 Good morning, and thank you all for being here. This spring, Vermont will join states across the country to participate in the U.S. Census. Now this may not seem like the most exciting topic, but the consensus has tremendous importance to Vermont. And we've already begun work across the state to get a complete and accurate count. In fact, the census even came up in conversations with other governors while it was there in D.C. for the National Governance Association meeting last week, as well as when Speaker Pelosi spoke to us as well. So I'm pleased to have so many of our state, local, and federal partners here with us today to talk about this effort. Having a complete and accurate count on our population is critical in so many ways. It ensures fair representation of Vermonters at all levels of government and helps us to inform us on many important decisions we make, including the level of federal funds we receive. These decisions impact our work to grow the economy, make Vermont more affordable, and protect the most vulnerable in all of our 251 towns and villages. To help get the most accurate count possible, I signed an executive order in November, creating a Vermont Complete Count Committee. And many of the members who agreed to help are here with us today. We know this will take the collaboration of community leaders, nonprofit organizations, local government, legislative leaders, federal partners, and more. And this committee is working to make sure that we meet our goals. Jason Broden, our state librarian and chair of this committee, will share more on their work shortly, but in summary, this group is charged with identifying barriers to responding to the census. And trying to break through those barriers so we have the highest participation possible. This includes partnering with schools and nonprofits, ensuring outreach in multiple languages, media and education campaigns, and more. And knowing certain groups are historically hard to count, this committee includes leaders and experts representing these communities in order to better reach them. I want to thank Jason and all members of this committee, including Secretary Kondos and representatives from the U.S. Census Bureau, the Vermont State Census Data Center, the Office of Entrance Affairs, the Howard Center, Disability Rights, Vermont, the LGBTQIA Alliance of Vermont, Capstone Community Action, Association of Broadcasters, Vermont League of Cities and Towns, Vermont AARP, Voice for Vermont's Kids, and state agencies across my administration. So with all that, I'd like to now turn it over to Secretary of State Jim Kondos. Thank you. Olia, you all sat over there. Just making sure. Good morning. As Vermont Secretary of State and Chief Election Official, I am a proud member of the Vermont Complete Counts Committee. It is also important and personal for me as a second generation American, as my grandparents arrived on our shores in the U.S. 100 years ago. I want to stress the importance of the census and the importance of obtaining an accurate and complete count of all Vermonters. While a once every 10-year count of every person living in our cities and towns seems abstract, the census plays a fundamental role in our democratic process. Data from the census is critical to drawing our electoral maps. Yes, I know, when it comes to Vermont's congressional map, there's really only one way to draw it. However, the accurate census data enables the Vermont Apportionment Board to accomplish its important task of configuring our legislative districts. From an election standpoint, an inaccurate and complete census count really comes down to ensuring fair representation, as the governor said. In our political process for every single Vermont resident. For those of you who don't know me well, I have over 30 years of experience as a public servant. 18 years on the South Brooklyn City Council beginning back in 1989. To my eight years in the state senate serving with the governor, and now nearly for a decade as secretary of state. I cannot emphasize how important census data is to the basic functions of our local state and federal government. It's the primary tool for Congress and for other federal agencies to use while making funding decisions that impact all of our citizens, our schools, our roads, and highways. Examples, my colleagues and I were successful in securing recently, securing election security funding from Congress in both 2018 and 2019. With the support and leadership of the Vermont congressional delegation. Namely, Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy. Vermont's funding allocation was determined in part using critical census population data. I can also tell you from firsthand experience that census data is used by our city councils to select boards and school boards to make decisions that shape their communities in big ways and small ways. The census plays a fundamental role in our democracy. While there are some who have sought to wrap or the census process for political or personal gain. I am thankful that is not the case here in Vermont. During my time in public service, I have served in a number of national roles. I served on the board of directors of the National League of Cities. The board of directors of the Council of State Governments and most recently as the president of the National Association of Secretaries of State. In those capacities, I have seen how other states handle their support for the census and have gained the national perspective. I can tell you that Vermont is ahead of the game and that is why I'm so proud to be part of this important work. I want to thank everyone who was here