 My name is Sally short, I'm the aid to the Senate Democratic caucus and I'll be monitoring the event as I typed in the chat. If you just type your questions into the chat just so we don't have people talking over each other, and then I'll read them out loud. And the announcement is going to make which pertains to this captioning issue is that tonight's meeting is going to be recorded by Orca media to be shared on their website and on their cable access channel. I'm also going to be live streaming it on to the Senate Democrats Facebook page. So, hopefully, there will be better success with some captions there. Yeah, I'm welcome thank you everyone for joining us and senators if you'd like to introduce yourself we can get started. Okay. I'm a senior so I'll start. I'm in Cummings. I represent Washington County, and I chaired the finance committee and I serve on the health and welfare committee. I'm Cindy Polina, I serve as vice chair of the government operations committee and on the agriculture committee. I'm Andrew perks like also represent the same 18 towns and two cities that Senator Polina Cummings do and I'm the vice chair of transportation, and also on Education Committee and also this year. I have a third committee for the first part of the year on the reapportionment committee to reapportion the Senate. Great. And we'll start with a question that we received ahead of time just as people are putting their questions in the chat. For Senators Polina and Purchlich. I know you are co sponsors of s 222. Could you comment on the status of the bill and efforts to create a system of ranked choice voting and federal elections, and then for Senator Cummings do you support this bill. Good start. Well, we know. I certainly favor ranked choice voting, we used to call it instant run off voting as a way to make elections a bit more fair and allow encourage more people to run and make sure that the person who wins actually is a person who got the most votes. This is going to sound a little pessimistic. We've tried for a number of years to move Frank choice voting through the legislature. We haven't made much progress. The bill that we're looking at now that is the most likely to least skates get some attention would allow Frank choice voting and for federal offices and for some primaries, but not in the general election for governor or like that so I mean it's there it gets discussed a little bit but I guess I'm I think it's a long shot to expect it to happen anytime soon which is unfortunate. I wish it could I wish I had better news but I don't. Yeah, there's. What is the hold up. Well, some people just don't like the idea. You know, you got to build support and right now, you know, when you go into committee, people talk about their priorities and you sort of decide as a group what you're going to take up and what you're going to move forward with and you know yet limited amount of time. And this, but there's just not enough support right now, given the time we have left. I also think one of the things that's that is people some people say it's confusing. Some people just say it's unnecessary. And also, one other sort of thing that hooks into this is like, you people are afraid senators are afraid to not afraid but don't want to make a law that affects elections in an election year with election coming up. So the fact that there's an election coming up later this year is another reason why people would say we can't, we can't do it now anyway we have to like if we do it we'd have to let the whole election cycle pass with the old way before we allow the new one to work to work itself in. In the, the Secretary of State condos does support it but he's one of the people like to do it next year we have too much going on. The bill has it for just federal election so that's a 2024 for for the presidential primary just do it what he suggests is just do it for the presidential primary and just do it in 2024 so we have more time. The board is trying to go out and do more education. I haven't seen their ads but some people have contacted me that there's some ads out there. I think mainly one of the problems is people just don't know what it is, and it just seems confusing and they feel like what we have now works, the governor also has came out, not supportive. So people don't really want to work on a bill that's going to get vetoed, you know spend the time on that if they're not confident we have the, or not be confident that we have the votes to override but just at least there's a chance to do it so we have more educating to do, I'd say to get it to have more, more support that one, one thing that might help is the city of Burlington is past the charter change to use it in their city council elections. So, giving it back going in Burlington will help a little bit to educate people what it is and we'll probably have to take it one step at a time. Okay, and for me. We actually worked on this when I was in government operations, many, many years ago. At that time, the city of Burlington did use ranked choice voting. I'm not sure what happened, but nobody was happy with the outcomes. I think everyone's third choice one. And that was the, and they did away with it. Maine has passed it. And I'm watching to see how Maine, how it works out. I think I've got an open mind on this when my concern is, I just don't think this is the year to mess with elections, giving all the controversy surrounding this at this point to change the whole process I think it's probably not the wisest thing so we have time to really watch Maine's experience to see what happens in Burlington this time. And to learn from their mistakes and to see if that's where we want to go. Okay, while we're talking about election, if you give a brief update on reapportionment. I know it's not finished yet. But how's it looking. Yeah, in the house, I understand I haven't had a chance to go look at their website and the maps but my understanding is the House committee has least decided on what they want to present and I think they're still taking testimony but they have at least a map so people will look at how their house districts have been redistricted. The Senate committee is going through different maps. I think the southern half of the state I mean people probably only care about Washington County on this call but a lot of the talk has been about Franklin and while Chittenden County, we have to do