 Okay, welcome back folks. We're going to continue our work on good time. And now we're going to shift gears to what s 18. Proposes to do and the first thing one of the first things that proposes to do is to rename good time to earn time. Reduction of term. So it's earned time instead of good time. So Eric, if you can just quickly give us a real run through of s 18 and we will come back to it in more depth. When we don't have a couple bills up on the floor. We need to focus. Yes, I know committee's got a lot going on on the floor these days. I know absolutely. Yeah. Well, I can be brief and it's also, it's helpful that the. The committee again, I'm sorry, Eric, it's Patrick back again with the office of legislative council. To talk now about s 18. It's a good time statute. Which is entitled an act relating to limiting earn good time sentence reductions for offenders convicted of certain crimes. And it's helpful. We can go through it pretty quickly, especially because the committee got a good grounding earlier this morning in what the current good statute, the current good time statute does and how it works. So with that understanding in mind, I can, I can explain pretty directly what the proposed changes are. And I'm going to go into this current good time statute. So there are four main changes. That s 18 proposes to make. And the one, the first one is the one that the chair just mentioned, which is that it changes the name. Of the earned good time program to earn time. I could, you may recall, I explained last time that the, at least the senate judiciary committee. Had the perspective that the question of whether someone was. Had not. Had not been re-incarcerated from the community. Really didn't turn on whether someone was good or not. And so they decided to get away from using that term and just call it earn time. Cause. On the idea that it was. Something a reduction that in sentence that the person was earning on the basis of whether they. Didn't commit a violation or get. Or get. Re-incarcerated from the community. So that's change number one. Change number two. Change number one. Change number two has to do, and I'm just sort of going in order on the bill. From the, from the section one through. The very end of the bill. So the first one that you come across in section one has to do with victim notification. So again, we talked about that this morning as well, that there is some victim notification and statute already. And that's done by the prosecutor's office. And that's done at sentencing. So in other words, it's an earlier stage of the process. That a victim would receive notice. That. This earned good time program exists or earned time. If the name. Becomes that. That the proposal from. The Senate Judiciary Committee. And from the Senate, not the bill has passed. Sorry. Is that. Is that there's additional notice to the victim. That is done by the prosecutor's office. And that's done at sentencing. So in other words, that there's additional notice. That the program exists and what. What amount of time. The offender might earn. Through the earn time program. So that, and how their sentence might be reduced. So that has to be, and there is an existing statute. About certain information that has to be provided to crime victims by the prosecutor. So that's already exists. And this just adds to that. So that's, that's another item that the prosecutor has to disclose to the victim. About the existence of the earn good time program. And how much time that might result in. The offender. Having their sense reduced. So that's piece number two. See a question there. I can pause if you like, between each section, maybe that makes sense or each change, I should say. Thank you, Mary. So my question was on the first part, the name change in various states earn time and good time have distinct definitions. So earn time usually is through. Activity through prison programs where good time is a behavioral. Credit. So do we have that distinction? And for mom, will there be an issue with, with a name change like that? If it's understood that in other states that there are distinctions in the definition. I, I don't think there's an earned time. Program in Vermont already so that there wouldn't be that ambiguity. So that as long as you were clear that this was a, you know, Vermont only terminology, essentially. And you wouldn't run into that. That problem that you probably, as you say, we would run into in other states. Eric, when wouldn't it depend that we have defined what it is. In section two. So, B. Yes. So for purposes of the Vermont program, exactly that you've, you've. Changed the terminology throughout, including how you define the program. So. I think, I think it must, I'm not aware of it. I think this would be the only earned time program in Vermont. So you wouldn't have that ambiguity. So we're on section one. And this is notification of the victims. And the new language is at the bottom of the page. Did you go over that Eric? I was. Yeah. Okay. I was. No, that's right. Yep. That's just the piece I was just talking about the, because this is new, new victim notification, not by the department, but by the prosecutor at the, at the sentencing stage of the proceedings. So it's much earlier on. And then, then under current law. And again, kind of. It's conceptually related to this carve