for helping ensure a complete and accurate count. And thank the governor for convening this important committee. It is now my pleasure and honor to introduce Jason Broughton, State Librarian and the chair of the Complete Count Committee. Good morning, everyone. All right, I'm going to use some technology here. I'm moving from print to digital. And the reason why I say that is for those who are paying attention and aware, you might not know that the census will be virtual for the first time ever. So you will be able to use that digitally. You can use it on your own device or seek places where there are public, let's say, computers. And that's why libraries, and my other capacity as state librarian, will be utilized hopefully quite frequently for those who are monitors out in rural and remote places. It's going to be a very different type of census in which you don't have, for example, a type of card that will be sent to you first with a code. That's gone. You simply will log on and take it as you need. But there is a sequence of events that we want to make sure under the executive order that we are very inclusive, extremely accurate, and want to make sure that every Vermonter is counted accurately. So what would a company look at hard to count populations? Excuse me. You'll be looking for a variety of people, rural areas, remote areas, isolated youth, transient populations, migrants, people of color, those who are disabled. All of these persons in this state should be counted on that specific day. That day will be April 1st. Yes, it will be April Fool's as a social commentary, but the census will not be fake. It will not be a joke. But then we're going to make sure that people understand beforehand and afterwards the importance of participating. One of our hardest groups to actually connect with will be those who distrust government. That is a very unique conversation that we will have to have with a variety of people. We have had unique questions of how many questions can you leave off and it still be counted or accurate. We will not encourage that type of thinking. We're going to ask people to fill out simply nine questions. And we have a variety of partners that we connect with our local complete counts, from the south to the north, to the east and the west of the state, especially of central Vermont. One asset that I would ask you to check out if you have some time, would be on the census webpage in which you can actually examine the state of Vermont to see where there are locations of very low response rates. Some of those tracks are not far from here, near Barry, where I reside. You might not think that, but that means some people are saying this is not that important. For us, it is. This is funding that could be appropriated back to Vermont and utilize in a very specific way at the most useful of times, from emergencies to planning commission to boards. Without doing that, we would be hobbled. So with that, libraries will play a very unique role in helping shape a variety of access points for people to play if they are not able to have good connections or connectivity. In closing, one of the things that I would like to say is I simply will ask all of you to make sure that you make yourselves available to answer nine simple questions while living in Vermont on April 1st and thereafter. Thank you. With that, I will now introduce Michael Moser of the UVM Vermont data center. Thanks. Good morning, everyone. So Jason and I are on the statewide Complete Count Commission and we're really excited to be doing this work, this outreach work, the Complete Count Commission. It has already met a couple of times. We've got essentially a network. We're developing a network across the state of Vermont. Advocacy organizations, state agencies and departments, and really reaching out through those networks and reaching into their networks as well to distribute the messages that we have about the Census Bureau to the state's diverse populations and including all of those hard to count populations that have been mentioned. So we're really out there meeting with regional planning commissions, meeting with other Complete Count Commissions that are local to different cities and towns across the state of Vermont and coordinating our efforts with them. We're sharing some of the messages about safety and security of the census, sharing the message of the simplicity and ease of the questions and the form. And really trying to ensure that Vermonters have the best information possible to respond to the census beginning actually mid March is when they will start sending mailings out to addresses across the country, including here in the state. And folks will be receiving a postcard in the mail that they will be able to go online with and just follow a simple web link and take five minutes or less really to answer the form and be counted. And that's really what we're hoping that folks will do. It helps save taxpayer money if folks can do that online and not have to be visited eventually by an enumerator who will come to doors of households that haven't responded so far. So we're out there doing that work and we really appreciate the governor's efforts on our behalf, on this behalf. And we hope that as we move forward, the word gets out there among all of Vermont's communities, regardless of citizenship status, regardless of your socio-demographic status, none of those things matter. What matters is that you're counted as a Vermonter. And so with that, I'd like to turn it over to Michael Harrington, who is the commissioner of the Department of Labor. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. As a member of Vermont's Complete Count Committee, the Department of Labor is committed to the goal of generating an accurate and comprehensive count of Vermont's population during the 2020 census. Ensuring a complete count will have a major impact on the department, as well as the state as a whole. Data points published by the department, such as our state's monthly jobs report and local employment data, as well as analysis performed by the department's labor market information division are all derived from the census population data. Plainly, the more accurate the census, the more true our data is. This, in turn, drives decisions like policies to adopt or programs to fund or where to invest our money. For example, when we talk about refugee resettlement and new American incentive programs, that is based on census information. When we talk about equal pay and economic equality, that is based on census data. When we talk about tax relief, that is based on census data. These are just a few examples to illustrate the importance of having a complete count. More specifically, census data has a direct impact on how the federal government funds a variety of state programs, including the Department of Labor, and which communities are eligible for special federal assistance. At the local level, this can translate into downtown redevelopment opportunities, available financing for businesses and accessibility of services and benefits. There are still a large number of census jobs needed to be filled across the state, so whether your goal is to simply do your part and support your local community, or maybe earn a little extra cash, I encourage everyone who's interested to apply to be a census taker. For those who are interested, there are many ways to apply, one of which is by visiting one of our 12 career resource centers across the state, where our staff have been working with the US Census Bureau now for more than a year to assist in filling these vacant positions. In addition, the Department of Labor and the State of Vermont's Department of Human Resources are looking at ways to look within state government to encourage state employees seeking additional part-time employment to consider this important role. As we encourage state employees to take part in this historic event and support their local communities, I would also like to encourage Vermont employers to encourage their employees to also take part in this opportunity. Through these joint efforts, the 2020 Census can prove to be a success for Vermont. Thank you, and now I'd like to invite Bob Stock from the Regional Census Center to say a few words. Thank you. Thank you. I'd like to thank everyone here today, Governor, the leaders in the community, the trusted voices that are here to help us shape your future, the Vermont future, through the 2020 Census. By the way, although I do work for the New York Regional Census Center, I am a Vermonter, I have lived here for 36 years now, so I'm vitally interested in making sure that we get a complete count and an accurate count. And my message is simple, the Census is now as our responses can be collected in less than a month. A successful Census is easy to define, counting everybody once, only once, and in the right place. But first, we have jobs, as Commissioner Harrington mentioned and others have mentioned. Although the Census is a national event, in order to be successful, it first has to be conducted at the local level, with local workers who understand and represent their community. I can tell you that we're currently hiring at a pay rate of $20 to $22 an hour. These are great part-time jobs, they're flexible hours, you can work in your own neighborhood, work evenings and weekends, and you will be helping your community. It's easy enough to apply, it's on the 2020census.gov jobs website. It doesn't take very long. Second, we need Census ambassadors. We need trusted voices in every community, sharing the message that the Census is safe. It is easy, and it is important. We do, as the Governor mentioned, and others, that we do have the State Complete Count Commission. In addition to that, we have over 20 individual Complete Count Committees working within Vermont. These are, some of them are town and city-based, some of them are more county-based. And they are bringing these trusted members of the community to get the message out about both the importance of the Census and the jobs. We have over 600 partners in Vermont, active, that we're working with. All your responses, in addition to that, we need to share the message that the Census is safe, it's easy, and it is important. All your responses are private and confidential, it's safe. Title 13, which every Census employee works under, it's federal law and it protects every piece of data we collect. That means we cannot release any information that identifies an individual or a household, period. We cannot share any information we collect that would identify an individual or a household with any federal, state, or local agency, including law enforcement. So be assured, the Census is safe. And the Census is easy, as others have mentioned. There are four ways to fill out your form and self-respond. Online for the first time, as well as by phone. And for the first time, the Census will be available in 12 non-English languages. These are toll-free numbers, by the way, on telephone. And each one of these has its own unique, individual toll-free number, and it is answered by a live person, there's no voice prompt. In addition, if you prefer to fill it out by paper, you'll have that option as well. And finally, the most costly operation we do