something with Chittenden County, and of course that ripples throughout the state that for Washington County, there's been some push to move stow into Washington County. And there's also been right, the most recent map, not that they're iterative but the most recent map has wall cut Elmore and hardwick in the Washington Senate district. What Washington has is population wise we're under by about 7% and we're surrounded by a bunch of other counties, so a couple of them which are over. So, often when we're drawing this maps, they slough off population meaning towns into Washington County. The goals that try to keep to the county maps as close as possible and not split any towns. And it might mean that Washington County gets some other towns there's been other proposals to like cut the county in half and not make it a three member district but a two and a one or a two member district combined with lamoille or orange or but I think we'll stay with a three member district but it could be different than the county lines. If you have any strong opinions. So mean email let me know. And you can go to the reapportionment website if you're familiar at all with the legislative web page. It's a committee just like all the other committees and on there is different draft maps that we've been going through. If you want to look at different iterations. Next question. S to 48 the bill to democratize the Board of Trustees at UVM and the Vermont State colleges if you just give either an update on it or your thoughts and comments on it. I'm a co-sponsor of the bill I don't know if the others I think I don't know if Andy partially case he might be. I've gotten some hearings in the Education Committee I believe I should I should really and I look at Andy because he's on that committee. Yeah, but I thought it was important particularly as part of the reorganization process for the state colleges that there be more input on the Board of Directors Board of Trustees from people from students and teachers and faculty and workers at the college campuses. Okay, so we I've introduced a couple of bills to do that over the years, along with trying to make colleges and state colleges more affordable. This bill includes UVM as well as the state colleges and calls for again putting more students on the board, putting faculty on the board putting some of the staff on the board, Board of Trustees, I, you know, I'm not sure where it's going necessarily but I think it would be a great idea I think as we're reorganizing the colleges it's important to have those voices in the mix. Plus, you know in the future, it would be important to keep those voices in the mix as we move forward. We have a lot of work to do to like strengthen our state colleges and take better care of UVM so this is one step in that process. And we have to take a testimony on education. I thought I went well. I support the concept. There might, there's been some strong pushback from certain quarters, the, some of the administration of some of the state colleges. I think I, if I had to guess right now so I would think that maybe something would pass but it might change it might not be as many teachers or as many students but now is a good time to do it since we are restructuring the state colleges. So in that regard, there's, there's a good opportunity to make make some changes. That's perchlet. It looks like we have raised hand you have a specific comment about this topic. But we both teach at Vermont Tech, and to give you a perspective from the boots on the ground, the faculty feel very disconnected from the administration and certainly from the board. We have a lot to offer where engaged or interested, but we feel that we're not being taken advantage of paying $250,000 per report. We don't have business professors who have generated similar reports already feels asinine, honestly, so without getting faculty on the board, I don't feel that we can fix the problem that we're experiencing with our students at our schools right now. I don't know any faculty member who is not strongly in favor of this, and we encourage you all to support as much as you can. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Would like to know if you are aware of the Vermont disabilities housing initiative and the only current housing option for individuals with disabilities. There is a great need to create options other than the shared living provider option. Will you support the bill coming out of the House committee on human services. Well that will probably come to health and welfare, and I haven't seen it. Absolutely, I would support it, but I've always supported anything that adds to the independence and security of people with disabilities and I think they should have as many housing options as we can possibly give them. So we've made a commitment that everybody in Vermont is to be able to live and work in their communities regardless of their ability or disability and housing is certainly an important piece of that I've not seen the bill either but it sounds like something I would support going forward but obviously can't say exactly for because I haven't seen the bill it's in that it's in the house. Likewise, I would know what what my two colleagues you said. Yeah, I would just let you know for those of you tuning in at home crossover happens in just a couple of weeks that's when all of the Senate bills go to the House and the House bills go to the Senate. So if there is a particular issue or bill that you're watching that's in the house. It's very possible that they won't see it for another couple of weeks, but obviously it's great to let them know what issues you're on the lookout for. Next we have an environmental question about constituency plans for the closure of Coventry landfill as a nearest capacity. Currently thousands of tons of wastewater sludge are sent to Coventry each year which results in serious environmental damage, and this dumping reduces the remaining capacity is there a plan to discontinue the dumping of this sludge at Coventry. What is to be done after it reaches capacity and elected to say that there's PFAS and a lot of the sludge not to mention any metals. Yes. I don't know about dumping Coventry, but I was at the city council meeting and another meeting in Montpelier because the sludge is going to the Montpelier water waste treatment. Yeah, waste treatment plant. And I know, and that that was