 Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to Senate Education. It is Wednesday, April 14th at a little after 1.35 in the afternoon. We have a pretty full schedule today. We are going to start with having a walk-through and some testimony on S-134, an act relating to the Vermont State Colleges. Appreciate the Chancellor and her team being with us, and we'll kick it off in a moment with the bill. One of the bill sponsors. I then hope that senators are comfortable. If not, we can always do it, postpone it a day. But I would like to advance the Secretary of Education's appointment confirmation. That would just be a vote of the committee. And then senators and others will recall last week, we looked a little bit. We had Representative Christian and Mr. Demeray's coming back with language around diversifying the state board of education. And then at the end of the day, we will return to H-426 public school facilities in the state. So with that, Senator Hooker, thanks for taking us through, if you wouldn't mind, a little bit of background on your bill. And I know your colleagues in Rutland County cosponsor this with you, Senators Collin Moore and Terenzini. And after we get sort of the genesis and the big idea, we'll pass it on to Mr. Demeray. Hey, thank you, Senator. And thank you, all of you from the Vermont State College system for being here to listen to our request. And Senator Terenzini, who's the lead sponsor of the bill, is not available. He has some dental surgery today, so we're hoping that he's well and can come back soon and rejoin the discussion. But first of all, let me say that we understand the stresses that the Vermont State College system has been under and the effort that the select committee, the chancellor's office and the board of trustees to address these serious issues facing the future of our state colleges have been working on. The purpose of this bill, S-134, is to allow the legislature and Vermonters to more fully understand the problems, especially as they relate to individual institutions. Where are the pluses and minuses? Where are the profits and losses of the system as a whole? And of each campus. The proposed merger of the four campuses may be the way to solve many of the difficulties our long-standing schools of higher education are facing. And S-134 would allow us to know where those difficulties are, system-wide or school-specific. So the first part of the bill has to do with the finances and a more public offering of where the finances are for each of the schools, whether it be Castleton, NVU or VTC, as opposed to the state of the system as a whole. The second part of the bill has to do with branding and the names of the institutions themselves. These schools have spent, have been around for a long time and people know them by their names, especially down here in Castleton, where Castleton was the first of the schools of higher education in the state. So we kind of have a history, we do have a history of that particular moniker being associated with this area of the state. And we see it certainly as a point of pride and also as an economic tool for our area. So our request to have the names of the institutions be at the front of the names of this system is what's driving this. I'm speaking personally from Castleton's point of view, certainly that's what prompted this bill. But we also recognize that VTC, I mean, where, how many other places in Vermont besides UVM perhaps? Can we say the initials and know what we're talking about? VTC has been around so long that it's a household name. NVU has made its own brand now after the merger that took place a few years ago. And it seems that to ask schools that have gone through this change already or have not gone through the change yet to have to do it would be economically a challenge whether it's an unnecessary expense to change the name. And it would do harm to the time that has been spent branding those schools to draw people from the area, from the state, from the region, from the world, perhaps, as is evident in the number of foreign students that come to Castleton. So we're asking for a continuation of the names of the institutions at the front of the new name, whatever it would be, for the merging system. The I think Mr. Demeray is going to take us through the bill section by section, so I won't go on. But that is the impetus behind what we're asking for. First, it's kind of transparency as to the finances and the needs of each of the institutions and also as witness to the importance of the names of the institutions as they are, so I'll hand it over to Mr. Demeray. Great. Thanks, Senator Hooker. Appreciate that. Mr. Demeray, we're ready when you are. Would you prefer I pull this up on screen or look at that separately? I think we all have it. No, OK. All right. So for the record, Jim Demeray, let's console. We're walking through S-134. And the statement of purpose of the bill, page one, does summarize the three major points that Senator Hooker went through. So first of all, the purpose is to require promising colleges to annually submit to you. It's either financial statements for the prior year, including separate financial statements for each of the university colleges in its system with information on their sustainability and enrollment. The second purpose is to require the promising colleges to publicly disclose its annual budget allocation to each of its colleges and universities together with the rationale for that allocation. And third purpose is to condition state funding of the promise of colleges on the requiring that the name of the college university that currently is used if it is changed to be used at the beginning of a new name. Going on to page two. Section one is amending the statute on 2177, which deals with financial reports. And this is a new subdivision, too. That says the annually before December 15, the corporation, which is VSC, shall submit to you. It's either financial statements for the prior fiscal year. Again, a very separate financial statements for each university and college in the system. That will include a profit and loss statement. And we'll include a report on the financial sustainability of the