 Today is Thursday, February 23rd, so those watching our work, we have on the board that then probably by the end of next week we'll have a cool school construction fill out. I think hopefully we'll push that school safety bill out by the before crossover. And then Ms. Laney said maybe toward the end of next week or when we get back. And I did put two things at the bottom of our board. I just don't want to do sight of something. We could do these things through the budget process and we'll pick them up after crossover. Higher education could be when I need something with teacher debt relief around workforce. And then also higher ed marketing is another topic we talked about. And then if people have other ideas, which remember I need to check with Peter Conlon that I believe they are sending us from Ms. Laney's bed bill also. Do you know if there's anything you would have been in there? Does that sound familiar? No, but I might not have all the information. They usually do and that's things that we can always add to if we need to. So thanks for joining us Sue. We have a very rough draft of the Ms. Laney's education bill that we're going to have a committee discussion about this afternoon with Ledge Council after we hear from you and Jay, but just thought we could go through and together with you and just get your overall impressions of the direction we're going in. You have a copy? Yes. Okay, seven extra. So the way we've structured this so far is we've started out looking at state board of education staffing and compensation. We have heard from a lot of people. And Jay, good to see you. Maybe we could kind of do this together with Sue. And so we've heard from folks from the state board of education trying to understand the amount of work they do, which I don't have anecdotal information and whether or not they're being compensated adequately. And so we thought we would, we've heard from people that have been 20 hours a week. It's almost like a hard time job. And they get six bucks an hour. So something that we thought would be worth considering and wondering if you guys have any comments on that first section. Yeah. The VSBA legislative committee met on this miscellaneous education bill. So I do have feedback from that committee because we really didn't have necessarily resolutions that covered all the various aspects of this. Sure. And we're still, when I say miscellaneous, I mean broad. Yes. Yeah. And I would say, and this was not meant to be like glib or disrespectful or anything. But when they, the first thing they asked me when they looked at it was, and they had it ahead of time, and they also listened to your Ledge Council's introduction for your committee, was what problem was it trying to solve? Like they just didn't necessarily understand that. I love that question. Yeah. So, but they did give some feedback on this state board. Let me start with the first part. The problem that at least it's looking to solve is maybe identify, we're hearing that people are working six bucks an hour, some 20, 30 hours a week for this job. Is this similar to what other, what we ask other agency boards to do? So that was, I would say, if you want to, and I appreciate you framing it like that, what is the problem trying to solve is should we really increase their support? Should we give them some real money for what seems to be a lot of work? So what they ended up with is asking me to advocate for including the Commission for Public School Employee Health Benefits in this study. That is a commission that bargains for the statewide school employee health benefits. And they would like that commission to be considered as well. And there was also some feedback from. So just so I'm, because I don't think, is Ledge Council watching? She's watching both. So, and she may notice, so you're wondering, so in addition, separate from the state board, would we consider looking at the Commission for School Employees? So this is another group that does all the work bargaining? Yes. And what do they get right now? Do they get any kind of funding or anything? They have in the past gotten, I think it was the state rate of $55 a day for 10 meetings. Okay. But they, it's a lot of work. Yeah. Especially during certain periods of time. Yeah. And I want to be respectful of that. As you know, the legislature right now is also looking at its own compensation package. And asking the questions, is this adequate? Is this respectful? Does this get people to, you know, run for all those kinds of things? I'm sure we all have our own opinions on that. And, but I also want to, you know, share that broadly. This is the time we're going to start reviewing things. We also have to start looking at the individuals that all intents and purposes are doing all the volunteer work. And we don't want to lose people from these conversations. And as we heard from, we talked about equity a lot last year, there are people that cannot do this without getting some kind of financial support. And I absolutely respect that. We want people of color. We want, they're not usually on these kinds of boards. We've been part of this financial reasons. Yes. And I would just add that one of the members of our legislative committee is also our representative to VPIC, the Vermont Pension Investment Commission. And he mentioned that they used an outside expert to conduct staffing and compensation study. So that was the way that they approached it, which would require allocating some money. Yeah. I don't know if this is necessarily a question for Stu, but when do we get a chance to sort of discuss and chime