 Good afternoon. You are with the Vermont House Government Operations Committee. It is Friday. It is snowing. I am so glad you all made it here safely. And thankful that we can be with a whole series of folks from Boards of Civil Authority around the state who didn't have to get in their car just to drive to Montpelier because they can zoom here now. So welcome. We have folks mainly from the Washington County and Lamoille County areas. And so we are going to just cruise through our list of folks who are here with us today in hopes that we can hear some feedback from them on what was proposed in H589. And I would also welcome folks to comment on where your town is currently districted relative to the proposed districts and any other comments you would like to share with us. So let's start at the top of the list. I've got Liz Schlagel who is the Board of Civil Authority from Waterbury and welcome Liz. Good afternoon, everybody. Thank you, Representative Copeland-Hanses. So my name is Liz Schlagel-Stevens. I use she, her pronouns. And I am the chair of the Waterbury Board of Civil Authority. And full disclosure, I am married to Representative Thomas Stevens of the Waterbury Chittenden District. So just making sure people know that. Here does share the opinion of the Waterbury BCA on the recommended map as proposed in H589, also known as the LAB alternate map. The map in H589 makes no changes to the existing Washington Chittenden District, which is a two-member district that serves the entirety of the towns of Waterbury, Bolton, Hewlett-Score and Huntington. On November 4, 2021, the Waterbury Board of Civil Authority unanimously voted to reject the single member districts proposed in the LAB adopted map. The Waterbury BCA has no desire to subdesign this proposed two-member district into two single-member districts. And so the district as proposed in H589 will be reviewed by the Waterbury BCA on February 10. And based on our past discussions, we expect that the BCA will approve the proposed district. In our response to the LAB adopted map in November, the BCA made these points that Waterbury is well served by the two-member district. That the current two-member district does not deviate significantly from the ideal population numbers, why the proposed adopted map did. And the shared two-member district with Huntington, Bolton and Hewlett-Score has worked successfully for the past 10 years. Since splitting the district and the town, well it's first proposed in 2011, the Waterbury BCA and residents of Waterbury have consistently advocated for a two-member district. Residents feel that having access to true representatives to help them solve individual and community problems and represent the district's collective interest in the legislature is of great benefit. So the Waterbury BCA is well satisfied with the LAB alternate map as proposed in H589. And that is the opinion of the BCA. Thank you for your attention and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Liz. Questions from committee members? All right, clear and simple. Rep LaClaire? Thank you, Matt. Good afternoon, Liz. We heard testimony from the other part of your district there. I think it was yesterday that it feels a little bit different than you folks do. We're clear about that their representatives are diligent about getting into the area, but they don't feel that they've been able to have the influence and the impact on things by staying with the current district. If you weren't to go with them, would you have any suggestions of where else we would go to get your district to the right number? So we do completely respect the opinions of Huntington and Bolton and Buells Gore and understanding that being placed in a district that is outside their county and school district lines does not feel natural to them. The same was true, you know, in the past, right, and they're in their in prior districts as well. And we have collectively, I think, worked very hard to make sure that when we do have to come together as a district, we make sure that everyone is heard equally. In terms of the asking where else to put Waterbury, I think that the key point that the Waterbury BCA would want me to make is that we are satisfied with the district as it is while understanding how our neighbors feel. In prior to 2011, Waterbury was districted with Duxbury and Huntington, and that was a successful partnership. And the key part that I know my colleagues on the BCA would want me to express is that cutting the community as is proposed in the alternate map and in prior maps is not acceptable for Waterbury and they would take that very seriously. Any other questions from committee members? All right, seeing none. Thank you, Liz, you're welcome to stick around if you'd like to listen to what other folks in the region have to say. Thank you. Next up I have Amanda Guston, who's the chair of the BCA in Berry City. Welcome, Amanda. And please share your thoughts on the redistricting plans. Good afternoon. Thank you for having me this afternoon. I'm Amanda K. Guston. I'm the chair of the Board of Civil Authority for Berry City. I wanted to come before the committee this afternoon to reiterate the conclusions and the vote of the Board of Civil Authority for Berry City for a redistricting plan that keeps Berry City as a single multi member district. Thus, rejecting the plan that the legislative apportionment board proposed which would split Berry City into two single member districts. Berry City is just over four square miles, which is tiny for Vermont and has one of the highest population densities in the state. We work very hard to build community in our place. Our recommendation to the legislative apportionment board was based on both surveyed feedback from Berry City residents and a lively debate at a meeting of the Board of Civil Authority on November 4, 2021. We argue that the city is a contiguous whole and can best be represented as such issues that face our city do not stop at legislative lines. In