 Thank you, Teresa. We are now live streaming on YouTube, so it's the official start of our Wednesday morning meeting and creation committee. And we are going to jump right in to an amendment that's being offered by Representative Donahue on the stimulus equity bill that was on the floor yesterday. And welcome, Ann. It's always good to have you. Teresa, if you could pull the amendment up and we can read it. And Ann, if you would like to just introduce yourself and for the record and walk through this very short amendment. Yes, Representative Donahue, thank you. And I guess we can walk through it first and then I'll explain from a background point of view. The walk through, as I said, is not difficult. It changes one number in subdivision A4, which currently says 18, and inserts instead the number 17. Teresa, let's go back to the squares with all of us so we can have the conversation and all see each other, because I think we can remember that change. Okay, sorry. Thank you. This came up for me just after hearing the presentation and discovering, which I hadn't known, as I said in my comments on the floor, that 17-year-olds were not included in the federal program. And my first instinct and first reaction was to say, well, this bill is about capturing people who were left out. And if 17-year-olds were a glitch in the federal system, then I would like to propose that we bring them into this bill, in other words, include 17-year-olds who did not have an immigration barrier but who were left out from the federal program. And actually, even just in hearing the further debate, it became clear that it wasn't some unintended glitch. There were reasons behind it, and it was specific to how that program had been set up. It didn't change my feelings that we were creating an additional core inequity if we were adding people based on having been left out because of their immigrant status, but not intending to add other people who would not have been in the federal program for other reasons. And that would include the definition of child as being up to age 17, but not including 17-years-old. So we would have the anomaly of creating in this new bill a category of people who became eligible because of an immigration barrier, except that they wouldn't have been eligible without the immigration barrier. That may not be, that may be an awkward way of saying it, but I think the committee understands the issue or the problem and this proposal would simply align our initiative with the way that it was handled in the federal bill. And this was the way that legislative council said it would accomplish that alignment just by changing that number. Thank you, Anne. We did take additional testimony yesterday from legislative council to understand the 17-year-old provision and those up to 24 who were dependents and Michael Grady did send. I don't know if it got sent out just to me or to everyone, and I'll check about further explanation about relatives and the CARES Act. So we did hear and fully understand that the 17-year-old was based on the tax credit definition. Are there any questions or comments that any committee members have for Anne regarding the amendment? We did take, we did have committee discussion on 18 versus 17 yesterday as well. And so if there are no questions for Anne and we did have our committee discussion yesterday and we did take a straw vote so that we would understand what others were thinking in the committee, are we ready to take a vote on this? And I put my hand up there but I just did want to essentially I was about to say the same thing that you did to Anne that we, you know, after after the discussion on the floor and hearing that you were going to propose an amendment and then getting a little bit of an indication about which direction you were going to go with your amendment. We, you know, we had much the same conversation that you've just explained and well on the floor, I assume, and came to the same conclusion that we, you know, that we would inadvertently be creating inequity among those who were left out of the CARES Act eligibility. And while I think our committee agrees that it seems there didn't seem to be a good reason in that why the feds did that, we understand how they did it or what caused it, but that it was clear that we can't rectify the federal, you know, programs oversight with state money. And so, like I say, we can't have come really to the same conclusion that in order to in order to do what we've always intended to do, which is to provide equity between those folks who were eligible for the CARES Act and those folks who were not because of immigration status, that we will, I'm about to recommend that we find your amendment favorable. Thank you, Chip. Is there a second? We need a second, okay. And Mary, go ahead. Just in the vein of discussion, I wanted to say what Chip already said, so I won't attempt to say it again, other than to say I hope that the feds will address this inequity at the federal level. And then when that is taken care of there, that we will have an opportunity again at the state level to fill in gaps that may have been created. So this is not the end of a conversation. I think it's an excellent catch. And thank you, Anne. Going forward, I think we're going to continue to try to right wrongs. Thanks. Thank you, Mary. Anne? I would just say I echo that. As I said, my first instinct was to say, well, let's bring in that missing group. This is about equity, and that became clear that that was not a viable way. So I appreciate and agree with Representative Hooper on future hope. Legislative counsel yesterday did state that it's on the radar, but whether, I mean, we have no idea to know what will happen at the federal level, but the good piece is that our fiscal note includes this. It would be a very small catchment in this group that we're trying to address. And so the fiscal note, if that changes on the federal level that we have the capacity within this bill to address the 17-year-olds. All right. And so we have a motion on the floor. We have a second. Is there any other further discussion? If not, I would ask the clerk to call the roll. Thank you, Madam Chair. Representative Conquest. Yes. Representative Fagan. Yes. Representative Feltas. Yes. Representative Helm. We'll continue. I'll come back again. Next, Bob, that we're on a roll call, please. Representative Hooper. Yes. Representative Jessup. Yes. Representative Lanford. Yes. Representative Myers. Yes. Representative Townsend. Yes. Representative Yackeloni. Yes. Representative Toll. Yes. Great. Bob. Yes, because he is here and not absent, I just need him to unmute. Bob, can you hear me? Because if you are present, I believe you should vote. His ceiling is present. Excuse me? His ceiling is present anyway. Yes. I see his shoulder. I see a bit of his shoulder. Yeah, I do too. I'm giving him a quick call. Mary. You're closest, Mary. Yeah. Okay, Mary. Diane, we will hold the vote open as long as Bob is here. Okay, I'm not getting an answer. I know that he is, he's doing business, he's working at the same time. Okay, Anne, thank you very much for coming in. We appreciate your attention on the floor