corporation at each university and college over the next five years. And oh, this is sorry. My version is I were not sorry. And the fourth time enrollment for the prior school year. And a five year enrollment trend analysis for each college and university. And then a new subsection G says the amounts of the corporation and the budgets to be allocated to each of its colleges and universities shall be publicly disclosed by VSC, not less than 10 days prior to the payment of any allocation or part of an allocation to any of the colleges and universities together with the rationale in support of the allocations made. And then lastly, Section two is around branding and first, it has language about about about the background saying that the college is a brand within the count their counties, the state and beyond and that students, families, donors and business communities recognize the brands and that a change does include the current name of the college or university at the beginning to damage this brand and may negatively impact enrollment donations to business support. But as I said, the purpose of Section three is to ensure that the corporation does not change the name as we just mentioned. And then we go on to Section three, which is amending statute again. And so first of all, as you change on line 12, which makes funding subject to Section B so come on to and be first of all, changes that the names to the correct names of these colleges and universities. And then, yeah, and then in line three through six on page five, it says that the corporation changes the name of any college or university and assistant to a name that does not include the current name at the beginning of the new name. It's no longer be eligible for state funding and the effective date is on passage. Thank you. Any questions, immediate questions for Mr. Demarine? All right. Seeing none, Chancellor Zedotny, great to see you, as well as Miss Scott and Miss Lavasser. I know you're here with your your team, which is great. The floor is yours. And I think however you would like to handle it, there are two issues that we're talking about. Address them as you as you prefer. Great. Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. So, yeah, we do welcome the opportunity to come in and talk to you. It's always a pleasure to come in and share information about what we're doing at the Vermont State Colleges. So thank you for having us in. And we do understand the concern from each of our host communities and our school stakeholders regarding what the transformation of the Vermont State College system will mean for those institutions and for their communities. We also recognize that change, particularly on the scale of transformation that the Vermont State College system is undertaking is challenging and uncertainty creates anxiety. So we completely understand that. And we also recognize that the Castleton community in particular has been vocal about the school's identity and their brand. And so we want to assure you that we care about the same things that you and the Rutland community and all the other communities that host our institutions care about, including maintaining the Castleton campus as a vibrant and attractive campus for students, incorporating the high value elements of Castleton's and the other institution's existing brands, while also having a marketing strategy that communicates the mission and vision of the new combined entity. We also want to make sure that the new combined entity is fiscally sustainable so that Castleton and the other Vermont State College institutions can continue to serve as economic, social and cultural anchors in their host communities and that we do everything with transparency and accountability. Having said that, we do have significant reservations about the bill as drafted for several reasons. Primarily, the bill would really take us in a different direction than the path that we are currently on. And so, you know, briefly, I would just sort of remind everyone that the legislature created the select committee on the future of public higher education and Vermont last summer. The committee was charged with providing that with developing an integrated vision and a plan for a high quality, affordable and workforce connected future for higher education in Vermont and to offer recommendations regarding the financial sustainability of the Vermont State College system. And as in sort of as part of that, we received funding for this fiscal year in recognition of the need to have the select committee do its work. The select committee issued its final report on Friday. It received unanimous support from the committee members, which did include a Castleton alum and a local business person, Jeff Weld. A copy of the final report has been submitted to this committee. Two of the select committee's central recommendations have remained unchanged since the committee first issued an initial report back in December, namely that was aggressive administrative consolidation system wide and restructuring the Vermont State College system by unifying Castleton University, Northern Vermont University and Vermont Technical College under a single leadership and a single accreditation. Our board of trustees adopted those central recommendations at its February 22nd meeting and a copy of the transformation proposal that was submitted to the board and approved by the board has also been submitted to the committee. Consistent with the recommendations of the select committee, the board is seeking to create a single unified institution that is student focused, that it assures statewide access to academic programs, it strengthens academic program offerings and continues to provide the high touch personalized student support that we're known for. We do recognize the importance of being transparent about the finances of the Vermont State College system and the value of being held accountable to the legislature, given the significant amount of state investment that will be needed for the Vermont State College system to continue to meet the needs of the state and its students. The House in its budget bill H439 did include a number of actions and reports on metrics