controversial. But basically, if Montpelier doesn't take it, it will go to Platsburg because they're the nearest place that will take it. We then have no control. So the state and is working with the city with the owners of Coventry and trying to find a way and develop the tests to know what because it isn't just PFAS there's all kinds of things. And I'm on health and welfare, we have banned a lot of PFAS and there's more bills in there, but like a lot of chemicals there with us for a lot of years and these are with us for particularly long amount of time. But what we're trying to do is develop the testing develop the filters. And then the rules and regulations that would put them into place. But again, you got to do something while you get that done. Yes. Senator, I may be of assistance in this matter at some point we should we should probably talk I have a spreadsheet that was prepared by Eamon Tuig at the Department of Environmental Conservation that breaks this hour. A large part of the problem is that this this sludge is being shipped as mostly water. They don't even dry it out. We've got all these trucks with it's 85% water on our roads and bridges. This is a serious problem as well but I may be of use to you. Yeah, and we talked about that in transportation the people representatives from on the way to and from Coventry feel like their transportation infrastructure is getting taking an extra toll not only for the waste coming out with a sludge, but all the trash going in and I have a question pointed out it will fill up and that something as we as a society have to take on about how much waste we producing. We've done a good job by banning organic materials, going into the landfill and some other materials but we need to do a good job and on a waste we're generating because once that's full that's the our last landfill that we're going to start trucking it out of state and I think it's going to put pressure on the region to start doing what they've done in Europe is an incineration which has other I've been told that's where our organic waste is going right now is to mean to be burnt. And there are better ways to do it. Yeah, right right now. City of Burlington is shipping to shadow way New York. It's 120 miles each direction to truck their sewage sludge to this landfill. Yeah, that's right. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Okay, an update on the pension funding. Is it going anywhere and can you elaborate on a sense. Well it's in the Senate it's in the Senate government operations committee. It's definitely going somewhere we went through the bill just thing was yesterday. Believe me when I tell you it's very, very, very complicated. There are smarter people than me when it comes to the numbers and the percentages that have worked it out. The important thing is that the teachers have agreed to it the state employees have agreed to it. Everybody's on the same page everybody basically basically supports it. We're going to probably go to that a Senate government operations to either tomorrow or the next day and it'll go ahead and head over to the house. They'll make some small changes because there's a few tech the way we call technical changes that need to be made to build nothing nothing controversial or that important. But they will make those changes in the house and it'll come back to the Senate. There's no doubt in my mind that it's going to pass and pass relatively soon relatively quickly with a lot of support. The group that they took a long time for the for the task force to come together in a cooperative way there was a lot of mistrust I think at the beginning of the task force. But over time they really found ways to work together and I think everybody's pretty happy with the outcome. So we'll see but it's definitely moving forward and it's definitely be out of the Senate, well probably won't be out of the Senate until we come back from John meeting they break, but it'll be out of our government operations committee in the next day or so. Yeah, I think the hold up has been just getting that very complicated agreement drafted into language that says what everybody agreed to. Yeah, it's really complicated piece of reading. That was my question do you have any idea, any idea on the funding or where the money is going to come from, or any allocation. There'll be some one time funding is that's what you mean to get things sorted towards back on track. In the future they'll be funding, other than the regular funding that comes out of the employee and the employer relationship. There'll be, I think it's a certain percentage of every year we have a surplus in the general fund it'll go towards this towards it as well. And also, I want to be honest with you it's hard for me to explain it but in the past up until now we've been not paying for the teachers health care and on an ongoing basis we basically would wait to get the bill and start a story to find the money to pay the bill. And there's bill the new proposal changes that and allow starts the paying raising the money to pay for the health care throughout the process instead of just waiting before we get a bill. So I guess it's it's complicated I can't not going to pretend that I can explain it all to you but I think we had everybody in the committee the other day. The teachers were there the VSA was there, you know, not everybody's super happy of course because it's there's compromises that have been made. It really is amazing to see how much they were willing to agree on tell you the truth so I think it's, I think it's going to be okay. And I think part of it is making sure that we don't let it happen again, you know, because this was really a bad scene. And there were people who were afraid of that they were going to have to work more and get paid less not get paid less but get lower benefits and after they work more that didn't really doesn't really seem to be the case. So one of the interesting things about it is the way that people pay into the fund lower higher income people are going to pay a higher percentage of their income into the fund so it's progressive in a sense in that way that it has higher income people paying a bit higher percentage of their contribution and lower income people and lower salary salary people. Okay. Um, could we get just a very brief I know it's, it's an issue that could be talked about for a while. I have just a brief