 All right, give me one second, I was pulling it back up so I'm going to work off there. Thank you everybody for joining us. It is October 7th and welcome to the Social Equity Subcommittee meeting. We just hit our first milestone on October 1st where a report was turned in so the plan for reducing or eliminating fees for social equity applicants. We have additional deadlines coming up so this is a good critical meeting and we're happy everyone could make the time today. I'd like to go to the agenda. I'm going to officially call the meeting to order now. And also I'm going to ask if we have a motion to approve the minutes from 10-4. Motion? Do I have a second? Thank you so much. All right great, let the record reflect that the minutes for 10-4 have been approved. There are no public comments this week so Julie I would ask do we have any members of the public in the room with us today? We do, we have two members of the public. Welcome, fantastic. At 10 till the hour we will open up the floor to public comments for those who are in the room but as a reminder to anyone watching the video if you would like to submit public comments you may do so at ccb.vermont.gov. There's a public input form but you can fill everything out and you can also attach files and provide any additional resources. So I'm going to flip back and this is today's agenda. We'll be going through exclusive licensing for social equity applicants, delivery, a co-op, cannabis business development fund and then of course ending as I just noted with public comments. So with that being said Gina I am going to turn this over to you and I will be updating and writing in real time for this today. Thank you. Thank you. Before we begin I just want to take attendance for everybody. I'm so sorry. I see. Present. Nader. Right. Julie from the Vermont Cannabis Control Board. Yes, here. From NACP we have Danika here. We have John taking notes. We have Susanna from Vermont's government. Present. Great. Who is absent right now is Nuzulio and Jeffrey. He is out there from NACP. We will make sure after this meeting to send them the minutes and our presentation as well. Thank you. So exciting times everyone. We are on exclusive licenses so we're going to consider if there should be any exclusive licenses for social equity candidates. Please note none of these licenses are in any of the cannabis regulations that we will be making recommendations for them to be added. So do not despair. I think recommendations go a really long way and I think Vermont is open to seeing these licenses. So as we spoke about last week about delivery licenses and cooperative licenses, one of the things that we also have to establish if we're saying that these will be exclusive to social equity candidates will there be a time limit of exclusivity. We have discussed that in other states they often do make a time period where these licenses are introduced and then social equity. So for delivery there was three years or four years on term periods and then they will look at it again and see if they want to open it to everyone or just keep it as a social equity. So we should also consider that when we are discussing these licenses. So I'm going to go into our first one with delivery. I know people wanted to speak about different models that there are in the industry. We will discuss that but one of the things that I wanted to focus on is not to try to limit what Vermont chooses to do for licensing. So if we can kind of be a little bit more open-ended we'll really define. On it that I'll give you some of the choices that Vermont may choose. So Massachusetts does marijuana courier. It was previously called a delivery only license. The next few licenses, slides that I'm going to show you about delivery was created by Jeffrey Gallego and unfortunately he couldn't be with us because he was going to present them. So just please note that for the record he's done a really great job on giving us all of these slides and explaining what models are out there. And so this is what we were discussing sort of last week. Acting as a marijuana courier. Picking up marijuana from a retail shop and bringing it to the consumer or the patient if it is a medicinal patient. Right now currently this model is allowed for the medicinal cannabis industry in Vermont. And just to know on this model marijuana cannot be stored overnight. So if you have a delivery and the person doesn't answer it it definitely needs to be returned to the retail store. AKA the dispensary. Now there's another model here. It's the marijuana delivery operator. And so this would allow a person to be able to store marijuana. So we like to compare that to the ice cream truck store. You are able to get products from the cultivator and the manufacturer. I'm sorry. I'm seeing some notes. Can you not see the slides? I can now. I just had to bump out of the meeting and went back in. So now I'm with you. Sorry about that, Gina. Oh, no worries. Okay. Now you kind of just jump in there and just say, gee, wait, wait a minute. Can you see the slides? Are you able to see them now? Yes, our same deal with me. I left and came back and it worked. All right. Fantastic. Thank you. Did everybody in the call right now hear about the marijuana carrier license? Yeah. One more time. Yeah. We'll go back to the beginning. So one of the delivery license types that are out there is a marijuana carrier license. You currently sort of have this license type without calling it a license site that in the medicinal cannabis dispensary, they are able to career a product to a patient. So basically with this one, you have a retail dispensary. They have a customer delivery to them. The courier service picks up the product that is locked in a seal container from the dispensary and then brings it over to the patient. We, of course, we're not going to pay any legislation around this, but you know, they would