that the Vermont State College system is to provide to the legislature, including this committee, moving forward. The actions and metrics that are included in the House budget bill correlate to the recommendations in the select committee's report and include that the chancellor shall establish policies and procedures to implement the board approved transformation plan as developed by the select committee on higher education. So the proposed bill would derail the Vermont State College systems transformation. And I'm talking about the Senate Bill 134 by increasing the personnel and administrative costs and also restricting the system's ability to create a truly unified, innovative, flexible and fiscally sustainable public higher education system by essentially requiring it to maintain the existing status quo, which as we know is unsustainable. The state has already invested significantly in the Vermont State College system with the expectation that the system will transform itself consistent with the recommendations of the select committee. And in our view, the bill would make it virtually impossible for the system to successfully implement the select committee's recommendations and reduce its structural deficit by $25 million over the next five years. So I just want to turn to the specific provisions that are in this bill. So the proposed bill requires that the Vermont State College system provides separate audited financial statements for each university in college within the system with information on their financial sustainability and enrollment. So first of all, the Vermont State College system is one single corporate entity, and it has been since its creation back in the 60s. Its annual audited statements are publicly available on the website. We have a single set of annual audited statements. So this provision would actually impose additional requirements on top of what we are already doing. So it goes beyond maintaining the current status quo to actually impose additional requirements on us. Those requirements would significantly increase the costs of our external auditors and would require us to hire several additional staff members to manage the internal accounting that it would require. So this is asking us to do something we haven't done in the past, and it would require us to create new systems to make this possible. The Vermont State College system's finances are highly transparent, particularly given what's occurred in the past 12 months. So again, our finances have been examined, scrutinized and studied very closely over the past 12 months by the State Treasurer, an external consultant hired by the Joint Fiscal Office, Jim Page, last summer, and then the external consultant, NChems, who was hired and worked with the select committee. All three reports are publicly available. In addition, there is detailed financial information publicly available on the Vermont State College system website. And that information is available in the meeting materials for the Board's Finance and Facilities Committee, as well as materials for the full board. The system's finances, including enrollment data, are shared in public open meetings, and detailed enrollment data is also readily available in the Vermont State College system source books, which are compiled annually and made available on the Vermont State College system website. Moreover, the metrics contained in the House's budget bill include providing detailed information on enrollment levels to the General Assembly, as well as its annual profit and loss statement. I'm going to ask Sharon Scott, our Chief Financial and Operating Officer, to chime in here as well, because one of the major changes we've already implemented in the past year is moving to a system-wide budget. And Sharon can explain a little bit more about how that operates and why that's valuable. And in fact, there's a lot more financial information being shared system-wide about what the costs are and how everyone is managing their budgets. So, Sharon, if you don't mind. So, today, in fact, as of last summer, the Vermont State College's Board of Trustees elected to create a system annual operating budget. It has always had a system-wide budget, but it has been composed and comprised of each of the individual institution's budgets. But those budgets are only the unrestricted portion of the institution's funds. They don't look at the other elements of an institution's operating budget. By moving to a system-wide annual operating budget, the Board is better able to direct its attention and its resources where it is most needed within the system, augmenting where it needs to, the work that is going on. And so, our ability to be able to do that is to make sure that the institutions are fiscally sustainable and that the Board is able to move forward effectively to allocate its resources to meet the goals and objectives of the system itself. I think it's also important to note that, I mean, again, referencing the reports that I just mentioned, but Jim Page's report, the Treasurer's report, the Enchamps report, none of these institutions within the Vermont State College system are capable of surviving on their own. And so, to the extent there's concern about, and I know we have heard this, but somehow Carselton is the star of the system and somehow Carselton is going to be disadvantaged by being combined with the other two entities. This is all about the survival of Carselton as well as the other entities. So, this is not, you know, it's not about winners and losers in the system. The winners, if we can pull this off, this transformation is going to be the state and the students within the state, because the goal is for us to maintain where we're located right now to provide statewide access for students and to also meet the workforce needs of the state by making sure the programming we provide is relevant and its high quality. So, again, I'm happy to answer any additional questions that you might have. There was a piece on the annual included in this. I can happy to talk about it, but in terms of the annual budget allocation that's also included in the bill. And again, the board right now determines the base