 This is June 2nd, the Education Committee in the Vermont House of Representatives. And we have two things we're going to be talking about today. The first is the COVID response education funding, the CRF funds, looking for ways that we will be able to use those funds, schools will be able to use those funds. And second, we're going to be talking about a study related to the Vermont State Colleges and higher ed. So I want to welcome Secretary French, who will start us off. And we've got JFO in the room as well. Just to give us an opening on the use of COVID relief funds. So welcome Secretary French. Good afternoon. It's good to see you all. It's good to see represent of Coopley's beard is growing. That's great. Good morning. I haven't seen you in a while. It's great. Yeah, it's good to see you all the just in terms of an overview. We found it useful. We talked about the CARES Act as a pertain to education to talk about the sort of three discreet funding sources we have the CRF, the coronavirus relief fund, which is the 1.2 billion. And then we have dedicated funds for education. The ESSER fund, the elementary secondary education relief fund, which is the $30 million 90% of which must be allocated directly to the school districts. And then the governor's emergency education relief fund or the gear fund, which is $4.4 million, which can be more flexibly used, I would say. And the governor's expressed an interest in working closely with the general assembly and determining how those funds get used. So those are the three pots of money not to conflate the issues, but they are slightly different. And it's important to note there is some dedicated funding set aside for education and the impact COVID response has had on K-12 education. In terms of the CRF on the 1.2 billion, I think it's hard to know at this point what the impact will be. Though we are, you know, focusing now on our planning for reopening school in the fall and as part of building our proposal to how the CRF funds should be used, specifically education. So we took a look at what's emerging as our sort of planning template, if you will, and decided that there's at least $200 million worth of applicable costs for the CRF to be considered. You know, they fall into two domains. One is, you know, facilities, upgrading school facilities, HVAC systems and so forth. The other being the provisioning of continuity of learning, that's the technology sort of related issues. But those really are just placeholders. So I say $200 million. We have no way really to dig into the detail of what would generate that number. I think we will, however, be able to do that as districts engage in their planning process for the fall, and that that planning process is still under design right now. Importantly, it's with a good part of the Department of Health and being augmented by stakeholder groups from the education community and so forth to work on sort of definitive health guidance for what the school classroom context will look like for the fall. I think once we have a better understanding of that, we'll start to see, for example, the sort of projected impact from a cost perspective relative to facility upgrades and modifications become more clear. But in terms of just having a placeholder, you know, really just by general guess essentially we put $200 million into that that area. I think I'd also draw your attention to there's really three areas that I generated I put 210 into that proposal, 200 million between facilities and technology but then 10 million not an unimportant consideration either and I think that's the social emotional support domain which really at this point is really more unclear in many ways as to what our costs and needs will be in that regard but I expect that domain to grow considerably and probably on equal footing with both the facilities and the continuity of learning categories eventually. Sorry, do you have a document for us to see at this point. Not separately I think it was submitted as part of the administration's proposal for the CRF. Okay. I think we should get that. I'm sorry I thought you had it. Yeah. I don't think that we have it in the committee and I don't think the committee has seen it. I don't know if Chloe or mark if you have access to that could get that to us. I think it was just put out on Friday so understandable. It might be it might be buried in email. Yes. She didn't receive it yet either so. We'd like to get a copy of that if you could help us. Yeah, appreciate it. Are there questions at this point for the secretary we're going to be looking at ways we're going to also be the legislative administration is coming up with ideas on how to spend this money the legislature also wants to take a look at this and be talking about that in the testimony from people in the field I'm very happy to hear that you are working with the Department of Health and stakeholders. This is a complex process and we don't have any other examples of having to do this in the past so we're we're we're designing it as we go here. Chloe or Mark do you have any or do you have anything to add at this point on on what was represent what was presented. Hi Kate, Chloe Wexler here from JFO at this point I don't have anything to add. I will follow up and I can look for that document as well for you guys. The only thing I will note is yesterday, everyone in the House should have received a document from JFO, which outlined the current restrictions on, or at least our understanding of the current restrictions on the coronavirus really fund. So I think as the committee really starts to think about this and listens to the testimony that they hear today. It will be important to sort of read through some of that guidance, just to sort of wrap your head around the issues that we are dealing with with some of the restrictions on those funds and to maybe help generate some creative ideas. So Chloe, I think what I'd like to do is because we're time crunched I'd like to do is maybe put you folks at the end to go through that document if we have time before the. Absolutely, that's what I think. I mean since you have everyone from the field here today will be great to hear what they're seeing and thinking and you guys have that document and we're happy to come in and another time to discuss it. Yeah. Who knows we might have we might have time. Yeah. So I don't see any other questions at this point. So what I'd like to do is invite and we don't have have Megan Roy in the room yet do we. I don't think so. She was going to be reporting from the from the field field. So, let's start with Jeff and Chelsea can we start with Jeff and Chelsea from the superintendent's association. I have a question. You have to unmute. This is for Secretary French. I was wondering if that some of that funding will be used for helping teachers create groupings for the fall in terms of a transition I mean especially for students that are coming from different classes and then creating a new classroom. I just think that that took a lot of time that was a very complex process and I wonder if there'll be some time set aside the summer for teachers, you know, who might be new working together with another new team to work on that. Yeah, I appreciate the question. Good. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Is that in your current plans and professional development. Yeah, certainly the, the, the question I think, and I was just going to thinking of adding thank you for the prompt to just talk a little bit about the answer funds as well because I think the districts have a lot of flexibility. I think of the three pots of money that I outlined, I think the answer funds specifically because they're targeted to the leas bring with them greater flexibility perhaps in some of the other two sources. The application for the answer funds has not been turned on so to speak for the leas so the funding has been approved at the state level. We have not deployed the application to school districts yet we were holding that back for two reasons one was originally the US Department of Education put out some last minute guidance on the equitable services provision that caused some concern. How districts would have to allocate some of this federal money and share it with independent schools private schools in their regions. At that moment when that first came out we sought some additional clarity nationally and that US Department of Education is more or less confirmed that they're going to stay with that guidance. But then the second reason it was delayed is basically at the request of the General Assembly, as I was working with the Ways and Means Committee in particular. It's a really useful strategy to not have those funds go out until after July 1 so that those funds could be present at the same time when they were confronting the shortfall and you had fun in the same fiscal year so to speak. So I think, you know, to represent of us this question. The funding on the table that can support the planning can support professional development support all that work that needs to happen it's a question of turning on spigot to use that phrase you know when we're going to put the federal dollars out there I'm increasingly concerned that we need to we need to deploy the application for the answer funds sooner rather than later because we've been asking schools to do a lot of different things and those those funds are being held back and those funds provide. They provide the immediate motivation the immediate means by which they can start to address some of the planning issues this summer and particularly feeding students over the summer. So I think we need to get going on the answer fund application. I do agree though it is it's useful to consider all the federal dollars on the table and ensure that we're using them as effectively as we can but this issue of planning is a very important consideration. The funding will be necessary for districts to engage in the planning and to implement the planning. We have a little bit of time as we're finalizing the planning template at the state level but very quickly districts are going to need both the resources and the direction to begin doing that planning. Thank you and we also know that there's activity going on in Congress right now and we'll be watching to see what happens there. Let's move to Chelsea and Jeff and what I want to do is make sure we get to all of all of these folks Chelsea and Jeff will start with then we'll go to Tracy and then Sue and Sandra think is what we'll do. And let's if we can unless it's a clarifying question let's hold our questions to the end so we can have a broad conversation about everything. Chair Web you'll be pleased to know we've consolidated our testimony VSBA and VSA Susan Glowski is going to deliver it. The rest of us may have very brief comments but we put together an outline this morning that Sue is going to provide. Good morning or I should say good afternoon House Education Committee it's very nice to be with you again and we'd like to start out if we can with a video from Ed week it's about four minutes long and I believe Avery has keyed it up to be able to start. Would you be able to play that now Avery. Sorry I just want to check to make sure everyone can hear the audio since I'm muted. We couldn't hear it then. Okay I'm going to start the video over. What will it look like when schools welcome students back to their buildings and what precautions might they take to limit the spread of COVID-19 in their communities. These questions took center stage recently when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released recommendations for reopening school buildings and they propose some pretty big changes to their daily operations. The CDC caution should be implemented in a way to bowl and practical and meets the needs of a local community. It also cautions that schools