need to confirm it's the person, the age, and also the responsibility is also let the retail to do the same thing. With this license, you cannot, the courier person cannot store marijuana overnight. The second is a marijuana delivery operator, and this person would be able to purchase marijuana and any of their products from a cultivator or a product manufacturer, and they can sell and deliver to customers directly. So what we like to compare this to is an ice cream truck. And in some states, it's a natural truck. They get in orders and they say, you know, do I have the product with me? Do I have this in my inventory and can deliver to them? Or they can pick up more from a retail store or manufacturer and deliver to them. So it's like a third party. All right, I'm going to sell you products and then you sell those products. We see this often with online retail. And then that is also similar to the wholesale delivery license. It's the same thing. You're able to pick up and sell and hold on to products overnight, and that's sort of your inventory base. So they're sort of acting like your own dispensary in store. And then we have, I know, someone made mention of the Ease model, which is in a couple of different states, which is an online platform. So they act as like DoorDash or like Uber Ease, for example. You go online, you research, you put in your zip code, you research what dispensaries are around, you click on the dispensary, they have an inventory list, you click what you want, you check out with that dispensary retailer, and then the courier then says, you need to pick up this client product. And then they go through the dispensary, they pick it up, they deliver it to somebody to warm. One of the ways that we are thinking about with the Vermont retail delivery is that what might be the easiest way to get in, to start off delivery in Vermont, is to have a Deliverier Courier System. But that Courier System is related to the retail. So they have that as a delivery add-on, if they want to hire a delivery licensee. Where the retail employs a driver, they employs a vehicle, and they have to provide insurance coverage for the driver. They are giving authority to the customer to be able to call in or shop online from the realtor. And then the Delivery Courier then brings the product to the customer. We like to call this a piece of delivery. I make a piece of delivery, call in my order, they send someone out to send me my product. And this is also really the least expensive way for a social equity licensee to get into the business. It is also a good way of keeping security on the item and also making sure that the illness falls on the retailer to dispensary itself to really choose who they would like and also ensuring, you know, 21 ages, the payment processing system, etc. Because with some of these models, for example, Ease, or a wholesaler by delivery operator, there would be a lot more issues. A social equity licensee would need certain trusts, certain reasons, cars, storage, ability, insurance. They take more liability of who they're selling the product to. It's just a lot more that is really involved with those larger sort of delivery models. I'm not saying that Vermont should not adopt any of them, but this would be a really first easy step to create. I just want everybody's opinion about delivery or maybe we just keep this open-ended that we're happy to see any of these models be implemented in Vermont. Nat, how do you feel about this? So, you know, the first license we're talking about where the delivery driver is a part of the retail business, I think that's a good idea. I think that they're, you know, my mind goes to legislators who are going to oppose this. You know, my first thought is that a lot of concern is given to highway safety and just road safety in general, and, you know, there will be this concern that people are going to drive themselves to retail shops by their cannabis and then smoke in that area and then drive around, whereas, you know, having it delivered to their house or rental or apartment that could relieve that fear, I think. The ice cream truck model thinks that... I don't think it's a terrible idea. I think there's pros and cons. You know, I think about how rural Vermont is and how, you know, some folks may not have transportation to go to and from retail locations, but I also think that it's kind of... it's a lot of steps forward to all at once when it comes to trying to follow the ice cream truck idea. So, those are my initial thoughts. Thank you, Ashley. I just want to piggyback on the ice cream truck model. You know, I've seen a little bit of that in New York City, and I think it's, I think that much. I do think that delivery is going to be essential in Vermont because of how rural we are. I like the idea of the retailer license having it as an add-on because that will definitely be important for retail. I don't know that they should add on for a year that they open their retail facility. So, that could provide a little bit of a gateway if we did want to do an exclusivity or an exclusive for those licenses for social... for any licensee holders. I think there could be some compromise in there to help encourage those folks to get into that sector. I think that also a really nice gateway to understanding what it's like to kind of sub to these retailers or sub to these wholesalers and really get to know all the players that are going to be in the market. So, I like the community development involvement in that. Let's see. What else? The calling and getting your weed. I mean, like that is... I think anybody for the tourists is going to expect that. The Airbnb rate around here is incredibly high. I think, you know, I think that's going to be really, really important to have. What I do want to avoid though is like folks coming up like to resort and doing like the ice cream truck around like parking