addition, the proposed line between the two legislative districts as drawn by the legislative apportionment board cut across established ward lines. Before redistricting in 2010 voters frequently expressed confusion about their two different voting districts municipal and legislative. We did not want to place any possible obstacles on the path to voting in a city with many people who have been historically disadvantaged. Thank you for your time this afternoon. I was glad to have the chance to appear and share the conclusions of the Berry City Board of Civil Authority with this committee. Thank you very much questions from committee members. Seems like that was crystal clear. Thank you for being with us Amanda. Michael Suboran justice of the peace in Marshfield. Welcome Michael and happy to hear your thoughts on redistricting. Yes, thank you. I'm justice of peace Marshall on the Marshall Bill of Civil Authority. I'm here to speak in opposition to the H589 that proposes the legislative district. Washington six of encompassing cows, Marshall and playing field, which is the current alignment of the district but the legislative legislative appointment board. First of all, I'll backtrack read from my notes is going to be easier, easier for me. So my understanding is that this current proposal is not aligned with that the legislative appointment board. I would like to also point out that the Marshall Board of Civil Authority did vote in support of the proposed redistricting redistricting by the legislative appointment board, and that district would be composed of playing field Marshall and and then go on to speak of the alignment of playing for Marshall and Cabot in the sense represents more of a community and is the fact that natural community. Not that being a community is a criteria for redistricting, but it should be a consideration. These three towns have more in common than the previous configuration of, you know, the included cows. The playing field and Cabot share proximity as well as similar population demographics. They also share in common US route to the Windowsky River as well as the resources of Molly pond State Park and associated them. The mail for cavities delivered out of Marshall by Marshall rule carriers. We, I live in Marshall, we do our local shopping at the playing field co-op Marshall and cabinet building stores. We obtain hardware supplies from playing field hardware various hardware store and cabinet. We get gas at the Maplefield the missies gas station in Marshall. We get our car repairs done at the cabinet garage to get pizza deposit the pie and playing field. The school has common Marshall service area like community meals between the Valley senior center service area wide meals and will will meals and will. There's a church and plain for certain community meals and provides an area a meeting. The plain food health center provides local health services, local employment is provided through area stores, schools, cabinet creamery, Goddard College, both stops, etc. The emergency services are provided by cabinet ambulance and playing from fire department. The local radio station is given WGDR out of Goddard College in playing field. And then I can go on and on with various examples and what I'm essentially trying to say is that the local community has no cause to go to Calis for normal business or teams like the people people around here in Marshall we do, you know, we do our every single day stuff. Pretty much in playing field and cat, you know, Montelia one not but, you know, we really have really have little to do with Calis other than being in the same legislative district and then my final sentences. Why would we want to be part of a larger population base there's no natural relationship to her existing, existing community and thank you for letting me speak today, Thank you for being with us. members any questions for the representative from Marshfield representative Cooper. Thank you madam chair. Michael I understand your position of reaching out to other towns. The people in Cabot come Marshfield and playing field to do their business. I mean yes they do because you have the co-op in plain field you have the village store in Marshfield and you have the gas station in Marshfield where I think a lot of people go to get gas. So there is something going back and forth. Yeah I mean you're not going there. Right route to pass it through all three communities of Cabot and Marshfield and Plainfield and also the Wondoski River Valley affects all three communities. I mean I mean and in a distance wise all three are within proximity. I mean Cabot not Cabot but you know I did a mileage thing today in Callas is you know like 14 miles away from Cabot and 12 miles away from Plainfield. There is there is really no relationship between Callas other than being in the same legislative district. Thank you. Any other questions from committee members. All right. Thank you so much for being with us. Feel free to stick around as we jog next door to Plainfield. Jim Vols is chair of the select board in Plainfield. Welcome Jim. Hello thank you for having me. We have a slightly different view of this situation than Marshfield does. We have no we don't have any strong ties to Cabot. We are very comfortable with our relationship with Callas. We very much like having Janet Ansel representing us and we've been big and we've been very pleased with with her representation. We'd like that to continue. So we feel that the new district we'd rather we'd rather have things stay the way they are. But if a change needs to be made due to the requirements of reapportionment then we would we are OK with being joined with Marshfield for that purpose. So we do have interest that we share with Marshfield. We have the Twinfield School and it's called Twinfield because it's the school for Marshfield and Plainfield. So there is that strong interest there. Although otherwise I tended to agree with with we with no otherwise I would say we don't the people in Plainfield