and we look forward to supporting your amendment once we get back to the floor this afternoon. Thank you very much. So before we close that amendment, I will wait for Bob to come back and vote. I did want to walk over the documents with everyone, the documents that we're going to see at the caucus of the whole at two o'clock. Yes. Just before we leave this, can I just tell the committee what I found out about the penalties for disclosure of personally identifying information? Yeah, but first I want to take Bob's vote, Bob. I'm sorry. That's okay. We just took a roll call vote on the Donahue amendment, which was to follow the federal guidelines and change our 18 year old date back to 17. At this time, all members have voted and the vote is 10-0 and we would like your vote. You've got it on me, yes. Thank you, Bob. And I appreciate very much your tolerance of me. I couldn't avoid that phone call. No, I explained to the committee that you have a job and you're working at the same time and so you're playing some balls. Just keep them all in the air, Bob. Don't let them drop. Yeah, that's a problem. They always stay in the air. They never come down. So Chip, it's 11-0-0 and you're going to report this one right. Okay. Okay, Teresa, you'll do the work to electronically send that out and Chip, you'll confirm it. Yeah, do I have to do anything with a clerk's office? No, you don't need to do anything and when you're on the floor with the amendment, you would just say that the committee goes in. Great. Thank you. I just wanted to give the committee a quick heads up so you have the information before I say it to the rest of the folks on the floor. So yesterday, Mike Yantoschka had asked me what the penalties were for disclosure of personally identifying information and I said that I didn't know but that I would get back to him with the answer and that I would let the body know. It turns out that essentially there really are no penalties for that. According to Michael Grady who checked with Becky Wasserman who actually drafted the legislation that's referred to in our bill, that there are no penalties set forth under that section, 20 BSA, 46-51. The Judiciary Committees at the time chose not to impose a criminal or civil penalty. The Attorney General could seek an injunction or other equitable relief but that's not, you know, that's just sort of a general power that the Attorney General has and not a penalty associated with that particular prohibition about releasing that information. I'll say that and I will probably suggest that the, this is an area that Legislature may very well want to look into because it's not just in our bill that we have a prohibition against releasing that kind of information and if there's no penalty that there's no real, weakens the prohibition. Thank you Chip for looking into that and the point that you said it was a decision made by the Judiciary Committee not to impose them and your recommendation is going to be to, this is a January issue, knowing the fast track that we're on now to try to develop penalties in a policy committee to catch up with a bill we won't be here that long in September so that that will be a part of your, for the committees of jurisdiction to look at it when we return. Thank you. Questions for Chip on the penalties? No I'm just surprised. Yeah thank you, thank you Chip. Now I'd like to just turn quickly to our presentation that we're going to do at two o'clock this afternoon. We have several documents that went out to the full legislature last night and I just want to make sure that our committee is completely clear with the documents so if there's questions and then you're in your section you know you'll know the directions that you need to go with your responses. Theresa do you want to put the CRF one up first please? Sure and what I am going to do is I'm going to outline these documents I'm not going to walk through them line by line by line or we'll be there until Saturday. They're very self-explanatory and but then we have to remember our committee sees these things all the time and so the numbers and the notations all mean a lot to us because we see them all the time but when we come to the coronavirus relief fund appropriations the CRF appropriations I'm going to ask members to drop to the back page and to look at box B. Theresa if you could go to box B on the back page on the last page yeah yep it's on the back side double printed. So this is where I think that it would be good to start and it shows the 1.25 and then if you go down to the next two lines it shows what we what the Joint Fiscal Committee had had within their purview and it was the administration could ask for 75 million in emergency needs when the legislature was not in session or even if we were and it needed to move quickly and then the next piece 150,000 were other items that the administration could propose that the Joint Fiscal Committee could act on and so that is the the 225 million that that went to the Joint Fiscal Committee and the administrative administration's needs. The next pieces are all actions that we did in June and it shows the the bill not the bill number but the act number and you can see all of the work that we did in June for a total of 826 and so with the 826 in the Joint Fiscal amount it was just over 1 billion of the 1.25 that went out the door which left the that left the legislature with 198 million to include in our work since we returned in August so if you take that 198 million and you go to the section just above here so go up on the screen Teresa to the section just above this right here stop right here below the lime green line you will see that 198 million that's the that's the amount that we needed to appropriate in in our budget however there were some other moving pieces in the Joint Fiscal Emergency Fund there was 2.5 million that wasn't spent that we brought back to be used in our bill we were able to use FEMA dollars to cover some CRF money and so that FEMA money paid for those eligible costs and it freed up an estimate of about 20 million we do not have a solid number of what the governor's number was I think it's higher than this it's changed and and some agencies were I don't know planning to use it so we didn't have a solid number there and I didn't want to guess and so we used 20 million because that is what the house used as a number for FEMA eligible expenses and then in Act 108 the municipal borrowing bill that we put out to help municipalities that time frame that that time limit has gone and all of the applications came in it left 2.7 million of of those total dollars and so that's why our 198 turned into 223.549 million does that make sense to everybody do you think people on the floor are going to follow me on that no I see a no no but they'll understand that we balanced okay so the next page go to the top of the front page Teresa kitty yes I was asked that question I explained it without this sheet to someone and they understood it so I think you'll be fine okay good yay I think it's helpful so the the sheet here shows that in the budget bill the very top box these are all the CRF dollars that we used in the budget the governor