in, you know, valet and like people just come like, that's going to prevent all of those people from coming just out of their hotels and going either to a farm or going to a dispensary and kind of getting outside of that resort field. So, I was later on that front. I do like the idea though of what Massachusetts did of offering it for the first couple of years. So, that's an interesting point that I'd be willing to keep exploring. How many years would you be interested in giving exclusivity to social equity candidates? Like around three or four years? What are your thoughts, more or less? Well, that being hypothetical then would retailers who want to have a delivery service be required to have social equity applicants as their, you know, as their delivery service? Because that could be cool too. So, that's really a need, yeah. Exactly. The way that we can ensure that, you know, we are getting also social equity candidates into the industry and we take part in it. I don't know about the amount of years. I want to ask Jennifer like when they started their program to like how effective, like how many people are utilizing that type of a license. If it's a ton, then it means the program works. If it's the same amount as anybody, you know, in a state that doesn't have it as an exclusivity, I just kind of want to look and see if we can ask Jennifer that. So, they do more of a bigger business model than what we're suggesting here. And it did start earlier this year in the year 2024 when they re-visit if this will just remain exclusive for social equity. And I think there's about four licenses right now that they have issued for that. And so, you know, this is obviously sort of a very different thing. You know, it's just really going to depend on, you know, how many social equity candidates want this in Vermont. I'd like us to look at most issues because it's a very close date that has social equity, but we always have to remember just, you know, five elements of doing a comparison. I think that, you know, when we make the suggestion that we have to say, you know, that the social equity board has to approve this. It's maybe six months a year and see if this is working out enough because, of course, if there's not enough licensees out there who are going to get delivery, we have to allow for retails to be able to look out of having someone who has a delivery license. But I think we have heard many public comments already that people are really in support of delivery and really want this. So, you know, I think based on anything, you know, this is a new program and every single legislation that is created around it has to be revisited to ensure that it is working properly. So with that being said, about this timeframe, would you like to see it at four years? A lot of often it's about the three to four-year exclusivity in other states. Would you do five years or more or less? Do you think about the actual time of it? Because if you think about this, like in intervals like, what's the first year of the flight and what the needs are versus the second year and what the needs are, there's going to be a lot more needs in that second, third, fourth year because there's going to be more of us that needs the service for delivery. So, let me take a little bit more on that. Yes, Anna, how do you feel about the delivery license? I think that I like it as proposed and I'm still really thinking a lot about the intertwining with other systems like the justice system and et cetera. I don't have fully formed thoughts, but that's where I am right now. Thank you. I'm sorry. Do you like this Vermont retail delivery license idea? I'm just confirming which slide you're referring to. Yeah, I think it's... Yeah, I like this proposal particularly because it helps to break the onus on the more powerful party. You know, when I was in New York, it was suddenly, overnight, you wanted to start forcing all of the electric bicycle laws because you're not supposed to have them, but all the delivery drivers did, and it was like the drivers because they were the ones getting fined. These have to be fined, but really, you know, it was the employers who kind of wanted them to use it as an excuse. So, anyway, that's what came to me, but I think that it's really important that we put the responsibility on the right party, and I think that this helps to do that. Thank you so much. And Julia, I see that you've joined us. I've been here for a while. I just didn't have my camera on. Oh, okay. So, with the delivery models, I know you've received a PowerPoint presentation and you might have heard us discuss that. How do you feel about this Vermont retail delivery license and, you know, if you don't like this, is there another model that you might like more? Well, I would say if Vermont is going to do retail delivery, I agree with the others who have said that starting with an employee-based and, you know, retailer-based delivery service would probably be the best way to step forward and then see how deliveries work out. My understanding from Massachusetts, and I'm not the expert, I've done a little reading in advance of this meeting. My understanding is that Massachusetts started retail sales in 2018, but they only started home delivery service this past July. I know the pandemic may have affected that, but it looks like it didn't all launch at the same time. I think we're making a more... Very originally, we're going to go with a courier service and then some of their social equity candidates really wanted it to be more of a business model, so that was one part of the delay of it, but I believe they had courier service for their medicinal cannabis, which is the same that Vermont has right now. And other state employees that do that for... Vermont doesn't... or does Vermont contract with delivery service for medical? I'm not sure. I believe it's an internal... I think that's right. Julie, do