in the Census is sending Census takers door-to-door to collect the very information that you can complete online over the phone or on paper. So the Census is easy. And again, as others have alluded to, it's important. Think money. More than $675 billion from the federal government funding vital programs like Medicaid, SNAP, Section 8 housing, Medicare Part B assistance, foods on and on and on, school lunch. And think power. Legislative boundaries and congressional seats at stake. Yes, it's important. But I think one of the most important things to remember is this is your Census. We get one chance every 10 years to get it right. And I'm confident that by working together, we can achieve the most complete and accurate count possible for Vermont. Thank you. Go ahead. Thank you. Well, now, I'll open it up to any on-topic questions first. Is this normal? Well, the most recent news report of the Census was the fight over the citizenship question. And for those who are undocumented, can you just address where that stands? Look at Bob first. The citizenship question is not on the Census. That was decided, I believe, last spring or summer by the United States Supreme Court. Are you concerned particularly about new Americans, others who might be scared away? It is a concern. That is why we have partners that work within that community to make sure that those folks understand that the Census is both important and it is safe. Can you clarify that April 1st, that is the date by which what happens? The official start of the Census. It starts. But you will receive mailers and different items days to weeks prior to that. For example, Alaska has already, in a sense, started because it's in a different zone specifically. But within that, you have a lot of announcement prior to mailers, informational items on online. And then on April 1st, the Census will roll out. And it concludes when? You said it concludes. On that, I would say more or less around September into late October. And then the actual ending in winddown will complete by the end of 2020. And finally, the GAO, the Michigan Court yesterday, said that it raised a lot of red flags about the Census and about security, gay security, as well as big challenges with recruiting across the country. Does that all translate here as well? Let's say for a moment when it comes to that, the Census has, in a sense, allowed us to know that the type of systems that they are using are going to be extremely protective of confidential information that is demographic or can pinpoint somebody. The most, I would say, we'd want to be aware is how those other systems, for example, if you are web-based, you're going to be fine using the Census. But if somebody in their own internal home or, let's say, business is not secure themselves, that's a different type of conversation with that entity. But for confidential data by, let's say, statutes of the federal government, it is important that this information not be breached, compromised in any way. So the Census has, I would say, assured us in a variety of different ways that it is a strong system and they are very supportive of how it will actually interplay the rest of the year. As well, Stuart did receive a phone call from someone on the federal level about the number of Census takers. And they said that we're short about 1,000 in Vermont and they're struggling to find people as we are with everything else in our state. We have more jobs and we have people available and this is going to be a struggle for us as well, but that's why we wanted to emphasize that this is part-time in nature, pays $20 to $22 an hour, can do it nights and weekends. And this could be, it could be students over 18, I believe. And as well, those who are retired or some are retired and need some extra cash for a short period of time. Apart from this event, do you have other times to sort of market that, Nate? I don't know what you talked about, Jason, but we're committed to a hierarchy and we kind of come up with a bit. One of the things that we are doing from the complete committee for the state, we have connected with a variety of different partners. So for example, being a state librarian, some of our libraries want to actually have hiring events. Department of Labor will also be doing a variety of things. Capstone will have a variety of community action items across the state that they're looking to do hiring events or make computers or information accessible at those points so people are aware that there are jobs that they can partake in. So we have a lot of people who are trying to like, as many people know, that there is employment if they would like to have it when it comes to the census. I'll just say that I think we'll see a more concerted effort just even from the Census Bureau itself as we ramp up to make people aware. From the jobs perspective, we are reaching out to local communities. We are working through our regional career resource centers. We are using a variety of different means like social media to get the word out there. But I think that's where we would ask each of you to help us in getting the message out that there are positions available. So if there are people, whether they need extra cash or they are looking for work, there are positions available and we're happy to help them. And they can do that directly online from home or they can go to the libraries or even come into one of our resource centers and we'll assist them to fill out an application. What are the consequences of human men hiring if people do the job or part-time job to process? Or what is it? With that, I'll let Bob come and talk about that thoroughly