don't go to Cabot on a regular basis for services of any kind that I'm aware of. If you have any questions I'll be happy to answer. Thank you. Committee members any questions for the other half of the Twinfields. Great. That was crystal clear. Thank you Jim for being with us today. Please feel free to stick around as we are continuing around your region going next to East Montpelier E.D. Miller. And we just need you to unmute yourself. Thank you. The last 2 years I should know better. Thank you madam chair and committee members for allowing me to represent East Montpelier. I'm a justice to the peace here and the board asked me to speak on their behalf. We are here. I won't take much of your time because we don't have any complaints. I'm here to affirm our agreement with the alternative plan. Now when the lab came out with their their majority plan we had strong disagreement because it chopped off. We are we are in a one member district with middle 6 and currently and the new plan had the same thing except it chopped off 404 members of residents of East Montpelier and put them in a different district. So we did object pretty strongly to that for reasons that are outlined in writing. I won't unless you want to hear them I won't necessarily go into that. Anyway we were delighted that that our concerns were heard and this alternative plan has the entirety of both middle 6 and East Montpelier represented by one representative and we are happy with that. So essentially that's what I'm here to say. Excellent. Thank you so much. That was crystal clear. And we appreciate it. Committee members any questions for the representative from East Montpelier. Yes, that's a good thing. Right. Thank you for being with us today and please feel free to stick around. Thank you very much. Next we have a pair of gentlemen named Paul Malone and white from Berrytown. I'm not sure which one or both of you were planning to speak but I will let you to signal who you're OK go right ahead. That looks like Paul Malone. Yes, my name is Paul Malone. Everybody can hear me all right. Yes we can. Thank you. Fantastic. I am the chair of the Berrytown Board of Civil Authority. Everybody wanted me to talk. I figured I must like the Chief Justice. I said Jesus not the Supreme Court but I'll do my best. I just want to refer to Title 17 of the Vermont Statute and Chapter 11 of the Vermont Constitution which allows for two member district in the House of Representatives. Berrytown has been a two member district since 1980. The Board of Civil Authority strongly believes this configuration has served Berrytown residents exceedingly well for more than four decades. The town's population has remained stable for the past decade and all facets of the town governance structure recognizes the municipality as a single entity. Maintaining a single town wide district ensures equitable representation of the town's common interests. Examples of this would be our public safety, our roads, our infrastructures, our education funding and economic stability. The BCA has recommended that the single district two member representation be maintained. Issues with the multi town district exacerbated with Berrytown's configuration of the map being joined with Orange creates another multi town district. Examples of that could be when we look at populations we see that in Berrytown which has a population of 7,923 when we add in Orange we go to a plus 4.63% deviation where currently we are at a minus 7.5% deviation. If we add in and if we leave Orange with the current scenario that creates kind of a lesser than expected 5.78% deviation. If Orange were to come out, I'm going to correct myself on one thing, if Orange was to be placed with Berrytown that particular district would wind up with a greater deviation than what we have with Berrytown by itself. I would point out to the committee that there are other two sister communities that are in our general area. Berry City right now has a population of about a 491. It's pretty much close to spot on. It's about 150 individuals underneath what would be the ideal at 8574. Montelia which has been recommended to stay as a two member district has about 8,074 individuals in it or a negative 5.83% deviation. So when we look at our 7.59 minus deviation we're well within that area. I think by changing and applying Orange to our area does a couple other things. One is the representation of those folks in Orange would probably be less served because a population of a thousand in that particular community being combined with almost 8,000 in Berrytown is pretty unlikely that they will have this direct representation just by the sheer numbers of voting population. I don't think Orange wants that. We reached out to those folks and they said they liked where they were. We feel the same way as our board is concerned and we think that based upon the little cows of these two communities and the mountainous regions that we're in there really isn't a lot of commonness between the two communities other than we have a borderline that's on a high ridge somewhere heading towards the southeast. Any questions? Any members? Any questions for the member reporting out Berrytown? Representative Lefebvre? Thank you very much Mr. Mullen for testifying from the member of Orange. We would like to stay with what we are but given the opportunity between the two maps we did decide we'd want to go with you guys. Just to clarify I am the member of the BCA there and just to clarify that we would want to go with you over other opportunities that were given but yes overall we'd like to stay the same but unfortunately we know that that won't happen so just to clarify Berrytown would be our first choice of where Orange would go. May I respond to that? You may respond to that yes. We've received mixed messages from Orange including the Orange Town Clerk. We want to reach out to as many people as party as possible as we did within our own community. It was a strong debate. Our particular governing structure