out, which I'll get to in a moment, but that's part of the reason for adding that. Big notification at an earlier stage in the process. So I flagged this when you came in earlier, that the next civilized sentence on the page. I'm wondering how the earn time only affects one of the defendant is eligible for parole consideration. But doesn't necessarily rely results in the defendant's release. I'm wondering I flagged about furlough as well. Because we'll still have some statuses of furlough that they would be eligible for. Not just parole. Consideration. And that was when it was, when you walked us through this. Back. In February or whenever. And this looks just to be dealing with parole consideration, because I know we're thinking of presumptive parole, but we still have three classes of furlough that they would be eligible for. Oh, I see what you mean. So in other words, because, and this kind of goes to what Monica was talking about this morning as well. I think that. The person becomes eligible for furlough when they reach their minimum. As well as becoming eligible for parole, whether it be presumptive parole or regular parole. And that. That for. Full accuracy, full accuracy of this sentence, you might also want to say. Earn time on the effects when the defendant is eligible for furlough. Or parole. Right. Because you're, that's a good point. Sorry. You'd be eligible for one or the other. Right. You're eligible for both. And here it's the same that the victim would be. Inform the victim of the maximum amount of burn time that would just go. For just when the defendant, the inmate was eligible for parole consideration. Yep. So it's sent in saying for the defendant, you're eligible for one or the other. So you're probably going to look at when the person's eligible for parole, not when they're eligible for furlough. And that may have been the intent. I don't know. I don't think the furlough issue even came up that I recall. I think they were probably thinking of presumptive parole. Yeah. Yeah. For that. And. I'm sure you're on the next to last line of the first page. Is that correct? Yeah. Yeah. So we need to go to our bills in and out of committee. I have that. Some folks don't. Okay. Hang on. So go to our, our in and out of committee or bills. In and out of committee and click on S 18. But then where we are on S 18 is at the bottom of the first page of the bill. That right? Okay. Okay. So the bill is in our committee. And we do have it posted on one of our dates. Age could be back in January or first of February. I'm not sure. Okay. So let's go to section two. Yes. So we've covered. Remember, I mentioned that there's four. Primary proposed changes to the good time statute. That is 18 makes. So we've covered the first two change of the name. And the expanded notice to victims. And so now we're on number three, which you'll see at least on my version of document is on page two. That's an in section two. And now we're in the back in the, the good time statute itself. And in subdivision B one. And this goes to the issue. I remember I discussed this morning. How there's a list, which was right there that we went through this morning in existing law B one. The universe of offenders. For whom the good time program is available. So, and there's a list of. Basically folks for whom it is not available. Cause the sort of fallback is it's available for all sentence, a sentence offenders, except for, and then it lists a few categories of folks. Who wouldn't qualify. I remember we went through this morning, the existing ones, which was people on probation and parole. People who could get their term reduced pursuant to this. Work camp statute. And this next proposal, you'll see the underlying language. This was a request made by the department of corrections. And this was to add a category of folks, which is offenders sentence to serve an interrupted sentence. Now at the very end of the bill, I'll read down there so you can hear it because that term is defined at the very end of S 18 and an interrupted sentence. That means a sense that is not served continuously, including a sentence to be served in intervals or a sense to the work crew. So an interval sentence, for example, could be a weekend sentence. Again, the idea of someone serving only a sense that serve. Non continuously, like in a weekend or on the work crew, which is only during the work day. So that doesn't really make sense for that person to also be earning good time at the same time. So I think that was something that the department realized during the rulemaking process. And so they made that request during the course of S 18. And that's why that piece was added. So I'll pause there for a moment because that's change number three. Change number three being the interrupted sentence. Exactly. Okay. So that's what we're going to do. So we're going to go ahead and do that. And then we come to the fourth primary substantive change. And that is the, all the new language at the end of the bill starts on my page four. It goes over onto page five. And this is what's been called the card out. This is a, a remember under existing law. The only types of offenses for which a person would be excluded from earning. Good time or earn time. Our life without parole. It's only life without parole offenses that a person can't qualify for a good