appropriation that's allocated to each of our institutions. That's public information. We've had board policy that lays that out. We previously described the history of how those state funds have been allocated. And the fact that it's the allocation model is currently suspended, was suspended by the board last summer, but we provided that information and written testimony to the committee back on March 18th of 2021. The board of trustees will be revamping the allocation formula consistent with the recommendations of the select committee. And that's in pages 89 to 90 of the final report of the select committee. Resource allocation is one of the most important tools that the board has to make sure that its strategic priorities are being served. Additionally, once we unify Castleton Northern Vermont University and Vermont Technical College under a common accreditation, the allocation will change significantly because at that point there will only be two institutions to allocate the funding to rather than the current four. The other on a more practical note, the other note I would make with regard to the proposed bill is that it states that no less than 10 days prior to the payment of any allocation or part of any allocation to any of the colleges or universities, we would be providing information about how that allocation is going to be made with the rationale. As a practical matter, we receive the appropriation on a monthly basis. So as written, it would require monthly disclosures, which again would add to the administrative burden and cost of operating the system and make it more challenging to meet our transformation goals. Finally, the branding piece, this probably is a piece that is of greatest concern. The proposed bill seeks to condition state funding on the Vermont State College system, not changing the name of any college or university within the system to a name that does not include the current name of the college or university at the beginning of its name. This seems clearly intended to protect each institution's existing brand in the belief that a name change would negatively impact enrollment, donations and business support. So it is true that a merger or unification can impact enrollment in the short term, but the Vermont State College system does need to transform in a meaningful and substantial way to become sustainable in the long term. Given the demographic challenges, the number of high school seniors in Vermont and New England is decreasing each year, with a significant decrease anticipated in 2026 as a result of the 2008 recession. Accordingly, the select committee has recommended that the Vermont State College system transform to meet the needs of all students. So we're thinking about not only the traditional 18 to 24 year old students, but also early college, high school students and also adult learners, which is a population that historically has been underserved in the state of Vermont. Therefore, we're seeking to better serve students where they are with a learning modality that works for them on a schedule that works for them with the courses, programs and credentials that provide them with the knowledge and skills they need to attain their life and career goals and at a price they can afford. We're looking to build on our workforce development and continuing education programming, creating stackable credentials and non-credit certificates that enable people to upskill and reskill. The transformation plan includes the creation of a single point of contact for employers seeking further education for their employees and to provide input on programming for short term certificate programs with clear labor market returns, developing non-credit programming to meet immediate employer needs, and seeding and nurturing entrepreneurship through the curricular and development of specialized programs. So we will be seeking to connect students to meaningful, relevant and preferably paid internships and work experiences to better prepare them for the workforce and to assist them in covering the costs of obtaining their education. We're also exploring ways to attract businesses and potential employers to locate on some of our campuses to help build working and learning communities and provide paid internship opportunities on campus. So again we're looking to build relationships with businesses. So again I hear the concern from the Rutland community about businesses, but again we do plan to work with local businesses, with employers and to reach out and build even stronger connections to those that we already have. As far as the donor community goes, when Johnson and Lyndon were unified some alumni and donors were initially unhappy about the unification, but through targeted outreach and communications, donations actually increased following unification and NVU did recently receive a multi-million dollar gift, which was the largest in Vermont State College's history. Our development alumni relations staff at the institutions are already starting to collaborate on messaging to donors and how they can strengthen their outreach by working together. We do recognize the strong attachment to institutional identities and brands that each of our institutions has, and we will be seeking ways to honor and preserve the traditions and customs that are unique to each of the affected institutions. However, it is vital to the success of the newly combined entity that we be able to create a new unifying brand and to market its strengths. We are creating a new university with an academic program array delivered across multiple campuses with a single set of policies, business processes, and administrative functions. We plan to create a singularly memorable brand that emphasizes the student focus mission of the new entity and builds on the Vermont brand to attract students from out of state. So no decisions have yet been made on the name of the name of the new entity or the brand of the new combined entity and those decisions will be grounded in market research and shaped by data. Our marketing teams from across the three institutions are currently collaborating on a request for proposals for that kind of market research. So while we will