that are shut down in areas with significant spread should keep their buildings closed. Here are a few key points from the recommendations. First, masks. Staff should wear masks and students particularly older students should be encouraged to wear them the recommendations say. The CDC acknowledges that younger students may struggle to wear masks particularly for longer periods of time and it says they're most necessary where social distancing isn't possible. Next social distancing. Desk should all face the same direction the CDC says it recommends they sit six feet apart, which is not possible in many crowded classrooms and older school buildings. It calls for buses to seat students every other road to avoid crowding and to limit the use of shared supplies and classrooms that could be linked and kept to individual students. It also calls on schools to consider grouping students in cohorts that remain in their classrooms and avoid interaction with students in other groups to close large shared facilities like school cafeterias having students eat in their classrooms instead. Third, protecting vulnerable people. Students and staff at higher risk for severe illness should be given accommodations like the option to telework or to continue distance learning, the CDC says. Some analysis find that about one in every five teachers is over the age of 55, putting them at heightened risk for severe illness from COVID-19. The CDC says schools should have plans to isolate students who show signs of illness and if possible to screen for symptoms like fevers on a regular basis. It also recommends that they cooperate with local health authorities to help reduce the transmission of the virus and keep it contained. So will your school follow these recommendations. The CDC leaders around the country are making plans right now and many of them are considering multi-tiered approaches that might call on schools to continue distance learning to reopen their buildings or perhaps adopt a hybrid approach to avoid crowding. Other countries that have reopened school buildings after closing them for the coronavirus have adopted similar precautions and face similar challenges. In the United States, one of those challenges might be state funding cuts that will make normal school operations difficult in some areas. Leaders around the country have said reopening schools is a key part of our nation's recovery. But public health officials have cautioned that until there's a vaccine or an effective treatment for COVID-19, it might not be business as usual. I think it looks like it will depend on our understanding of the coronavirus and its transmission changes. The effects of the virus and its spread in your region and the decisions your local leaders make. Thank you very much Avery for playing the video and we hope you were able to hear most of it there were a few times where it faded out a little bit but we can provide the link to you so you could watch it again if you need to. Right now I'd like to just move into some of the points that we'd like to convey today including that public schools are an essential component of Vermont's successful economic recovery. School officials and all the personnel are contemplating what the return to school is going to look like in the fall and we don't know what that is going to look like yet. Each of our associations is participating in planning and preparations for school in the fall, but all necessary information is not in place yet. And at this point we're not sure when we will have all of that information. Every day, we're learning about scores of items that need to be addressed and resolved in order to put school decision makers in the best possible position to support schools in the fall. And I'll give you some examples of the type of decisions that need to be made and the information that would need to be considered. One is social distancing to personal health and safety equipment. Three will school be distance site based staggered schedules or some combination of all of those. For what will be the requirements for building operations protocols and mechanical systems. Five, how will transportation be managed. Six, will vulnerable members of the community be able to work and how will they be protected. And seven, how will we contend with an incident of COVID-19 infection or outbreak at a school. These are just examples of issues that need to be considered. There are many, many others, some of them are much more specific than what I listed and some of them are broader than what I listed. Reopening schools will include strategies to reduce person to person contact as was just outlined in the video that you watched and promote social distancing. And this may be difficult and confusing for our youngest learners. Vermont's pre kindergarten system provides only 10 hours of education per week, which results in many children being in the presence of more than one environment in any given day. How can we reduce person to person contact in a system that does not provide the extended hours needed by working families, providing early childhood special education services outside of the public school setting further increases potential exposure. Schools are still awaiting guidance on the best and eligible uses of the Essar funds the coronavirus relief fund and the governor's emergency education relief fund. VSA and the joint fiscal office have been collecting information from some school districts in an effort to determine what types of expenditures may be eligible for reimbursement. Once further decisions are made regarding the eligible uses, it will be imperative that school district leaders are informed of the decisions and guided with strategies to address fiscal concerns. The joint fiscal office can provide further information about their analysis of those findings. I'm going to let you know that we appreciate the approach that was put forth in h9 59 the yield bill, because it acknowledges that budgets for most districts in FY 2021 have been 2021 have been settled, and most expenses are fixed. We continue to have specific concerns about the fate of the school systems and communities that do not have budgets approved for FY 2021. I would note that the state has contributed significantly to the challenges of default budgets at the FY 2020 education spending level by adding expenses that districts cannot control in form in the form of the statewide bargaining for health insurance for school employees decision, which goes into effect during FY 2021. In summary, we'd like to let you know that the delivery of public education as complex as it normally is has grown far more complex and is likely to be more expensive due to all of the concerns that I just outlined. At this point, if any of the other people from VSA and BSBA either Jeff, Chelsea or Sandra would like to add anything I'd like to invite them to do that. And also, if you have any questions, the four of us are available to answer them. Thank you. Chelsea or Sandra. Sandra, I'm certainly interested to hear a little bit about pre K. And, you know, just hearing that UVM and UVM childcare and St. Mike's are closing. There's a lot of slots. Yes. Thank you, chair web for bringing up the topic. It's important and we don't have enough information right now really to think about direction, but I did reach out to a couple of colleagues and what I'm hearing from the field. A couple of ideas or requests are one that the issue with fingerprints be resolved. It's still lingering out there. I would like to, you know, if there's any. If we're thinking about strategies of how to reduce the number of environments children are experiencing in any given day that we might think about prioritizing four year olds and extend the day somehow for them. That doesn't help families who might have a three year old and a four year old, but if we're going to have to do something this is what I'm hearing from colleagues in the pre K world. Okay. Hmm. I wonder if we could extend the day to four year olds. Could that be a covert expense. Kind of an interesting thought. Chelsea, did you have anything to add. No, I'm just here to answer any questions if you have any on specifically the work we've been doing with Chloe and the joint fiscal office. Absolutely. We're going to want to hear from that. Why don't we move them to Tracy and then I'd like to move to Colin and Jeff. And then we may end up cutting back to you then Chelsea. All right, good. Can you hear me? Am I unmuted? You're good. So for the record, I'm Tracy Sawyer is the executive director of the Vermont Council of Special Education administrators and thank you as usual for inviting me. I'm going to abbreviate my remarks with the tight schedule but generally, you know, we're going to have increased need increased costs and decreased budgets and overall addressing regression and the impact of code 19 is one of the biggest concerns. It does seem to be an important way to use CRF funds. We're very concerned about the amount of service that is about to be requested by parents regarding COVID-19 impact on IEP goals. So thinking about maybe creating a formal structure to apply CRF funds to those requests would be potentially helpful. For example, we might create a state fund that parents could use to support their own access to services, you know, through like a list of approved providers or through the school services at the district to address these requests. This is just it's such a big issue because it's going to take a lot of work to figure out because it's not realistic for kids to be in classes 10 to 12 hours a day and schools are going to be overwhelmed, but there's going to be great need. There will likely be an increase in costs for outside evaluations due to the sheer volume that schools will likely see in the fall. They won't have the staff to keep up with the delayed evaluations or new requests so there's just a lot of worry about having enough people to meet that need. In regard to professional development targeted PD regarding distance learning structures is going to be necessary. And possibly that could result in looking into the state contracting with an entity that is trusted to offer statewide trainings for teachers that could be helpful. And in general more training on how to use Google classroom and zoom and how to teach in a virtual manner. We don't replicate in person teaching through zoom but it's clear that it's going to need to be a tool if not the primary method of teaching for this foreseeable future. It's really important that teachers learn how to use all the features available that the technology has to offer for rich robust virtual learning environment. We need to address anxiety and related issues with both kids and adults when we return. We will need funding for PD, as well as possible staffing to help with these needs. Teachers and other school personnel should receive training on how to talk to and support children during a pandemic and principles of psychological first aid. Educators are not trauma informed they need to be now. Also PD will be needed on developing healthy and safe classroom routines and I can't stress how important this will be. We're going to have to take the first several weeks of school and it's going to be along a developmental continuum but to develop new routines and schools. They're going to be different than when we left and teachers are going to need to talk to kids about why things are different without completely scaring them. Everybody's going to need PD and help with that shift. Another thoughts or parenting classes or groups at night could be helpful. Teacher wellness routines are going to need to be the norm. Kids will be suffering but again adults in the building will be too. The social emotional needs are just huge and they're going to have to be addressed first before kids are able to access academics. And as you heard Secretary French is very aware of this and in support of this and a smaller group of us are working with other Boucher to continue to kind of look into this, this huge issue. And I would say, I was going to say a bit more but I just want to make the point that we continue to be very concerned about maintenance of effort implications, because those are very real schools will likely spend less because of COVID-19 and we could very well be in a situation of needing to send money back when we need it more than ever. And that's just a continues to be a big concern. And we also just want to make sure that, you know, you all in the governor mindful of funding cliffs from one time financial support from the CRF act. As we all know, at least the next two years are especially going to be extremely challenging and likely well beyond that so that's the main pieces of what we're thinking about and my members are concerned about. Secretary French at some point we're going to need to have a conversation about maintenance of effort and maintenance of school support. Yeah, interestingly on that topic. Tammy Colby just authored a paper on maintenance of effort in the COVID context and she said it to me this morning. I can forward that on to for review. That's interesting. That'd be great. That's what she was doing during her during her. Yes, among other things. Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to move on to Colin and Jeff. Great. Wonderful. Thank you all. Colin Robinson, Vermont. Good to see folks. I'm going to echo, and I'm not going to repeat what others have said, but I think some of the points that Tracy just made are really, really critical. And, you know, to the point that represent Boston made earlier the beginning of the school year is very focused on social emotional learning. And so one of the most important uses we see as we enter into the new school year recognizing that student needs are going to be greater perhaps than ever dealing with trauma, the needs of staff and in their ability to support students in accessing their learning environment are going to be greater and perhaps ever making sure that there's a dedicated fund to support that work. And recognizing that districts, you know, I think we all are engaged in conversations and recognize we don't know exactly what school is going to look like when they return in August and making sure that there's dedicated resources that we can tap into to meet the social emotional needs as new issues perhaps emerge in the middle of September and October and November. So a significant chunk we believe should be used directly to support those social and emotional needs of students. Additionally, one idea that we want to throw out there is recognizing, you know, we all know schools are kind of hubs of our community and I think we've seen that in this pandemic. And I think obviously that's going to continue. And students and their families are going to continue to need with massive unemployment with all the trauma involved continue to need access to supports and services. And schools can and already do in many ways function is that that hub for accessing those services. But thinking about whether or not it makes sense to provide grants to schools to perhaps have a specific staff person, who is the point person for building those relationships, connecting students with those families and services some schools already do this, but maybe building where that doesn't exist building that out so there's a dedicated person who's helping to connect students and their families, the critical services and supports that they're going to need to be able to successfully access their learning environment. And two other points that haven't been mentioned. One is, there are a lot of schools that don't have full time nurses. If we're talking about students going back to the physical environment of schools we need to make sure that every school has a has a full time nurse to be able to meet the needs of the health needs of students and staff in the community, and making sure that those nurses have the resources they need. I mean we're talked about and I think we all recognize the PPE needs for students and staff generally. But in a nursing environment of course if you have a student or a faculty or staff member that shows up exhibiting symptoms, you want to make sure you have a space where you can properly isolate them until they're able to receive the care they need and be removed from the school in a safe and an appropriate manner. So, there's obviously a waterfront of issues that will need to be addressed I think the physical infrastructure. One's are ones that obviously are really critically critical as well in the professional development, but I'm laying in on and making sure that there are significant resources available for schools to address the social emotional needs of students and families and making sure that there are the key people inside schools to help coordinate accessing those students needs is going to be critical to allowing them to access their learning going forward. And I'll pause there. Jeff, did you want to add anything. Jeff fan. I don't believe Jeff was able to join us yet. Okay, great. So, have we heard from everybody on the list so far. Okay. Chelsea, could you speak a little bit. I don't see any questions yet from folks. I know that we certainly have a lot that are that are out there. I know that Jim dameray perhaps we could start generating that list. I believe that's what the speaker is looking for from us on ways that these funds could be used. Is that something that you could you could help us with. Sure. And if the people that have spoken so far wouldn't mind sending us sending in a document that would be much appreciated. It's just easier than trying to scroll back through zoom meetings to find the points. Chelsea, perhaps you and the JFO could could tell us what's been going on in that conversation. So, a couple of weeks ago, Mark Peralt and Chloe Wexler asked VSA if we could host a meeting that brought together some superintendents from around the state to discuss some of the options on the table in terms of federal dollars. And just to inform the thinking of JFO as they looked into the use of the funds. That meeting seemed to be very informational for Chloe and Mark. I don't want to speak for them, but they then approached us to release a more detailed survey to a subset of our membership to get at some of the questions. We're hoping to answer and I will let Chloe talk about those questions. We received nine responses it was a pretty lengthy and challenging survey so we were happy with getting that many. Now Chloe and I are discussing ways to present that information and make it a useful tool for you all moving forward so I will let Chloe speak further to that and chime in if I hear anything missing. Thank you. Thank you Chloe as well. Thank you Chelsea. Well, since you know we have to, you know, at least be a tiny bit ahead of you guys. So that we can, you know, come in and talk about stuff. We did have this meeting and similar to what you guys are starting to think about now. The conversation was very much based on trying to get a more detailed understanding of what kind of expenses schools were incurring and sort of trying to think about those expenses in two distinct buckets. So, you know, the idea of additional costs. So yes, districts are experiencing additional costs. That one you read through some of the guidance that was distributed yesterday. Also trying to think about if there are any existing costs that could potentially, you know, be funded at least obviously I agree with what people are saying you know it's dangerous to fund with one time money. But just sort of through this period of revenue shortfall, are there positions at the school that, for example, they were doing something substantially different than, you know, what they were previously doing for example, an administrator working in food service. So the questionnaire was largely targeted at just trying to get an idea of, like I said, you know, how like sort of a rough idea of what kind of additional costs they were experiencing, and what sort of what was the range of those costs, which Brad James has also put some information on but then, like I said, I'm trying to get into some of the thinking of, are there sort of a niche cost that are in there let's call it their base budget, you know, that what they were already anticipating spending that could be covered using CRF dollars if it's about, you know, someone who's doing a significantly different task, or potentially one of the other things was one of the other questions that we posed, for example, and I mean this will maybe help you guys start to think about things creatively as well. So we posed, were there any staff that potentially would have been subject to layoffs, had it not been for the governor's directive to keep all employees employed. So, could that, could that be an area that we could, you know, fund those positions using CRF money. I said, what we were really trying to start to think about is not only providing funds for these additional expenditures, but to what extent could we cover, you know, some some existing school expenses which, if you did read through the guidance quickly is is not easy. So that's where we're really trying to get creative and think of some ideas, because the funds are the CRF money is at this time extremely restrictive. And as you guys know from our previous conversations. There's a significant funding shortfall in the education fund. And some of the discussions were around if how we could figure out how to use some of that CRF money to sort of reduce that funding shortfall, but we. In order to do that you have to find a dish cost that they're already planning on spending anyways personnel costs, potentially, you know, is there going to be a modification to their curriculum. A significant modification to their curriculum that would potentially support the idea that those funds could be covered with CRF funds. I really do think when you start thinking about the important thing to think about is additional costs and a lot of what was spoken to today, those were all additional costs and that's great schools absolutely need support to cover those additional costs because when they pass their budget in March, they did not anticipate any of this. And so we can't like sort of just leave them in the lurch on that, but then there's also the other bucket of sort of more the state, and this is more on the state side. The education fund side is, is there any way that we can cover existing budgetary costs. I did want to. Yes, I did want to flag one thing that the secretary mentioned earlier in regards to the Essar funds just sort of to flesh out sort of, and maybe now that we've had this discussion about sort of the uniqueness of the funds and the idea that some of these additional costs that schools are incurring are very much, let's call it CRFable. So, we, if we if we can part of the reason of not sending that money out right away was because it's in this universe of sort of scarcity of funds. We need to make sure that you use the most restrictive funding for the things that are absolutely 100% COVID. For example, everything, everything that they're having right now which the secretary mentioned they're sort of like we need this Essar money to cover some of these costs, but sort of from a funding perspective we want them to use the CRF money for those costs to set up protocols for that. And then the Essar money which is more flexible. The legislature and the administration can make a decision on how they want those funds to be distributed to be sort of utilized. So that's what I've got for right now I guess I could take questions. We are working. It's essential that the players are working together right now we have we have time