you have the answers to that? Yes, so I believe that they're employees of the dispensary. I don't think that they're for the medical program. I don't think that they're connected to the state of Vermont at all. Right, but they're... I'm sorry, I made a mistake in speaking there. They're dispensary employees. Yes. Yeah, I think... because I think there's another... there are other committees that are going to provide advice and guidance on how delivery would work, things like security, verification, and so forth. So I'm not... So I'm assuming if they are able to work that out, I'm comfortable with what you have on the screen, which is the retailer-based delivery service. For me, one, I think, at least as a little bit of reasoning, I said there are a lot of people who want delivery, like there's a market for home consumption, and there may be a benefit to have people who are going to deliver solely. You don't have to worry or speculate about whether people are using in the car on the way home, which is maybe a little assuring. So assuming that those details can work out, the benefits of having the employer-based one is that the concern I worry about is that you have... You can also... If you just go straight to like a quote, gig economy model, there may be a risk of economic exploitation of people who themselves might not have experience in commerce to be the best advocates or have the most power for themselves. So an employee, if they were injured, for example, during delivery, there's an auto accident or something like that, and the worker's compensation would provide a safety net for that. They would be... The vehicles would be subject to... The duty to maintain a working vehicle to make sure, especially in Vermont, where the climate can be unfriendly at certain times of the year, that that's a safe vehicle for them and to put the illness on that. That's one of the great points about cost should be... I said someone raised their hands, I'm going to stop. Great point, that was a great point. Ashley, I see your hand raised. I'm curious, thinking about how small businesses work, we wear all the hats to do all the things. Are cultivators going to be able to take their plant material and drive it to a dispensary for sale? I'm missing the steps. Or is this delivery going to be implemented so that you have to use a carrier service? Because I see that in some ways of being a little bit more expensive for the cultivator, but a lot more security knowing that this person's licensed, they went through the whole process of getting whatever type of vehicle they have, insurance they have, they know the protocol, perhaps there's going to be some budgeting certifications so that they know how to properly carry one to the place of the other and how it's... So just if you can speak to that, I'm just... I think that that is a really great point and I would love to sort of say that we can add cultivation here, but I think that's really a compliance and enforcement subcommittee distinction there. And I'm just going to take a call. Danika, I see your hand raised. And then I would love to vote on this because we have some other licenses to look at as well. Danika? Julie, I believe that Brynn shared with us what the retailer license can do. And please correct me if I'm wrong. Transport, possess, and sell. Does that sound right? Yes. And it may answer your question. I think what's different here is that this is delivery not from one business to another, but from a business to a home. Got it. So that was my question. Is it clear in the license type too? Yes, it's clear in the license type what the retailers can do. Thank you. Wonderful. So I would like us to vote on that. Yes, we would like to have a delivery license recommendation that this be added to current licenses that will be exclusive for social equity candidates. Timing of that to be determined by the Vermont Cannabis Control Board. And that we are recommending the retail delivery with the details that are on slide 13 under this presentation. Which is the retail license with delivery add-on. The retailer employs the driver, the vehicle, and insurance coverage for the driver. The social equity licensee is the one who delivers the product to the customer. And they are given this authorization from the dispensary. Please send this out. So it's a comparison to a piece of delivery service. And that they are employees of that dispensary. Nader, how do you vote on this? Before I vote, I just hoping for some further clarity. Are we voting on how many years this license will be exclusive? Or is that for a further discussion or another discussion? I think maybe we just leave that in the hands of the Vermont Cannabis Control Board. Okay. Just a check. So I voted yes. I support the license scheme that we've discussed. Thank you, Ashley. I'm still a little on the fence. So just my questions are the, you said that the exclusivity aspect, that's later. That's not a part of it. No, I'm responsible for the Vermont Cannabis Control Board to deal with the time periods and what they think is appropriate based on all the other different licenses and schemes, et cetera. So I'm voting on if the delivery license should even be added to the licenses that are being offered to social equity applicants. Yeah. So we are voting on adding a delivery license through the current licenses available, allowing that for exclusivity to social equity for whatever time periods the Vermont Cannabis Control Board deems appropriate and suggesting the retail delivery model to the Vermont Cannabis Control Board. Okay. So yes to everything but exclusivity for social equity applicants. For that particular. I think you do not want that only social equity license can get this license. Yeah. Okay. Because when we're talking about this license it's only for social equity candidates. Forever and always? Not forever. For a time period determined