is this program that people can be eligible for snap That would help them and i'm wondering if the food bank and other agents if we should put language in there saying that we technical assistance to help people apply for food assistance programs like snap or something like that because You know, it's it's great to give away food, but really we want to have a more long lasting Solution which is to get people on programs where they can buy the food themselves And obviously get them back to work so they have income etc But you know in the interim when they need that food assistance getting them on the snap program That also helps eligibility for school food programs So I could read your lips Yeah, I could read your lips in fine. So I took the numbers at least that i've been writing down So bobby's dairy Number was 21 7 9 3 750 Then add in the 4.6 million for the food bank and 192 20000 for gust's shop and it comes out to 26 5 85 750 right now which Is close to the Ceiling but there's still a little bit there and I sure we can probably find well Yeah, but the big issue brian is there isn't a dime in any of that for the processing And I I'll take care of the the turkeys and You know chickens and the beef and You know have a little bit left for them So I mean it's really Getting pretty tight And I thought we'd have eight You know eight million for that but The food stuff we'd have to get our money But I know that's a critical piece to deal with Yeah, if you subtract what we've already sort of Played with in terms of allocation And take that away from the 30 you're left with 3.4 million Which as you point out is probably shy of the process of need Yeah well what the agency had was 10 for them and and 40 for us and now that we've got 30 for everybody. So we're 20 million short so Somebody's getting going to get shorted yeah Maybe we can all play around with the numbers this afternoon and talk about a more tomorrow morning and michael can We may have to Yeah um But anyhow, um Michael can you add the lines about the local food on the Yeah The you know the the food stuff it it adds up really quick to for all the hunger that we're facing And I I still have trouble understanding why Everybody is so hungry Because of you know everybody got Anger right from zero to 1200 dollars most citizens um You know the schools have been putting meals out five and six days a week To all the children The national guard has been putting food out from the military the you know the The unemployment has been increased to Anywhere's from you know with that extra six hundred dollars for the unemployed uh from the feds on top of the vermont uh unemployment um I I don't know it's just rough for me to understand why You know you see miles of car lines waiting to pick up food But you know I I guess I I'm not in burlington or The bigger places where it could even could be more compounded and more problems, but I think a lot of the programs that people just rely on getting food from are not happening And and in fact the numbers for feeding Kids in school are down particularly in the chitin and county area because they're not doing delivery So kids are not eating the school food as much They may be more in our areas bobby where they're delivering But they're lower in ruttland county and they're lower in chitin and county Or where the cities are yeah, and and then also people Are still having a hard time getting their unemployment benefits. They're still Challenges with getting those and I think there's just a general insecurity out there And not everybody got those $1,200 checks and those go pretty fast when you have to pay rent So I think there's just a huge insecurity and people are worried and nervous and So many people didn't have any kind of cushion At all so you know their cushion went away in two days and then There's scrambling to make ends meet in a in this really difficult time and and everybody nobody knows what the future is going to be So that makes it even harder Yeah, it's not a easy time right now. That's for sure Well, um, so I mean the food issues are you know, it's expensive and it's a big issue and it's a necessity You'd think that you know health and welfare would be really drilling down and In getting into this stuff, but I don't know if they are um, but I think you know, we've done our our share and and See I was going to do maybe if we had that 50 We would still do maybe 10 toward the food stuff and And we have we haven't got 10 But anyways, um We um Chris is going to talk to jenny Uh, you know and health and welfare and see what They can do and I talked to james some about Maybe getting trying to get a little bit more money So we could deal with with this And we haven't reached a resolve on that But she's very adamant that we not spend all of our money Because of the unknowns that could be coming later on this year So do you have anything else michael no not right now No So you want to you want to go back to the beginning and play with any of the numbers or play with the numbers separately and we'll start tomorrow morning Bealing with those I have no witnesses lined up because we need to work on this ourselves I'd like to go and meet room 11 and Around a big table where we could be six feet apart and discuss the damn thing Can I ask you um you guys what you think And michael uh that you know, we have that the the non Dairy farmer piece of it all together the processors and at everything And do you think it's better to have them all together or is it easier to separate out the cheese processors? Because then we can do it Some kind of based on volume of milk processed or does it work okay to have them all together? I'm sort of going back and forth on whether I think it's better Or not to have them together and Uh, what are your thoughts? anybody Nobody has thoughts okay I mean, I think it makes I think it makes more sense to put them all together I'm not even always sure why but it just seems like it's all agriculture and it's all farmers and They should be together in one piece of one piece of law. So I'm not convinced of that but that's just where my gut goes Yeah, that's I mean that's what I was thinking too But then when we get into the sort of how do we disturb? How do we decide the payment amounts? That's when I guess it's going to separate itself anyway eventually Well, what we could do is If we do the dairy part And we know how much we want to do With the food part if we're if we're going to have to do that or do dairy and give the agency the number and then That we expect them to use on dairy And then just give them another number and say this is for you to figure out how to hand out to the processors You know, we wouldn't have to work that down to Bear bones we It would be up to them to devise a system to pay it out to the processors My only concern is I I want to make sure that we take care of the little guys and I'm a little worried that the agency Might have In our dairy stuff, we we have done that, you know the the small and the small in the Small certified or getting you know quite a lot more money than The big guys if you add the medium and the smalls They're getting quite a lot a lot more than than the little you know Oh If if you take the medium Uh, oh, that's the wrong paper Um But I figured it all out. So, you know, we're using the the little guys, you know As good as You possibly can and still help the big guys Some I guess I'd be in favor of each of us just taking a spreadsheet and Yeah, taking it taking it apart putting it back together. Maybe have two or three different options and When we get together tomorrow, we'll have all that stuff done at least We do without witnesses tomorrow Linda, let us know Gus and Nick Richardson are coming in tomorrow morning They're coming tomorrow and not friday Well, that's what Linda said in the look in the chat box. Yeah. Yeah. Thanks, Brian. I didn't see that What time are we supposed to meet tomorrow? Are we meeting at nine again? Yes That's why I was planning on because some of the subgroups meet beforehand and It makes it rock Yeah, ours is meeting tomorrow 7 30. So The eyes is done What time? Ours is all done. I hope we met this morning at eight Yeah So we'll we'll plan to meet We'll plan to meet in the morning at nine And we'll go through till noon again Okay, sounds good And if you have any ideas with the numbers Work them hard All right. Thank you so much Michael Yeah, thank you. I just I just want to confirm what you want for me for next product You want a sheet with all of the appropriations decisions on it? So basically the the dairy assistants the processor assistants and all the other appropriations I'm going to revise the draft somewhat. I'm going to include the alternative food service language that for schools That that I I walked you through today because that's not in the overall bill Um right now And then I'm just going to make some minor revisions That you requested or that I noticed some typos and things like that. So I will I will have all of that for you tomorrow Yeah, okay Okay folks. Yeah, we'll see you on the floor. Thanks guys. See you later. Yeah, thank you