update on COVID in Vermont and anything related to COVID that is being worked on in the legislature. And then health and welfare. Um, we haven't done anything really on COVID we've been monitoring it and getting updates. There was talk of doing a mask mandate, but about that time the numbers started to drop and that was highly controversial and we was guaranteed to be vetoed and at least, you know, we did. It was very hard, especially in the house to get enough votes to veto override. So, that backed off mostly. We've been working at getting legislators back into the building. The house has been back in for I think, well, since they started but they phased in part of them are there remotely part of them are there in person. There are testing requirements and mask requirements. I know we are going back and the rules committee is working on rules. We're going to keep as many witnesses as possible on zoom which most witnesses seem to like because you don't have to get out and drive in a snowstorm to Montpelier to find out the committee's been tied up on the floor and they're not going to get to meet that day. And so, we're going to be working that way. Try and just get the senators and the representatives back in and work it through and again we're watching the numbers. So far, we don't seem to have had any we've had a couple positive tests in the house but nothing that seems to be community spread within the building so we're, again, I think, watching it. There will be questions coming out of it. I think focus is starting to go to recovery, not just economic recovery but a lot of concern about school children and how we're going to help them make up for these two years where they had a regular school experience. And we are hearing that there is a mental health crisis among kids. There were some serious issues before COVID, and they're getting to be worse. Part of, you know, we're looking at trying to get extra money for our local mental health agencies. Washington County mental health actually runs a school. They have a building down on their main campus in Barry and the kids that just can't make it in the regular classroom and you can come there and get your education but also work on your issues. We're working with a lot of after school but I think we're really the focus is switching to recovery and coming out of this. And hopefully it will stay that way. I think we were starting to think that way last summer and Omicron arrived and I hear there is another variant in Denmark in New York City but we don't know enough about that now to know if it's going to cause any extra issues. I know there is a vaccine committee that meets and advises the Department of Health they met last week or the week before and did not recommend any additional vaccines requirements for schools. I don't know if that will continue, but that's where we stand right now. It's worth mentioning that a lot of the decisions about how to deal with COVID are not made by the legislature. They're made by the administration by the governor under emergency order so people would often say like, don't do this don't do that and without the knowledge that the legislature really is not doing one or the other because it's not in our power to make those kinds of decisions. So what we did do in the state in the state house among other things though we were the ones who encouraged mail in voting and changing the times of town meeting days or allowing people to do town meeting votes to an Australian ballot. We had we passed a number of temporary laws that would make it easier for people to do things they had to do to have select board meetings and other kinds of public meetings in a way that was safe. But you know what it came down to the actual medical so that we did that kind of stuff in terms of organizing the public domain to be able to do their work without having a fear of fear for their safety. But the actual decisions about masking and vaccinations and whatnot were made by the administration. So Sally I don't know if there's any vaccine questions but that's where we want to take. That's the only thing that we've really talked about at least in education. We've there is a bill to get rid of the religious exemption that that has sponsors on the committee so we have we have talked about it. And I think in the sense that there's a support for that. I think I've heard my two colleagues here not really supporting that so I don't I don't see that happening this session. I like having some kind of exemption in their religious or philosophical. So I don't see any changes to our vaccine policy. We, we've talked about how we can help this help the schools. But as Anthony said it's been more the issue of what the Agency of Education is doing and what the Department of Health is doing. And we've just been trying to see where we can either apply pressure or be helpful where we can. Yes, there were there were a few questions about that as well. Next question is directed to Senator Cummings. Senator Cummings says my understanding is that s 148 the environmental justice bill will be passed out of natural resources soon but still needs to be funded. Will that come to you in finance and will you make bill gets adequate funding to accomplish its mission of ensuring equitable distribution of environmental related burdens and benefits. I know that won't come to finance that will go to appropriations finance deals with raising revenue appropriation spends it. I know everyone is committed, and we'll get it as much funding as we possibly can. I don't know why it won't go through but there are always competing, despite everything you hear about how much money we've got. Most of it is one time money. And so, when it comes to ongoing expenses, like adding personnel, something that's going to carry over more than two years in two years our revenues are predicted to grow 0.8%. And so we're going back to where our just costs are out stripping our revenues. And so that's the balance that's going on but environmental justice. A lot of those programs would qualify for some one time funding because it would be start up money it would be, you know project money. So, you know, that's as much as I know at this point. It looks like we have a quick comment from Dexter. That question was posted at 604. My question was posted at 552. And there are a number of questions ahead of mine. I'm just concerned that people's questions