crunches that we're going to have to deal with we have money that needs to be spent by the end of December. And to that effect, having the agency working with JFO and working with with the field is critical in us and us using this this money to the advantage of our of our children. Thank you so much, Chloe. You were going to say something with that 10 more minutes so. No, I, I, I was just gonna say, I'm happy to take any questions and like Chelsea mentioned we are. I am sort of trying to work through how to present that those nine super like the data that we received in a reasonable way. So, I'll keep you. I'll send it to you and soon, hopefully. I don't see any questions yet. Peter come in. Thank you so much for the information for you and that is as Chloe was talking about like the fact that schools had to keep on people who they might otherwise have laid off as a possible CRF expense. As more of those sort of pop into our heads. What should we do with that information or those ideas. I think we're going to have to Jim is going to Jim thank you Jim is going to start to put together a document. So I would say, is it okay Jim if we send those to you. And then I would, I would also note that sort of what if I was currently sort of set up and you'll see that in the guidance that we sent out yesterday was a team at JFO and it also includes two lawyers from legal counsel. So they, Jim when you get your sort of list together. It would be worthwhile to send to sort of step the team is Stephanie Catherine. And then Jennifer Carby and Rebecca Wasserman, I believe. So just a thought I have and you know I sit here worried, you know, as a retired special educator thinking about the regression which is a big, big concern. But I also think about the work that we've been trying to do it implementing, you know, act 173 and the MTSS system. And I think about the work we were trying to do in literacy, and the loss of loss of skill in literacy right now is a pretty big deal. And I just wonder if there's a way that we could think of addressing some of our literacy goals. Yeah, some of our hopes that we had for literacy that the plan, we can think about something in that regard. In terms of our professional development and not only increasing their remote learning around around literacy but also increasing just the basic expertise of our community in that area. Wow, I think we're going to be doing this within the hours is excellent. Are there any Peter is that you still you have another question or another thought. Another thought I just wanted the committee to know that right now ways and means is still discussing our school construction bill, and they're looking at some modifications that would include $800,000 of CRF money. And the school needs to support remote learning, healthy environments and social distancing. So just wanted to make folks aware of that discussion going on. And the Senate is actually looking at that as well so they're looking at least age 209 our age 209 so so Dylan and Lynn, pay attention. Thank you there so read Austin. You're so muted. You might be frozen Serena. She's got kind of a frozen look doesn't she. When you're frozen. There we go. Okay, you're back Serena unmute. I tell you what when you get unmuted you've got the floor. I got it. Okay, so this is kind of again thinking way outside the box, which I'm sure my committee just is so thrilled about. But I guess one of the things I'm wondering is and I'm wondering this. This pandemic is an unprecedented event. And I know we're talking about the impact on children in terms of anxiety, and meeting a lot of social and emotional support. I understand and I studied before I became a legislator I was really into studying the impact of trauma on children but more like school shootings, you know what might occur in Vermont in terms of how to help kids recover from trauma and flooding those were the two areas in Vermont I could think about that, that children could experience, you know trauma other than in their own homes but I'm, I am wondering about because this is unprecedented what data. We have the children will return to school very anxious, you know full of anxiety I mean they've been with their parents. They've been in their homes, you know in most cases of this kind of trauma that you know like a hurricane or tornado or whatever earthquake they've lost their homes they've lost someone they love. But I do wonder I don't think there's any research in a situation where children are at home, you know with their family. In fact, I do wonder about if they will experience the level of anxiety we're assuming they will. So that that's one piece of it in terms of that funding for that piece but you know I, I want to get back to what Kay was saying about literacy and regression. I didn't know if maybe instead of if we find out that kids may come back to school and within six weeks or a month might be fine in terms of their emotion regulation. Either way we could either high higher additional staff parent educators extend maybe part time teachers extend them to give them more time to to to really ramp up the instruction that kids would need that they lost over the summer, in terms of regression or just because remote learning, you know wasn't able to catch them up in terms of where they should be in terms of their grade level and and and also literacy so anyway that's just a thought in looking at funding and really where would the best expense you know where would would it be best where we use funding to help kids I think we're going to definitely will be working on that list. And I would suggest if you have some, some, I'm going to ask you to put him in a bullet point and send that would be great. But again, I just want to say if anybody has any research in terms of what we know about kids returning to school and the emotional impact because I just can't imagine we have any research because this has never occurred before. I'd be curious to learn more about that. Well, might have a little bit more of information is NFI, and it would be worth it. Maybe you could reach out to NFI and see if they've got anything. Yeah, yeah, that's there. That's not extremely Institute. Okay. Very much appreciate this work. Mr. Secretary, we have a minute or not really a minute, we have three minutes. I'm looking at if you could just talk to us a little bit about the administration's budget in education. I'm just really out of the loop on that at this point in time. Is that something you or Brad could speak to. Yeah, I can. I made a note to make sure you have a copy of that. I was put together, I think Friday with leadership, but the education piece of it, what I would I put forward in there really conforms to what is our preliminary planning template document for reopening in the fall. So we sort of looked at it to Chloe's point, you know, we're trying to, you know, certainly look at all the different funding sources that are available. But I think time is of the essence as well as the other variable, but the planning document identifies five domains, one of which, you know, is the sort of underlying public health guidance that one form. The context of the classroom or school will look like. That's underway. But I think the two of the five domains that really identified pretty quickly where there's going to be need for additional funding is the facilities area, you know, the sort of retrofitting of classroom space, for example, nurses office HVAC systems that kind of thing. And the other domain up to so each is $100 million, the physical plan another 100 million for continuity of learning. That's the technology distance learning systems, devices, PD, and then additional 10 million in the last domain, which is the social emotional support systems. Again, this was put together very rapidly just to I viewed as a placeholder. There was no real detailed ability for us to get in and produce numbers based on some sort of analysis or survey from the districts I think that'll that'll start to come forward as the planning is underway. So this is not related to the information we're going to get tomorrow on the floor this the first quarter. This is more related. No, this is this is about CRF sort of planning today's topic. I'm sorry to switch switch it on you, but we are going to have that this first quarter budget on the floor tomorrow and I think there are a couple of things in education. Is that something that you could speak to. I'm not, I don't have that in front of me right now. I can, I can put that together, but it's just wait till tomorrow I will say, similarly tomorrow I'm in Senate Finance Committee talking about the same issues, particularly at fun situations. Okay, if you want, I'm happy to speak to a little bit of the appropriations proposal for Ed fund. Yeah, but I see that we have Joyce on and pretty soon we're going to have Nebbi on they'll be joining us shortly. So we might want to just wait on that. I appreciate the work from the community and helping us as we're going to start this a completely different world on funding and serving our students so with that I think we can probably end this part of the conversation. We're going to switch. I don't know Dan this might be something that you might have some interest in I think I've lost him right. We're going to be starting the conversation on the Vermont State Colleges and the current current study before the Appropriations Committee that Peter and I helped to work on a little bit this this weekend. Peter Conlon and Peter Fagan. So we can wait for Nebbi to come on. Avery, you have a copy of the document. Yes, I'll pull it up now. Yeah, we can have it ready to go. Joyce, you're there. Yes, I'm here. Thank you. Thank you so much Joyce. Oh sure. Thank you for your time over the weekend. I'm sure you have nothing else to do. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. We're going to pull up the document. Shortly that we discussed the document that you sent to us. Let's just first have a moment to talk to Joyce and what we're going to talk about. And what we're going to talk about. And basically progress so far and appropriations and what. What we will be. Okay. And the session selling audio issues. Okay. Maybe you could give us Joyce a sort of an update on where they are in appropriations related to this document. Sure. We're going to start with the project of the New England Board of Higher Education. They'll be sent to us by the New England Board of Higher Education. And when we first started working on this study, it was going to be. JFO hiring a consultant. The consultant would produce a report. Presumably by January 15th. Then. off to the New England Board of Higher Education. And they've had lots of experience with different states working on a similar kind of study. And their thought was that the study would receive much more prominence and would be embraced by a wider community if the study were coming from a blue ribbon commission or what they're now calling a select committee. So the proposal that we'll be looking at today is basically their drafts that used, I think all of the points, many of the points that were in our original draft, but fleshes them out a bit more and has a nice phased in schedule so that the state would receive different parts of the study along a somewhat extended timeline. I believe the Appropriations Committee is waiting for this committee to weigh in on the proposal. Many people think that the current draft has a very large select committee. There would be many, many people involved. So it might be helpful to try to slim down that committee just a bit. And that, I think also with that select committee, there's the option for us to, I believe this is gonna be on the floor tomorrow, but there's an option for us to do a friendly amendment that we could bring on Friday. Is that your understanding? Yes, on Friday, right. Okay, great. I think