that we have within our BCA is that we have an understand where we have a divided board by intention which is made up currently of eight Democrats and seven Republicans and everyone across that particular spectrum would seem to agree that this would be better to remain this way. I think that the numbers will speak for themselves ultimately but I question what kind of representation Orange would actually have and also there was one other tip that I left out and had to deal with the actual census itself. We were a little bit puzzled by the census is not having really changed and we checked into that and we didn't know how complete that census really was. What we found that was very interesting was that we have right now based upon the census number and our registered voters we seem to be slightly over 80% of all citizens in this community being 80% registered. That seems kind of high when we looked at all the surrounding towns around us so I don't know if the census may have had some deficiency in it but I'm sure the legislature has failed some way around that. Well I wish that there was some way around that but we are bound by the statute that requires us to base our district lines on the decennial census and those official numbers. I think in most parts of the state seem to be roughly accurate but you folks on the ground may believe differently about the count as it impacted your community but we don't have a lot of latitude and so I think the only other thing that I would ask you is since Berrytown is a little bit small in terms of population to remain a two-seat district what other configurations of adding you know some some bodies if you will to your district would would make sense to you. Looking at the geographic area coming out of Berlin which is one of the communities that surround us looking at orange is another one Plainfield really doesn't seem to make sense in any kind of configuration when you say there are numbers a little bit smaller there again I've got to bounce back to Montpelier I mean we've got about a population it's about 140-150 different than theirs I don't see any resectioning out in that particular area this is just what the general senses was of the community leaders and particularly the board of civil authority which looked at this very very closely this is where we feel we should stay and that's our opinion. Thank you. Committee members any other questions? Representative Jehovsky. Madam Chair I actually have a point of clarification for you or maybe someone else on the committee I'm just trying to remember we're trying to stay under 7% deviation correct. So plus five or minus five is generally the the target range for an overall 10% deviation and there have been times in the past that Vermont's districts have extended beyond plus five or minus five but it's a good thing to aim for and it's sort of the first the first cut and then the rest of the statutory criterion coming along behind that. Okay I'm not sure where plus seven was ringing in my brain or plus or minus seven was ringing in my brain though perhaps that was that measure of constitutionality. Now it's the plus or minus five that has is presumed to be and maybe you know how to say this better than I do. No under 10% is assumed to be constitutional but you have to be able to rationalize a district that's higher. Yeah if you have a district that's either larger or smaller than plus or minus five you know you've got to be able to rationalize that. And the other issue is if you were settling on 10% deviation for all your districts then your overall deviation assuming you had somebody at plus 10% and somewhat at negative 10% that would give your overall deviation of 20% which the United States Supreme Court has said is of questionable constitutionality. Great thanks for clarifying that for me. Representative Leclerc. Thank you Madam Chair and thank you Mr. Malone and Mr. White. As much as I recognize that we are looking to have the 5% deviation high or low you're right that if we're under the 10% number at least from a constitutional perspective that hasn't seemed to have gotten challenged but if I remember correctly the deviation for the overall plan in the state for 2012 was what almost 18% almost 19% almost 19% so there's precedent to show that as much as we're trying to work with that 5% that there is some realm for deviation where it's appropriate. Any other questions from committee members? Representative Lefave. Thank you very much. How would Berrytown feel about any division or separation of the town if you know part of the town was to be taken to maybe supplement somewhere else? I think that would that would make our our deviation worse. I'll let Paul White speak. Chair Board, chair of the select board. Welcome Mr. White. Thank you Madam Chair. My name is Paul White. I'm the chair of the select board in Berrytown as mentioned and I'll be brief because Mr. Malone covered most of it but to answer the question asked by Representative Lefave I think the residents of Berrytown would be strongly opposed to having a part of our town chiseled away and grouped with some other district. As Paul mentioned before you know Berrytown has been a standalone two-member large district for 40 years. We think it's worked very well. We certainly no offense intended to our good neighbors in Orange. Representative Leclerc had made a point earlier in the talking about the Waterbury district about how speaking of Bolton, Huntington and Buelles Gore, how they feel that they are maybe perhaps overlooked since the population center is in Waterbury. What we're doing here with grouping Berrytown and Orange is creating a similar situation where the population of Berrytown is seven and a half times that of Orange and I understand Representative Lefave's comment that they would like to join with us and we certainly don't want to shun them but if you look at the comment was made about our numbers being a little too small to be a standalone district. If Berrytown was left to itself