are not being ordered. I am jumping around just so that we can try to hit a variety of different topics. Our next question is about bill S 154 a bill that would dedicate 60% of the cannabis tax with Vermont State colleges. Can you update on the progress of that bill please. I have it. It's in finance. I have three bills. One would give money to the towns one would give money to the state colleges and dedicate a fund. And the third one would add a third gross receipts tax at, I forget which level, trying to even out the playing field for small growers. And last night, literally about this time. I found out the cannabis fee bill, which is where we would probably attach these bills. The S and H bill has to come out this week because they need the fees because they want to start issuing licenses on March 16. So that's kind of thrown a wrench into our plans. I understand that we need to spend more money on the state colleges. Everybody understands that. I also understand that we've had several different groups, everybody would like to have a dedicated fund dedicated to their issue. And that gives us trouble with our bond ratings. And it, it prevents any kind of ability during a downturn to move things around so I can do it, but it probably won't make it through the appropriations committee. Which is where it would send the whole bill. So right now, I think we're going to try and get the cannabis fee bill out. And then so that they can continue on schedule and then take a look at the other bills, we can usually find a vehicle taxes a pretty broad term so we can usually do that or I can send the, I think it's 154 156 and seven. They came in pretty close together over to appropriations which is where they go anyway, because they really are appropriating the funds I'm not sure why they came to finance, but we have taken testimony we've looked at it. But as we're trying to keep the whole program moving and right now the money is dead is set to go any revenue and it's starting to look like this is not going to be the gold mine that everybody thought it was kind of like growing hemp. We know that the fees are not going to cover the cost of the board so we're going to have to use some money there. That it's as it as it plays out we're learning as we go this is a new process and I think we're trying to keep as much fluidity in the system so we can respond as you know, reality sets in. So that's all I can tell you we are, you know, we've had the state colleges into caucus. We are trying to deal with the funding very seriously but it's hard to dedicate funding to the state colleges and know that our long term care home health agencies are literally starving. And so on our mental health agencies, they at least need a 10% increase to break even. And those are just the realities we're trying to deal with. Not happy news. Okay. This is another question about coven slightly addressed with a bit of a different wording. The mandatory health measures specifically related to the coven ones. These mandates have caused a vision in Vermont and created a minority of people that actively resist the mandates sometimes for religious reasons. How can Vermont protect its citizens that seek medical freedom in terms of forced medical interventions and vaccinations. Nobody else wants to take that. I can just say right now I mean there's a there's the debate about is it is it a forced vaccination if, if you're like saying it's required for schools because it's hard to. You know, we're not forcing anybody to do the vaccine although we're sort of are because if you can't participate in certain parts of society then it becomes a de facto requirement or or force issue. I mean, there are ways to get around it but I understand some people are not, you know, whether the medical reasons or religious reasons are having a real difficult time with that. And I think, you know what my conversations with folks at the department of health that I've asked about how they try to deal with this. I think they are trying to do a balance of public health and specific individual health and individual liberties and it's with the same with a lot of other of our constitutional rights. And there's a, there's a time where the individuals rights yields to the rights of the community but it's a tough tight walk. And it gets very gray area sometime and it's definitely something that I struggle with on this issue and as well with other issues. So it's, but I understand that it's been really difficult for, for some folks and you know we're trying to help out where we can. Yeah, I think also that some of the things that make. People find the most threatening or annoying or excuse me. Are things that private entities are doing not necessarily the government. I mean, restaurants are not being told they have to like request require vaccinations. Restaurants are taking that on their own, you know, airlines and other kinds of businesses that are saying we've decided that we want people to be vaccinated. I'm not a lawyer. Thank goodness for that right. I think that, I mean, I, people said you can't why can't you stop them from doing this. Clearly they're able to do it because they are doing it and there's nobody there's no legal challenges being raised it's kind of like if you want to really sort of downplay it in a way it's like saying no shirts no shoes no service. Businesses have the ability to make those kinds of distinction so I'm not saying it's good or bad I'm just saying it's, it's not all in the government that's doing this that's required requiring or encouraging vaccinations it's actually private businesses as well, private citizens. Yeah I think, you know, through this whole thing. To me, one of the pride, if not the primary reason that governments are formed is for public protection. And that's either an army but it's also been, you know, extends to public health. We have health departments. And so we've been, you get, you've got these rights you've got a right to make your own medical decisions until that right comes up against your neighbor's right, not to be infected with a potentially deadly disease. And, you know, thanks to the internet we have a dueling set of experts out there which makes it even harder to find a way this is a new experience there is no roadmap that tells us this is what you should do. Like there is for floods or hurricanes or tornadoes you know this is the evacuation