I saw Michael and I see Candice back again. Excellent. Maybe Avery, you could give Candice or Michael the steering wheel, remote control, co-host. Yeah, I'll just ask which would be the best to give co-hosting permission to? Definitely Candice. And would that be Candice or Candice's iPad? Let's use just Candice. Okay, just one moment. All right, I'm sharing my Microsoft Word so that you can see the draft proposal. Thank you. Michael, do you like to sort of kick us off and reviewing? Well, Candice, I'll admit that I think after handing it off to you and Joyce, you probably had your hands in at the most so I'm happy to have you lead out. Sure. So what we did was, a lot of what we heard in discussion with Representative Webb and the chair of Appropriations relative to the focus and the approach for this select committee. So you'll see that we've started off with a statement of purpose that acknowledges some of the challenges that Vermont is facing similar to other New England states. And then focusing in on the elements that a select committee would blend their focus to, including opportunities, issues, and challenges facing institutions, the nature and role of systems and institutions within this environment, new innovative models to expand affordable learner-centered workforce-aligned credentials and degrees and perhaps a re-envisioning of the state's post-secondary institutions and infrastructure as talent, innovation, entrepreneurship, et cetera, platforms, as well as anchors within their cities and towns and their communities. So I might have missed the beginning of the conversation I was having trouble with some audio, which is why I have to join in my iPad as well. But we have heard that the composition of the select committee most likely should be narrowed and made a bit smaller, but I think that's left to you folks to decide who needs to be represented on the select committee. But we also proposed that within the select committee would be a steering committee to provide leadership and hold additional responsibilities related to basically hiring and overseeing the work of a consultant, setting the timeline, considering the approach, whether it should be phased or not, et cetera, as well as the possibility that there could be some subcommittees that would be sort of topic-specific such as program development or workforce alignment or governance, et cetera. So we wrote in some roles and responsibilities. Sorry, I'm just making a change here. For the steering committee of the select committee or the consultant, which would be hired by the steering committee through an RFP process and would be charged with a lot of the data analysis and recommendations related to governance systems, cost drivers and evaluation of program offerings and alignment with the workforce. And then in discussions with Representative Webb and others, we proposed some project management capacity offered by Nebbi to help execute the timeline, manage the meetings of the committee, oversee sort of dissemination of meeting minutes, public comments, and the other liaising that we might do. And then we further detailed areas of focus. There are four areas of potential focus, the first being the financial sustainability of the system and its capacity to innovate to meet state goals. The second is how well the current structure promotes student success. The third being alignment with higher education and workforce development goals, policy frameworks and collaboratives. And then the fourth being alignment with the economy and emerging labor market needs. So we also discussed that there's the need for some short-term solutions in addition to a framework for some longer term strategic thinking. So it could be that this committee works in multiple phases over the next six to 18 months. And then finally, we delineated some key areas in which the select committee's formal action plan would develop recommendations. So system redesign, government, governance, academic innovation, integration of campuses, residential campus sustainability, resources and funding. Michael- Was there anything else you wanted us to speak to? I apologize. I missed the first moment of the call as well. So. No, this is really helpful. I think I'm apologizing to my committee that we're bringing them in so late, but bear in mind that we just started this conversation. I think on Saturday or was it Sunday, Michael? It was late Sunday afternoon. Yes. Late Sunday afternoon after a quick call on Friday. So we're bringing this to the committee quite late. The appropriation committee is definitely asking us to weigh in on a couple of things. One is the, at the moment, Nebby has given us a list of potential people to participate. And for a small state of only 630,000, this seemed like a large representation. So one of the things they're looking for is perhaps a recommendation to reduce this number to something that's perhaps more manageable. And the other is to look at the timeline and third, of course, is anything else that we see. In the meantime, in relation to looking to the proposed, and I realize committee, I'm jumping way ahead right into this detail and everything and giving you a chance to think about this, but hang on, we're on a really fast roller coaster here. A couple of things coming forward. One is Dillon has been appointed to a task force called Vermont Forward. Is that right, Dillon, I think? From the Vermont State Colleges as one of the trustees. And we wanna make sure that somehow we incorporate that the folks in that group along with this group. And another option that came to mind in talking with our Ledge Council, Jim Demeray is the possibility of, could we use the State Board of Education in here to reduce some of the members? And I don't know if Michael or Candace or Joyce, you had a, anybody have a thought on where, if there's ability to use our State Board of Education in this as well to reduce some of the members. Can I explain that? Yeah. So if you look at that list there, toward the bottom, you've got a number of bullet points to deal with, I think, engagement by various members of the community. So you've got six reps of business industry, reps of cities and towns, heads of Vermont organizations. One way to address that possibly is, you will remember the State Board of Education in that point six went around the state and held meetings to both inform and take input. And that was a way of community engagement. And you're about to get, this week or next week, S166, which is the building that's set that reorganizes the responsibilities of the State Board to lift their vision up more toward, think about strategy and vision for the state, boss of community engagement. So one approach maybe, though the COVID issues might impede this, would be to task the State Board with being part of this process to gather community views and share information out to the community rather than having all these initial members, members of the community have the State Board report back to the State Committee. That would help out for the bottom people points. The top ones, obviously, that wouldn't help someone. But in terms of the engagement piece, that could help. Michael, Candice, thoughts on that? Yeah, well, it's a really good point. And again, I think as we emphasized in some of our previous conversations, some of you may have been party to those, but I think our approach in that list there was to throw out some opportunities so that you could then tailor and size it to the very factors that you've all, I think, cited here. Our goal was to be as inclusive as possible and to find ways to, as we described it yesterday, avoid giving any sort of group or key constituency the opportunity to say, well, we weren't consulted, therefore, this is not valid. But I think the suggestion that was just made was a good one. You may be able to use sort of single contacts or participating members who by virtue of their work or their role or organization can serve as sort of a conduit or a funnel for expanded data and information into the process. And I think as just described was a good example. So they might be able to hold other discussions with their groups and collaborators and pull that information back into the process. They might be able to use sort of standing activities of their organizations to do the same. So I think that could be a very good strategy for expanding that. Joyce, any thoughts? So that sounds good. And it's also true that we had talked about using maybe the State Chamber of Commerce as a point of reference for some of these representatives of business and industry. So there may be other opportunities to use this similar single point of contact idea. Yeah. And Chair Webb, I think we mentioned yesterday too, sometimes Nebbi, in our boards and commissions will sometimes form within the larger group we may form a couple of subcommittees on areas that need particular focus and input. And sometimes that group could actually call actually call its own witnesses for lack of a better word, right? And those witnesses are charged with being voices to represent key constituencies groups or to speak on key issues. So you can sometimes, you can invite everyone to be on the committee, but through either the hearings and the conversations of the whole or the subparts, you can create bandwidth where you can make sure that every voice is represented. Right. Kathleen James says our Nebbi member, did you, I saw your hand up at one point. I took it down because I think I answered my own question. I was trying to sync up sort of the more immediate crisis facing the Vermont State College system and this year's presumed bridge funding with the different dates and timelines and the phases of the report. But it looks to me, I've just been scrolling back and forth and it looks to me as though that's handled in phase one, deadline one. So thanks. Thank you for looking at that. Sweet, Asta? Yep. I'm wondering if it would make more sense to maybe have fewer members of the legislature on there and more members from labor and workforce development. You only have one person and I think a big part of this kind of restructuring is looking at workforce development in Vermont and that transition after high school, post-secondary adult education. So that's just a thought. Yeah. I think that the list of six members of the General Assembly has been brought up as well. And also, I think Michael and Candice, I also sent you the latest task force from the Vermont State Colleges that was just created yesterday, a way to incorporate that or use that in a way so that we're not all working at cross-part purposes. We're actually... Yeah. Yeah, so that was very helpful to have shared with us and sort of fills out the broader context of the state and in some of our conversations over the last couple of days, again, some of you were partied to this discussion. We did mention that it's not uncommon when sort of the question of the future of public post-secondary education is brought to the forefront to have sort of multiple efforts to answer that question. Obviously, you're leading a legislative supported effort. It's very common for the system and the institutions and the governing board themselves to jump in and do their own iteration. And then you may sometimes even get outside groups, public policy institutes and other observers trying to do the same. And I think part of the impetus behind this notion of a select committee was to try to do what was possible to bring the system and the whole of public higher education in Vermont into this process so that it wouldn't be seen by respective groups as just being a legislature's approach and the VSC is just being the VSC's take on things. The more inclusive you can be, the greater is the opportunity for you to say this is a statewide inclusive process that really brings together all of the people and thereby hopefully