seek to market the new combined entity, this does not mean that we will not be able to market our individual campuses and programs to target audiences. Similarly, the name Castleton will continue to be associated with the Castleton campus regardless of what the new entity is called the same way that the names Johnson and Lyndon continue to be associated with the two Northern Vermont University campuses. By combining the marketing budgets and the admissions offices of the three institutions, we will be able to reach and hopefully attract more students from within Vermont, from out of state and internationally. We've also requested 5.25 million in transformation costs specifically for marketing and branding from the legislature. Some of this money will be used to ensure that all existing institution names are easily found and accessible via search engines and college search sites so that current and prospective students will easily and readily find their way to the new university. So again in very brief summary, but for us the bill represents a real shift away from the path that we're on and we do really have concerns that it could make the transformation unsustainable. It would require us to keep the status quo and the status quo just is not sustainable for the system moving forward. Thank you Chancellor. Committee questions. I'll guess I'll start if you don't mind. I'm curious about the name piece. It seems you know I think this is the kind of committee and the Senate likes to be responsive to our colleagues and certainly all of our constituents and so I'm wondering if we could get to some kind of compromise or something on this. What would be the problem with keeping you know given that our colleague, a couple of our colleagues are from Castleton area keeping at Castleton University? What's the downside? So the one would be money and two would be confusion. Three would be accreditation. So when with a single accreditation that would there will be a single name for this new created entity. So we don't yet have the name for it, but it will have we're calling it NCE. New combined entity for now. But it will have one name right and it will be accredited under that one name. So if you call it Castleton and then I'm just going to make this you know Castleton University at new combined entity. I mean one that's quite the mouthful. And two I think it's going to cause confusion. I mean it would be from a marketing perspective we need to be able to market you know come to this the new combined entity you know we have the student focus. We really want to be able to to market and brand what we're going to be doing. We're really looking at creating a very different higher education system here. We're really trying to envision it for the future. And so you know if we if we're sort of limited because of the names. I think that's going to cause a problem. I mean it's it's going to affect our ability to market and capture the students that we're looking for. And again there is nothing to preclude us if it's again new combined entity just for sake of argument at this point. To have the Castleton campus at new combined entity you know you can come you can play football you can you know do all these things this is you know you can ski you know it's great you know all the stuff is happening. We can certainly market that to those students that are interested in a more traditional you know 18 to 24 year olds looking for a residential experience and looking for programs that are based at that campus. But again the programs are going to be available statewide is that is the goal. So we can we can market that way but I think if we have if we're forced to use Castleton University at new combined entity it I mean I just think it's going to be a real struggle to be able to do that effective. What about just Castleton at new combined entity. I mean the accreditation piece you know I looked into this a little bit this morning I ended up calling Larry I think it's Shaw at the New England Commission of higher ed and you know I just wanted to talk through with him you know that the accreditation piece and said you know Brian there are nine standards to accreditation you know name is not one of them so I don't see much concern around getting things accredited as it relates to to the name. Now again this was a you know 15 minute conversation at breakfast perhaps you know he misunderstood me or I misunderstood him but it sounds like the nine standards to accreditation all this back could sort of be somehow worked around with the Commission so you know I just I'm thinking to myself historically this is you know wonderful campus wonderful community people know the name Castleton could it could we get to a compromise and I know we're not going to get to it right here but to you know again to Castleton at you know new entity University or something like that so that's just that's from where I'm at but you know wanting to be responsive to my colleagues and and their constituents. Senator Chinden. Senator Campion I had very similar comments so I see the arguments that you laid out very well Chancellor Zadattani on the financial piece and the auditing and everything that you put in put on the table I could definitely understand why I wouldn't want to split and create additional financial reporting but when it comes to the Castleton University I was more sympathetic to allowing for that the retention of that name can I just ask a clarifying question to the last thing I heard you say Chancellor Zadattani will it not be possible to accredit it as one institution if we allow for the name to be Castleton University I have dogs Castleton University at name to be determined is that not a possibility is that a showstopper for the accrediting body as far as you understand. I don't believe it's a showstopper for Netchi but I believe it will be an incredible challenge for us in terms of moving forward with the transformation I think it will make it even harder than it is right now I think it will be very difficult to market something where we've got six different place names with six different campuses before the name it were very very small you know we're not on the same scale