route. We've been trying to find that route. I think, you know, the one place there are mandatory vaccines is for public school attendance. And that's been upheld in the courts, numerous times, because it protects especially the kids that have an issue they can't be vaccinated. There are highly communicable diseases that can on occurrence, make children or their parents mumps. I've had them all mumps measles chicken pox we didn't have vaccines mumps was a piece of cake for me. But if I had an adolescent brother or my father that caught mumps, it could be a much more serious disease. Same with German measles. And so those vaccines are there I have no knowledge, but my hunch would be the reason there wasn't a recommendation for vaccines is that we're all hoping that COVID goes into this endemic stage and it's just it's there like the flu, and you get your flu and you've got protection and every year you get another one because there's another variant of the flu. But there's enough people that are vaccinated and that things are just, you know, nothing like, you know, the kinds of things we were seeing a year ago. We've had more Americans die from this disease than we've killed in any war and in combinations of several wars. It's it's serious and we're trying to find a way to to thread that needle. Okay, thank you everyone. So question about the issue of PCBs in the schools. They mentioned that states such as Washington and New Hampshire were successful in suing Monsanto and Bayer to finance testing and remediation. Is there any influence that the legislature has over this issue and anything that could be done about it. Yeah, I can. We have talked about it in committee and I hadn't heard that other states that successfully sued to help with the cost that's, that's good to know. And we should talk to our attorney general about that and as well just as the state. We are going forward with a testing regime so all schools will be tested. The Department of Health is designing that test now and and I don't remember what the schedule was like for how long, you know, we have 200 or 377 schools. So we have a lot of schools to test, but there will all schools will be tested. And we will see what the results are and then we'll have to remediate those ones. So that's where we find it and it, it's not all schools will be tested only the schools built in the time that PCBs were used in the building materials. And so that that is ongoing, and it is going to be pretty large cost. So it's great to hear that others have found a way to maybe make the companies responsible. And then we'll go back to our medical monitoring bill that we passed, I don't know, two or three times that the governor's vetoed that the companies that are producing this, these products that are making a sick should be held responsible for the ongoing monitoring and and testing of the population that if it is found that they're being harming our public health so I'll take a note on that. Yeah, that that is good to know. Because this, you know, brings up another issue we are testing. I know someone that's doing some of the testing. And it's guaranteed we're going to have schools that are going to come up with, you know, with these chemicals because they were just used so frequently. But what we don't have is a fund to clean them up. We have a test for lead and we got off fairly easily just having to replace some piping. But we do not have a fund for school construction or more importantly school repair. We have done a survey of the schools we have some very serious health and safety issues in our schools there the newest ones were built in the 70s. And a lot of them a lot, you know, a lot longer ago than that. And so we're part of you'll hear, you know, we have a $95 million surplus in the Ed fund. Most of that is thanks to the federal stimulus and people went out and bought things and all that sales tax revenue was dedicated to the Ed fund. That's not going to continue you're not going to keep going out and buy washers and dryers and big screen TVs. So the question is what do we do with that money. And, you know, this is one of the things that's hanging out there we're going, we are going to need some money to help schools, because if we don't put money into it. That costs in the individual school because of our funding formula is going to get spread out over everybody and the property tax. So that's another one that we're looking at. So, one, one good thing though we do have money for from over to help schools with age back system as ventilation, because it was considered a coven recovery issue so a lot of those projects with indoor air pollution, including which is airborne. So we're trying to use as much of that to improve all these old ventilation systems. So that's the bill for the system. Group group that indoor air quality in our schools. Deborah I know this was your question. A brief comment on their response. Okay, thanks. Yes, I was the one who who posed the question and I've been doing research privately on the PCP issue. And I will send you all the research that I've done about successful lawsuits against I'm on send. The most recent one was reported today or yesterday on WCAF New Hampshire won a $25 million lawsuit. And it's important because costs could be astronomical and in remediating the issue and then was Washington state and then three teachers in Monroe, Washington were awarded. $66 million because of brain damage that they had incurred from teaching in school for decades. This is a real issue for long term teachers who have been exposed like perhaps in Burlington. One lawsuit against the Berlin school district could because maybe they didn't, they didn't publicize in a timely manner could really devastate any school budget. So I'll send along all the information I have right now I call the state, the Attorney General does not plan to, they don't have a lawsuit in the pipeline but I would hope that there would be some. But thank you. That would be helpful. Thank you. And I'm sorry I've got, you know, there's so many of you that I don't get to see everyone's hand raised so Jeremy I'm sorry you've been waiting for a minute. Yeah, I just wanted to make a couple of comments on a couple different issues that came up so first of all thank you, Senator Cummings for your awareness of sort of the greater public health issue around the vaccines and the mask mandates. I want to make