time at all. The proposal from S 18 is essentially to add seven more offenses. To that list. Retroactive. Not going forward. And this is a crucial distinction here. This only, this car about only applies to folks. Who are in department of corrections custody. And our inmates at the time that the bill is passed. Doesn't apply going forward. So if someone. Has a good time. If someone has a good time. If someone has a good time. Let's just to pick a number and pick a date sort of randomly, but just for, for the sake of an example, let's say if the bill does pass. It passes on July 1st. Well, someone who is sentenced on August 1st. For one of these seven crimes would still be able to earn good time or earn time. It's only someone who's already been sentenced and is already under DOC. Supervision. So there's a number of people who are in the office. Who would not be able to earn. Good time going forward. Now remember, I'm saying going forward because also as we discussed this morning, the program's already been in effect since January 1st. So that group of people. And I think even. Monica had even mentioned the number this morning. If I remember right, it was 290 something close to 300. I think. Of people who. Who are in DOC custody now. But those folks have earned good time. Up to now. And they will continue to earn it. If we assume S 18 passes again, not trying to assume it, but just for the purposes of discussion. If that's 18 were to pass, they would continue to earn it up until the time that the bill passes and becomes law. It's only at that point that they would stop being able to earn it. And that's. Certainly a function of not being able to. Be able to earn it. So that's the legal ability to take away this good time that a person has already earned. So. The bill makes clear that it does not do that. So that's the big picture. Discussion of how it works. The seven offense. The seven disquieting offenses are murder. Voluntary manslaughter, kidnapping, sexual assault. Aggravated sexual assault. Aggravated sexual assault of the child. And lewd in the civius conduct with a child. And then the two offenses that were. Chosen. In the Senate. And again, the way that would work is if someone is. Has already been sentenced to for one of those offenses. And as in under DOC supervision for one of those offenses now. Then they would be able to keep the earned time. And that they have up until. The act. S 18 becomes effective. But after that, they wouldn't be able to earn anymore. Any additional. And that's the. Essence of the way the carve out works. Questions. On the committee. So we're going to take more testimony on this. And spend more time on it. Kurt. I assume Monica is still here. I'm just wondering if there's any. What her thoughts are with. Regarding an administrative burden for this change. Is this going to make it. That much more difficult to calculate good time. And how difficult. Representative Emmons, do you want me to respond? Okay. So. Hi, Monica Weber again, administrative services director. So we were already working on this issue. We've been following S 18. And we have been. Planning. We've been working on this issue. And we've been trying to figure out what our process would be for identifying those people. As I mentioned, you know, we already know. That we have 297 people. Who may be, you know, be disqualified moving forward. So we would have to, you know. Write our queries, develop our process to make sure that those people were excluded moving forward. So that's what we're trying to do. We're trying to figure out what our process would be. If we were to move forward. Once more or less and just carry it over because. After S 18 passes. As representative. Oh, as. Eric said, people who get sentenced to those crimes. Would be eligible. I'm sure there's more complications there that, you know, will come up because they always do. But we'll just figure those out as we start. As we move forward. So because this is a sentence reduction. Each time you actually reduce their sentence. Once we get past July 1st or whenever this passes. You will have all those sentences reduced to where they're supposed to be. And so you don't have to even look at whether they were. Fitting those crimes or not in the future, you would just reduce their sentence. No, you'd still have to find that you'd have to track those people separately and not reduce their sentence. And I don't want to get into all the complications around. Sentence computation and what may happen. And different scenarios, but, you know, we'll, we would have to work that out within. You know, our system. To make sure that we excluded those people. But you're not pulling your hair out saying this is. Way out of line. We're going to be doing this forever. So. I guess we're okay. Yeah. I mean, we're, we need to manage the program though. The way it's built. As you all pass it. And we'll, we will figure out how to do it. Okay. Good. Thank you. Karen. Yes, thank you. So my question is regarding the, the carve out. And the set list of crimes. And we don't need to necessarily answer it here, but my question is curious. So like how those. Specific crimes were selected. And how do we know like those are the ones to carve out. If we're going to carve out. Cause what doesn't prevent us from, you know, a year from now hearing from. Victims of