in on these issues now? Should we do this now or should we let Stu go through the whole? If you have something, I mean, we can do, I mean, at any point that anybody thinks they want an editor ad, just jump right in. Okay. Yeah. So my question about the board is those are appointments, correct? The folks on that board, they're not necessarily running for office. That's right. Yeah. So they're appointed. And then just also, as I'm thinking about this, because I'm on a school board and we don't get paid a penny and I'm just wondering if we were to set this precedent, if there might be some trickle down throughout the state, good or bad. I'm not making a judgment call on it, but just thinking about the implications of what I could look like. Those are just a few questions slash thoughts. Yeah, I know those are good. And I would say, so there are, as you'll find, in fact, this committee will likely approve up to 50 people this year to serve on different commissions and boards related to education. Natural resources will have theirs, transportation. What we've heard, a lot of them are volunteer, but members of low income backgrounds cannot afford to literally take half a day or whatever. There does need to be some support there. And so what this is basically at is just kind of an assessment. Is this something we should do? And it also, as I recall, that this energy is watching compares it to other similar boards and commissions. Some boards and commissions don't have that big of a heavy lift, I think we would say. So I think some fishing wildlife boards, there's a heavy, heavy lift. This is a heavy lift. I think I'm assuming that the commission first for employee health benefits is a heavy lift. Yeah. So these are really, there's a level of expertise we're asking and a level of time. And I don't want somebody to say, I'd love to do it. I'd love to do it. But I just can't afford it. Yeah. I guess my other thought is if we want to increase diversity going forward, which I'm obviously 100% for, we, when it comes to an appointment, yeah, we don't really have, even if we have a pay element to it or an insurance element, it's still an appointment. So yeah, you don't really have control over that again, that's another thought. Well, we do. Remember, we approve these. We approve. So we could say, and this has happened, we have said that the state board is not diverse enough. And so that is in the authority of the Senate, just like we approve justices, we approve boards, all those kinds of things. So this issue of diversity did come up. And the governor, as I recall, I don't remember if we sent names back, you'd have to go back and look, but there was that issue. But the other thing is, you can ask people, but they still won't say no, because they just can't work. And what the process is, we'll start to get letters, appointees that the governor will give to us, and we'll make phone calls and check in on both. So we usually divide it up by districts. So if there's somebody in a particular district that wants to be on a particular board, I'm sure Health and Welfare will do this to them. Yeah, we're doing that. We're doing that. Yeah. Would you like me to go on to this statewide course offerings? Well, so commission for school employees would help benefits. So you want us to look at that as well? Yes. Yeah. Okay. I mean, that sounds logical to me. And again, we would not move this for this bill for a while. We'll see another draft maybe in the middle of next week. But it would be great. Okay. Report on statewide course offerings in grade K through 12. The feedback consensus from the committee was they're not opposed to requiring this report. They had a question of whether AOE has capacity to do it, but that's they thought that was up to all of you to determine. And so feedback on that is very generally. Yeah. Yeah. Propitiency based learning study committee. The feedback on that. Yeah. Was this they didn't think schools have been doing it long enough to necessarily be able to study it. So they were unsure of the need for this committee. But if it remains in the bill appreciative of the SBA being listed as a member of the committee. And you're not out there now. I think we are. Okay. Yeah. Just if you can refresh our mind and memories. When did the shift happen? Was it 10 years ago? I was thinking it was less than that. But I thought it was with flexible athletes in 2012. It may have been that. But you could be absolutely right. By the time it got implemented, I think. Yeah. Go back. Yeah. I can find out some more information. Remote teacher grant program. This one. It didn't necessarily feel like they had enough information to respond now. And would like the opportunity to come back later after there's been some testimony from subject matter experts. Yeah. So in this might not, it may feel as though we don't need this. We heard last week from a couple of teachers, what I was trying to, what came up early this year in testimony was, or maybe I was just raising it in my own brain, was are there districts that need to have certain classes taught, but because of the teacher shortage, they're not able to find people. They're not getting, as you know, a lot of these are external factors. You can't afford a house in the area, you can find a house in the area, all that kind of thing. And so was there anything there that we needed to do to really be able to help some of those districts, some of those schools be able to get that third year map or that language arts class kind of thing. So that was sort of the thought behind, I don't know if that's helpful to