sure people sort of stay aware that there are people who cannot be effectively vaccinated. The one reason or another they may be recipients of organ transplants they may have blood cancers. There's a whole variety of reasons why people are more vulnerable to COVID and so I just hope that everyone well I don't. I respect the other side of things to hope that you all can sort of keep in mind that people are more vulnerable to COVID than the general population. And then just on the issue of the funding of the state colleges I'm fully aware there's competing interests for any new source of revenue. It's just that our students pay the highest public state tuition of any state in the country. You know you think with the people's Republic of Vermont that we would be funding all sorts of things you know we would be at the very top but we're not you know places like Mississippi and Alabama have higher per capita state funding for higher education than we do we are actually either we're fighting it with New Hampshire for either last or next to last and per capita state funding. And so when our students have such high tuition they have to pay. That's obviously a disincentive to get the higher education they need to be competitive in the workplace so anything to be done to reduce the tuition for students would be much appreciated. Thank you. Now I appreciate that my daughter graduated from VTC. So, I'm aware. Okay, great. We've had a couple of questions that are related to housing I know that there's quite a few bills in the Senate regarding housing. If you could speak specifically about multi unit dwellings and affordable and accessible housing for the aging population. Yeah, there is a big housing bill but none of us are on that committee we're kind of waiting to see what the Economic Development and Community Affairs Committee is going to be coming forward with, you know, we're all aware of the crisis with housing and we're supportive of finding different ways of doing it. There's, there's, like Sally said there's bills try to get at it through permitting there's bills try to get it just with money through BHCB so we can build more affordable housing there's tax credits there's efforts to get landlords to build built you know to renovate buildings that are sitting vacant because it's not economical for the renovate them so you don't have to do it all to try to have a successful bent in the, in the crisis to find affordable housing or any housing, and then you really gets more difficult when you talk about, you know, like the disability housing and things like that I think I saw a question at the very beginning about electric vehicle charging stations at multiple unit houses that is something we're working on that we have a grant program to help those buildings. I think the question answer question was that it wasn't for all types of buildings so it's, there's a lot of need out there for sure as Senator coming said you know there's, there's, there's more need than, than we cannot kind of tackle all at once so we're trying to find out what's the best, the best use of our money to have the best. You know best bank of the box so to speak on the housing issue but I know if Anna Anthony. I mean, we're pumping as much and it's federal money into housing as we can lay our hands on. The problem is it. We have the supply chain and the labor issues that everybody else is and even if we didn't housing does not appear overnight I've known Gus ceiling since he was the director and I was on the board at what is now capstone. I know he feels very strongly that if we are building housing, we're not going to slam it up. You know, the cheapest possible, the way hot did in the 60s, and then it fell apart in the 80s that we want to build, you know, decent housing, not luxury but we want to build it, so that people want to live in it. I mean you want to feel good when you look around your house. So we're trying to build good housing. And, you know, a lot of it is been focused on trying to find housing for the homeless. We're trying to find housing for lower income people, but we have a serious need for housing for workers. You can't be a nurse or a teacher anymore, and be able to afford a house. I wouldn't have been able to afford my house probably for the last 30 years. Fortunately, I've looked here for 45. The housing values are going up. I'm a retired realtor, they will come down. But probably they, you know, the median will will keep creeping up over time housing real estate is, it fluctuates. It's all it's predictable like the economy. We're at the peak. And yeah, it's very, very difficult. I know it took me several years to find my daughter who was a state employee, housing that she could afford in the Montpelier area. And it took a long time to find something you'd want a human being to live in. So we are trying, but again, the demand is just outstripping the funding. Hey, and I see a hand raised from Mr. Frothingham. Do you have a quick comment about housing? You're muted. Sorry if you're trying to speak to still muted. Maybe we'll just move on. Yeah, you're muted. He's trying. It was almost there. Okay. Thank you for your patience. Thank you for putting on this, this round table. I am concerned. I read from time to time I read. And here in the gossip mill and read that 5G is not safe, or at least 5G is the step up that we're embracing with the money that we're spending for the build out. I'm wondering with, I'm wondering whether the legislature has any interest in the health effects. And I can't speak competently on the subject, but I am reading about it. That's mine. And 5G and the effects of low frequency radio waves health effects have come up for years. One is the state is precluded from regulating telephone and it will basically internet service. It is the FCC. And so we cannot ban 5G we can, we can do siting, but we can't do siting to the point where it would make it almost impossible to put up a tower. The whole thing is that the courts have recently told the FCC that their health research on 5G or radio waves in general was basically not adequate. We could find better words for it and they were ordered to go back and do that research. So we're waiting on them. We've dealt with this and we've had our health department tell us when we put in the smart meters for your electric service. There is a lot of concern the towers. 