gives added legitimacy. And I think what is described in the VSC forward is really important. And if you can find a way to, you know, in terms of representation on this select committee that you're proposing, if you can find a way to bring in the representatives directly from VSC forward and help them to see that, you know, this is the goal of what you're doing is to try and build on the work that they're uniquely qualified to do as the system itself with their inside knowledge and experience and history and all of that, that you want their work to be a conduit into this broader state discussion. And the real purposes of that is so that you can help them build greater ownership, investment in involvement in and focus on the core matters that they're facing. So I think, you know, I think there's an opportunity to do that, you know, I think it's gonna have, you'll definitely have to work to sort of work to integrate that and build the understanding so that they understand how your effort is gonna complement theirs. But I think there is an important opportunity to do that. They needn't be seen as sort of competing or disparate activities. And I think with the right leadership and efforts and strategy, you can help them be very complimentary and, you know, very, you know, synergistic in many ways. So. Let's also remember that not only is there a select committee but there's also a steering committee, which is a smaller group. Yeah. Yeah. Go ahead. Yeah, no, that's right. And I think at least our conversations or recent days was that, you know, select committees bring together lots of very busy people, many of whom have got, you know, day jobs that are ultra consuming and you're gonna ask for their additional support and it might be good to have a chair and a co-chair and maybe a few other people that are designated as sort of a steering committee. And they might just be able to sort of tend to the management of the process and to make some of these decisions around process in a more timely and compact fashion than if you had to sort of consult with the whole of the group. So if at the outset you sort of say that the chair and the co-chair and a small group of steering committee, which is again, roughly representative of the whole of the group, maybe called upon to, you know, sort of help manage the process sort of day to day and make some decisions and I think if you get people on board with that early then that can be an efficient way to most effectively manage this, you know, time-consuming process. Is that consistent with what you had sort of thought about, Chair Webb? Yeah, I think so, at least for me. Joyce, I don't know. Do you wanna speak to that? No, that sounds good. And I think given our short timeframe, it's going to be really important to be able to make decisions quickly. So I think the steering committee is a great idea. Yeah. Peter Kalin. So Kate, your warning that the legislature is very bad at making lists always rings in my ears when we are confronted with something like this. So just a couple of questions. One, is it our committee's responsibility to be the ones to pare this list down or come up with a list before Friday? And two, a question really for Dylan about how much overlap there is between this proposed list and who's on VSC Forward. Maybe Dylan would be prepared to speak to us a little bit about VSC Forward. And again, bearing in mind that the VSC has got to do their work. They've got to really drill down into their specific issues, concerns, what got them there, use of their facilities, all of that. And I think our role is to be probably a larger, more state view that might ask some more difficult questions. How about just the timing and process, Kate, in terms of this language and a bill? I think they would really appreciate us having a recommendation to them by Friday. And I don't have a committee scheduled. I'm looking to see if I could do something on Thursday or perhaps Friday morning. But I would see it as being an amendment that we would add. And it would be very helpful actually if I could just get a small group to work on that. I think doing it as a committee is gonna be a little bit of a challenge, as we know. And I guess I would say, I especially think so, because really delving into this area is something that our committee hasn't done a whole lot of, or the legislature as a whole, it's not really delved into the running of our state colleges, so this is pretty challenging. Yeah, we've been more of a pre-K-12th committee, haven't we? Serena Austin. Yep, I'm just wondering if the regional group that we had the presentation, the PowerPoint, if they would be in this group? I know we had talked to them about possibly advising, helping us out with this situation. Is this where they would be included or would this group develop something and maybe they would react to it? I'm not sure who you're referring to. Remember the regional, the New England regional group that presented us that PowerPoint? Yeah, they're here with us right now. Okay, so would they be on this committee? They do have a role, maybe you could review that again. Yeah, I'm sorry, I might have missed it, so they do have a role. Yes, in project management. We ask them very, very nicely if they would help and they said, we are members of a New England State Consortium and so they are approving their value right now. That's what they were. Thank you. Joyce, so is that your understanding? They are looking, that's what they're looking for from us, is feedback on timeline and feedback on the select committee is the primary thing they're looking for, understanding most part. This is a pretty comprehensive approach that we're taking that allows for a fairly robust conversation with stakeholders and with experts and facilitated by a professional and there's money in here somewhere for that. I don't think it's in this one, but that's something that the appropriations will be adding. Yes, that's my understanding. And of course, if the committee has other thoughts about the proposed laws currently written, that would be welcome as well, but those are the two big areas where the House Appropriations Committee knows that they need help. Yeah, okay, just to repeat something. Okay, just to the committee, I do wanna apologize for how late this is coming to us and the fact that we've had precious little time to engage in it. This came from the, I think on Friday, we got the draft proposal and immediately contacted Nebby and just started trying to work on bringing them into the conversation. So if people are feeling like, why are we getting this right now? It's because we really, really just started to work on it and spent some time over the weekend coming up with this. And I will tell you that when, I think I sent them an email Friday afternoon and by Sunday, they had a pretty extensive proposal. And I just grabbed Peter Conlon to help as well as Peter Fagan and Mike Marcott to work with Kitty as well, Kitty Toll in a meeting with some of the appropriations folks to try to figure out what to do here. So the reason this is all coming so late and the reason that you're hearing about it right now is that's how it went down. And welcome to the legislature. As we're trying to create a new budget in the middle of a pandemic and when we can't even meet and catch each other in the halls. This is an example of how complicated it can be. Normally these conversations, plus we usually meet five times a week or four times a week. Right now we're not doing that. So it's been very, very complicated. And I appreciate your patience in this and for not contacting you all on Sunday to have a quick meeting. So I don't know, Peter Conlon, this is usually when I turn to you to come up with some. I see Dylan's hand is still up. Oh, good. I don't see it up. Dylan, please. Yeah, can you hear me? I have two pieces of technology coming here. Can you hear me? Yes, I can hear you fine. Thank you, Dylan. But my apologies, I haven't upgraded Zoom yet. So I've got my phone going and my computer and I'm worried that pretty sure I'm gonna short a circuit here in my house. But to Peter's question earlier about the Vermont State Colleges System Forward Initiative, I view these as two very distinct things. The panel that has been pulled together by the interim chancellor is made up of folks specific to the Vermont State Colleges System. I'm very pleased to have an opportunity to work with that group, which will include members from the chancellor's office, but then particularly focus on members from the campus communities, including representatives of the different faculty and staff unions, a student representative and others. And that's more for us as a system. And keep in mind we are separate from the University of Vermont in terms of our public higher education investments in the state. We're gonna be looking at the Vermont State Colleges System both as a whole system and also the campuses to address things such as program duplication, ensuring access and quality of programs, trying to distinguish the characteristics of member institutions. And there is a charge more broadly about identifying the sustainable strategies that will allow us to thrive in the future, but also looking at things like reconfiguring the system to achieve organizational, financial governance and accreditation goals. So that is a separate piece, but the legislators look here, and if I understand the intent of this correctly, is much broader because it's more about our total public higher education investment in the state. And I think that convening it at this level with some of the representatives outlined in this proposal is distinct from what the Vermont State Colleges System is doing. And I think it's a real opportunity. So I certainly support this concept and from the point of view as an education committee member, I think this is one of the most important things we can do because certainly we know the world of post-secondary education is gonna face some real pressures, particularly if there are more disruptions resulting of COVID-19. And so I think that taking this look now while we have both an abundance of uncertainty but also an abundance of federal resources and other resources coming into the state, it's the right time to do it. And if we wanna get serious in the 21st century about how we deliver post-secondary and being a leader for modeling how a state can transform its system and its public higher education investment, then I think that this is a good part of the strategy to get there. So I'll just leave it there, but if anyone does wanna catch up about the Vermont State Colleges Initiative, I'd be happy to do so as we get working. Thank you. Dylan, do you have any recommendations? I'm looking at this list. And I also am aware that even though this is a large committee that we have a steering committee and we want the steering committee to have a pool to draw from in putting them to work but looking at the list right now of folks from the Vermont State Colleges, there's two from the Board of Trustees, the Interim Chancellor, president from one of each of the colleges and then faculty members. That's just VSC. And then we have two from UVM. Wondering if you have any thoughts on that list, particularly as it compares to Vermont Forward. How long, Vermont Forward is only going until mid-August, is that correct? Yeah, so we have a short-term horizon here to make system-specific recommendations. You know, I think the one piece of feedback I will provide to this body because it's separate from the governing board of the Vermont State Colleges System is that when we talk about transforming and changing, having the voices from the campus communities, I think is very important. And I'm not sure I have a specific recommendation of the composition here, but I do personally feel a strong desire that we should have representation of faculty