you, or if you want to play in knowing that. And I guess the question for you would be, gosh, you know, Brian, I don't know if there's really that much of a need or yes, I can see there's kind of a need for that. I think it would be helpful to have some data on whether there is a need, right? Yeah, because they didn't. And then maybe some funding if we'd be. I mean, the other thing is I think Senator Gullit raises less and a lot of the stuff would just be part of their annual budgets voted on if you need an extra teacher. I was thinking more also any particular, is there is there any need to supplement funds for technology or sustain a certain kind of technology. But that was just sort of the thought around it. Yeah, Senator Gullit. And this is sort of above and beyond the BTBLCs and the Vermont learning, virtual learning, all those virtual learning platforms. And so this would be above and beyond that. Well, you raised a really good point. And when I left it last time when we had these teachers come zoom in, I wasn't feeling as much of a need for this, honestly. But maybe we just kind of keep the conversation going and see if anybody comes in and says we really do need more of this. But if schools are already able to do it through their budgets and are able to access the technology, I think the big block is still broadband in certain areas, which you know, in my area of broadband is being built out really quickly. But I know that in other areas. Oh, and I see. Great. Thanks. So we'll just keep it there for now. We'll marinate on it. We'll see if it goes anywhere. Okay, Vermont Post Secondary School Marketing, they did not have comment on that section. Sure. The and this I should mention, we've had people in, you know, around higher ed stuff. Can we start to market ourselves, you know, market all of our institutions of higher education in a way that says, hey, soup to nuts here. Come check things out. We know, you know, the other way we could think about it honestly is committee could also say, maybe just to the state office, you know, maybe that's where the funding goes. Ask me. That's where maybe the funding needs to be focused. I know this isn't necessarily, you know, something that your members might not be as fluent in, but we are hearing that places like University of Southern New Hampshire, they're marketing. And it's huge, huge. And, you know, castles, you know, our colleges. So one way to think about it, and I guess I'm talking aloud as we start to think about this is do we focus on colleges? You know, something to think about in our weeks. Oh, no, I would submit that we need to focus on the state as a system of post-secondary education and market the entire group. Certainly focus on state schools, but what we're really trying to do is recognize one of the economic engines at the state. I think this is a good signal. I think that we could send a very strong signal with a strong infusion of tourism, marketing, budget. Yeah, I want to second what Senator Weeks is saying. I mean, like I said, when we were first talking about this, when I just came up for a visit and hung out at the entrance for a weekend, and that is what drew me to move here after checking up Burlington and the different parts of the state. So I think it's definitely a good investment to look at the marketing aspect of, you know, not just the state colleges, but, you know, the state as a whole and, you know, everything that we have to offer. Okay, that's good. I'll talk to Senator Ron Mansell about it and the chair of probes and see if, you know, it's either in the state year, maybe go into another bill, but it sounds like we have some consensus. Pre-kindergarten. Yeah, so yeah, this, as I understand it, the current law language was put in with some highlighting to show the areas that might need to be changed if you were to allow public funding to go to programs in bordering states, and it really hinged on the standards. Yeah. And so as it recalls to you, you may notice this is Senator Kitchell's constituent. Yeah. Yes, I did explain that. Great. Yeah. And so the feedback on that one is that Vermont standards should not be lowered in order to allow out-of-state pre-k attendance. And the question was, is there another way to address the problem this language is trying to solve? I don't know. There is, but okay. Okay. And then lastly, the report of the working group on status of libraries in Vermont. Yes. And I gave, there you go, 17. So for this one, and I should just mention on the appropriation side, as we'll all find out in those last couple weeks, all those bills we really want that have any money in the middle, end up, Senator Kitchell, Senator Starr, Senator Sears, Senator Westman. So I usually try to accommodate anything that any of those four or five people asked for. Yeah. Well, at least four, whatever, four out of the seven. Yes. Oh, no. Okay. So for the last section, report of work even on status of libraries in Vermont, there wasn't feedback on that as it, they didn't see that it pertained directly to education. It was language regarding libraries that are not in schools. Right. Right. Yeah. If I could go back on the stuff to pre-k. Yeah. So we were dealing with pre-k issue in the Health and Welfare Committee in depth for quite some time now since the very beginning. I'm just curious if the intent here is to kind of pick up the language from Health and Welfare or let, no. No. So what's the intent? So as I recall, and I know Beth is somewhere in the World Wide Web right now, I just shirt my age. Senator Mitchell has a conflict with that. He wants to