 And this is a joint meeting between the Vermont House Human Services Committee and the House General Military and Housing Committee. And we are talking about housing, but in particular, what many folks identify as the third leg of the stool, which is the importance of providing those kinds of supports services to enable homeowners to remain housed or to be housed. Committee, this is a follow-up and a next step to a beautiful friendship. Let's see now. On Thursday, we met jointly with House General and were presented with a proposal, a broad proposal by the Agency of Human Services in terms of how to address the crisis in terms of housing homelessness as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. And between Thursday and today, the legislation was drafted to do part of that and put that into statutory language. And today, Katie is going to share with us language that focuses broadly on services. So to add that, and so that is what Representative Jessup was referencing in her introduction to the bill today on the floor. But it was very important to both House Appropriations and to House General and Military and Housing Committee that this committee look at the language and consider introducing an amendment to really flesh out what is the proposal from the administration. Katie, if you could go through that with us, we'd appreciate it. Sure. I'm going to try to share my screen here. Oops, it says host disabled participant screen sharing. Is that something you can help with? Yes, Katie. I just made it available. Great. Thank you. And as Katie is doing that, this is language that at one point was shared, has been shared with the department. And we will be asking them their views and things like that. Thank you. Good afternoon, Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Council. So there have been a few different versions of this language. But the concept is there are five different proposals outlined here. And instead of presenting them as individual separate proposals, they're being presented here as a package with one lump sum. And then there's the breakdown of how the money could be each of these different original policy proposals. So this would be an amendment to H966. And right as I was jumping on to share this document, I saw an email that came through that flags for us that when and if this amendment moves forward, we would have an amendment to section one of H966, which is a statement of purpose, which says how much H966 appropriates in total. And if this were added, that appropriation would have to be increased to reflect that. But in terms of the substance of this housing piece, in subsection A, it says that the sum of 16 million 61,600 is appropriated from the Corona virus relief fund to DCF to fund programs and services that support safe, stable housing opportunities for Vermont households experiencing homelessness as a result of the public health emergency and related administrative costs. The programs and services funded by the appropriation may include and this is where we lift list out, excuse me, each of the specific proposals. So first, expanding the Vermont rental subsidy program to provide homeless families with temporary rental assistance through December 30th as a bridge to public housing vouchers. Second, providing or arranging for housing navigation and case management services, such as the identifying housing barriers, needs and preferences, developing and implementing plans to find and secure housing, conducting outreach to potential landlords, assisting with relocation logistics, developing permanent housing support crisis plans, other services necessary for households to maintain permanent housing. Third, providing financial assistance to Vermont households who are living in motels to help them rapidly resolve their homelessness and enter into safe housing arrangements. Fourth, supplementing the GA hotel voucher program to address the immediate housing needs of households who are currently living in motels or hotels around the state and whose motel or hotel lodging is related to disruption and their previous housing situation as the result of COVID. And lastly, capitalizing a housing risk pool for landlords to encourage rentals to individuals experiencing homelessness or housing security, which would help landlords lessen their risk of exposure to financial loss through December 20th while renting to households that have poor or no rental housing history as a result of financial hardship due to the public health emergency. So that's what the money is to be spent on. And then if you remember from, well, Human Service Committee remembers from going through 965 that the way these provisions are structured is subsection A is how the money is appropriated. Subsection B is the rationale for the use of the money. So that's what we're moving into next, that the expenditure is necessary to secure safe, stable housing opportunities for Vermont households. It's experiencing homelessness, many of whom have been disproportionately impacted by unemployment, business closures or business interruptions as a result of the public health emergency. The number of families living in state supported motels or hotels grew from approximately 300 to 1400 over the course of two months. And the COVID pandemic has rendered housing and shelters incompatible with maintaining public health. Increase the number of housing homelessness and in need of housing supports to obtain or maintain safe, stable housing and create a demand for diverse social services to safely house these vulnerable Vermonters. And then we have a subsection C that the provision of housing programs and services is not compensable under the section to the extent that the same costs or expenses have been or will be covered by other federal funds. For example, FEMA funds. So that is the language that's currently, this is the most recent version of this housing proposal. And that's it. Madam Chair, your microphone is off. Thank you. Thank you, Katie. And let me ask if someone, if anyone has questions right now for content and then I will, in terms of what is in the bill and what is it, what is in the proposed amendment. And after that I will ask either. I will ask Ken and Sean to speak. Representative Wood. Representative Wood. And then after representative Wood, I have a representative Calacchi, representative Wood. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes. I think this is a question for Katie because it's, it's about format and relationship to the original bill. I'm just curious about, there's a provision in the, in the main bill that indicates that any funds not spent by December 20th would be returned. And would funds under this amendment also, would that provision be applicable to funds under this amendment? Yes. Okay. And then I have other content questions, but I think I'll wait till after the commissioner and deputy commissioner speak. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Representative Calacchi, a question about the language in the bill. Yes, it's also about the timing. Thank you, chair. Katie in the other bill in the housing component, we had reports due back mid August for decisions by the agency of human services to reallocate if necessary by September 1st. So shouldn't that similar language be in this amendment of the bill? I think it's a policy choice for the committees to make. That certainly could be added. We would have a subsection D to have similar reporting requirements. If that is what the committees chose. Okay. Thank you. From either house general or human services, or there any further questions. Thank you. Representative, I can't raise my hand. I'm a co-host. So they're not allowing me to raise my hand. Just on page two, I think line 20. There's a reference to families, the number of families living in state supported motels. And I'm just, we've been referring to these as households. There you go. Great. Thank you. Thank you. And I guess I, and then I'll just pre-ask question. To the commissioner about the, the numbers on line 21 or to explain, because to me 1400. Households can still include 2000 people because of children and others. And I just want to clarify that these numbers are. Are currently accurate. Thank you. Thank you. One last go through. Does anyone else have questions for Katie at this moment? Okay. Thank you. Is it the commissioner or the deputy commissioner who is going to talk about this. Can you commissioner, you seem to have unmuted yourself. Thank you representative few for the record. Thank you very much. I'll be brief and then turn it over to Sean Brown, but I do want to state we really appreciate the work that has been done on this bill. We appreciate the opportunity to review the language representative Stevens made the one particular comment that I was also going to make seeing this draft. We support this proposal. We, it is very consistent with the agency of human services. And so that is again, greatly appreciated. Glad to turn it over to Sean to, if it's helpful, again, we want to be responsive to what the committee is looking for here. If you want him to go through this to explain more what we're doing, we can do that or alternatively can respond to questions. Thank you. Thank you commissioner. I will. On some level leave it to the committee, but first, I do think we would appreciate hearing from Sean because it is our understanding that this is consistent with what was presented in the slide deck on Thursday in terms of the administration's proposal. And if this focuses on that, those aspects that can be paid for with COVID-19 funds. Thank you for the record, Sean Brown, deputy commissioner for department for children and families, economic services division. I too want to thank both committees and ledge council and joint fiscal for the work on this bill last week and this week. We do support the language on the new proposed language. We think it works better than our original submission. So thank you. We are looking for just over $16 million. We are continuing to house in response to representative Stevens, a large number of households. I don't have today's numbers. I haven't looked at the report yet. Unfortunately, I've been running all over northern part of the state today. So it's first time I've been in my office as was now. You know, we are doing the work to implement this plan. So if approved and supported by the legislature, we'll be prepared to move it forward because time will be of the essence. We appreciate the question regarding timing and whether some sort of mechanism should be added regarding where we're at with the spending at the end of August or September. We certainly appreciate the need to make sure we have some accountability in terms of where we are with spending and we would support some sort of reporting out mechanism. So if that's where the committees policy committees would like us to go, we would certainly be amenable to that. We would certainly have a better idea where we are at with spending as we implement this plan through July and August so that we would have a better sense of our, our spending patterns at that point and what our projected spend is and that we would be hopefully be able to be willing and able to report that back to the legislatures for your review and we'll be able to do that. So I'm, you know, we do have, we're able to get a hold of Josh Davis from GroundWorks, who's an incredible partner, housing partner of the departments to answer any questions as well regarding services. I believe he's available today and on the call, but I'm not positive. Someone is trying to get in who is called iPad. So I'm happy to introduce, we can't enter people who say iPad unless we know who they are. So that may be him. Okay. Okay. So we're certainly happy to answer any questions from any, the members of the committee. We do believe this bill reflects the proposal that, that we reviewed last Thursday, the housing, re-housing plan. And so I'm, we're happy to answer any questions. Representative Wood. Thank you, Madam chair. I have a couple of questions. When it refers to bridge money. Or rental subsidies, often people wait quite a period of time before they have between application and actual awarding of rental subsidies. And. What will happen to people or what can we do to ensure that there won't be a gap between when this assistance, rental assistance ends and when somebody is approved for an ongoing rental subsidy. So normally that work starts three or four months before the original subsidy is set to expire. They, that those families have been or individual households have been receiving ongoing support services. And as they're nearing like the eight or nine month mark on, on the original like state subsidy, if we're referring to the Vermont rental subsidy, the connection is made with that, with the housing authority that has the most appropriate federal voucher for the, that family situation. And then the work begins so that at the 12, at the end of the 12 month mark, those families just smoothly transition from one program to the other without a break. And subsidy. And many times they stay in the same housing they're in. Most of the time. Sometimes families do want to move. If they have the ability to locate a different apartment, but for the most part that work in the coordination between the housing authority and the case management. Begin that transition in terms of getting the application in the preference and then making sure any documentation that needs to be submitted to support the federal application is provided in time to transition that family