because these are positions for a government. Pardon me. These are part-time jobs. Most of them will end approximately July 30th. However, at this point, if you're working for the United States Census Bureau, you have the federal government on your resume. And you do have the opportunity, of course, on the USA job site to see if there's something that's there of interest to you. But most of the jobs, as I say, are temporary and would end July 30th. There are a few that might extend a little bit longer. I think, and I believe you were asking what happens if we don't complete by July 30th, right? Not filling those 1,000 jobs. Yeah, and our goal is to make sure that we do that count and if we run into difficulties at that point in time, we'll probably be taking extra measures of some sort to be contemplated. Is that all the on-topic? Was there a particular trigger? You set up this commission in November. The census is still six weeks away-ish. There are particular reasons you're doing this even now. Well, I think it's, from my standpoint, a couple of reasons. One, just to make sure that, for monitors, they're acclimated and understanding what's coming and how important this is. But as well, the struggles we have with finding people to fill these positions needs a little bit of lead time. So we want to make sure we get out to as many people as possible to let them know that there's something here for you. So it's really about more of a public service campaign and something that I think is vitally important to the state. Can you just clarify? What message are you sending to undocumented people who are in this country? Yeah. What message do you want to send I want to make sure that they understand that they're safe, that this information will not be used against them. This will help our state. But again, I just want them to have comfort that we're not going to utilize this, that the government's not going to utilize this information for anything else. But we need to count everyone here. And it won't be shared with law enforcement. It will not be shared with law enforcement or any other entities. It's just for the census itself. Despite the problems we've had at the DMV. Despite those issues at the DMV. This is totally separate. You probably have friends and neighbors who are sort of suspicious of government by nature. And we probably have more than a share of those people in Vermont. We talk about new American communities, but that's a sizable component of Vermont as well. Yeah, absolutely. They don't trust their government and we have to do everything we can to convince them otherwise. This is a struggle. I'm sure it's a struggle every 10 years. And this is nothing new. But it seems as though, with the number of those suspicious for different reasons grows, this is going to be more of a challenge for us. But again, that's why we have to make sure that we get the message out and give them comfort, that we're actually here to help in some respects. And it'll help all of us in the long run. I could add something to it. You know, the folks that are suspicious of their government, this is really about getting counted so that their taxpayer dollars come back to our state. So it's a way to take that power back and keep it for themselves and keep it local here in the state. And I think that's a message that might resonate with some folks that would otherwise not be interested in having the federal government involved in their daily lives. Anyone else? Any other questions on the topic? All right, thank you very much. Appreciate it. The Senate's about to try to override your kingdom of weight. The Senate leaders have matched seven minutes to keep up your administration to be uniquely unwilling to work on compromises, but specifically to the minimum wage bill. What are your thoughts on that? Well, this was a compromise that the Senate and the House came up with. We weren't at the table, so to speak. And so they came up with their agreement and it's not acceptable to me. That's why I decided to veto it. I have no doubt that it'll be overridden in the Senate. It appears the numbers are on their side, so then we'll see what happens in the other body. Was there any compromise to be found on the minimum wage? Well, you never know. I mean, hopefully, if it's sustained, we'll see what happens. But from my standpoint, I've said this consistently over the last number of years that I just don't believe artificially raising the minimum wage is going to help anyone. And I just feel that it will hurt the economy overall, particularly the rural parts of our state, and I'm concerned about that. So how come you raise minimum wage without artificially raising minimum wage? It may sound like there is a compromise to your mind. Well, again, we can focus on growing the economy and the wages will raise by that growth. And I think that we've seen that and I believe that we need to do more of it. I mean, this money just doesn't come out of nowhere. I mean, if you take, use whatever math you want, I've seen some, I think the pro tem invention, a number that doesn't seem to add up to me, but if you use this number, you're talking about $200 million. It comes out of somewhere. It comes out of the economy. Somebody has to pay for it. So we're fragile in this state. And particularly when you go up in the Northeast Kingdom, all along the Connecticut River quarter, Eastern parts of our state, all parts of our state outside of Burlington. And as I said before, even New York realized that they did it in zones, four zones, because they recognized that they were different parts of the state that more susceptible to economic