had proposed 18 plus million the reason it's 41 is because we used additional money to secure general fund for the Vermont state colleges and so we found areas where there were eligible costs that CRF money would fit the definition that we felt very comfortable with within public safety and the health department and the need for the state colleges was 23.8 million and when we took when we did the swap with the health department they needed an additional bump of CRF money to cover eligible costs so it was just over 24 CRF in that whole construct and and with the transportation pieces that were swapped out so the governor had 18 and then we did another 24 and that and you know there's some odd numbers there 18 plus and 24 plus and that's where in our big bill we see 41 million of CRF dollars marveled throughout the bill in different appropriations where CRF expenses we found eligible expenses and we use these dollars to pay for them and it freed up some general fund for us to close a budget without making reductions in programs and services the only difference is the governor used CRF for the state colleges if the guidance changed and instead we found where CRF could be used and then gave the state colleges the general fund we just did a swap you think that will be clear kitty yes um i know that we have said that the gov had 18 marveled throughout the budget if you look at that line item so thinking about your presentation the bottom total appropriations section says 16.9 so you need to put those two numbers together oh i gotta have to thank you i'm gonna i always thought the number was 18 million and either i'm wrong with the number or there's another million plus um and steve on teresa thank you mary for looking at that number i never even paid attention to that 16.9 yeah i can ask steve to jump in yeah when adam did his presentation i'm sure adam used the number 18 because i have it in my notes several so we've we've talked about 18 but yeah thank you excellent mary and i will uh get that straightened out so then i'm wondering i'm wondering if it's the unused that 2.5 that he i don't know i'm just now i'm just speculating i'll be quiet okay so let's go down to the one time and part of the budget bill also includes the remainder of the crf dollars we use dollars within the budgets you know our budget sections but then the committees of jurisdiction worked with our committee members and these were all of the additional crf dollars that we chose that that now spends the 1.25 million and these were within that we worked with within the committee of jurisdiction and some that we brought to the table from our committee and um and i think that people will remember if they're in uh the education committee of the independent colleges and uvm and the need for the pre-k through 12 system and this is where that would be um mike marcox committee the accd the 100 million is here and his committee can speak to those needs uh the health care committee can see their 1 million for health equity and all of those are listed and then the last piece at the very bottom are um are set asides and we did set aside 15 million for the hazard pay bill uh we know that this is a work in progress and this is an unusual unsettled year the the ground is is moving that can move between 15 million to 22 million and um we will have to make adjustments or there's a possibility of additional thema monies that will um offset or make available crf money so there's still lots of moving pieces and that is what if you pick up a little bit Teresa so we can see the waterfall there uh we've set aside the 15 million um for eligible use for hazard pay and then the governor had some other pieces in his waterfall we took care of the bsc bridge and did an alternative and then the other pieces um the um secretary of state um the australian ballots it's uh it's a 21 issue and so it doesn't fit the guidance that's why it was in his waterfall and to tie the money up uh you know we we have used it up above and um if there's guidance changes or more money that comes in we can make adjustments the military spring tuition we um we is reflected above we made the decision to reflect that um in the uh agency of administration that was spring tuition we did the fall we did the spring thank you thank you for noticing that peter and that's the same issue it's it's it's beyond and and so it doesn't fit the eligibility criteria at this time and the grant porthole there was testimony um uh we had sent in um i had asked actually from the joint fiscal committee to understand some of the um it project more and uh dan smith who is our it person on contract in the joint fiscal office wrote back about this and um we the the um so when it went out to the policy committees for um you know to to be considered the recommendation from the joint fiscal office the it individual was this is really a larger policy question and decision and so it's probably a january issue uh that that needs more time and attention and there were some timing issues involved there can i just ask what the what's the erp solution that was another one that um that came to the uh joint fiscal office and uh marty you can speak can you speak to the this it project that ads wanted to do the erp i don't remember the erp yes erp means enterprise resource something or other i can't remember um and they had originally asked for five that i think perhaps jfc is maybe still looking at but another 10 was to extend it's for the human resources department it's the first five they asked for was to help them with onboarding employees and performance management and then and that's a shorter term project the remaining 10 was a longer term project so that was partially the problem because it was it would take many months to to implement the 10 million dollars which would modernize the payments the accounts receivable systems within the human resources department and uh i remember the number one felt that number one it could not be done in a short amount of time so timing and guidance changes were needed for uh these waterfall pieces thank you marty so that is the crf piece and then if we can go quickly to reset to the highlights um kitty can we just answer one question for you i'm sorry about what you had at the top of the sheet the 16.9 yeah um steve just sent me a text and in the b section right underneath there is 1.5 just a little bit more trees oh there you go one five five seven four three eight that would that if you add those two numbers together for the transportation COVID expenses it'll get you up to the 18.55 that we were talking about before but why is that one down there the aot it's actually appropriated in the b section it's um in the one-time list that's where it was where it was put in the bill so if those are the two numbers that add up to your 18 yeah yeah it's one time money so that they we appropriated in the one-time list okay even though all the above is really one time too it yeah but i guess that there was a yes it's a good question um it's i think it may have been uh you know that's a i i don't know the answer to that question i'll try to figure out why that one time was unique i