be able to just go over the border for pre-k, instead of driving the kid, as I recall the person came and said, maybe it's a 40-minute drive. And so that's what we were trying to figure out. Is there something that we need to do for that to happen or can that just sort of happen all day? And I think your point's a very good one, too. We don't want to lower standards so people can go over the border. We want to make sure they're getting that same quality. Yes. Senator Gullick, do you think you want to add anything to financial literacy or civics? Is there anything that you might be thinking about or anything that, it's no pressure kind of thing. We've got plenty of time, but I know you've raised them both. We've talked about civics. We have time. So it's not just you, but it's anybody who's thinking, do we need information back on either of those? Do we want to move forward with some financial literacy kinds of things? Civics I feel pretty good about, just judging by what we've heard from the Secretary of State and some other folks, but I would like to explore the financial literacy that might be hearing from the V's and some other folks who are working in districts to hear what they have to say about that. I don't want to add more work to their page in a time that's already quite stressful, but I have spoken to some educators who think it's a great idea and we had some pretty compelling testimony a while back. So yeah, good, explore it. Yeah. So do you happen to know, and maybe this is a Jay or Jeff question, a teacher or two who could talk to us about anything they're doing right now around financial literacy might be a way to sort of kick off the conversation, just something to think about. Yeah, I think that might be a Jay or Jeff Fanon question. Yeah, I do know as a teacher and I know it seems to be perfect. Let's go with that first. All right, so you've got somebody. Okay. Anything else that's supposed to be? No. Thanks for coming. Thank you. Yeah, feel free to stick around. Okay. We have refreshments at the end. Is it Sue? I have a Friday. Senator Williams happened yesterday. Oh, wow. Wonderful. Yeah, right. All right. We could offer you some trial mix too, but that's all I see. All right. Mr. Nichols. Good afternoon. For the record, Jay Nichols, Executive Director of the Vermont Principles Association. I'd like to say, Chair, that one of the reasons I like to testify in person is so that I can grab you ahead of time. My plan was to testify first and announce Sue's birthday and have you guys take your time. What you called on her first, so I wasn't able to do it. Yeah, I screwed up. Add it to the list, Jay. We're thinking of her and I'm glad we had a chance to wish her a happy birthday. When is your birthday, Jay? That's a no comment, sir. Okay, so let's go. Section one, Jay. State Board, you've been around for a while too. Any thoughts on this, on the commission piece that Sue mentioned? Anything else you think we need to be thinking about as we look at how we treat our monitors who are doing this kind of work? Yeah, so the VPA fully support what's in the bill. We do think there should be a look at the State Board in terms of composition. I've got written testimony in there. We think that the State Board for the last almost decade has been really heavily private school oriented. We think it should be more public school since most of our kids are public schools. So we think that's something that should be looked at. In terms of compensation for boards, I had no idea that some of these people were making $6 an hour. That's awful. They work so hard, some of these folks, Senator. I think people like me and Sue and stuff like that, when you stick us on committees, we shouldn't get anything we're getting paid to kind of advocate for that work. But volunteers are really volunteers. I think we should really do a much better job of supporting them because it's really easy for them to say no. And we, as you mentioned, we want representation from different sections of society. So anything you could do in that area, we would fully support. Yeah. And I'm more than happy to rework and consider that recomposition of the State Board, independent, public, whatever, mixed. How do we prioritize diversity? If you have, we can certainly put that into this. I don't think anybody would disagree. I don't know if there's anything we can talk to Beth about it, what the guidelines are now versus what they should be. Right. And I think that would be true. You know, in fish and wildlife, for example, I know there's always conversation around, you know, how many trappers, how many hunters, how many conservationists, even though actually I would argue hunters are some of our best conservationists, but people who don't, you know, all that kind of conversation happens also. So good. I'm going to drag down the woods many, many times as a point. Yes. Okay. Please go ahead. So the statewide course offerings, Eklund Sue, a little bit. My only concern is making sure the AOE has the resources necessary to accomplish everything federal law already requires them to do and anything additionally required by Vermont. I continually worried, I've been saying this for years, about the capacity of the AOE to successfully function at the level necessary to be truly successful in providing oversight, which I think they do reasonably well in public schools and providing appropriate levels of support for the field, which I think is an area that's lacking. We've heard that this year. We definitely heard that this year. They've got great people there too. I don't want to imply