a different subset of crimes. Saying, you know what these folks should also be carved out. So one of the questions I'm coming to mind is like, if we do this carve out, how do we know that we are getting it all? So we're not revisiting this every year. Cause I think to speak to Monica's point, like that will be her having to readjust it every year. And this calculation piece. So I don't know, Eric, if you have information of how these crimes were selected and. If we feel like this is going to be it. I guess we can never guarantee that. Right. Your latter question. You're right. I can't guarantee that. But. But the former question that it was a proposal from the attorney general's office. And they had a list of offenses in there. And I don't know, Eric, I don't know if you have information on how these crimes were selected and. If we feel like this is going to be it. So. I mean, I think they, I think they had a list of offenses in their proposal and the. They went through them in committee in the Senate judiciary. They, I think they took a couple of them out actually was it was a larger list. When it came over. They took a couple out and they settled on these ones. Essentially. That was where that was how it all happened in committee. So it is a possibility then that it could come up again. We could revisit this. Yeah. One never knows. We could also reverse it. Other questions. So we will schedule more time on this with. I know the attorney general's office wants to come in. So we will schedule time with them. As well as. My sheet of paper here. As well as notifying. The defender general. That we are taking this up. We have. A victim, a family that was victimized. I would like to come in and testify. We also have council state governments. We also have some of the investment to analysis. On this proposal and. What impact that would have on our justice reinvestment to dollars. And I'm trying to think if I have forgotten. Anyone, of course, we'll have DOC in the room. Whenever we do this work. And we're going to look at the list. Eric of what Senate judiciary who they had in to testify. And go through that list and make sure we cover. All the basis. For that. So we're going to set up some testimony. I don't think it will be tomorrow. I think it will be starting next week because we have a full day on the floor. Tomorrow we have judicial retention in the morning. And we have a full day on the floor tomorrow. We'll have a full day on the floor on Friday. So we would start working on this bill. Probably next Tuesday afternoon. At the earliest. For that. I just wanted to get the background information out for folks here. Anything else. And then we can start shifting gears back to our capital bill. Anything else for folks. Anything you want to share, Eric. Anything. No, I think that's a, that's a good, a good foundation for, for understanding where it's at. And then keeping posted what the committee needs. Let me know. And I'll happy to, happy to chip in as you go forward. Okay. Phil will keep you in the loop. Okay. Sounds good. Good luck on the floor today, everybody. Okay. We have a correction spill on the floor today. We got a big bill. So speaking of that with Monica, you might want to notify commissioner Baker and your crew that. The DOC committee bill. It's 435, right? Is that the number? Correct. And I'm reporting on it. So. Just to watch on YouTube in case we get in trouble. Okay. Okay. Yes. I think we're done with it. But it's on our calendars. Yeah, that's up for action today. Yeah. Yep. Thank you. So I think we're done with the DOC and we will schedule time for you folks next week. For that. So thank you, Eric. And thank you, Monica. Bye everybody. We will see you. Okay. So. Anyway, how are people feeling about their report? Well, I do have a question about clean water. And how that is being paid for. We have. 11 million dollars a year. And a capital bill, but there's also money in, in, in general fund, right? So what, what is our, what is our. Our total requirement. Under the agreement with EPA and how does that. Breakup between. Annual appropriations and capital bill. Anybody enlighten me about this. I have no idea what our annual requirement is. 52 million, 52 or 53 million. That's shared between that. The general fund and the capital bill. I don't think there was any money in the T bill this year. I checked. I don't know, Scott, how important it is for you to speak to the number. The, the actual. I'm not, I wasn't. Well, I, I don't know. I'll tell you what I was going to say, but I, and I wasn't going to go into that detail. I just want to know. Magic money too. And we're going to get magic money too. Magic money. Yeah. Well, there's money that comes out of the clean water fund. But we're also going to get some of that stimulus money toward water. Yeah. But that is up in appropriations. I know. Right. But we have committed within our capital budget. For the next two years, 22 million to address our clean water requirements. And this is a breakdown. And, um, How is it determined how much is going to be capital and how much is, is, is general fund. I don't know. I know I don't. If you look at our spreadsheet, we are saying 11 million this year and 11 million next year. No, I know. They live within those confines. Okay. My question is to split between capital and general fund. Is