think there's a reason but i will register thank you if that comes up i'll just um relate if they heard the 18 million that those pieces added together thank you kitty yep maybe just a general kind of question this afternoon for the caucus of the whole when you're referring to these documents we will we have the capacity to have them actually show on the screen or are we relying on people to pull up these documents individually i cannot answer that marisa can you answer that will we be able to put these up on the screen i think so yes we should be able to so um i i don't know the protocol for the clerks office i i just don't know i mean that's something somebody will i can ask bill magill okay or um or somebody can ask jill what the person made that that's a that's a great point um i made it wonder will you run this down with jill and see sure i will my my concern would be my concern would be that you could be halfway through this before some people even find the chart yep you're right yeah i'll ask jill yeah okay thank you thank you and if we could go to the highlight sheet now and we do have a bill number is it on the new highlight sheet it's 969 oh linda did you have a question i'm sorry yeah i had a question about the highlight sheet as a matter of fact so glad you moved there in your second paragraph it says that a list of CR investments will be found on the backside of the document it's a second paragraph yeah i'm going to change that i don't see any time that was a separate document in the email to members last night and i just need to adjust that sentence i just haven't had time okay so that sentence is going to come out thank you linda for that uh yesterday um mary had brought up a piece um teresa took copious notes and and to say that which we really need to state this is a balanced budget that is consistent with house spending priorities and spending priorities would be you know if i'm asked what are these spending priorities one would be uh justice reinvestment you know that bill passed the house and and um it wasn't in it and and we made um you know we you know we made the decision to reinvest those general dollars into our justice system if you can think of other good examples that you know i'll let you guys bring the other pieces it invest it keeps our reserves full it invests in local economies with i mean look at the crf money we're you know putting millions and millions into our local economies it does not cut programs and it protects vulnerable for monters and then these were the key uh some of the key spending priorities that we had gone over yesterday so does that do this does this do this um does this work for the committee as long as we take out linda had seen that edit that needs to be done on a list of investments on the back side and teresa you have the bill number at the top thank you teresa or kitty i think that this your comments on the highlights are outstanding as someone who used to be a newspaper reporter and wanted to know just the facts this is very very good it's i think people will be able to read it and really get a good feel for what we're talking about for and you're going to do that today during the caucus of the whole correct yes yes well i think it's great so that's my opinion thank you and um maria gets all the kudos and then you had your hand up yeah kitty fifth bullet from the bottom talks about court diversion and it says in response to lost revenues are we supposed to be talking about revenue replacement uh yeah let's take that off funds uh 162 000 for court uh well actually this is general fund this is general fund mary sorry never mind sorry okay and then uh who else has a thank you i didn't quite catch what linda's comment where where is that edit so i'll just mark it second paragraph the last the last sentence in the second paragraph a list of investments on the back side which is not there okay now the next document is the operating statement and i looked at this and i was like what kitty oh sorry dav yes go ahead dav i didn't mean to interrupt you but i just wanted to jump in and this is just um then this is a balanced budget that line yes are you following with me yes i am investing local at economies does not cut programs and protects vulnerable brahmanters um when i sat here i said well it preserved services for vulnerable brahmanters if i weren't on this committee and depending on what kind of mood i was in i would i would um i would give a list of all the things that were unable to do to help them including raises for their caregivers etc etc now probably no one else perhaps no one else is of that mind on the floor because you could argue well you know uh preserving services protects them yes it does but anyways it's just uh i doubt if that will come up but if it does i think we need to be able to speak to it well i think that we have plenty of room there and i think we could write preserved services to protect vulnerable brahmanters where we're preserving services to protect it may seem like a nuance but it's not to me okay so would you agree that we can do preserved services to protect vulnerable brahmanters yeah i i don't know if we need to say for sure we're going to say preserved services for vulnerable brahmanters okay either way which way do you want to go i'm going to make this dave uh they got the word protect and put preserved services okay preserved services and i just want to go thank you committee do i thank you sorry to be so anal and picky no it's important dave and does anyone have an opposition for preserving services to vulnerable brahmanters instead of protects hearing no opposition maria would you put that in or theresa whoever yeah i'll talk to theresa one of us will fix it thank you okay thank you dave it is important and distinct anything else before we leave this page and go to the operating statement okay let's go to the operating statement and i was like you know so the operating statement is i'm gonna i'm gonna work on move this use this one backwards too like i did with crf i like how it's done it just makes sense to do it are you talking about the gf balance sheet gf summary and outlook yes this is just general fund okay so um we're not talking about crf or transportation or special funds this is a gf sheet okay so um what i was going to do is bring the attention first um to the very bottom where the reserves are listed and this shows that our reserves are intact we did not have to use them in the steady state budget this is building capacity for difficult decisions in january and it shows the totals um of f y 20 that gray is the or is the early bill that we that we got and then we have the restated budget and then we have the house's decision and the far right column so um as you can see the governor's um proposal and our proposal we are he didn't use our reserves we didn't use reserves and we're counting the same amount for the number of reserves 22 228 million dollars in reserves and it it shows the funds then i'm going to bring the the caucus back up to the very top and i'm not going to go through this line by line but there's a couple really important lines the very first line where it says current