as we currently are the deviation would be between seven and a half and seven point six percent to the minus. However if you look at the proposed new Orange I which I believe is where Orange currently sits prior to redistricting that proposed Orange I has a deviation of minus seven point seven eight so we're actually creating a worse situation. I believe if if Orange was left in Orange I with its neighboring towns of Williamstown, Washington, Corinth, Chelsea and Burshire that everyone would be a little bit closer to zero than what is being proposed and I guess I will just finish with everybody that I've talked to whether members of the BCA members of the town. I haven't spoken with a single person who has not been of the opinion that they would like to see Berrytown remain as it has been for 40 years as a standalone two member at large district and looking back to what was recommended by the LAB where Berrytown was divided into two single member districts. We are very much opposed to that as well as was mentioned by the Berry City speaker. Berrytown is very much one community there is really no difference between the north side of town and the south side of town in drawing an arbitrary line to create two single member districts would really be counterproductive in our opinion. Thank you for the opportunity. Thank you for being with us any other questions from committee members. All right seeing none next I think I would love to zoom up to Belvedere and have a conversation with Kathy Mander Adams. Kathy you are the town clerk in Belvedere. That is correct. I am the town clerk in the beautiful town of Belvedere Vermont. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak with you. I'm hoping that most of you know where Belvedere is. Thank you. The Belvedere Board of Civil Authority did meet back at the end of October. We did submit our comments and certainly appreciate the opportunity to review and renew our recommendation to the Board. As I said in my survey that I feel that in November having the consensus of the Belvedere Board of Civil Authority we were comfortable with the adopted plan that was submitted. The suggestion that Belvedere can combine with Johnson and Waterville is an advantage to Belvedere as we are combined with these towns through school and family activities. Well the alternate plan which of course is the original plan keeps us with same towns and we do share the same school and we're not unhappy with the configuration the way it is but Waterville is we have to pass through Waterville to do anything and Waterville currently is not part of our district. So that would be an advantage to us if we could be in a same member district with Waterville. Yes we participate in a lot of things with that town but again we're all in the same county. We also utilize community services within those towns. Belvedere feels a too representative district is a greater advantage to Belvedere when our representatives do not live in our town. However if we stay connected to Waterville and Johnson we feel a greater connection will exist. In other words our preference is to stay the way we are. We're not uncomfortable with the adopted map because it brings us closer to Waterville. You can't change the connection through any of this. You can't change our connection with Waterville. We will continue to be close neighbors with Waterville and do a lot of things together. However again the committee feels that the way we are now is our preference but we could live with the adopted map. That's all I have to say thank you very much for letting me speak. Thank you so much for being here and representing the town of Belvedere. Committee members any questions? Alright crystal clear that is excellent. Thank you so much. Thank you. We had on our agenda a representative of the town of Eden and I don't see her at the moment but we will skip over her and come back if he arrives before we take a break. So now we would like to hear again from the town of Huntington and Heidi Rapp is with us. Heidi welcome. Hi thank you very much for hearing me again. I thought I'd hit both counties because we seem to be split here. So I thought in the interest of giving a more cohesive presentation. As I said to our BCA yesterday I would not win the Best Actress Academy Award but at least I'm on the record. So I'd like to read my letter to Tom Little that was written on behalf of the BCA in November. Much of that was paraphrased in January to our representatives and senators. Dear Mr. Little and Legislative Apportionment Board the Board of Civil Authority of the Town of Huntington thanks you for the work that you have put on the legislative and senatorial districts for our state. We are most pleased that we are having your support for our request for representation in our county and that is Chittenden County. Toward this end we would like to address the two districts that were discussed at our meeting on November 1st. Number one we applaud your efforts to create a balance of the populations of the towns that would be in the Chittenden Waterbury District so that would be Chittenden Washington District. By creating a district that includes two small towns and a gore. Huntington, Buells Gore and Bolton and part of a larger town Waterbury. As we said in the previous letter to you last February we have been underrepresented in the Vermont House since 1980 and this is 40 years having been placed with Waterbury in Washington County where the geographic and cultural disparities have been large. While we have enjoyed fairly keen representatives who have recognized the weight of our voter block we have not had a representative from Huntington in the Vermont legislature since 1965. And despite an opening in the Vermont House in 2011 due to Sue Minters change of career the appointment made by the governor was the Waterbury candidate. And Tom Stevens who has been and Teresa Wood have both been excellent representatives so it's nothing personal or anything like that and I will say that