that just, is that set or how is that determined? I don't know. Do you want to say something? The best place to look, Scott is the original treasurer's report. Where she outlined the total commitment of the state. Towards that, I can send you a copy. She specifies over the next 20 years, we need to spend this much money. So that's this much per year. Things like that. Yeah. I know I saw that whenever that was, but thank you. I wasn't paying that close attention back in those days. Thank you. Thank you. We have traditionally committed about over two years, about 20 to 24 million. Of our capital budget. To go towards the clean water. Portion. Okay. And these, these projects here are recommended by the clean water board. Yep. Thank you. So. Okay. Karen. Yes. So I think I'm feeling set. I am really taking to heart the piece of keeping brief and high level. So I haven't written out my points yet, but I feel like it's going to be maybe a sentence or two for each section. So that's helping me. Cause I'm like, I can only say so much in that amount of time. The one question I have is. I don't know if we can get to the next slide. But if you look at the next slide here. I've got the bills. And they're doing it towards the bills. And pointing to section. Dada, Dada, Dada. Are we using our spreadsheet more as the guide? Look at. So now I'm moving to section four of the spreadsheet. Okay. I guess on that that's helpful. Just so I am orienting folks to the right document. And then two is. But I'm not stating the exact numbers. Is that correct? What you could say, Karen, you have, um, you can say when you get up, I have section if you, because it's, I'm really going to encourage people to work off the spreadsheet. Um, for, for the report, but I think it's really important for everyone to have our language with us as well. Yep. In case there's questions for backup. Um, what I'm going to suggest is that people work off their spreadsheets. And then, so when you get up, you would say, Madam Speaker, I, I'll report on sections four. Sections four through eight. Um, section four deals with commerce and community development for a total of, um, about 873,000 over two years. And that goes towards our major maintenance of our historic sites. And then we also are responsible for the underwater preserves, roadside history markers and unmarked barriers. Okay. Section five is our building community grants program. This goes, these are dollars that go directly back into our community for small scale infrastructure infrastructure projects. We have increased these. Um, to 600,000 each over two years. And these go towards projects for nonprofits and our municipalities for items such as adult daycare centers, parent child centers, parks, recreational town parks, town recreational facilities. Um, could go also for historic preservation, historic barns. Um, and then, um, there's a total amount of resources for these, uh, grants. And there is a one to one match requirement and they really target small projects, capital infrastructure, like roof, roofs, a boilers, HVAC systems. And, um, the, the grants are capped at 25,000. That's all you need to say. Okay. Sorry. And then can you just share? I don't expect this. But there's going to be questions, but what is the statement? Like if you are asked a question and you're like, Oh my goodness, I just need help. Um, like a brief recess. You can say, Madam Speaker, may I yield to the chair? Perfect. Great. That's all I need. Or if you think you have the answer, but you need to catch your breath. You can say, Madam Speaker, may we have a brief recess? I mean, last year I was reporting the capital bill and my cat decided to walk in front of me. And I couldn't, I, I couldn't do it. I mean, I, and I asked for a brief recess. So I could move her. But usually if you really feel that you're starting to not under, not know the answer, yield to the chair. And hopefully I can bail you out. Hopefully. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Perfect. Do we have things straightened out for section 27 and 28? Uh, we, we do. Thank you, Kirk, for bringing this up. Um, I e-mailed, I spoke while I text. Um, Bill Lippert. About that. Um, I'm sorry. I don't have anything to say. And on who is going to speak on it, but not during our report of the bill. You will just need to give. A sentence for each one of those sections is really brief. Just a sentence. And then after we've gone through. Um, all the amendments. I mean, we've got, we don't have any amendments at this point to our bill. Donnie, who is going to get up and speak to those two sections in depth. So you just need to give section 27 and 28. It's basically when we open up any state-owned run facility that there needs to be a bed count done for the whole system and really looking at our community beds and needs. So I do that just at the end of my regular end of my little period there. So we're not coming back to me. Once I'm done, then I'm done. OK. Once you're done, you're done. So if you have language, if you have a section that has dollars and then you've got policy in the back, you do the policy. I think you're the only one for that. Yeah. Did you ask Andy to keep a brief? Ann's in her own world right now. So I do my policy ones and then I do a quick sentence on 27 and 28. And then you yield to care. Correct. And we