law revenue that amount that that is from the official forecast the general fund from the official forecast coming into this budget and it agrees with the governors because we have a joint agreed upon fiscal forecast is 1.4 billion dollars and then the next line down just so that people understand the next line down that 181.1 is due to deferred taxes remember our taxes were pushed out uh april and this is the july number the 181.1 and then we have all of those uh small moving pieces you know with reversions and direct applications and property transfer tax um and if you look at the property transfer tax our number is different than the governors by just a bit because um he had 14.6 we had 14.5 and that is because we created a capacity within within BHCB for the grant writer of a hundred thousand dollars and that's why that number is different um the reversions we were able to revert a bit more money four hundred thousand dollars more so that's the only difference there and then it drops down to the total revenue of 1.7 billion and it's very close to the governor's number except for that small reversion and the in our in our priority to um fund the the grant writer uh the next piece are all of our appropriations which include base appropriations the pay act and it brings us down to a subtotal and then we have a placeholder for uh other one-time appropriations which uh our one-time appropriations are higher than the governors and steve i need some help there what would account for that that higher one-time appropriation is that all the state no that wouldn't be the state colleges steve i need help with that line are you there steve aha i'll come back to that one steve which one are you saying um other one-time appropriations where the governor had 11.3 and ours is 25.9 i think that is the um the isn't that just the one-time appropriations in your bill and i we haven't itemized those but uh it's uh uh the biggest one i'm trying to think what the push was barry do you have a thought on this one what the big i i have to i wonder if the biggest one of that is the um uh the um state brawn state colleges which is 23.8 but i let me double check that yeah that's what i wondered if that was the brawn state college so i will have an explanation for that one on the floor yeah our total our total appropriations uh the governor was 1.661 were 1.666 marty now you enter him i'm sorry yes i why do we have two lines that says other bills oh yeah i think different numbers in them i don't understand that because one is the governor's other bills that he was accounting for the 5.1 and ours is uh 7.6 and that's because we added money i believe that that accounts for some of the added money to the stimulus equity he had the 2 million and plus he may have been accounting differently for other bills so the other bills we have in the 7.6 is the 5 million of total now this is all gf steve so we have yeah 5 million because we had 5 million for of course that is a 5 million for um the stimulus equity bill the 5.88 is a placeholder for the climate bill the 1 million for um the primary care piece and that's five six fifty steve give me the extra million where the other bill is what is the other bill kitty while he's waiting the the difference between the governor and us on this equity stimulus is only three million not five because he had two already in right right which which would be reflected in these numbers but he may have reflected i'm not sure what he what he was accounting for in the other bills so i do need steve to um walk us through how we got to those two numbers and when he gets back on we'll go back to the other bills i'll also have to i'll get back to the governor's right so if you could the governor's equity was two million in one time right as opposed to a bill that's right you're right about that so uh steve we're going to need um i'm going to need a sheet that explains the other one-time appropriations and the other bills that make up those numbers and how we're different from the administration's proposal do you see where i mean teresa can you highlight the two yeah and i may bring sephine on to do that but i'll i'll i'll get okay okay and then as soon as we get that we will put that out to the committee and then the next piece are just the differences in in you know what we agreed with and um what was proposed by the administration with the transfers we transferred to iraq that was a decision we made uh we transferred um the 1.7 from the tobacco litigation in our bill and steve that would have been um the 1.7 was for two pieces i believe 1.6 was out of the attorney general okay and then where was the other hundred thousand steve so which one are we asking about we are asking about the transfer from the tobacco litigation fund 1.6 additional came in from the attorney general but was that one it's actually a rounding error because it's 1.656 that came in from the attorney general and so it rounds to 1.7 thank you kitty yep that was additional money that came in from the ag after the governor had presented his statement budget peter so to answer your other slash one time appropriations of general fund totaling 25.9 all of that can be found in the b 1100 a section of the of the web report the biggest pieces are the vermont state college system restructuring the dam whistle i had to say that sorry uh and the the the cut broadband of 1.5 million so if you look at the at the vermont state college restructuring and 23.8 plus the cut uh the the cud broadband of 1.5 you're almost there and then there's a bunch of small numbers thank you peter so if we go to b 1100 a the 1100 a they'll find it and that's our whole list of one time appropriations thank you peter did you get to those that this big so stephanie is on in case you want to do the other bills bob are you asking me a question nope i think he was talking to somebody else okay let's uh while stephanie is on let's go through the other bills uh stephanie can you give us um i apologize my phone is ringing i just have to get rid of this phone for a second that's fine we all uh try to fiscal this is stephanie i can't talk i'm gonna i'm gonna zoom okay all right bye yep uh so other bills are you talking to the difference between 5.1 and 7.6 is that what you're asking so in the governor's list the other bills are uh the five million dollars that would in the court q1 bill um and the um tiny bit of per diem money for something um the five the five million refresh my memory in the q five million for state college bridge money q1 oh okay okay that was ours too yes that's part that five million is part of your seven point six yes the other thing that's part of your seven point six is the two million dollars general fund for the migrant workers that two million dollars in the governor's was part of a list in his big bill it wasn't in another bill okay okay and then the last piece of it is the global warming those are the differences okay so it's the five million for the state college bridge from q1 right yep and it's the two million in a separate bill for uh the additional money for the um for the stimulus yeah for the general fund portion of that five million okay gm