as the SUNY system or or somewhere else I don't think there's a problem with being the new combined entity at Castleton but I think if we're leading with that it's it's going to be a dilution of the message it's really going to impact our ability to reinvent ourselves and to resell ourselves to to our students moving forward as far as Netchi goes the understanding I have is that you know it's there would be one entity that has a name that is accredited if we have students for example that start at Castleton University and then in two years time they're graduating from the new combined entity they can request to have a diploma with Castleton University on it and that's I know that's an important thing for for many students but you know the danger here is that we're going to land up just with in tremendous confusion and we just think it's really important that we have the flexibility to come up with a marketing and branding strategy that really fits with the mission and vision of the new entity and not be constrained you know by having to predetermine the names on this we live in confusion down here Chancellor and we have the Bennington battle monument that the battle happened in New York State so we've worked around it but but I understand your points Senator Hooker and then Senator Lyons please I was just going to ask the same questions that have already been asked about is this contingent upon accreditation I mean it's accreditation contingent upon having one name and it seems to me that there must be a creative way to get around this I certainly understand that there there may be some complications and maybe some confusion at first but it seems to me that there might be a way to come up with some creative way to acknowledge these individual campuses up front so I think we certainly will want to do that I mean there's certainly things that we want to preserve at you know at all of our campuses and they're going to have different personalities just like they do now but I do think it could cause confusion to students because again if you've got Castleton University at a new combined entity from the Department of Education's perspective it's new combined entity in such engines it's new combined entity I again we will do what we can to make sure that students find their way that that are familiar with Castleton and they're looking for Castleton that they will certainly find their way to Castleton as part of the new combined entity you know but it's and we will do what we can to honor and mark it and preserve the you know the things that are unique and special about each of these institutions but it just is a concern it just seems unwieldy to have again to have a one entity that is you know Johnson at New Combined Entity Lyndon at New Combined Entity Castleton at New Combined Entity and I don't know with the Vermont Technical College they might want to go with you know Technical College at New Combined Entity rather than starting with whatever the new name is and then having that be at the you know at the end rather than at the beginning send her lines so I think the issue is I think it's an important issue moving forward having a change come that feels like it's top down is somewhat confusing and also problematic and you are you represent the top there's no question about it but then the question I would have I have two questions and I have comments but so as you're looking at all of this it would be helpful to hear the process that you're going to go through now that you've heard the significant concerns and I think they are significant I don't think they're limited to the three senators from from Rutland I think that it goes beyond that I think there are a number of people who are want to know that the identity of these campuses is maintained because they have become so prominent in our state so that's that's one then of course I went to Rutgers okay and Rutgers has campuses all over the place but we always had to defend ourselves that we went to the real Rutgers not the satellite Rutgers and so I think we don't want to put ourselves in that position but I think we would want to know that perhaps we have Castleton at Vermont's Castleton Vermont State Vermont University or Northern Vermont University period that's the Northern Vermont campus it seems to me I'm hearing you talk about advertising and marketing and brochures and internet linkages that might be confusing but I don't I can't see the confusion if the if there are commonalities to all the campuses they can there are there are commonalities and there may be some really distinct flavors to campuses that can be highlighted but you know this is available at Castleton this is available at Northern Vermont this is available at CCV I don't know so I'm not I'm not feeling the same sense of confusion perhaps about my my question is what's the process that you may be going through to ensure that there's some public input to this really I think really important issue for citizens out in the state yeah so again I as I mentioned we do have we will be putting out a request for proposals to do some market research to really sort of find out what people think of think of when they think of our different institutions I think it's important to remember you know this new combined entity will be 5000 students it's still going to be very small it is significant costs at the marketing and branding if we if we're trying to maintain multiple separate different brands I think it will be costly and expensive for us to do that and I think it also sends the wrong message in terms of what we're creating we're creating a new university that's going to have this very student focused approach that we want to be available to students of all kinds across the state you know we're not reaching out solely to 18 to 24 year olds we really need to remarket ourselves to those adult learners and people that haven't found their way to to higher education before or need to complete so we really would like to be able to use the dollars we have as wisely as we can to really tell a good story about who we are and what we can do in our role here in Vermont the wide spectrum of experiences and programming that we'll