that they don't. I just think sometimes it's just too much. But I would also say, you know, last year we talked about, you know, is there some way to just sort of do a general audit? I also respect that Secretary Frenchman, he comes in and says, listen, we're nimble. We need to change. We need to add people, you know, shift things around. But we've also, yeah, we've heard that that agency has some staffing issues for sure. And not that we'd be able to find those people right now in this job market. But we increased, we did increase last year, I think, positions by adding the literacy person. And maybe they may have had one or they're hired, but their points will take them. Okay. Proficiency based learning. So the agency of education has recently had renewed leadership in this area with a portrait of graduate work. And practitioners around the state are continuing to, you know, revise and improve their systems and approaches related to this. We do not think that it's necessary, nor a good use of time without appropriations for continued development implementation at this time. I think the law is 10 years old. I think Act 77 is 10 years old. But I think the actual implementation and putting in schools actually coming to bear, I think this senior class or maybe last year's senior class might have been the first one or two that really were kind of underneath this system. So I do agree with Sue, even though I don't have that in my written testimony, that I don't think we're in a rush to do that. And I think if we get to the point where we're ever going to look at this, maybe the study's more on Act 177 in its entirety and looking at what's working in terms of do enrollment, what's working in terms of PLPs, what's working in terms of PBL, what should be changed, maybe it's more of that conversation. And I would love to put that off for a couple of years given everything that we're contending with right now. So I would tend to agree with you that we hadn't heard from teachers that are saying it's maybe, again, this is not, we're going to get rid of it. This is sort of a, let's just kind of a touch base to see how things are going kind of thing. Yeah, I don't have a major problem with that. I just think if you talk to 100 different teachers and 100 different schools, you're probably going to get 100 different answers. And a lot of it depends on how it was implemented at the local level in that school. Yeah, that's an argument. I was just wondering if instead of sort of speculating on who likes it, who doesn't, which I agree with, those variables that probably get a wide array of opinions, is there a way that we can look at some data to suggest that it's working or not working, test scores, graduation rates, I don't know anything that might help us form a decision or not form a decision in this area. And that's what we would have that group do. The question is to your point is what do we have them look at? All right, we'll keep working on it and see if we can get, you know, ask this group to look at, like you said, certain things to just sort of touch base, sort of like a 10-year anniversary, here's where we're at. You know, again, I'm not looking to get rid of it, doesn't need to be touched. But the other thing is, I think it was Jeff Bennett, you know, there might be some things that need to change now 10 years into it to make it better. So I mean, I'm trying to read you, Jay. I used to get, you know, if you're sitting right here, I'd be able to read you better. I can't tell if, you know, this is the worst idea in the world, or if you're like, yeah, you know, this isn't, this isn't that bad. Yeah, if it was the worst idea ever, I think I'd be pretty straight with you. Senator, this is the worst idea ever. Thank you, Senator DeWitt. I'm wondering just to take Mr. Nichols' lead, if we should just, at some point in the future, dive on Act 77 instead of just focusing on proficiency-based learning, because I mean, we could probably all stand to learn about that act, and then maybe take a look at how it's going. Yeah, I think it's a great idea. I think maybe what we do is, if we could do it a couple of different ways, we could let this go with just looking at the proficiency-based. The other thing we could do is we could, if we don't have time to act at the Act 77, we could ask the House to act at the Act 77, if we looked at it, and we could sort of, you know, do some testing right that way. It might be good, Senator, Senators, to have Jess DeCarlo's come in and just give an overview of it, especially with a pretty new committee. Pretty new. Jess is back. She's been away. Yeah, let's have Jess come in. Thanks. Good idea. Thanks, Jay. Remote teacher? Yeah, so you can probably hear we're sort of, you know, is this really necessary? Is it not kind of thing? What are you thinking? Well, I'm thinking that, you know, in general, we support this as an option when there's no other viable option available. And, you know, we'd want to see what the program was and how it be implemented, and we'd like to encourage the use of the Vermont Virtual Learning Cooperative as an option and to make sure that we have limited costs to any schools that are trying to avail themselves with the opportunity. So I'm thinking of a place like maybe Canaan may not be able to get a teacher for a certain thing. It might want to have this kind of option. We want to make sure it wasn't cost prohibitive, if at all possible. Fair enough. Yeah. Okay. And post-secondary school marketing, it's hard for me to see who said it. I think it was Senator Williams that talked about Vermont and