out. And so to do that work, it's normally a three to four month period. And the way the wording reads, it doesn't necessarily refer to people who already have subsidies. It's, it's referring to people who the way I read it is referring to people who don't do not currently have subsidies because they're homeless. Although I guess that it is possible for somebody to have been eligible for a subsidy and not utilized it yet. So are you saying that if, let's just say if, there is a gap between when somebody is formally approved for a rental subsidy, whether it's a state or federal rental subsidy, that if that happens, let's just say, for example, that happens sometime in January, that they get formal approval is the, it will the department for children and families extend the support for that individual until that formal subsidy is approved. Yeah, so our plan, this is only funding in this bill for the, using the CRF fund. Our plan does contemplate providing a full 12 month rental subsidy to these families. And so they would continue on the state subsidy for up to 12 months. All that work is being done to transition them to a federal subsidy. And so that's what we're going to do. We're going to move them to a federal. Some families may move to a federal voucher very quickly. And others may stay on the program for the full 12 months. Okay. Thank you. And then. If I can, if I can reinforce the fact that this is COVID-19 money. Stuff that will be. For the surge or for the transition. And. And then that is the final presentation we got last Thursday. This is on some level, just a piece of the presentation. Yes. Yes. Yes. I understand that, madam chair. Thank you. And I'm just. And this may have been last week, but a lot of things have happened between last week and now. I do know approximately what proportion of the total funds will go into each one of these categories or. We're proposing of the COVID relief fund. We're proposing in the grand total of just over 16 million, about 1.25 million for family housing rental assistance. Five million for a housing and case management navigation and case management and retention services. 3.78 million for a rapid resolution fund. And then 250,000 for, for the risk, the landlord risk pool. And all total is just over $16 million. Thank you very much. Representative Wood. I think the. The thought in not. Breaking it out in this proposal. In this proposed amendment is to on some level have it. And I'm just going to, I'm just going to, I'm just going to, I'm just going to, I'm just going to mirror the, the concept of the provider stabilization fund, which is to give some flexibility. To the agency to perhaps. As needs change to maybe make other decisions. And so not to lock them into. Particular. Pieces. Yes, madam chair. I appreciate that flexibility as well. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I was just wondering what the plan was realizing that that could change in the next six months. Representative Calacchi and then representative McFawn. Thank you chair. I'm in total support of this. I just two questions. The 16 million is additional dollars. To what's already been suggested in the bill. We're amending. Is that correct? It's not coming out and reallocating the. It's not coming out. It's not coming out. It's not coming out and reallocating the. The deputy commissioner or for the representative. From appropriations who was sitting here. Yes. Madam chair, if I could answer that the answer is yes, this is additional money. So currently we have a running tally in the bill that we just took up on the floor of H nine 66. Which is somewhere in the vicinity of. The commission. The commission. So that bill would then be approximately a hundred and 11 million dollars. With this amendment. And for what it's worth, there are, there is as we, you may have heard a commerce amendment coming. So it will grow still further. Thank you. My one, I think my one. Question. Is the. Capitalizing the risk pool. Because with all the timing of this. We're trying to move households and we're doing all of this and we're trying to get new. I don't know how we're going to know. If the landlords need this risk pool by December. It seems. And if that is not used. That gets returned. So. This is the one part of the bill that I just don't. Actually see how we're going to. The timing of it seems off to use by December 30th. And by its definition, a risk pool. It is that a risk pool that it may be spent and it may not, depending on. Circumstances that could or could not happen in the future. We do know that there are landlords who have been reluctant. To work with many of the households and populations. We're serving in the program now. Due to problematic. Rental histories of their properties. And knowing that there is this fund available. To provide some sort of level of financial. Or, you know, Support to mitigate the risk that they're undertaking. For renting to folks who have a troubled rental history. You know, we may spend it. We may not, but it would certainly. Support moving this plan. For by bringing more public and private landlords into have been reluctant in the past to engage with us. And so we would get a good sense probably by September, the end of August, September, whether we will need this fund or not. I don't have the, I don't have the amendment in front of me because we're talking about a bill. We're talking about a human services. Potential amendment or members of human services, possible amendment. Okay. The risk pool. Concept in that amendment. Sorry, could you repeat your question? Is the, um, represent Kalaki brought up a question about risk pool. Is that in this amendment? Yes, it is. It's under number five. Under number five. And so I believe that. We have not put dollars. That is one reason why there is a total figure. As opposed to breaking it down. So that if it is you, if it's not. Then that might be for something else. Great. Thank you. It's clear. Uh, representative McFawn. And then representative Hango. And you represent. Oh, sorry, Redmond. I don't know who was. Sorry. Thank you, Madam chair. I'm a little bit concerned about this bridge. Funding. I understand it's 12 months. That the person will be supported. I'm concerned about it. My experience with the Vermont housing authority. Is they do not have. Any. Available vouchers. Um, Almost all the time. The only way that one comes due is if somebody leaves the program. My question is, do you know if there are new housing vouchers that have been allocated to the state of Vermont? So that that's not the situation. Um, our understanding regarding the availability of vouchers in the future to support this plan. Fall into two categories. The first is that they have a turnover rate of vouchers becoming available due to. Um, households