have so we will have the sort of traditional residential experiences we'll have low residential experiences we'll have you know very flexible programming for you know students that are you know I just was hearing one anecdote the other day but of a a stone mason in Peacham who's been able to to take courses and complete a first year of a degree at VTC because of COVID and because everything's been online how do we preserve that and enable that person to complete a degree so we have a lot to do ahead of us we have an exciting story to tell and my concern is that this will really restrict our ability to do that and again there's no intention here to to ignore or not appreciate the history the traditions the name the past but really we want to be able to create something new and move us in the right direction and send the message that it's not the status quo we are transforming we are doing things differently it's not the same old same old where everyone can just oh well no we're we're at Linden we do things this way here or we're at Castleton we do things this way here so it is I think really important for us moving forward to have the flexibility to rethink what we're going to look like in the future and what the name will be Senator Hooker I guess I'm kind of stuck on the idea that the corporation the new the new combined entity will certainly move in a direction that I think education needs to be moving in and I appreciate all of the future differences that it will make you know the stackable credentials the connection to business and being certainly being student-centered but when you talk about a new entity it strikes me that the new combined entity isn't an entity and that Castleton University is and new you know Northern University is and VTC is they are entities they are things that you can see new combined entity you're saying that we're going to create this new university system this new university but it isn't the university it's what sort of governs the university yes okay but how do we differentiate between those things that are I guess tangible and the things that are not and is there a way so that we can maintain that connection between the things that are tangible and the the process or structure that is necessary in order to maintain them right I mean so we do have some experience obviously with Northern Vermont University because that was certainly two separate physical campuses before that came together to be Northern Vermont University so while the new combined entity is not a reality yet it will be once we get to that point in two years time so I don't know if Sharon or Catherine if you had other so I would love to hop in for just a second I was working for Johnson State College when Johnson State and Linden State were identified by our Board of Trustees as requiring to merge a top-down activity which is similar to what's being proposed today though the work has had substantially greater vetting and conversation regarding the creation of the combined entity from Castleton Northern Vermont University and Vermont Tech than what we even saw when we created Northern Vermont University Senator Hooker you referred to Northern Vermont University as an entity which it is today but in 2016 when we began that conversation it was not an entity it was two separate institutions with two very divergent cultures two different presidents two different organizational structures all operating within a single corporation we brought those groups together we brought the two institutions together and through a lot of shared conversation and shared governance we created a single general education program we identified where the strengths are for each individual location and we market those strengths but what we market more so than that for Northern Vermont University is the strength of the overall institution that you refer to we are stronger as a system and I would argue that Vermont Tech Northern Vermont University and Castleton will be stronger together as a combined institution in three years time than they can be independently on their own today and certainly when what they would look like in the future they are on shaky ground right now and their ability to be able to come together and create a vision for what that institution will be to move towards working with adult learners stackable credentials workforce education and simultaneously continuing to serve 18 to 24 year old populations is where they need to head but it's something that they need to do together in order to be able to do that in a fiscally responsible fiscally sustainable way to be able to continue to meet the needs of Vermonters across the entire state of Vermont and I'm not arguing that that's not the case I'm just saying there must be a way to hold up these traditional names if you know certainly if the institution sees that as really necessary and apparently down in this area of the state people see that as necessary there must be a way to market the whole entity this whole new system that's coming into being and yet be able to hold on to that part of tradition that is important to at least in this area and I do believe that it's important to the other areas as well I would absolutely agree with you Northern Vermont both campuses felt that way yeah no I appreciate that I just want to move us along center lines final question well I guess it's a question but so what I've heard the chancellor say is that the bill that we're looking at is contrary to what the board has indicated and contrary to the select committee recommendations is that accurate that is accurate you just shake your head you know so and so then then the question comes up what is the timing on getting to some decision about the the marketing piece and that includes the naming piece and how that will be done I guess because I'll just ask the stupid question again what's the timing on this because I probably didn't hear it I also got knocked off the internet for a little while so I may have missed it yeah so we're working on that right now again we've got our marketing teams doing markets getting ready to do a request for proposal to do some market research so that any decision we make will be