and then it's the five hundred and eighty six thousand dollars for the um five eighty six for climate and then there's that little there's a little tiny bit of per diem in there somewhere too the same as the governor yep it's just that they were in different places you you've moved things into other bills that were in the big bill etc thank you just you're welcome to your areas thank you so much okay are you finished with me never okay but at least for now okay thank you bye bye all right so that was uh any questions on I think that was I mean that totally cleared up the the um five point one versus seven point six and then um the other pieces are all uh very clear um and then we already talked about the reserves any any other questions on this sheet and I'm just afraid this is going to open up a gazillion questions on the floor but um that's good you know it's it's um it's there and then the last piece that will be on the floor Teresa do you have the appropriations by funds it shows from 16 f y 16 20 21 restated it's all the percentages the general fund increase the total spending of all the budgets it looks like this no no we don't have that okay and that one I haven't sent it around yet I just got it completed this morning I'm going to put on the screen and then I will send it to everybody and put it in the one drive and it has been posted on uh gfo thank you and kitty kitty well things are getting squared away here um message with regard to this afternoon um following up on can we get these up on the screen these documents while you're speaking about them um the response is um the clerk uh says they can do that but want you to be aware it would be a static screen so no one would be able to see either you or anyone asking questions if you're okay with a static screen without your picture or the picture of whoever it might be asking a question if you're okay with that then they can put up the documents as you're speaking about them sure so what we would do is go through a section at a time and then take it down and ask questions so I should let them know that it's okay yeah because I think people will be totally confused if it's not yeah and I'll ask it I'll ask Jill to find out so what what we need to do it are and to make this happen yeah yeah okay thank you okay so this is this is um Marty go ahead before I go over the sheet are are we going to have a sheet on the ed fund outlook as well we have general fund outlook transportation fund outlook I don't know where is the ed fund outlook Steve do we have an ed fund outlook we and I'm not going to go over the t fund outlook uh because we're going to let the transportation committee do that we can put one up it's a it's a good question we don't always do it but um it's probably not given we're giving them the full court press maybe we should well it's a whole budget I think we need to include it so in my presentation Marty I'll make reference to the ed fund outlook in the t fund outlook but I'm going to I'm really going to focus the budget in because I think those are going to have to be questions that that go out to the transportation committee and the education committee but yes the problem with the ed fund outlook is just even more it's really long and very convoluted and I think that one could really raise the issues you're raising about questions that we would have to refer to someone else so but let me let me talk to Mark see what we can do with that okay perfect Steve thank you so on the you can see the lines for 16 20 governors restated and where we are with our budget so the general fund I want to zoom in first and and the number I want to go to is the f y 20 number that is 1.607 and we have to remember that that's an artificially low number because our tax revenue didn't come in until the next fiscal year and also we know the pandemic caused havoc with restaurants and hotels and so that impacted tax you know tax income that that typically comes in for rooms and meals and we do not tax food which is a good thing in Vermont but if if we look at where most of the spending was in that last part of the year there was much more spending on food than there even was on gasoline hotels restaurants and all of that so we have an artificially low number there and then in the governor's restated budget you will see that that number significantly and then ours moves up a tiny bit over his due to the moving pieces but the general fund growth from 20 to 21 the year over year growth is 3.7 and and that's just due to the unusual nature of what COVID-19 did for fiscal year 20 compared to the a great amount of one-time money that popped into 21 and Steve did I accurately you're not listening to me so I'm going to say I am listening yes and you were right it's a lot of it is that that factor the difference between the governor and you is about 0.2 percent or you know there between the difference of five million dollars there is given our general fund is 1.6 is putting 0.2 and 0.3 percent so the governor's growth rate would have been around 3.4 maybe I don't know where the rounding error would have been so you're exactly right it has to do with the when the money came in and when we were spent it and kitty kitty I'm sorry I might have missed this why is it FY 16 oh we are five-year look back oh okay that's the got it thank you over in the right yeah it's just a five-year look back okay thanks thanks sorry and then if you go down to total appropriations the 7.1 is a very big budget but we have to remember in that 7.1 we have 1.25 billion dollars of federal money that come in and and if you look at the federal fund and CRF fund the percent change of what typically would come in went up 358 percent where are you I'm looking at see that 358 percent is due to the unusual nature of the amount of federal dollars that came into that came into the state and some of those we spent in fiscal year 20 and some we spent in fiscal year 21 but the year over year growth is huge because most of them landed in 21 and so we wouldn't typically have a 7.1 billion dollar budget but it's it's due to the large amount of the federal dollars that came in and that is if we look at all state funds that is all state other let's see if we look at all state funds and include the education fund it's a 3.5 percent growth and the five-year growth is 2.7 from fiscal year 16 so we've always done a year over year growth and a five-year range and that is as much detail as I'm going to go in people ask for a line by line you know the transportation and tip I would send to whoever's here from the transportation committee they're dropping like flies I think the chair may be back so that would be great and then the ed fund I would give to the ed fund committee to to comment on or to the ways and means committee yeah we will be posting an ed fund analogy okay thank you Steve any questions from any members on this sheet and as you can see this has already taken up a lot of the hour time for the caucus of the whole and so I'm going to try to narrow it as much as we can and make sure that there's time that you know we really get to the highlight sheet about the things that our budget does and I think