the Vermont schools or maybe Senator Hashim. Whoever said it, I agree. That's my testimony on post-secondary school marketing. Let's try to get people to come to Vermont, see Vermont, and let's try to get them to stay here. Jay, might I ask, if you feel free to punt this, if it's not if you don't want to ask, did you, were you from the state? Did you come to the state for college in the state? I was from here. I was a poor Vermont kid, first generation, go to college and all that stuff. Yeah. And I went to Johnson State College. You went to Johnson. Yeah. And then say your mics for my masters. Yeah. Great. Okay. Pre-kindergarten? So you all know how I feel about Pre-kindergarten. And my testimony in writing says that I went back to the four-year-old thing again. In terms of kids out of stay and the concern that was brought forth, I agree with Sue. And I think you all agree that if we're going to do that to some early childhood provider that's in a bordering state, then they need to have rules that are at least as rigorous as what we have in Vermont. Yeah. Yeah. And I have to understand also a little bit more to open up a huge can of worms by doing that. But it's okay. Yeah. Yeah. And then any thoughts on status of libraries? No, I had no comment on that section. I just don't know enough about it to really feel like I could weigh in on it. Okay. Anything for Mr. Nichols? That was helpful. Good. Yeah. Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Please make sure you help Mrs. Zalski out of the room at her age. She might need some help. Thank you, everybody. I won't even ask. What we'll probably do is once we get a clean version, you know, we're always welcome to come back in and weigh in on it again. Or if you just want to say by email, thumbs up, no thumbs up. This is what I'd like to change. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Hey, Beth. How are you doing? I'm well. How are you? I'm doing pretty well. And Mr. Zalski, do you mind speaking around for just one minute while we ask? Sorry, Beth, to address your question. Even though it's your birthday. Even though it's your birthday, I apologize. In this first section of the miscellaneous ed build that we have, Mrs. Zalski mentioned, in addition to examining the staffing and compensation for the skateboard, we would consider also examining the Commission for School Employee Health Benefit Group. Do you have a sense, and this might be something Mrs. Zalski can answer, how many people are on that board right now? I don't. I can easily look it up. I have the binary boards and commission page, but it soon knows the answer. So each side has five commissioners and two alternates. So that would be 14. Okay. Just tell us how it works, if you don't mind. Because you've got seven on both sides. Yes. Yeah. And so they, this law went into effect, I believe it was in 2018. And so there have been two rounds of bargaining. The commissioners are appointed by the law states who appoints the commissioners. Okay. And they do the bargaining for the statewide school employees health benefits. Yeah. So the next year they'll be entering into the third round of bargaining. Okay. So they need like a lot of people at a table to bargain 10. Seems to be working. I mean, I guess I can read just that. Yeah. Can you tell me? I could, I'd be happy to have the chair, each side has a chair. So I'd be happy to have the chair. And I'm sure you'd want to hear from, you know, both sides. And this is not really, you know, I'm not asking for one side. I'm talking about the entire just looking at the entire, you know, commission just like you're looking at the state board. Yeah. Anybody have any concerns with looking at this? I don't understand the two sides. Do you want to explain to us how it works? Yeah. So they, it's, it is collective bargaining at the state level. So that's for health care. Yes. And so on one side, you're going to have the five people, seven people appointed by home by the Vermont school board association. And then the other side, the other side, they're appointed by the Vermont NEA. And then there's also I think one person that is appointed by another community. Okay. Any issues with adding this kind of study? Okay. Okay. Great. Mr. Seglowski, would you put that in our next graph? I'm sorry. Sure. Feel free to leave it in. This St. James, if you're still at council, would you mind, thankfully, not that we would have your birthday later? Would you mind putting that in the second draft and the next draft? Yes. But I have a couple of points I'd like to make about this section if you'll indulge me. Absolutely. Please go ahead. Thank you. Beth St. James office of legislative council couple of days. JFO is probably not the right organization to conduct this type of study, especially if you're asking for policy recommendations. Yes, I just did the text from Catherine and I'm saying just that. Yes. So, Sue mentioned that the VPIC, which is the Vermont Pension Investment Committee, newly became an independent or I'm sorry commission. It went from a committee to a commission, I believe last session, and they were required to hire their own consultant to do a study on staffing and compensation. And so for the state board piece, I would suggest either AOE or the state board hiring a consultant and to carry out that study and make those recommendations and start and replacing JFO in that context. I would recommend agency of education for now. Okay. And then I do want to say, so I am not terribly familiar with the commission on public employee health benefits. They are different in many ways from