data driven we will take input on that we don't have a formal process yet with the board but the board is meeting if not monthly at least every six weeks and we'll continue to do that through the summer so again we're gathering information at this point so we don't need to have the name right now but we recognize the sooner we have it the better it will be we'll help our marketing and admissions folks as they're recruiting because they're already recruiting students you know for full of of 22 and full of 23 I mean they're building those connections with students right now so it will be helpful for them to know what it is that they're selling to prospective students so we will be you know we are working on a name we will have a name I would anticipate by the end of the summer or beginning of the fall okay and if we pass this bill into law that really precludes any of the decision making that the work that's going on I guess doesn't allow for the data-driven marketing right analysis okay so I'm starting to feel a little ambivalent about all of this a whole lot in terms of sort of putting a barrier up to the work that's going on just because so much work has already gone on around all this with all due respect to my Rutland colleagues you know it's hard there's G G and there's just no question about it this is so difficult because and it is about the people who live in the area it's also about all of us who identify Castleton University at Castleton yeah so but we want it to be successful and I just I mean it's really vitally important to us that this be this transformation be successful and we just want to make sure we have all the tools that we need to have it be as successful as it can be and again there's nothing to preclude us from marketing you know why coming to Castleton and that Castleton is a great place to come to and the campus is at Castleton I'm sure it will continue to be known as Castleton we just don't want to be hamstrung in our ability to really design and envision something new that will really serve the state and the students thank you chance for Zidnodney I would if if I could just make a recommendation I have in the Senate as I said in his Lavasser yesterday seen this movie before where a senator does have a particular local issue that isn't particularly political is something that's very important to those constituents there is real outpouring of of need and direction and I've seen the Senate move to you know make these kinds of changes as recommended in the bill so I mean I don't think it's our interest necessarily to do it legislatively but I reading the room a little bit of my Senate colleagues in my history in the Senate I would recommend if you would please continue having conversations with the Rutland delegation continue seeing if there might be a path forward where this could work or we could get to some kind of compromise that would be my hope and I would certainly appreciate any efforts that you and your team might put in toward to getting to that to that point so yeah we've certainly had a lot of conversations with folks from the Rutland area I'd be more than happy to communicate with with folks in the business community and whoever about what we're dealing with and what we're confronting again the goal here is the survival of Castleton the last thing any of us want is to lose Castleton that would definitely be damaging to Rutland and to the state so we want to make higher ed had on for a minute after 16 years I think my experience would be there are things to make an institution successful and I'm not sure if the battle to change the name from where I'm sitting is the one that I would personally want to be having but again I would don't want to make these changes legislatively I'm not saying we would make these changes legislatively but I am hoping that you will all continue to work hard toward a some kind of compromise one acceptable compromise for me would be to call it Hooker University and if we could all agree on that at this point then I think the conversation is over but for now let's put this on pause and and and return to it in the meantime I am hopeful that you will all just continue those conversations as we will with our Senate colleagues so with that thank you very much thank you very much thank you okay colleagues committee we have on the agenda Governor's appointments we've heard from the Secretary of Education we have he has shared his CV with us we've gotten to know him through his hearing but also through his time with us in committee so I am wondering if someone might want to make a motion to confirm the Secretary of Education in French probably I would move that thank you Senator Chittenden has made the motion any committee questions or discussion seeing none I think Senator Perslick is your preference a roll call or just or not would you I was told by Jeannie that the process is the same for these as they are Bill so I think okay I mean the roll call all but a roll call sounds great okay Perch look votes yes Senator Hooker yes an unmuted yes Senator Lyons yes thank you Senator Chittenden I'm a creature of habit so I vote aye I'd be concerned if you did Senator Campion yes and I'd like to keep the vote open for Senator Taranzini so he has an opportunity so if we if it's okay with everyone we'll try to reach Senator Taranzini he may even be watching us now from his recovery room and hopefully we'll get to him sometime today if Jeannie if you feel kind is to reach out to Senator Taranzini that would be great and let him know that we would like his vote one way or the other for the Secretary of Education okay Senator Persley how do you want to do that do you want to wait until we're back in community or if he just emails me or calls me or how do you want to have I think I'm comfortable if he were to just put it in an email okay thank you okay why don't we just take a quick five minutes stretch and we'll return to the State Board of Education yeah point on that do we need a reporter I would like to report if unless someone is uncomfortable with that just I'd like to share that you should report it okay Secretary sir reported by the chair okay all right let's see in five minutes