I will start with that what does the committee think Mary well I was just thinking about where to focus and I think the vast majority of members are interested in policy and understand things through narrative rather than through balance sheets and so I would tend to focus on the the narrative of the work of the of the budget rather than the balance sheet perhaps hitting very high level the summary statements on each of the different balance sheets but not walking them through now how it adds up well even to the degree that you walked us through right now you were explaining to us but I think I would do kind of here it is at the top and here it is at the bottom moving on to the next thing yeah and the operating statement I think you're right that the money that they came in this 1.7 and the money that went out is 1.6 and all of the pieces are moving pieces but I do want to reference the reserves but you know and to allow for time I you're right that's the we're only going to be able to do the very highlights but I do want to spend most of the time on the you know our rest our restated budget that you know that shows the investments that we made and it's a steady state Kimberly Mary were you done Kimberly I just wanted to say I found that last chart extremely helpful when you it's the percentage terms which gives you and it also just highlights the idea that this is not a normal year remember the tax deferral look at the huge percentage in CRF fund so I for what it's worth I personally found that that last chart particularly the percent column as a nice setup but that's just that's me that's what's going to happen on the floor some are going to be interested in the narrative some are going to want the detail and and we have an hour so we'll see how it we'll see how it goes Dave you know I was thinking I just thought this was a great hour a great presentation it was really helpful information granted I've been at this table for many months so it's easier for me to follow the many but what I was thinking is you could always say members for those who want a deeper dive listen to our YouTube video watch this video of what we just did and that will give you a much deeper appreciation than any of us could cover on the floor of the house it's it's difficult but you know I often follow committees and I I slow it down watch it twice etc and some of our members appreciate that detail it's right here captured on YouTube with what you just did kitty just just my comments I'm writing this note right now Dave I think that's an excellent idea to dive watch this morning's house appropriations committee YouTube video thank you thank you I think that's a great idea okay so I'll see everybody on the floor at two for our walkthrough and kitty yep just fyi my last message to Jill was does Teresa need to forward our documents clerk or what I don't have a response yet but I'll stay on that and be in touch with Teresa I can make a list and a link to each document we have to add the growth chart and when I get the education fund outlook so I'll make a list and send it directly to you Maida and you can forward it on to Jill or whoever oh okay good idea okay okay okay thank you and Peter you've been really good with timing if there's four documents and I do one at a time and we open up to questions after each document I think we're going to have to time this otherwise you know if in each document doesn't need 15 minutes you know the the the summary sheet's going to meet need more time and the I would say the CRF bill is going to be more time and I would just leave you know 10 minutes for those last two documents and give the the major time so when if you would just think in your head about a timing and I will I will just say to members that if they have additional questions to reach out to anyone to answer these questions and we can walk them through any of the sheet in individually and kitty I think if you stick with with Mary's recommendation you're going to avoid really going deep on any of the documents other than other than you know where the policy leads us and that'll that will give the members time to ask a few questions probably not all they're going to want to ask but we can handle that on the floor when we get there yeah sounds good kitty and yes chef if members have questions tell them to ask anybody but chef abc anybody but chef I'll remember that I might I might say that chef okay so uh work and I think that we're ready to go for the caucus of the whole and is everybody good with their five their their five minute presentations uh you you know who you're yielding to you know uh where you used to sit at the table we haven't been there in a long that that's for tomorrow right that's for tomorrow yeah make sure that if you are going to yield to for when questions start coming up except for the transportation is Bob uh tim corkman's going to walk through that as part of our you know like a member of our committee but when make sure that you reach out to anyone that you're going to yield to to answer questions you know so Dave if you're going to answer all the equity health equity questions on crf terrific but if you're going to turn it over to bill make sure he knows you know I've just used you as an example of is you were at my eyesight in the screen so don't catch any chair other committee member off guard make sure they know uh they're they're getting their questions and chip I don't know are you going to handle the ed questions or are you going to go to Kate you'll decide that I don't need to know okay uh Bob yeah I don't have uh and I don't think I remember ever seeing one a list of members presentations and in order if you know what I mean so I know when I'm coming up there is we're going to go around the table I'm going to start and we're going to go clockwise it's going to go me to Peter tomato to Marty to Diane Diane oops sit that around then we're going to jump over to Linda and Linda will do Kimberly and Kimberly will do chip and then you're at the end of that side so chip yields to you and then you yield to Mary and then Mary yields back to me so we're going to go right around the table and you get one shot to get all your information out and so I do all my sections in one setting yes you do yep and you get five minutes and the only difference in yours is we have a transportation bill in the budget so you're going to have a few yield the Corcoran for that and he'll yield back I'll do my little piece yeah all but transportation I may talk just a whisker about transportation but then it's going to Tim and he'll be about two minutes yeah perfect and then make sure he yields back to you okay he goes back to me and I go back to Mary from there yep yeah exactly yeah depending on how you want this structure you may want to do transportation first and then finish up your other budgets and then yield to Mary however you do it's up to you right okay Mary I keep forgetting that no you won't we won't let you sure I was thinking of putting the section numbers of my budget in the chat when we do the presentation so we've talked about how to refer people to the different sections and rather than saying the