need, did you send that list out to all? You did, Sarah, right about the yield. You did that on Friday, right? Who yields to whom? And that order stayed the same. There's no change in that. I'm going to drop it in the chat. I sent it as an email, but I can drop it in the chat right now just so that while we're talking, we can all see it. Is that all right, Madam Chair? Yeah. I got too many sheets going on right now. Maybe this, let's see if it does it work. Yeah. Can people see that? So I yield to Kurt. Kurt will yield to Karen. And when you yield, it's the member from, and then you say representative. So I will yield to the member from Colchester Representative Taylor. When Kurt is done, he will say, I will read. I now yield to the member from Essex Representative Donut. So when Karen finishes, she will say, I now yield to the member from St. John's Berry Representative Campbell. And Scott, you will say, I now yield to the member from Milton Representative Morgan. And then Michael, you will say, and now I yield to the member from Springfield Representative Emmons. And I should clarify at the bottom of, I sent this up before we got clarification from the House clerk about, we will not be yielding from the member from health care until after the committee does its whole. Well, she will be doing that when we open up debate. Right. When the speaker says. She'll be able to be read a third time. Third time, yeah. And then Ann will get up for that. So I can't emphasize enough to keep it simple. And Marsha, do I see something from you, Marsha? Yeah, I was just a question. If anybody brings up the sinking of the Adirondack, are you going to take care of that? I'll have to. OK, I just because I know it's out there. People are concerned. They have questions and they may not bring it up, but I just wanted to give you a heads up that. OK, they have questions. Is it your caucus members that are having questions? Well, put it this way. Some of the constituents are. And I don't know if they listen to them highly or not. So they want to sink the Adirondack. No, not really. It's just like, why would you not want to? And I made the comment that we spend so much money cleaning up the water. Why do we want to put stuff in the water? OK. Anyone that wants to give back up on that one, you're welcome to do so. Thanks for the heads up. I mean, I'm hoping that this caucus will give us some indication. And quite often the caucus, the questions will be asked in caucus. And then that really helps not having so many questions on the floor. And it's really hard to judge what people are thinking out there because we're not in the building. I'm sure there will be some things on the middle sex. I don't think that has gone away yet for that. So are people feeling OK with their sections? Karen? Yes, feeling OK. And this is a question, I think, that goes for the capital bill, but also for our committee bill today, since this is our committee's first time with bills on the floor, maybe especially for us new members. Anything that we should know? Is there anything of like, how do we support each other? How do we support Sarah? Things we don't do? Any guidance would be helpful. I think we are ready. Yeah, I think the thing is, is to really watch the floor. And that's hard to do on Zoom. But pay attention to questions that are being asked. And pay attention to Sarah, if you're picking up, that Sarah needs a little bit more backup, speak up. And the other thing too, quite often, you will see that a debate will go on for quite a while. And then the chair of the committee will get up and speak. And that's to indicate, we're good here. Debate should cease. Let's move on. That's what that indicates when a chair gets up like that. Or sometimes a chair will get up as the debate really begins to put it back on track. Because sometimes, particularly when there's a new member reporting, it's difficult for them to know all the nuances. And sometimes it can veer off track, and the chair can bring it back for that. But I think Sarah is going to do fine. I hope, I think. I appreciate your confidence. And I appreciate the committee paying attention, during the, if there are things that would be helpful for you to keep your screen on so I can see your faces. That would be helpful. And if there is a crazy question that it seems like I'm not able to answer, and you know the answer, you can text it to me, that's helpful too. I think we did good work. And I'm feeling pretty, we'll see. We'll see what members have questions. Yeah, we didn't have a caucus on this, so we don't know what people are feeling on it. Did you folks in the Republicans have a caucus on this? No. So we don't know what members are really thinking. And I can't emphasize enough, we are out there as a team. We're out there as a committee. And if one of our members is starting to really get in trouble, we come to the rescue and help them. This is a whole committee, and it reflects on the whole committee what you'll find over time. And this is really hard in the Zoom world. But once we get back in the building and we're sitting there well, you will pick up a feel of committees that do good work. And their bills are, and their reports are listened to. And a committee vote carries a lot of weight on the floor. And as committees, you have to earn that respect of your colleagues. And