the state board of education. And I just want to, their staffing and expenses are the authority for them to have staff and the allocation of their expenses is different than the state board of education. And that is that they have permission in state law to hire staff as necessary to carry out its duties. And I believe the similar language to the state board. But current law specifically states that compensation for commission staff and administrative expenses of the commission shall be shared equally by school employers and school employees. And those costs shall equitably be equitably apportioned among their members. So it's not a completely analogous situation for a study. And I don't know much more about this organization, but I would encourage you to think about two completely separate studies. Yeah, I think that sounds like a good idea. And what then I would recommend we do is if you would draft what Susa Glowski just recommended to us as a amendment, if you will, and we will hear from your testimony and then the committee can decide whether or not we would want to amend the miscellaneous education bill with Susa amendment after hearing some testimony. I'm sure. And you don't have to make any amendments at this point because there's nothing that's been introduced. So it would just be a new draft. So we don't have to be that formal. Yeah, I'm just talking about not any official way, but I'm just saying, you know, as a way to as a vehicle to sort of make the policy decision in the end. Sure. So I'm adding another study on the compensation staffing of the Vermont Commission on Public School Employee Health Benefits. Is that accurate? But you're not adding it to this draft. You're going to add it as if, you know, in a separate sort of as if we were to amend it later on, speaking not officially as an amendment, but just as a separate vehicle in which we will take testimony and maybe then eventually add it to the miscellaneous education bill. Orson language, no problem. And then just to be clear, are you thinking the same they have to hire a consultant to do the study? I think for now you can put that in as we dig into in the next couple of weeks we can decide. Okay. Okay. Great. So then I think as it relates to section two, we are going to be hearing from Secretary French about the statewide torso offerings and whether or not agency of education has enough resources to do that work. While we're on the topic, does it make sense for anyone else to do that work? I wouldn't. I mean, I guess the only thing this committee could do would be to have the agency of education hire a consultant, but I think let's talk to Dan about it and see what he thinks and then go from there, please. Okay. I think we're relatively straightforward and commission the study. Yeah. We fund the study and they figure out how to conduct the study. If they can't do it in-house, then they subcontract. That's fairly strange for me. It seemed to me. So we can ask that when Secretary French is in if that's the way that they want to go about it. One of the things Secretary French said over the years is like, I can save the $150,000 or I can save the $100,000 by kind of doing it in-house and we can get from that option. Sounds good. Section three, efficiency-based learning, study committee. We're going to continue to take some testimony on it next week. We'll also look at the possibility of doing something around Act 77, but I don't think there's anything to do there. And the remote teacher grant program, let me just give some thought to this. I just, I think J. Nichols point around, are there some rural districts that might need some additional funds to help them? Might be the way for me to think about it. Since I'm the one that's kind of maybe pushing this the most, I'll just give some thoughts and try to convince the committee one way or the other and we'll see where people land. The Vermont Post-Secondary School Marketing. I will talk to Senator Ron Hinsdale today and Senator Kitchell about budget items and see what we can or cannot do around this. And I don't know if we've heard a number from, I think the one number we've heard from the chamber and others was right now the state's marketing is 3.5 million. Okay, so I'll talk to Senator Ron Hinsdale and others and see if they can also get behind what I think this committee would support is some additional funds to the agents to the agency and or the agency of tourism to come up with something to help market higher education. And then I'm the pre-kindergarten. Beth, are we opening up? And I'm sorry I missed this because it's the first time. Would this be the first time somebody would be going over the border for pre-K? Are we opening this up? And so a couple of things. One, just to be clear, section six in your miscellaneous bill makes zero amendments to current law. There's no changes in the bill. It's just a pre-holder. I can't comment on whether or not you're opening up a can of worms because that's subjective. I think I encourage you when I did the walkthrough and I would encourage it again to ask AOE to come in and speak to what they believe the holdup is in allowing a student to use Act 166 funds to attend a pre-K program across state lines because there's nothing in here that says you can't go to a pre-K program in New Hampshire or out of state. My understanding is it's an interpretation and it may be the intent behind the law, but intent is for you to breathe life into, not me, and I didn't draft one Act 166. But I believe what you'll hear is that the way that AOE is interpreting the qualifications of these