leaving the program. Of approximately 30 to 50 a month. And then there are. Various. Different types of vouchers. Available to support different populations of families and individuals. Um, and some of those is our understanding our conversations with them. Um, I would encourage you to bring, uh, to talk directly with the housing authorities. My understanding is they have received additional resources to put new vouchers. Out into Vermont's. Communities. Um, I appreciate that. Um, I'm very, very surprised. That, um, There are 30 vouchers a month. Um, because of the turnover rate that are available. My experience. My own personal experience. Is it. That's not. That doesn't happen. But. You're no better than I do. You're welcome. I'm representing Redmond. Um, represent Redmond representative Ango and then represent Calacchi. I see your hand up again. Which is fun. Thank you, Madam chair. Um, I am really heartened by this, um, proposal. Um, this was for me, this leg of the stool was kind of the, the dangling, you know, finger nail that is like bothering you. And you just aren't quite sure. You're going to get it off clean. And I, I really feel like, um, This, this is, this just warms my heart that we have this piece. It's going to be tough to spend it in the time that we have, but I really appreciate the thoughtfulness and intentionality. And I also want to just really call out our, um, Our colleague on appropriations for, um, really holding all these pieces and helping us find a way. So I'm, I'm thrilled. Thank you. Thank you. Represent Redmond representative Ango. I apologize for the background noise. Thank you, Madam chair. I just wanted to be clear, um, with representative Calacchi bringing up the, uh, 250,000 for, um, the risk pool that the numbers talked about by Sean Brown, um, are not spelled out in this amendment so that they, so they are fluid. Is that correct? Am I to understand that? Thank you. Uh, representative McFawn. No. I see that, uh, are there any, uh, questions right now? I think I saw that, um, Mr. Davis appeared, but I don't see him now. I'm here. Oh, you are. Yes, I am. Oh, there you are. You're on screen too. So I had to lose screen one. Um, welcome. Uh, I'm representative amp you. Thank you for joining this joint legislative committee meeting with, um, house general and house human services. Um, we have asked you to come. Um, my understanding is that you have, um, seen and, um, not only the amendment, but maybe just in general, you have worked with the department, um, around housing and what, uh, the, as oftentimes referred to as the third stool of housing, successful housing, which is services and, um, Uh, half of us are the committee on human services. So we thought it would be helpful if you, um, explained a bit about what, what, from your perspective is services that are important and that are embedded in this. Absolutely. And thank you so much for having me. I'm seeing some familiar faces. Representative Stevens. I was in your committee not long ago. Thank you for having me back. Hopefully I did something right to get invited back. I'm also seeing, uh, Ken chats. It's good to see your face. Um, So friendly crowd here. Thanks for having me. Of course. I'm Josh Davis, executive director of ground works collaborative in Burrattle borough. And we are just a little bit of context information before I get into services specifically. We are an organization of dedicated people working passionately each day to meet people's basic needs with dignity. Uh, what we have for our services include a 30 bed year round shelter, 33 bed, seasonal overflow shelter, a day shelter, a food shelf. We provide case management and representative payee services. In short, if I were to sum that up, it is food, shelter, and supportive services that are at the core of what we do. This number may have changed in the past couple of days. I'm waiting for updated data. But as of the end of last week, we were serving about 135 adults. And we were able to do that. We were able to do that. We were able to do that. But as of the end of last week, we were serving about 135 adults. And 16 children and four different motels in the Brattle borough area. This has been a big push for us because it's about four times the amount of people that we typically support in the seasonal overflow shelter. And I would also like to underscore, I know we're talking about housing today, but just that we're supporting about 1300 people and 965 households with emergency food. And that is about twice the number of households that we would typically have visiting our food shelf in a month. And also, of course, we're not having visits. We're delivering that food and in large partnership with volunteers throughout the community. So it's been an incredible effort from groundwork staff. I have to give them a shout out, nothing short of extraordinary of the work that they've done, putting themselves and their families at risk to show up each day as I think a really essential worker. So kudos to our staff and also kudos to shelter staff at the state. I also want to say that we're thrilled. I am thrilled that what has emerged through this pandemic is not to return to normal. And so the normal that I'm referring to is a broken housing system that relies heavily on year round and emergency seasonal shelters for people who have nowhere else to go. The goal now is to make significant investments to functionally end homelessness. And I know that what has come out as talk about ending family homelessness, but I would like to say that we don't need to stop at family homelessness. So thank you on this committee, these two committees for your willingness to lead and invest and vastly improving our system of care for people experiencing homelessness. It's truly remarkable and I'm extremely grateful for you leading the charge there. So again, I'm glad that I'm here talking about the right things. I was understood that I was going to talk about housing recovery plan. And as you illustrated, it's the third and often least talked about leg of the stool in the housing metaphor. So I think housing navigation on the surface could be easily interpreted as somebody looking for vacant units in the newspaper and filling out applications, housing navigation. What's the big challenge there? However, the work that we do and other providers do throughout the state is much more complex. And so I wanted to unpack what that means to us just a little bit. In order to even begin the process, you need to get the client's engagement to unearth information and core issues. This is something that people are nervous about participating in, especially the folks that we work with that have a history of substance use and mental health issues. I hope that you've heard a lot about the coordinated process and