you have to earn that your committee does good work. It's not an automatic. And once a committee has earned that, the committee work is a lot easier on the floor of the house because people trust that committee. And you will find some committees may not be trusted. And you may find some committees are trusted highly. And my goal has always been that we have a strong committee and we take care of each other on the floor. And we do our due diligence in the committee and do our due diligence in taking testimony and arriving at the best language that we can with the information that we have. And that goes a long ways when you're out there reporting a bill to 150 people. Because if they have faith in your committee, it makes your life a lot easier in the building. And not just on the house side, makes your life a lot easier on the Senate side as well. Because that's the other half of the process here. I stepped out for a second, Alice, to let the dog outside. Might have missed it. You might have said it. What day are you projecting we're going to be? I probably missed that because he was chomping the bit to get out. Projecting what? To be doing the actual, we thinking tomorrow? Tomorrow afternoon. We'll probably go first tomorrow. OK, perfect. Instead of the appropriations bill, that's my hunch. Because the appropriations bill is going to be at least a two hour presentation. Usually it's in five or six hours. And they're condensing it to about two hours. So I'd like to have hours done within half an hour at the most. That's my goal. I would think we could. So let's, I'm not sure about tomorrow morning. Tomorrow morning, we need to see if there's any amendments on the calendar tonight. If there are amendments that are popping up, we will meet tomorrow morning. And we may have to meet at 8 o'clock or 8 30 because we're on the floor. Is it 10 or 10 30? We have the joint session. 10 30. 10 30. So we'll have to see where we are if there's any amendments that pop up. Because if there are amendments, we will work as a committee, we'll bring the person or persons in who are proposing the amendment or amendments. If there are any and we work through that, sometimes we can work up a resolution to the amendment. Sometimes the person's willing to withdraw the amendment. And sometimes we have to take a real vote on the amendment, whether we see it as favorable or unfavorable. And then report that out to the floor. If there's an amendment that comes from the floor and we're not aware of it, we will have to recess and convene as a committee to go over the amendment. So just be prepared. I have no idea. We'll have a better feel after the caucus today in terms of what's happening. So I'd like to break because we're in caucus at noon. Anything else before we finish up? OK. And Michael, I quickly look through. It looks OK. Yeah, I did it more bill sent from the bill language versus spreadsheet, but I think it accomplishes the same thing of what you were saying. Yeah, it's the same. So do make sure you have your bill next to you, too. Not just your spreadsheet. Yeah, I got both. Yep. Madam Speaker. Yeah, Madam Chair. Do we have. I'm going to be referring to line numbers on the spreadsheets. Do we have a final spreadsheet of what it's going to be? What they just they just emailed it to us. It just sent it. Betsy and just sent it to us. OK, and I just heard that health care is submitting an amendment. It's I don't think it's health care committee. I think it's a member. Oh, yeah. Yeah, yeah. So we will work on that. We'll probably work on that tomorrow morning. So plan on either 8 or 8 30. We're not there yet. OK. And the amendments on the secure residential 16 beds. So that that would be your section for some people. Don't give up. Nope, they don't. So we'll figure it out. And when we're when we're referring to the bill tomorrow, the capital bill, which which version should we will we be using? So we get page numbers and line numbers, right? Well, I always use the larger version. Good point, because I really need draft one point. We have draft one point six, right? And we have one point five and one point six. Oh, I would have seen it five. At least one point one point six to print out. I printed it. Yeah, it came through on Friday. So what I'm going to do is they let me see how it's let me. What is our number H four? Thirty eight eight for the capital bill. Yeah, four thirty eight. Let's see how that goes. So they're going to have to go to the bill finder. And that is printed just like our draft one point six. And it has the line numbers. That is just like our draft one point six. So people are going to be going off the large version that's electronic on the bill finder on the legislative web page. So it's the same as our printed copy copy and it has the same number of lines. OK, so it's just as introduced on that page. Is that what the as introduced? It's H four thirty eight. What's that number four thirty eight. Four thirty eight. And then the spreadsheet that was sent out does have the item does have the line numbers on it. OK, so are we good to go, folks? So we can have a little bit of a breather before we're on. OK, we're off of YouTube now. Thank you, folks. And we will see you. We're going to be at the caucus of the whole at noon to present our capital budget and then also the general fund budget.