burden. With minimum wage that you could have spent two months at the table with Democrat political leaders, nothing to compromise on this particular issue. Well, again, I think that what I've said is New York took it upon themselves and had regions, different economic regions. I'm more than willing to talk about it, but I think there was a, and maybe not in this conversation, but two years ago, I believe that there was an amendment on the floor in the Senate to just carve out one region, the Northwest area of our state around the Burlington area, and they could absorb it much easier than the Northeast Kingdom. So maybe that's where we should start. I'll tell you that you'll be in the, when it comes to the house, that you'll be able to sustain them. I think it's gonna be very, very close in the house. It could go either way. You're feeling about that hasn't changed because of the paid family leave, which would seem like an easier lift for house leadership than the minimum wage. Well, it may be because of it. I think that there's, politics will take place for those who voted against increase in the minimum wage on the other side of the aisle. I'm sure there's incredible pressure on them to try and override my veto, regardless of how they feel about, regardless of how their constituents might feel. So we'll just have to wait and see. What message to the 40,000 who will be denied to take part of the pay-care contest for veto? Well, again, I believe that we have in place that the wages are going to increase when I was in the Senate those 12 years ago. And we had this conversation. We had this debate on the floor of the Senate. And I was convinced to vote for an increase in the minimum wage and to tie it to the cost of living increase every single year. And we've done that. So it's not as though there's not increases coming to those who are making minimum wage. But I would say if we can help in any way, we have a lot of jobs available. If we can help with training, trying to give them a lift up to some of those higher paying jobs, we want to help in that regard. I think all of us have the common goal of supporting Vermonters, having them be able to keep more of what they earn, keep more in their pocket. But we have a different pathway to getting there. And one of the ways we could do that is not putting any more burden on them either from a tax standpoint. In your recent comments on climate issues, you've talked about the fact that your administration has taken a proactive stance and has tried to pursue action while the legislature is even more focused on taxation and deadlines and things like that. Could you expand on that a little bit? Yeah, I mean, I think what we did last year, I proposed last year, the last session, of what I'm proposing this year, it's actually action items, whether it's with incentives for EVs or infrastructure or trying to bring more focus on some of the energy storage, which I think is essential as we move forward. So we're actually doing something about it. And what I'm seeing is a pattern of how are we going to pay for something and we don't even know how much it's going to cost and there's very few action items that I'm seeing. So I'm trying to shift the debate. Like if you don't believe we're doing enough, then let's have that debate and let's prioritize. Maybe it means putting more money into EV incentives or more into infrastructure or whatever it is that we're promoting or weatherization. For instance, we put a lot of money into weatherization every single year. But if we're not doing enough, let's have that debate and let's actually do something about it and let's prioritize, and it may mean that we have to not do something in another area, but let's live within our means and prioritize the areas that we have common interests. Which is the other side of that is living within our means, you're against raising the pool of revenue in any way to allow us to do more. You do prioritize. As we talked about, there's a couple of different ways to have Vermonters keep more of what they earn. One way is not to burden them with any more taxes. So I'm saying, let's live within, we're already a very high tax state. Many Vermonters are feeling the burden of some of the actions we've taken in this building. Let's live within that, though, those parameters. And we have to do it in our own daily lives every single day, our own households, our own businesses, and you have to prioritize it and you have to think about, you know, want and need. What is it that you actually need and what do you want and differentiate between the two? And you sometimes have to make difficult decisions. And I'm saying, we may have to make a difficult decision here and prioritize those areas. For instance, I said, if we have a surplus at the end of the year, let's take part of that and put it towards climate change initiatives, things that will help. And I would say the focus might be weatherization. And if we took 25% of that surplus and did that, and if you compare it, you know, if it was a year like last year, that'd be $10 million more that we could spend for weatherization that would help Vermonters. Do you think the legislature has not come to the table to discuss concrete plans as your specialization? We're still in the midst of the session. I'm hopeful that we can find areas of common agreement. And then maybe we'll shift to some of this focus. I think they've come a long ways in some of the bills that I've seen. And we're willing to do more to make sure that we arrive at a place that we can both agree to and make sure that we focus on the areas that will benefit Vermont. There does