by the Vermont Cannabis Control Board. And we can make a recommendation. Because we were all sort of unclear of what that time period should be I was going to let that to be the Vermont Cannabis Control Board. But we can talk after this vote about how many years we think. Let's hold the vote and let's discuss if you want to make a recommendation of how many years. I mean how many years do you think there should be exclusive to? To a special licensee. I don't know that I can vote yet Gina. I think I really need to think about this because that's going to be a really important license to hold just based off of our state. Like we will need this indefinitely. And so I don't know that I'm ready to vote. And so when I will say to you that all of the licenses that we are talking about are going to be exclusive for social equity licenses. And right now there is no delivery license that is being offered for the recreational use market. So adult use does not have delivery as a licensee at all. Can you pass on me? Can I get just a little break? Julio would you like to discuss a time period before your vote on our retail delivery? Before I can make a judgment about how long I'm going to vote I just want to make sure that I understand who holds the license. This is a license that would go to somebody if it's like a second license or an amendment to your existing social equity retailer license. So it's held by the retailer, not by the driver? It's held by the driver. So you would have to apply for a social equity license. And then the retailer who would like to have delivery can hire those people who have a retail delivery license. So kind of the core of drivers for some period of time would be exclusively social equity candidates. Would that one be elsewhere if I hire? Presumably it could be hired by more than one employer. You could have a joint employer. The situation. Yeah, so with that understanding I like the idea that that's on the board and I'm comfortable with the board setting the level of the period of exclusivity. I think they, because they have a better sense as to how many licenses they expect to issue and get a number of licenses or the fees that would be involved and all of that and I don't have those facts. So I think it should be exclusive at the beginning because I think one of the objectives of the legislation is that these new markets are as open as possible to people who would face barriers to getting into commerce otherwise. And being a driver is probably like the easiest on-ramp to enter this economy because there's no capital cost. You have to qualify and be a competent employee but you don't have to get venture capital by buildings and rent property and equipment and so forth. So for me to have that market begin to open up to this group for a period of time I think is really a good idea but I don't have a sense to what the projections are for what this economy would look like. Is it a blank billion dollars per year of people estimating based on some economic projections I haven't seen? I don't know. But I'm comfortable letting that kind of, that's more of an economic calculation to let the board sort that out because I think they have more information than we can. Thank you. I agree with that. Julio, thank you for bringing that up which is why I said for the Remark cannabis control board to determine that timing exclusivity part of this because they would have better predictions of how long this really is feasible for. So are you saying yes to this model with the time period should be determined by the Remark cannabis control board? Yes. Thank you. Thank you for all of that. Julio, those are awesome questions and I think I'm with that. I can vote yes. Thank you. So where our recommendation is that delivery licenses are added as exclusivities for the social equity market. We are also making the recommendation that the Remark cannabis control board makes a recommendation to add this as a license site exclusive time period for them to determine based on the need for Vermont to make this for a social equity exclusive license period. We are also making a recommendation that they follow the retail delivery model and I just want one more clarification and both if the cannabis control board deems that another model is better with all of the information that they have that they will be changing the model that we choose. Julio? I guess they always have that right, right? Yeah, they always have that. I think if they have another model that they think would deliver better additional services to particularly the social equity part of that economy I mean I would hope they would let us know in case we have public comments or other perspectives on that but I understand that they're a great taker or modifier to call in our recommendation so I mean I think you're just stating what is the state of affairs. I think that's the current challenge. Anything that we come up with at the committee is just a recommendation. They will be seeing it so far. So far all the recommendations that we made for our first one tap pass so I think we're doing a really great job. Before I move on to co-op I would really like to have public comment period, Julie if that's okay. I know that's a few minutes early but just so that we aren't cut in the middle of discussing co-op and not have enough time. I'm fine with that, Gina. If someone comes in before the end of the meeting I'd offer them an opportunity to comment as well like if they were coming just for that and I'll let you know if that happens. Do you have public comment? Thank you. Shall I rotate? You can, yeah. Hi everybody, Ben Mervis. Great to see you again. So I appreciate this conversation. I appreciate everyone's thoughtfulness and in particular the subcommittee members. Pesitents around this in some ways. I took a lot of notes and what this comes down to for me and having seen this roll out in