programs is that it's really only for not programs that may qualify. But I would really encourage you to hear from AOE on those interpretations, not me, because they're the ones who are saying yay or nay to the tuition in your class. I will also say if you're also looking at, and I have not heard all the testimony you've taken on the topic of pre-K in the garden, but if you are looking to do, to make, you know, I think it's, I actually don't remember the bill number, but the pre-K in child care bill that came out this session, yep. If you're looking at making large programmatic changes like that, you know, consolidating changes would be helpful, you know, rather than making one small change in the miscellaneous bill, not a larger change in a larger bill. And then, because they may not, they may not match. And if they're, if they're becoming out of your committee, that's definitely something to think of. And then the last piece I will just say is that historically and going forward, I co-staffed pre-K in the garden with Katie, my colleague Katie McClinn. Right. So going forward, if you're hearing testimony on changes to the pre-K in the program and statute, and certainly asking for any drafting, we should ideally both be in the room for that. Yeah. And for what is worth, Hayden did tell me that. So I can assure you it's my mistake. Just given a, just given a plug, because it's so hard to coordinate schedules, I just want to, just want to make a plug for that. Yeah. And then working group on status of libraries, I don't know. Yeah. Kind of just make one recommendation on the last section was pre-kindergarten education. I just recommend changing the titles to alleviate confusion and call it like cross-border pre-kindergarten education or something to that effect, because we're about to go into this big confluence. If we don't join, we don't move this into S56. Yeah. We just need to be able to really, clearly differentiate what, what, what, yeah. Sounds like a good idea. Are you talking about the reader assistance heading? Yes. I can certainly make that change. Great. And then back on the library study, I think we discussed about just adding this, and I'm not sure if it already has it in there. Thank you. This is about, we were going to ask the group that's already looking at libraries to consider this one extra piece in their report. And their report is due back when? It is due November 1st of this year. Okay. So they have some time to, and we would do that. We would direct them in statute to do that. Yeah. So I did add language here. So this is a piece of special law creating a working group to report back to the legislature with recommendations. And I did add on page 18, so their powers and duties, they shall study whether current law, lines 15 and 16, or the current law provides adequate protections for libraries from firearm violence. And then their recommendations need to include on page 20 lines 20 through 21 recommendations for legislative action regarding firearm and weapons safety on library property. So perhaps you and I could look at a new draft together tomorrow afternoon sometime. We could just go through it and then we can present it again for the committee next week. If anybody else wants to join us after tomorrow, you may need after three or four or something like that. We can just scrap that. Yeah, certainly. Library. The State Department of Libraries, many of these college libraries fall under that or should they? I mean, it's another layer. I could be wrong with this. Did you hear the question? I didn't. Whether or not, correct me if I'm wrong here, Senator Williams, and I repeat the question. Do our state libraries at our state universities fall under the heading of any power or authority that any kind of library commission that might exist has in the state? And I don't, I think all libraries are very individual, right? You could have a library has its own board of trustees in a town. You could have the state university libraries. Is there any overarching authority for libraries in the state? Well, there's the Department of Libraries. And this is not in my portfolio. So I'm sorry I can't speak as eloquently as I could. But there is the, let's see. There is a Vermont state. There is a State Department regarding libraries, what their duties are I can't speak to. As far as if you're asking that question in relation to the firearm piece, if you're asking that question not in relation to the firearm piece, I can certainly consult with my colleague who handles library matters that either here I can get back to you on kind of control of libraries or regulatory authority over libraries. I think how are they regulated and whether or not our libraries at the state college fall under their regulations in any way, or if they just fall under the regulations of the institutions themselves. I think they just fall under the regulations of the institutions themselves. But if you could check with your colleague who has expertise in libraries that would be great. If that, if that. Yeah. You know. Sound good? All right. I don't know. Okay. I know the Department of Libraries oversees the public libraries, but are the state libraries part of the public system? Because they are even in the municipal one. Public. So yeah, that's a good question. They don't have the board of directors. Yeah. In most cases, but they still fall under the state library system. All right. Okay. I think we're good. Okay. I will have a new day tomorrow. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Let's take five minutes. We'll come back. We're going to up.