seem to be a backing away from the short and medium term goals that Vermont has set for itself. Are you focused pretty much solely on the 90 by 2050 and less concerned with the like 20, 28, 20, 30, 20, whatever? Yeah, I think I tried to explain this in previous press conferences. I believe the trajectory is a little bit different because of technology changes and acceptance and behavior changes and so forth. So putting an artificial goal in place by a certain date that isn't attainable doesn't help us and it opens us up to all kinds of liability. I'm just saying let's agree to a long-term goal. Maybe there's a midterm that we can agree to and then let's move from there. Let's assess what we're doing now and let's see what we can do, how much this is going to cost and how we're going to get there like we did with water quality and I think that we should learn from that experience and it took, admittedly, it took a lawsuit for us to get to that point but let's learn from that and let's not have the lawsuit. Let's actually do something about it. You talk about setting goals for the state already have goals that it was on track and missing terribly and are the reason and this is the reason for the Global Formal Solutions Act is to say you can't just set goals if it has to be mandatory. Your administration talked about letting that kid in in like 2050, why? Well, I don't think that's completely accurate. I mean, we're not trying to push it off completely till 2050. But not to have the sort of mandatory and mandatory. As I just described, let's figure out where we want to get to. Maybe there's a midterm point that we can agree to and goals are important but I don't want to open up us to a lawsuit that will just slow down the progress of whatever we're trying to do. But what makes you think that setting goals now would be any more without some sort of additional enforcing mechanism would be any more sort of effective than the goals were set that are set years ago? Because again, I think we're taking concrete action is the most important thing. And if we just are debating about arbitrary type goals that doesn't get us to where we want to go. And I'm saying let's focus on action. Let's actually do something about it. Peter, is there anything else you want to add? You've been part of the conversation. Thanks, Governor. I think there's a couple of clarification points. We're not changing any of the proposed goals. We're not changing any of the desire to make those requirements. What we're saying is that we need to have a plan in place and figure out what that's going to cost and work towards that plan. And instead of having litigation be the trigger that makes us do that work, let's make sure that we're all agreeing we're gonna do that work and prioritize that. And in the languages that we propose, they're actually, instead of litigation triggers, there's automatic triggers to reopen that work. Say, what are we doing to fill the gap that we missed it by if we miss it, right? That's, let's short circuit that step and get right back to work and figure out what we need to, what dials we need to turn in order to make sure we make that progress. That's just a different form of approach that gets rid of the hook of litigation and gets us to actually getting to work and shortens that timeline. So what is it about those triggers that would actually force the future administration starting to meet the targets that have been set? What were the certain barriers and six certain events? Sure, there are timelines associated with updating the plans and then putting it, getting to work on implementing those plans. And so, happy to talk with you more about it, but ultimately that's what we need to do. If we don't make a target, or if we don't make the requirement of whatever we're gonna call it, then we need to figure out what changes we need to make. That may be regulatory changes that's proposed in the current bill. It may be different incentives. We need to align with the current technology and make sure that we're pulling the levers that need to be pulled. And so that's ultimately what the plan needs to look at. And so if we reopen the plan and get to work on updating the plan and then get to work on implementing, that's the thing that will actually get us there. And as well, I think assessing, and again, the House has come a long ways in their proposal, assessing what we're doing now is important and valuable because maybe we're spending a lot of money in the wrong areas. Maybe we should be focusing on areas that give us the best return. And whether, again, we spend, I think it's up to $12 million in the Agency of Human Services for weatherization. I know efficiency Vermont spends a lot more money. I think all told, we spend $35 to $40 million on weatherization every single year. But if we're not doing that effectively and efficiently, maybe we should do more in that area. Maybe we're doing something else in another area that isn't giving us the best return on our hard earned tax payer dollars. With water quality, it was important, I think, to come up with, it's going to cost us a billion dollars, estimated. And we were able to figure out that's going to be $50 million a year over the next 20 years. So we came to that conclusion. And that's what I think we ought to do here so that we don't just set an arbitrary goal and have no idea who's going to pay for, how it's going to be paid for, and just open us up to all kinds of liability. I don't think any of us should be off the hook on this. Not future legislators, not future administrations. Let's deal with this now and actually put something into action. To