other markets ultimately it feels like this is a job that we're approving. It feels like we're talking about a license to hold a delivery job and whatever the time limit may be which just by the way always recommend that time limits be set from the date that the first license is granted. It's just helpful language for something that Massachusetts has run into is the three year time limit was not assigned to when the clock starts. But it really feels like three years, four years, five years it's just exclusivity on a job and that job is specifically delivery. I would say when talking about social equity applicants it's really important to look at their driving experience and how a lot of these applicants if they're coming out of incarceration they haven't been driving for many years. If they are low socioeconomic they may not be used to driving around their city, never mind the state. As Julio said, excuse me for using your first names if you don't mind. But as you said Julio this is a gig economy that we're essentially talking about creating it does really easily lead to economic exploitation from what we've seen in California, Massachusetts this is basically a ticking time clock until these folks lose their exclusivity and then the power is fully in the retail license holder to say you know what, as much as we've enjoyed this exclusivity period we're going to now bring this in how you can apply for this job if you would like is essentially where this leaves us. So I would just recommend in particular to the CCB to consider the other models as well in addition to this. It's great to offer this lowest barrier option but the other models do have more opportunity for proliferation to grow with the market and to create at least some more of a profit margin because this right here is most likely going to be limited to a fee on top of the purchase and that's what the license holder is going to take home and that's going to be a minimal profit so it's really limiting the opportunity that's available to the applicant. I also wanted to just add ease gets a lot of mention I worked directly with them in California definitely worth looking into their financial disclosures and the fact that in less than six years they had to raise over $255 million and required bridge loans to continue because they were constantly losing money on these deals because in order to get people to use delivery as opposed to just going to the store they had to offer discount codes to make the delivery fee free and so that meant that the delivery drivers were getting their hourly but there were if a delivery fee was being paid there was no tip if the delivery fee was waived then the drivers were getting minimal tips I do have a public comment that I wrote because I wanted to include as much information as possible for you all just building on my last statement about social consumption so you'll see that next week when it makes its way through the system but I've taken up enough of your time thank you so much. Other public comment? Thank you. We're all set for now Gina. Thank you. I know Ben mentioned which we included in here because of the public comment period as we have recommended something where you would be a direct employee versus an ease model it's because ease is very expensive and they also had some issues and you can see with advertising but also with payment processing it's a very big issue in this industry and at first they didn't get it right and so we are trying to eliminate social equity following the same journey path as that as new to the cannabis industry which was that they were using a credit card processor and they weren't able to do that and they were fined and some people did wind up in prison for it so these are lots of things in why we really want to educate social equity candidates about this industry it's a very different industry than any other due to the federal restrictions that is placed upon it so yes we do take that into mind and consideration but provided as a model based on recommendations on Monday so we are ready for co-op licenses I know we only have about 10 minutes left so we're just kind of starting to discuss this and first of all we're going to say why co-op licenses you know we've already talked about this cannabis business development fund which we'll speak more about next week about that there is only $500,000 that is allocated there are possible funds of $50,000 for integrated licenses but at this time we don't know if anyone will sign up for those and dividing loans or even having grants among other people it might be very very minimal at best and then we also have to take into account the administrative aspect of the cannabis development fund and we have to also take into aspect of how much that education is going to cost to run also, cannabis businesses is very expensive and when we start thinking about what is the most expensive cost for social equity candidates that is going to be land and equipment and land being the really a huge burdensome to people that rent expands all of the time so and there have been public comments like some social equity candidates may not know anything about cannabis but really trying to get into a new industry so working together, united is really stronger and so we have considered to have a co-op license and a different approach to using some of the money that has been allocated for the cannabis development fund is to pull it together and to have land and equipment purchased we can once the program starts out having social equity candidates pay more monthly rent to support the program and that this co-op would include cultivation, processing ability to sell cannabis from the license promise this works really well with a suggested license that they have out there right now is one to consumer license so I really just kind of want to start discussing these aspects Julio what are your thoughts