5G is really putting up towers that could be converted to 5G. But right now, there is no 5G in Vermont. It is it, you have to be very close to the transmitter for it to work. So the chance that it is ever going to any place outside of downtown Burlington is almost nil. Your cell phones will say they're they're 5G. That just means if you walk by a place that has 5G and right now they are larger than centers. Your phone will pick it up. But to date, there is no 5G in Vermont. And the providers tell us they don't have any plans of bringing it here anytime soon. So hopefully we have the, you know, the ability for the feds to do the research they should have done years ago, and give us something to work with because our hands are pretty tied there. We're kind of limited to screening and setbacks and stuff for towers. But we can't ban them. Thank you. And we'll end with a question that was sent ahead of time but it was sent shortly before this I'm just now seeing it. Can you give us an update on the ethics reform bill. It doesn't feel good that Vermont is only one of five states not to have an effective ethics requirements in place. Well that bill is in the government operations committee I actually was the main sponsor of the bill sponsored it a couple of years. I'm trying to make progress on ethics reform in Vermont, but good news is the bill is probably going to go out of committee tomorrow. It's been a long, arduous conversation and debate within the committee with other people around the state. There was some resistance as there always is when you're trying to change things and I think when you focus on ethics people there's resistance as well. So we're going to get it out of the Senate this year just this within the next couple of weeks hopefully. And for the first time it will actually see we'll have an ethics, an ethics code that covers everybody from the governor on down to the snowplow driver be everybody held to the same standard. We'll talk about conflicts of interest and gifts and whatnot and post employment post employment. There's a lot of revolving doors that you have to like, take time off but if you've been working for the state you can't then go in and work for the other side of the state. So there's a lot of good things in there that but it's been a complicated journey trying to find the best ways to fit the pieces together but we've actually spent many hours on it this afternoon and we did earlier this week as well. And I'm pretty sure that we're going to end up voting it out of committee in the next day or so. So we are making progress. And it's interesting keep in mind that, you know, we're not breaking any new ground here with the ethics code that we've written. It's not there's nothing fancy about it there's nothing groundbreaking about it. Basically we're one of only four states that has no code of ethics at all. So we're taking small steps in the right direction but it's good feels good that we're actually moving forward, assuming that we get full support from the Senate in the house but I think that people will when they realize that it's important first step for us to take towards restoring not restoring but building faith in government, making sure that everybody's helping the same standards and whether you're the governor or statewide office holder whether you're a state worker doing a job every day in the workplace. So we're feeling pretty good about the possibility of moving it forward in the next couple of weeks. I just want to say thanks to Anthony for his long work on this he's been working on for a long time so I'm glad that finally get a bill out and I look forward to devoting for that I agree that we need to we need to improve this the situation for sure. We do. And this has been a long time coming. But you should know that the Senate does have an policy. So, and so does the judiciary so there are ethics policies in place. But not this, the big government probably the administrative branch of the three branches of government does not have an overarching ethics policy and we should have one. Hey, thank you all so much for joining us tonight. As I mentioned at the beginning there are multiple ways that you can watch this back again, if necessary. And if we did not get to your question I do apologize there was a bunch of them. So please feel free to reach out to the senators or to myself and we will hopefully get an answer back to you. Senators if you have any closing words that you'd like to say now's your time. People taking the time to come and listen and talk with us, you know, we stay pretty busy most of the day into the evening and sometimes you really get a yearning to talk to some real folks about what's going on around town. So I appreciate people taking the time to join us here this evening. Yeah, I do too. I mean, it's hard enough when you're in person under the gold dome to stay in touch but with COVID. And I think like many of us. I haven't been out walking the streets running into people as often as I used to be I'm not in the grocery store as often as I used to be. And I'm probably not as recognizable with a mask on as I used to be. Even though it's kind of terrifying when people do recognize me with a mask on. But it's really helpful to have you turn out and talk to us because that's really the way we find out what's really going on out there in the real world and it helps inform our focus and our decisions. And it's just what a third on thank you to folks for coming and I, and maybe we could do it more, more often because we get so many emails these days we haven't been able. It's hard, you know, I know we all try to keep up with them but it's this is this is your second one this session so far. Maybe once a month. Right, we talked about doing once a month but maybe we could do it more often because like I don't think we got to all the questions and we can. I saw a couple of the people had comments about the way we're doing the question so we can clarify that as we go forward but I know I agree with what Anthony man said about the value of hearing folks so maybe if we can find it. I mean we still have Sally to help us with the moderating which is really helpful so thank you Sally for doing that. Yes, thanks for everybody for coming and we'll we will try to do, try to do it more often. Good. Thank you. Have a good night. Yes, enjoy the rest of the evening. Thank you everyone have a great thank you Sally. You're welcome.