this is a 10-year arrangement and I would be surprised if either of them are still with us in 10 years. And in terms of being in the legislature hopefully they'll still be with us. So we strongly support the single representative Washington, Chittin and Washington representative district proposed on the map drawn by Jeremy Hansen and Rob Rob Roper on October 13, 2021 and approved by the board for submission to the BCAs. And so then we had this whole other thing with the senatorial districts because at the 11th hour last time we were we were we would say we were complacent. We thought because we were already in a district outside of our county that we wouldn't be put into another county for the senatorial district. And so we have had 10 years of Addison representation and the senators have been fine they've been great. We have gotten a lot of attention from them so there's no complaints there. In fact I did some research before we were put in Addison and realized that after you probably know all these people Doug Racine, Sally Conrad and George Little all stopped being in the senate we didn't see anyone here for nine years in our town as legally representing the senate. And we used to see a lot of Dennis Delaney too. The man could be in 10 places at once and he was always here. So we support a two-member senatorial district similar as discussed at the BCA meeting of the five towns of the Mount Mansfield district at which Tom Little was in attendance. So that was organized by the town of Jericho. The goal there was to have the five towns in the Merge Mount Mansfield district have the same senators. That isn't exactly what happened but we are with at least one of the towns in our school district and we are also with Hinesburg and other other towns and we are happier about that to be in in the county. So we thank them for their efforts on this too and the BCA had consensus that the maps you provided on the Secretary of State's website are significantly better than our current situation in the Addison district. In fact we like all proposals better than our current senate district and we would get back to the lab with our BCA's official senate preference in the future which we didn't do because it moved pretty fast so then we cut over and started writing to our senators and representatives and a lot of it was the same language but I would like to just say that we have been on this we have Mr. Little's been very kind to us because we've been on this for a year over a year with him calling him showing up at the meetings when they had them thank god for zoom and responding you know he came to that meeting that was the Mount Leonsfield School District and heard what everyone had to say and then went away and you know heard us and so I would like I would like you to hear us too and to get back to the legislative district again there's there's no complaints about our two democratic representatives but we have run candidates from this town in the past and if they're a Democrat they never get past the primary to get on the ballot thank you you have any questions committee members any questions for the member from Huntington so I guess I have a question if you if you had to talk about the natural alliances and ties between Huntington and any of your neighbors to the west or north how would you describe where Huntington feels more connected we have great ties to Richmond and to Hinesburg that's a natural commuting direction as as long as we're talking about the county and Bolton you know if someone is working in Montpelier or Waterbury they would go through Bolton but part of what is going on with our town is we've had a couple centuries of isolation here because it's a completely it's the kind of town where you can get from any point in the town without having to leave the town because it's all in one valley which makes us a little isolated so to to get anywhere else we actually have to go to another town and for before we were put in with Waterbury we were with Hinesburg and we had Henry Kars for our representative and Mr. Kars owned property in town and you know was aware of the dynamics of our town so you know we we go to Hinesburg we go to Richmond and not so much anyplace else I mean the Bolton part of it is much better because it used to be um Waterbury and Duxbury and you know we share that commonality with Duxbury in that we claim the top of Camel's hump but they're pretty close to it so you can't really get there from here unless you hike hike up and over and otherwise you're driving through two towns to get to Waterbury and so we we would like to be with someone who's adjacent to us and Bolton we're still going through Richmond but it is it is closer and it is the same school district and the same county right right um this does Huntington sort of identify as you know I'm from the west valley and you're from the east valley you know do do folks um you mentioned that your town it you know runs uh runs up and down a valley so is that oh you mean in terms of splitting the town um what I have personally noticed um having lived in the town here for um 45 years or so is that um you know if you're on the southern end of town you might tend to go commute south if you're leaving town and if you're on the northern end of town you would probably commute north um and so there's a little bit of that but overall it's a it's a pretty cohesive town because you don't have to leave to go any plate to get to one point from one point to the other in the town we're all in this valley together and so it's unlike there's a part of Starksboro where they actually have to come in through part of Bristol and then up through the gore and into Huntington into Hanksville actually and then go up into the little um spur of Starksboro so um that's kind of a disconnected corner and thankfully we don't have any of those disconnections here yes I can see that on the map um any other questions from committee members all right uh thank you so much for being with us okay thank you