and staff in a proportion that allows some of those really creative ideas to come from the bottom up. So to the extent that we look at the makeup here, I recognize that there's a hierarchy in higher education and so forth, but I would encourage those ideas from the communities to be there. And you know, the other point here and a question just for us to consider, we've certainly seen our State Board of Education and many school boards include student representation. And I'm not sure that this is the place where we need that, but certainly it's just a consideration to flag for the committee. Should there be a student representative or student representatives? And I know that we need to keep a small or functional group for this type of work, but nevertheless, it's always important to consider all the options we've weighted. Okay. I don't think that we're gonna be able to go through this and pull this list together in this committee meeting right now. I'm inclined to think maybe getting together a small group, perhaps to work with Peter Fagan and Markot as well to review this list might not be a bad idea. See if we can bring it down. Bearing in mind the steering committee is only five to eight members. So Joyce, when did we figure this was about 40 people? Right, so I counted 34 down to the representatives from specific cities, towns or regions. So starting with that bullet and two more bullets, we have an unspecified number of people. So I've got 34 plus the number that's unspecified. So that gets up to be 40, 45 without too much trouble, which seems like a very large group. What I'm wondering is, are we seeing this? I guess I'm thinking of the relationship between the steering committee and this extensive resource pool in working with the consultant. Is it bad to have it that big if it's a pool rather than perhaps a pool that we're going from? Right, so maybe Nebbi wants to talk to this, but it seems to me there are lots of decisions that have to be made quickly with a consultant who wants to get to work. And if the steering committee has sufficient power to make those decisions without going through the entire select committee, maybe that can work. I did talk briefly to Jim Page who is doing the short-term financial study of the Vermont State Colleges System. He's been part of many of these groups and he was quite adamant that you don't want a very big group to be responsible for a report of this sort because the recommendations of the group may get watered down. So in order to get full support of the group, you have to sort of meet in the middle and maybe that means that you're not taking a hard position on some points. So he was quite certain that we ought to try to whittle down the size of this select committee. Okay. Are folks comfortable with me working with Peter Fagan and Marcotte on this? Or perhaps, are folks comfortable with that or do you want to be part of a small group that looks at this list? So I just gave you a question. So, Kathleen. Kate, just to say, I'll take a look at it when we're done here and send you some thoughts. Okay, great. That sounds like a really great idea. Can other folks do that as well? Yes. Take a look at the list. Jay, as a person who lives in the community where the Vermont Technical Colleges are, did you have something to say? No, I think I'll just be in touch with Dylan and make sure that I'm following along closely. I do appreciate that you're asking. Yeah. And if you have some thoughts as well on this, that would be great. And I'll try to pull that together and yeah. Kate, I just have a question. Yes, please. So, well, first of all, I think the history of this document in front of us was that it really began in appropriations with a list of roles and responsibilities and whatnot for a consultant to look at. I think you had the very great idea of putting in Nebbi to get some thoughts from them. And that they said, you know, this is really work that should come out of a select committee out of a single consultant, but with the help of a consultant. And I'm just sort of wondering because this time crunch is very stressful, especially when narrowing down a list. I wonder if, and this has really been kind of an appropriations generated idea, if maybe what needs to happen first is just get the consultant moving and then sort of reporting back to a team to be determined later when we're back here in August. I just throw that out as an idea that maybe we can discuss with those folks as a way to get out from under this time crunch for naming this list of the select committee. Interesting. Blackler, Candace, thoughts? Well, yeah, no, that's a really good question. I think, you know, it would be helpful to know sort of, you know, how you as either a committee or as legislative leaders from specific committees, including appropriations, the aforementioned will be sort of continuing to work over the coming weeks. But I think, you know, you may, you may need to make the consultant engagement decision prior to the full composition of the board because that of course will take a little bit of time, one to whittle it down and determine it and then two to, you know, engage all the people and sort of bring them up to speed and get the board moving. And you'll want to, I think, maximize your time of analysis and sort of benchmark and table setting so that when the select committee comes together for the first time, you're able to put out a lot of the sort of, you know, assumption setting and shared data that will undergird the conversation going forward. So I think that does make sense. I think I got Peter's point. Is that sort of what you're suggesting, Peter? Yes, we're just in this sort of unique circumstance where the appropriations committee is going to put out a phase one budget that just covers kind of the first three months of the year, the fiscal year, and they want to do that Friday. But then we're going to come back in August and put together the rest of the budget. And it just seems to me, while they split the budget up, we could split up this work over those two phases as well where phase one budget includes getting the consultant rolling and the remaining budget work in August would improve the meaning of the sort of committee. Yeah, you might want to put, if I were thinking about it, you might want to put the naming of the consultant in some of that initial work in the first and probably work to include the designation and engagement of the select committee members so that that, like I say, I think you want to get that set sooner than later. You may not actually have them meeting and in full work, but you might want to pull at least the naming and composition of the group into the first phase if possible. But you all can figure that out based on what's feasible and sort of your time frames. So there's the thought of appointing the steering committee in phase one. If possible, I think that would definitely make sense. But again, you'll all be able to figure that out, I think. We're happy to consult with you on that. We need you to help us figure this out. Let's just be very clear. Well, yeah, so, you know, however you split it between phase one, three-month budget and then what goes beyond that, well, I think we'll want to just make sure that you don't leave too much until August so that the process sort of is just starting up and then it's really sort of starting to run properly by September at which point you're a lot closer to your presumed sort of deadline for getting this work done than you'll probably want to be. So I think, you know, just might want to think about what we need to front end load to sort of set the table and get things moving to the extent that whenever you hit phase two, there's not a big learning curve and lots of other stuff that you need to complete to get everyone up and engaged. So, you know, we're happy to confer with you about that more and think about it from the standpoint of project management. I think those are good points. Yeah, something about at least maybe hitting some of these areas, but maybe not having it fully fleshed. So we have maybe at least one person from here, one person from there, one person from something else and then we can flesh that out as we move along as another option. My question, Joyce, is there anything we could put onto the joint fiscal committee or am I just out of my element during the time between June and August? So I'm not sure I can answer that question. I think maybe we need to consult with them. I do know that they're gonna have lots on their plate because there will be plenty of COVID issues that are still swirling around and of course changes in the guidance about how to spend COVID money and many requests for that money. So I don't think I can answer that. Yeah, they are gonna be busy. Let's be clear. Can I mention a question? I'm just wondering about usually when we hire consultants, we go through a compared dating process and that's done by an agency. Yeah. We've got the mechanics for that. So I'm just thinking about how that process would work. It wouldn't be the steering committee, I don't think, that would put out to bed, it probably be the agency of education or administration. We just, I think those mechanics have to be worked through in terms of how that would work. Right, my only experience is working with the agency of education is finding a consultant through an RFP. And I'm not sure, I'm not sure who that would be. AC is part of this working group. So maybe you could pass into that with that. Yeah. The Ways and Means Committee seems to like to put that work on to JFO, which is something we haven't done through this agency. Yes, and when I was talking to the Appropriations Committee about this study, they had asked us to put out some feelers as to would there be any consulting groups out there who would be available to do such a study in a short amount of time. And so we have done a little bit of that work to reach out to various groups to see if they would handle this kind of a study. So we have started tiptoeing down that path. So is it possible to give that to JFO? Give that, I mean, whose budget does this come out of? Right, so it would be possible to give it to JFO. I know that Steve Klein would prefer that we not be the group that is in charge of the contract because it is a lot of work. We were hoping that Nebbi might be able to help us in drafting an RFP and dealing with the process of choosing the consultant. But that's all up to you folks. That would be great. It's still a matter of who's in charge of it. Right. So if we give it to one of the agencies, then that's the administration. Yes. Okay, that's another thing to be thinking about. My only experience really is the agency of education. I don't have other experience to the under one from. Right, so JFO has done other education contracts in the past. Certainly the PICUS report came through a JFO RFP process. That's the one that comes to mind and they've done many more as well. So if it went through JFO, if you had the support of Nebbi, is that something would that make it a little bit easier rather than making an administrative RFP? That would certainly help us. Yes, yeah. So Candice and Michael, is that something that you could help them with as well? Yeah, not absolutely. Happy to do that. We do a number of RFP processes, so we're happy to help with that. We've got colleagues with some good experience in that regard. I would personally prefer to have it through JFO than the agency. Okay, so let's just put, now that we've completely solved the list, let's go to the timeline. Caleb has a stand up. Oh, Caleb, yes, excuse me, thank you. Caleb Elder. Yeah, thanks. I'm just looking at the documents as well and thank you for scrolling down on that. Some of what's on here seems worthy of a committee, but it also seems to coincide a lot with the chancellor, the former chancellor's white