be fair to arbitrary goals, the Vermont's goals were set by looking at the IPCC's recommendations for limiting the impact of climate change. So they aren't really arbitrary, they are based on something. Well, again, I think behavior change is going to be half of our emissions right now. I think we all know are related to transportation. And what is it we're going to do to shift in that area? We do relatively well in terms of electrification, in terms of power, about half of our emissions. But with Hydro-Quebec and others, we do pretty well. So we have that other 50% to take care of. And so how do we shift what we drive and how we do that? And I would say it's through incentives, the behavior change, trying to get to more competition. I think there's all kinds of ways of doing it that we put into place. And if that's not enough, let's talk about what it is that it would take to get there. And so, again, I think we're focusing on the wrong areas and putting more of the burden on future legislatures and administration far beyond any of us there who are debating it today. Do you think you're getting a bad rap on climate issues? No, it's all fair. It's okay. I think that the climate change is real. We have to do everything we can. We just have to be realistic about it. And just to set a goal and then just wipe our hands and say, we've done our job, isn't good enough. I think you have to put some action into place. There's a proposal in the building to prohibit them from schools, from flying. Anything other than the national and state flag. I guess it's focused on the comforts rather than the Black Lives Matter movement. Is that the proposal that will meet what you're talking about? Yeah, at first, I've heard of it, actually, but I think it's a local control type of issue. I think you should be able to fly whatever flag you want. You're not, you're not a problem here at the new fix. I don't believe so. No. Your administration has signed a five-year contract for blockchain to use as a safe host. I think blockchain is the future. I think that using this technology to make sure that we protect and track the use of this, I think it protects everyone. So I think it's just a good use of this new technology and I think it can be utilized in other areas as well. You know how much the state's spending on the project? I don't, I do not. Is it something you'd like to see expanded to other agricultural fields? Why does that happen? I don't know if it's just agriculture. I think it's just the concept of blockchain technology could be utilized for almost anything. I think about it in terms of some of, like motor vehicle with proof of origin and so forth. They wait a long periods of time to get their title and maybe with this technology, maybe we could utilize it to get, to be able to make sure these transactions happen quicker when you're trying to pay off a mortgage company or so forth. I think that that's the part that I think is exciting about the future in terms of blockchain. But it could be used in other areas as well. I don't know enough about it. I don't think any of us would do unless you do, but I think it's something that we should explore. Explain blockchain in 25 minutes. That's right. The Governor of the Super Tuesday is coming up and the Monk's partner. I'm wondering if you can share with us who you might be backing. Well, I suffice it to say, I think I've said enough last week to give you an idea of who I probably won't be supporting. Governor Weld is someone who is on the ticket. I've met with him before. I think a lot of him and his platform, so I would be supporting him. Are you gonna, is he gonna come? I'm not sure. Yeah, I have no idea. So the tax regulations continue to move along. I think everybody here knows your concerns by now, but some of the recent changes to the bill even paying attention to those in the outside, do you have any thoughts? I haven't paid a lot of attention to the bill other than my three conditions. And I've said, if they meet my conditions that I have, it's pretty simple, that I would, I'm not at no, I'm at yes if. Yeah, do you have any thoughts about those and other new directions at this point? It's, I don't think, I don't believe it's a lot of money. So we shouldn't count on that for solving all of our problems here in Vermont, our financial problems. But again, I've said before, I think the after-school program could be one area that it could be utilized in. The VSEA, they're rolling out their own plan. I don't know if you've seen it, but for the replacement of Woodside, there's two potential plans like a no-reject facility. I wonder if you've seen the plans yet from Steve Howard and what you think of them. I haven't personally, but we're still planning forging ahead the closure from my point of view. What will happen July 1? You know when we can see the RFPs? RFPs for closure. Or for the company or the organization that will eventually provide the space. Yeah, we're working that out. We're, we have a plan in place. We're looking for other opportunities as well. Okay. A lot of the thing tomorrow is a special day for lots of many women around the country. And I'm sure Vermont 50 are, and we want to share with us what we're planning, so. So, if I told you, Stuart, it wouldn't be a surprise, then let it. You won't tell. Yeah, you'd never. I just want to make sure you get it right. Thank you. I tell you, suffice to say, I do know tomorrow is a big day. Are you going to win your wallet? I usually do. Within the constraints of available, fine. Within the parameters of my wallet. I am not going to extend beyond that. Thank you very much for coming in.