understand what a game changer that has been for our work in terms of allowing for better local coordination, equitable resource distribution, as well as provider accountability. In that process, there's an assessment that we work with clients to fill out. And there are about 19 points of really intense questions that help us determine somebody's housing need on that tool. And based on that housing need, we're asking people to trust us with very personal, often deeply shameful information to score them. It requires a relationship. It requires trust. It requires a deft hand for people to avoid attaching to that score as though that is their worth. But to see this as part of a process that will help them unlock housing resources. So this work, we have to balance between time to cultivate a relationship, time to set up an appointment, time for people to sit down, get to know us to trust us to fill out this paperwork, as well as doing that as quickly as possible. So our case managers and our team really have to balance that sense of urgency to get people back into housing. But we also want to build the relationship as we go. And that process pragmatically what we do is we gather reference letters. We come up with identification documents that oftentimes we have to go back to the hospital where that person was born to track those down. We have to understand and plan around past housing barriers that have occurred. We have to make repayment plans as well as filling out significant application forms to get people just in the queue. So not the promise of housing, but the promise that a promise of housing is potentially coming. And people who are not hanging on by many threads, that is often a very big point that is misunderstood that once you fill out a housing application, you are automatically get housing. And so helping people navigate the ups and downs of getting back into housing. At the same time, we're talking about the services to individuals, but there's also the landlord side of the equation. I'd like to highlight. We often talk about the low vacancy rate in Vermont. A very real impact of this is that for every apartment that's available, there are a stack of applicants. And more often than not, the people that we support do not automatically rise to the top of that stack. So our relationship as an agency with landlords are key. And this underscores the importance of the landlord liaison project. So we commit to landlords to being available when needed within 24 hours of being called by the landlord. Every person with significant barriers that we've housed recently has been accepted in large parts because of that commitment of ongoing case management. Support and the promise that we will come and step in and help remedy a situation just as quickly as possible. Our ability to find housing for people who are not eligible. Our ability to find housing for people in this community. Now and in the future is largely determined by our ability to maintain strong relationships with landlords. And it's no secret that this is a small town and word gets around quickly as to whether or not you're trustworthy as an agency. If you say you're going to show up within 24 hours, you need to show up within 24 hours or word gets out. And that support team, the supportive service workers are called upon to do the craziest thing. And it's not uncommon in our past for them to have a hazmat suit on to literally go in and help clean up an apartment. And we go above and beyond within safety and protocol to make sure that units are ready for the next person. If somebody is leaving or they are in good shape for clients that we serve. So about currently 80% of the people that we serve have high housing needs according to our current coordinated entry assessments. And I would just like to point out that there isn't a lot of research out there about how to effectively work with people who are experiencing homelessness along with multiple morbidity. So come combinations of substance use disorder, mental and physical health challenges. But what we do know is that services is a key to success. And we must address the barriers that exist for each individual in order to ensure long term success and stability. So I think that's one of the things that we can do. And I was in representative Stevens committee. I read this list off. So if you've already heard this, please bear with me. But I think it really illustrates. And almost a high coup and extended high coup way. What does providing supportive services look like? And so one of our staff members came up with this list. A bullet points, which is support folks. Care about them. Use a person centered approach. And that's a key to success. So take that opportunity to look at conversations. Meet needs. Buy tobacco. Don't call the police for social work issues. Work with all the landlords. Answer when they call at 7pm at night. Get clinical staff on site. Never give up on folks. Avoid punitive measures. Adopt restorative practices. And promote harm reduction. So with that, I will pause. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm more than happy to go into detail about anything that I've mentioned thus far. Josh, thank you. Let me. See if anyone. Has any questions. Representing red men. Not a question, just a deep appreciation for the work that you do. And thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I represent McFawn. Thank you, Madam chair. It's not a question either, but I wanted to thank the commissioner and the deputy commissioner and all your staff. That worked on this bill. And this amendment particularly. You're a tremendous help to both of these committees. As we move forward to help those people that are. Who are struggling with the COVID-19. Problem that we have. And helping them with the housing problems. Which we know. It's one of the most important things that we can do. Let's get housing first. Thank you very much for your help. And representative. You made a cut in. Absolutely. I'd also like to. To reiterate that. I want to thank. Thank you. Thank you for the comment. I do know what. Representative from very town said this. Since we started taking testimony on this back in the end of March. It's been clear. It's been made clear to us. And we were reminded every time we had testimony on it, that the capital expenditures that we put forward. Are important, but won't be as important or won't. Won't be that thing that we need it to be. Unless there is this third leg. And to hear it explicated and to hear the support from the agency is really heartening. It's always difficult to see that things get done so smoothly when we're in a crisis situation, but I'm awfully glad that we're getting things done smoothly in a crisis situation here. And we'll leave our annual battles over what we think