words I was wondering about saying you can look in the chat and you know find the section numbers I'm curious and it looks like it's possible to do that um I curious what you guys think can I interject for a second just no possibility people are hating it I well I mean it's not a bad idea except for um I think then the public needs to see that and then public can't see the chat all right never mind just a thought I'm watching everybody's face they think it's a terrible idea depending on what kind of device you have you can't see or get to the chat easily chat okay right thank you and if our live streaming are we still live streaming on npr for your sessions on vpr sorry on vpr if we're still live streaming then the people listening would have to section numbers it's a good thought Mary but I was more curious how you are going to present and be typing your sections at the time I was going to do it in advance you can drop a document into the chat well you're more technologically savvy than the rest of us and I think some members might get confused how to go and look I like I would be left behind on that one but it's a good thought me too okay any other question if I may kitty your day yes kitty yes um I was going to do my presentation in alphabetical order based on what's been assigned to us um but maybe others are going in numerical order does it matter nope just just no matter what order I present my sections no I don't think so as I wanted I just organize it just give people just give people time to get to that section you know if they if they're moving through it give them you know give the you know pause for a couple seconds um and we're going to use the calendar uh for page numbers um yeah but the calendar won't be out till thank you the calendar won't be out until I know won't it be out tonight maybe tonight yeah late tonight it should be out yeah yeah hopefully late after we get off after we get off the floor I don't think we have time I feel like I'm not going to have time to give people a chance to get there if I'm going to be in five minutes I can't wait for people to get there I'm going to have to say be up be uh 511 and then talk what I'm going to talk about it and move on I think it will be helpful to use the page numbers in the calendar I think people will and if today I will tell them that we will be using the page numbers from the calendar and moving quickly I will mention that just can't wait very long for them to get there okay okay I was not even going to mention budgets I was just going to say that this these are where I'm responsible I'm only going to talk about the budgets that have significant impacts and I'm not even going to talk about even reference b106 finance I'm just not even going to go there yeah that's how I was going to do it okay um I think I think however you feel it it works for you and then yeah that's question then you can then go back well you find this question here you know yeah the only the only thing that I find as a gap is that by not referencing it at all they won't know uh well they might see it in the book and say who's got b106 and that would be me and I know that okay so there there's there's numbers there's language and then crf so please do this big crf spending last and don't worry about the big crf that's marveled through the whole budget I'm going to cover that in my opening remarks except that I'm going to talk about the commerce crf money correct uh yep you are and and then and yes 100 million I just meant the 18 million that the governor put in that 18 million there's a little bit here and there I'll mention that that's all marveled throughout the budget but then that larger appropriation you guys will all highlight marty will do the cuds you will do the 100 million Dave will do the health equity um mary will do the da's I'm doing the adult days meals on wheels on wheels yeah peter will do the state colleges typically education yeah you'll do i oh peter will do higher ed and you'll do the pre-k through 12 but when you say the stuff that's marveled throughout you mean the stuff that we went over there was the new crf that there was on this sheet yeah you know like um like that 16.9 where where there were just swap outs for things but peter may want to talk about um the 74 the 74 um million for the military kitty i'm i'm i'm not even really going to mention it unless somebody wants to know why it's it's not okay yeah all we're doing is is changing money there's really no nothing else involved so i don't see it as substantial change um this is just really swapping out crf money for general fund for eligible expenses so it's not going to take me no it's going to take me time to explain the vermont state college and and you know i've got to start with the rules as to the reason why it's going to allow us to do this and that's what i'm gonna do and work my way through that and then i've got to talk about the uh the the newborn uh piece not being extended this year so you know it's that's going to be most of my five minutes right there um the only question some of you may get is you know how are they able to find eligible costs in dcf reach up for five million and so kimberley if you know you can give some examples of how crf was able to pay for uh some of those eligible costs or within um the criminal justice training council there was 13 000 you know what what kind of eligible costs were they i have the list good and the clean water initiative marty that would be yours if somebody asked well how would there be eligible costs so make sure you know what your eligible costs is uh peter has a big section of them with uh bgs there was a lot there and you know it's it's either the work they're doing or you know cleaning sanitizing can i can i come there because when i looked at tax they they actually indicated that 87 of their staff was working remotely i mean that's all a crf cost not maybe not their payroll but the cost of actually setting it up and doing certain things to be able to work remotely yeah and then there's others that the actual work was you know crf related that some employees would typically be doing other state work we're actually doing crf work and then there's a whole bunch of well mostly with peter with sanitation and and which which i'm not even going to mention is anybody going to give a big nod to like our state employees and and how they they bucked up during this crisis not you know wasn't there a resolution all all house resolution what happened to that yeah it's okay you know i you know but then i think there's a big nod to the speaker for getting all this remote legislation up and working long before other states did and then there's a big nod to the governor for i think that that you know it would just you know well why why wasn't this okay i just want to because i'm not mentioning it any of my thing about how great they did so i'm not talking about it i don't want to be the only one that doesn't say hey you guys did terrific i i think the state of vermont has done an incredible job and all aspects of it so we leave it at that all right two o'clock see you then i gotta get some toast and you're ready to go off live i am