about a co-op license um I got in subject to the co-op experts working out the actual operation in a way that you know doesn't you know and has a mechanism I think it's a great opportunity for me it looks like it's another way to lower barriers for disadvantaged candidates to enter into the economy especially given that at least right now there's a relatively I guess it's all a matter of opinion but to me it seems like a relatively limited pool of resources that could be granted individually um although this is not an agricultural industry Vermont has in agriculture has seen co-ops work not only in the big agriculture like dairy but also the things like the cooperative gardening that's been set up in different parts of the state so I think it's I think it's a very promising idea I'm you Nader your thoughts around this program yeah so similar to Julio I have a positive feeling about developing co-op license I do still have lingering thoughts about the logistics of how of how this license would work and where land would be purchased where equipment would be purchased and you know whether this is a network that would be established in multiple locations in the state or in one central location so yeah those are my initial thoughts when is the things that we would like to do for this is to give this as an option for the kind of control board and then for them to really look into um establishing how that would look where that location would look etc um we may be able to get um someone who's doing some co-ops that are similar in the state of Vermont as well as an expert I'm not sure if we have that opportunity um so when we're voting on this it's the opportunity for the Vermont cannabis control board to explore doing um Ashley um I agree I think this is really positive I think about you know from logistics standpoint I mean maybe you're already thinking um but like I know of so many um processing facilities that are no longer operating because of the boom and bust so I know there are I mean there's auctions all the time for assistance assistance um I'm wondering for those who are you know like a percentage of their license that is written off because I'm going to agree to do a certain percentage of their output with SE applicants like there's a lot of equipment that's already out there I just wonder how we could utilize it in a way that's not exhausting the um the development fund um but I'm definitely in support of co-ops for sure right and I will let you know that you know we are hoping to conclude all of these meetings by the end of October but November is when we come out and say to people you know what education courses do you think we can have out there what mentorship programs do you think we can get involved who wants to donate equipment how can we utilize what Vermont already has and what we have in the industry to really make such an inclusive program so this is really just our first and sort of recommendations of what we want that you know how can we really implement this and work with social equity potential social equity candidates out there um and people who are working in associations or agencies who are already dealing with this work and how we can really make this a comprehensive program that really lasts with working with so many different people um so we will be doing that in November so people out there who are thinking about public comments please please come and engage with us we want to do some town halls we want to hear your voice you know that's really important to us because we will have a program that survives because of that um uh with we will be doing shortly some grace that everybody is thinking about that already because I certainly am so I would like to take a vote on to saying that there is a possibility to have a co-op license and then we can uh further really look into what that should look like um for the Vermont kind of this control board um so Julio um yes or no yes Nader yes and Ashley yes great that is um three yeses um for the record I I think it is going to be very fantastic and you know very Vermont focused and um to see how this whole works for for for the rest of the licensees um next week we will be starting out with this slide that we're talking about here about cannabis development funds and sort of just talk about this a little bit you know there is limited funding um sort of presentation of making 5% of cannabis tax revenue so we just want to support it um creating a social equity cannabis trust um so we can get public donation you know how can you help us um also in consideration of time um if you're out there you want to be a mentor you want to help this program you know equipment if equipment is allowed we will find out what the guidelines are from Julie um before we start to you know before people come in um and sort of you know what are some of the expenditures that the fund will have you know educational courses, operational expenses, workshops um how is it going to be funded and how can we get low interest loans to social equity licensees um you know can can we get some banks um out there who may be interested in it or do are there some investment companies out there who are interested in investing as well so that we can really make this where this is much larger than just one fund and though how we can really start to help um continuously fund and so I leave you with this slide because I know you all like to be prepared and start having your mind start thinking about all of this um I'm always thinking about it so you can always send me an email if you have some great ideas and until we speak next time um for the record we are not going to have a call on Monday that is canceled due to a holiday but we will be having this call on Tuesday at 3 p.m um in lieu of Monday's call so um does anyone have any final comments or questions? No? Great um can I have a motion to adjourn? Motion