is enough for another time. But I just really want to appreciate, some appreciations to Commissioner Shass and Deputy Commissioner Brown and their whole team for doing this. And for the providers and for the partner organizations like Jeff's that are reliant on doing this right. So thank you everybody for your help on this. And thanks to the committee for hosting us. This is good to see us working together again. It is. We have a comment or question from Representative Greg War. Just a comment. I would just like to echo the member from Marytown and from Richmond, both great points. And I also am very thankful for those who presented to us today and the efforts that are going into this very important issue. Thank you. Thank you, Representative Greg War. Committee I think are, let me ask first before the Human Services Committee begins to get into some discussion and things like that. Are there any other questions or comments related to this? My goal before we leave today is for the Human Services Committee to have a decision as to who was willing to add their name to the amendment that Katie walked us through, which currently says, offered by X. And so we have that. And then we have Representative Kalaki brought up a question around the Human Services Committee. A report back. I now don't have the other, I do not have in front of me what the language was in terms of the section of the appropriations bill and whether or not that is something that is important to add to that. Chair, I would withdraw that because in this amendment as it currently is, it's none of it's allocated so that agency can reallocate the money. In the other bill, there were dollar amounts allocated for each component and we needed that to align it but right now the agency can align it. So I think to keep it simple is good. I think that would overcomplicate it because all I wanted to do ultimately was have the agency be able to reallocate if they needed to. So I would say my question is irrelevant now. I appreciate that Representative Kalaki. That said, there may be interest in at some point in time a report back on what happened who was how successful in terms of the rehousing and ultimately where were the resources but whether that needs to be a separate report or whether that's gonna be part and parcel of what is being tracked in terms of the COVID-19 dollars have not a clue. Any thoughts, committee? Sean or Ken, is there going to be some sort of reporting back I don't know, state government-wise entirely in terms of the use of the COVID-19 funds? As Sean indicated, we'll certainly be monitoring our use of COVID-19 funds in any event. We'll be doing that very regularly to make sure we're how we're doing, we're obviously aware of the limitations of the use of the funds in terms of having to spend them by the end of December as do appreciate and reiterate that the chairs point that having the flexibility in this language does allow us to move things around as we see fit. And then consistent with what Sean shared earlier, we're glad to provide updates and information to you. I should say the department will be as time goes on to give you progress reports and updates. In fact, as to how we're doing and we can do that informally or if you did decide to ask us to do it formally we'd be glad to do that too. It's really up to you, but there's no question we'll be monitoring it closely. It's really important to us to make sure we're as effective as possible to address this situation within this timeframe that we do have the COVID-19 fund available to us. Thank you, thank you. Representative Hango, I see has your hand up. Representative Hango, you're muted. Yes, thank you very much. I apologize for that. I'm not sure if your original question a couple of minutes ago was going towards who's sponsoring this amendment. I just wanted to throw it out there. I don't even know if this is a possibility but that it be or it could be a joint committee amendment. Thank you, Representative Hango. Thank you. I probably should have been clearer. This is my understanding is something for the Human Services Committee to be introducing. And so my question was really whether to members of the Human Services Committee if they all wanted to be on it because this is the first time that they have seen it entirely. And now I see Representative Bromstead and Representative McFawn and Representative Redmond. Thank you. Has leaned in and I don't know if that means he wants to say anything or not. No, he's leaning back. Okay, so Representative Hango, your hand is still up. Did you want to add something? Okay, I'm going to jump to Representative Gregoire because his internet is more precarious than some other individuals. Representative Gregoire, yeah. Oh, I only raised my hand because you asked if we wanted to be on the amendment and I do. Oh, okay. Okay, thank you. Representative Bromstead. Thank you, Madam Chair. I wanted to go back to the sort of auditing function and to hearing something back from folks as to how this, what has worked well, what maybe not. I mean, we probably will never have this kind of funding again, especially from the federal government, but it is important. One of the things that when we did childcare, we did talk about that audit function being so important and to make sure, and so I appreciate the commissioner's comments here that to make sure that anyone who funds from the CRF grant or funds, it makes sure that they are keeping good track so that we can go back and look and see what works well, what maybe worked so so, and what we just never want to repeat again. And because this opportunity may not present itself again and with our smaller pots of money, it'll be really important that they be targeted. And this is, for me, feels like such a great project. I'm so glad that we were able to add that in because this is the piece that's the people piece that wraps around what's so important in order to help folks have success. So I just offer that. And I would love to be a co-sponsor to the bill. Madam Chair, is it fair to say that what you are proposing is that there be added to the amendment language similar to what was in the history bill that has to do with some kind of report around the usage and success. And I might say not January 1st, but February or March or something like that. Yes, exactly. I think we did do something like that in a recent bill. I can't remember exactly which one, but we moved the date even a back a little bit. So I'm happy to help with that. What I might ask Katie to do is because I don't have the original appropriations bill in front of me to know what it says around something else but to maybe make it consistent so that it's not too different reports or something like that. Absolutely. Representative McFawn, I see your hand up. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to echo Representative Unsted's wish to have that report. I think it's important. The other thing that I was going to suggest on your other question about being on the amendment, I'm wondering if there's anybody on the committee that doesn't want to be on the amendment. Yeah, but. And if not, let's just do it. Yeah. Thank you, Representative McFawn. I was trying to take the more positive approach. I've not seen anyone not say they didn't, I've not seen anyone indicate that they don't want to be but they can email me. I want to be on it. Yes, I. Thank you. Yeah. And Representative Wood had said that as well and she also has her hand up to say anything. Nope, just to say that I wanted to be on the amendment and to thank everybody for their work on it. So I just, I want to thank, so committee, if there is someone who does not want to be on the amendment to please let me know in the next 10 minutes so that we can pass it on to Katie. The amendment would have a couple of changes. I understand Katie said something about you have to do something in the beginning to change some numbers. And I'm a people person, not a number person, but, and then, and my understanding is this was also suggested by the administration and pointed out here was to where it says households, where it says families to say households. And my understanding that was also a suggestion that came from the commissioner and that there would be a piece around a report back or a report to the legislature or to the two. Well, however the report is to the other folks we'll figure this out so that it's consistent, whether it's to the legislature or whether it's to three committees, us, housing and appropriations, I don't know, however that is. Is there anything else in terms of from what people are thinking is missing in terms of the language or what we want to get across? Katie, do you have what you need from us? I believe so. I think there's still some conversations about the logistics moving forward, but I think for this piece of language I have what I need. Okay, good. Representative Jessup, you have raised your hand. Just a quick question for the Ledge Council. Katie, at the bottom of page 27, starting on line three, if this amendment is rolled into section 11, wouldn't that reporting requirement cover it? So it says honor before July 31st and September 1, 2020, each agency or department administering a grant program pursuant to this act shall provide information to the legislative committee of jurisdiction, including, and then it does list only appropriations there. So maybe that does need to go elsewhere because I do know that we next go to appropriations and I do expect they will. There's very much of feeling that they want a report. So maybe we could potentially consider expanding that to add human services or other committees in such a way that makes sense. Sure, I haven't been working on H966 besides this discrete piece of language, but I can take a look at it. I know Maria had suggested that we add this out as an 11A. So I'll have to take a look at how section 11 works. Okay, however it works for you. Thank you. So committee, the goal is that this will be in the calendar. This is the goal. This will be in the calendar so that all members can see it. So what that might mean is some of these specifics around language, I can send it out to you, but you may have five minutes to respond. And if you are comfortable letting me with lots of advice from legislative council and appropriations and representative Stevens so that we're all on the same, the three committees are sort of dancing together. If you're comfortable with that rather than waiting for all 11 of you to get back. Is that okay? Thank you. Committee, thank you very much. Josh, thank you for joining and educating house human services. This is a repeat I understand from house general, but sometimes it's important to hear things more than once. And commissioner and deputy commissioner, thank you very much. Thank you for working. This was a good collaborative effort to try to move forward something that is challenging. So thank you very much. Thank you both committees. If the house human services committee could be on for a short committee discussion around what might be possible next week. Others of you are welcome to stay, but we're changing subject. I was just gonna say that house general, you are free to go. We will have something on Tuesday. Apparently we got a bill about a sports betting study. So that's now for something completely different, which is the story of our committee. So have a good weekend. We'll see on the floor. We'll see where we see it. And then we'll be back in committee next time. Thank you human services committee. This was great. We really appreciate your time. Chair, Steven, I'm a little confused. Does our committee get this amendment and we have to meet beforehand? No. This is our amendment. Right. We don't have to, the house general military doesn't have to review the amendment and say we voted 11 to 04 or nothing like that. No, if anybody would be the appropriations committee. I mean, it's there. It's the appropriations committee bill overall. So. Okay. And if that changes, if we get told something different tomorrow morning, sure, I'll let you know. All right. I just wanted to say quick thank you to representative Stevens for today's floor discussion. You were incredible. It went on a long time and you hung in there. And I just wanted to say how grateful I was for that work. Thank you. Thank you. It's good work for everybody. Thank you. So. See you. Bye. See you. Bye all. You're welcome to our house anytime. Bye. Thank you. Thank you. Human services one, I just want to say thank you all for having my back yesterday. We are a great team and that was sort of incredible the way it went through in terms of the joint healthcare and human services amendment. And we've had to over the past two weeks do a lot of work very quickly. And we oftentimes like to have longer discussions and things like that. And I really appreciate the way that we have all collaboratively and cooperatively tried to work together. So thank you. I don't really know what next week has to to offer my in terms of whether there will be other things related to COVID or the the Q one budget that has I think come over or anything like that. We have two, whether we don't have to vote anything out but we do have two pieces of we have two bills from Senate Health and Welfare. One is S 185, which in all of your non-free time today when we were on the floor David Englander just sent lots of material around the connection to health disparities and environmental and other issues. And then we also have we received another bill from Senate Health and Welfare around I wanna say perhaps a bit of a continuation although in a different way of the work that we looked at last year around chemicals and that kind of thing. My thought about that, not that we need to do anything but that we get a presentation just like we got a presentation on S 185 and when we come back in August we'll see if that's something that we move forward or not unless that's something that people think very right now that they're ready to have a discussion and decide one way or another then my idea for this other bill that we just got from the Senate would be to have a before we go on recess to have a walkthrough from Katie so we know what it is. And I have to, you know and then that we although there's always multiple perspectives to be simplistic to have the people who are the groups that are supporting the bill they have a spokesperson and they got 10 minutes to make their case and the groups that have concerns about it have 10 minutes to make their case and then we go off on break. But so we have that in our head and we can make those sort of decisions and pick it up or not when we come back. How does that sound to people? Representative Bromsted. That bill is Senate 295 if anyone wanted to look it up and it's banning P-F-A-S in popular consumer products. So we started talking. I forgot to pronounce it so that's why I didn't say it. I just spelled it. But Kelly and I had met with folks when we were still in the state house in the cafeteria on this one and so we've gotten re-contacted I'm assuming Kelly you did too but I got a long letter from Elena from the conservation law project. So I'm sure she'd want to be on the list is... Well, absolutely. My thought would be in terms of the introduction that whether it's... There are probably multiple groups multiple different individuals or groups who think this is a good idea in general. And they're probably as there always is well groups who think this isn't either it's an okay idea but please make major changes or don't do anything or it's not a good idea. And it's like each side gets 10 minutes. And then we go on break. And when we come back in August we figure out whether it's something to move forward or not. This is my hope because I believe it may be next week. Isn't it next week the last week in June? Yeah, next Friday. I'm still hoping that that will be... That we will not as a committee be meeting next week until we come back. So that's sort of what my thought is in terms of being respectful of the Senate who has sent us legislation to look at and then we make our decisions. Representative McFawn. Thank you, Madam Chair. As part of a deep dive into the chemicals maybe we should get a copy of the work that we did a few years ago which I thought was extensive. So we should probably get that and find out what we did. Well, I think that's a good idea. Thank you. And McFawn, that part of what legislative council might do is summarize what we did and see where we move forward. Sure. And it would. Thank you, Madam Chair. I was just knowing that the Senate has these obviously on their list of things that they have passed and just reminding our fellow committee members that they now have bills of hours that we would also like to see move that hopefully we'll work collaboratively together. Yes. And what my understanding is advanced directives is on it's actually has been signed by the governor and the top or the bill that you introduced around receivership or that that has been sent. I think other things are in process, so we say. And I still see two hands raised a representative would take represent Brunsted. Just a quickie. What about we never got banning of flavors of tobacco and all of that? Is that? That is, I believe still in Senate finance. Okay. So we probably won't have to worry about that this year. We'll be back at it next year if we win. Yeah. Is there any final? Well, thank you all miss you but we have done actually I'm a lot of good work and it's been and I appreciate the trust that you put in me in terms of as I make little make changes and then try to run and tell you what's going on and those kinds of things. But I think we have really our voice has been heard and really important in terms of how we're spending and where some of the COVID-19 federal money's going. Representative. Madam chair, you were great on the floor yesterday. I'll just say, I know I just said that about Tom too but I was really impressed at the, I mean, when we were in committee, I felt like, oh no, there's a lot of stuff she's not sure of. And then on the floor, it was just like perfectly smooth, such good examples. Everything came out perfect. And I was just really psyched. So thank you. I would never have been able to do that. So I just was really impressed. Thank you. Thank you. You've all helped. I sent out a few help requests for, so that I'd have facts if I needed it. But thank you all. I mean, we're a team and I just get to be right now, the conductor, you all are making the music. Representative Redmond. I may sound a little bit like a broken record but I just really want to thank Kimberly for her work with our committee and the way we've worked with other committees. It has just been spectacular, the interface and the way we've integrated things. And I just feel like we're working at a whole new level and I just want to really honor that and thank you for that. I think Chair Pio really appreciates the late calls in the early texts. You know, I used to just have to say to Katie, isn't it time to go to bed? I sort of, you know, when I've said that to Julie, although Julie more often is oftentimes also email, between Julie and Katie, I'm not quite sure when they sleep. And, but Kimberly is coming to a close second. She didn't respond to my last one. When I said, we're time to go to bed and I think it was 11, 15. Okay, see you on the floor tomorrow at 10. And I've not gotten the schedule in terms of, so I really don't know when the master schedule in terms of when and if there are, when there are committees but between Julie and I, we will let you know. Okay, thank you. And this ends the committee meeting for House Human Services. Oh, Representative Gregoire raised his hand. Yes. I just wanted to echo the sentiments about how well everybody's working together and how lucky we are to have folks in the administration that have worked with us so tirelessly along with other committees. And it's been helpful for all of us to, you know, work together to get this stuff done. Yeah. Okay, thank you. And you take care, Representative Gregoire. All right, I think that this now, does anyone else wanna say anything before we get off and conclude today's meeting of House Human Services and good work folks. See you next week. Julie, if you could take us off of live, that would be appreciative. Stopping the live.