paper from last summer. And some of the goals about examining kind of the direction of the campus seems to be very similar to the work that led up to NVU, which was of course just in its second year. I'm a little concerned about the perception of re-engaging a process like that without somehow acknowledging that it was just done and that former chancellor Spalding has been telling us we need more money and this doesn't really even address bridge funding any place I can see. So I just wanna make sure that this bill, number one, isn't just look sort of like we didn't, we just do all that visioning, isn't NVU the results? What about that kind of work product? And also, what about that white paper, which isn't even 12 months old, couldn't that tell us a lot? It seems to me our problem is a lack of money and if this group takes too much effort not just focusing on the money, it could be seen as a waste of time. Maybe Candice or Michael can help us with that. Remember, we have financial problems where we also have a demographic problem and we also have a changing face of education and we have a few other things that are contributing to the problem, the reason that we're having some problems. Funding. But that's very much addressed and those documents have done that. All of those problems have been, they're not new this year. They've been front and center for a couple of years and we've got a lot of very recent projects and work product addressing them that we have not acted upon because we've not funded it. Chair Webb, could I say something about the bridge funding? Yes, please. So JFO has a separate contract that's been underway for maybe six weeks with Jim Page, who is the former chancellor of the University of Maine System and he was tasked with looking at the specific financial reports from each of the Vermont State College's campuses together with the chancellor's office financial reports. And probably early next week, he will come out with his report that talks about how much funding does the Vermont State College's system need in this current fiscal year and also how much bridge funding would they need next year in order to maintain operations. His report will be looking at various scenarios for enrollment. So do we expect that enrollment starting in the fall will be down 5% or down 15% or down 25%? So that report will be really informative in terms of what do the numbers look like? What do the campuses need? The treasurer's office is also doing a parallel report, which is looking at exactly the same issues. What do they need this year? What will they need in the academic year 2021? So both of those reports will be coming out and I think those two reports together will address the issues of the funding. So this new study was meant to say, let's look at all of higher education in Vermont, not just the Vermont State College's system, but all of higher education. And let's think about how the higher education system is serving the needs of Vermonters in terms of what's the workforce look like, where the gaps, who are we training, what's the graduation rate, all of those things in a big picture. So not just Vermont State Colleges, but use what we know about Vermont State Colleges together with the University of Vermont and the private institutions in the state to get a bigger picture of where we are and where we want to go. Thank you. Michael or Candace, do you have anything else to add to Representative Eldridge's concern? Which is a fair one. We don't want another report on the shelf. You've got Candace and Ethan. So I've got a few, but Candace, do you have anything to share? I think my only response. Are you hearing two of me? Yes, yeah. My response would be that I would hope that this larger committee, select committee, would take into consideration many of the reports and analyses that have happened in the last couple of years and use those as building blocks and not duplicate them, but cite and refer to them. Because I agree, I think there is the possibility that this could, like you say, be another report on the shelf when there has been a lot of attention to the sort of longer term issues facing Vermont. And in addition to those sort of system efforts, there are also workforce development and other sort of economic or economy wide groups like the Vermont Talent Pipeline Project, Advance Vermont, the State Workforce Board that have been doing a lot of analysis too about how to build out better education and career pathways. So I think if we can structure this effort to be one that allows all of those initiatives to be plugged in and represents sort of statewide coalition that would be a goal and a positive outcome. Yeah, that's great. And I would just add, I think Representative Miller makes a really critical point and it may be that we need to find tools, some of the language here to get to both of his points, the first of which is, you know, you don't want to be redundant here. You don't want, and you don't want to not acknowledge your benefit from the significant work that has been done. And I think even in the proposed work of VSA Forward, VSA Forward will be done. And I think the goal is to build upon it with a broader statewide perspective. And, you know, the point about funding is key and maybe that needs to be more specifically stated. I think we mentioned in one of the key bullet points of, you know, prescribed outcomes of this process is to come up with a resource and a funding plan. And I think that is both dollars as well as funding processes. And I think we specify a strategic investment framework as well as performance-based funding models that could be considered to figure out how to further drive, you know, the progress and the performance that are needed. So, and I think Joyce spoke well to the broader nature of what's trying to be held this year. So, you know, and so far as we need to retool some of this language, I think that would make sense to capture those critical points. Yeah, I wonder if maybe, and I appreciate Joyce, you count your response on that. I wonder if it's a matter of changing the name of the committee, removing the word public, because if you really look at the bullet points under there, they're not specific to the public schools. And I think to Joyce's point, this is a trend that is broader than the public schools. But if that indeed is the case, of course the inclusion or exclusion of the word public is very important, but maybe we're talking about something broader than that describes. Kathleen and then Serena. And then I want to see if we can figure out if we want to make some changes to some of this language or perhaps can talk with them. Talk with a few folks afterwards. Kathleen and then Serena. Joyce, I just wanted to jot them down to Caleb's point. I just wanted to say these are all the great reports that I've been working through just in response to the recent presentation that Nebbi did. And they're all very, very relevant. So I think it will be very important that we build on what we've already got. I knew the consultant was doing a financial analysis. I think I did not know that Treasurer Pierce was also doing one. Did you say those were both due in June? Right, am I? Yes, am I? Yes, so I'm not sure about the timing of Treasurer Pierce's report. I know that she and her office have been working diligently on that report. And the consultant was tasked with doing an independent report just so that everyone was sure that the numbers lined up properly. So I've been most in contact with Jim Page in order to be sure that his report is coming probably early next week. It's possible that the Treasurer's report will come out a few days before that. I just can't talk to that for sure. Great, thanks. Do we shoot for a group of 20? Just trying to give us some boundaries. Anybody? Bueller? Nope. Larry, is that in response to what I just said? Yes. Yes, okay. 20 is too many. So I assume the point is that 20 is much less than what's being proposed. 25. Bear in mind, we have two committees working here. Right. To defend it, I think one of the reasons to have a larger committee, assuming 20 is still considered large versus what it's already being looked at, so that you can have effective subcommittees targeted in different areas. Too confusing. Duplicative. You mean duplicative with the Ramon State College's task force? Well, I disappear too. So I think, Chair Webb, I mean, I think, you really need to think of who needs to be there. Then you need to think of who you want to be there and then you can right-size some of those numbers just to deal with whatever you think is the optimal number. There's no right or wrong answer. You wanna probably err a little bit towards the inclusiveness with the assumption that not everyone will show up every time you pull people together and you only wanna look like you've got a good group. So, oh boy, can you hear me? I'm struggling. I cannot. I'm not sure. I seem to be having problems. I don't know if you, am I making, can people hear me or not? Okay, you're coming through. I can hear you. Oh, okay, there we go. So can we say we need someone from the governor's office? We need someone from the, do we need someone from the general assembly? We need someone from the state colleges. We need the secretary of education. We need commerce. We need business and industry. We need probably someone from the town. We probably need something from all of these. Is there any group that people would be inclined to knock out and then we can adjust numbers based on that? One thing I think that we could do is double up. In other words, we've got state representatives who are also on the boards of trustees and from different parts of Vermont. So, you know, if we could, I haven't heard one person strongly support having legislators on this. So maybe those who are on there can fill dual roles. That was actually- I agree, Peter. That was the conversation and, as I would say, upstairs and appropriations as well in the meeting is, do we need legislators on it? No. Larry says no. Yeah. Oh, Sarita, I'm sorry, yes. That's okay. I'm just wondering about the process for getting funds for the consultant. I didn't worry about that. Well, also just, is there a way to fast track that? Because I think, I agree so much with- That's appropriations. Sarita, that's appropriations. Don't worry about that. That's not ours. They'll figure that out. No, but what I'm asking, Kate, is how long is that process to get the consultant on board? Because I really agree with what Peter said in terms of getting a consultant on board and then having them help us or whoever, you know, create a process to get to the outcome that we want. So that's all I wanna say. I just really support trying to get a consultant who has done this a lot and has a lot of skills and experience doing this. And that's when Nebbi and JFO are gonna work on that as well. So we're not appointing anybody, fortunately. Right. I just know if we could fast track it. Well, that's why we're passing something this week. It's done. It doesn't happen until this is done. Okay. I'm happy to, if people wanna, Larry, yes, in my participant. What's the appropriation? Has anyone discussed the appropriation for 40 members or 20 members or 34 members? I mean, I'm just baffled at the amount of people here that are gonna be needed to come to some decision on what we're going to do. I can't. I think a lot of people- It just doesn't come, it just doesn't make sense to me. A lot wouldn't get paid. It's really the cost of the consultant that's the biggest concern. And that's at least 100,000 according to. I wanna, given that we're out of time, I would like for everybody to send me an email on thoughts about this select committee. If we could quickly look at time again, I'm having a little bit of trouble on my participant list. And for some reason, things aren't showing up quite the way they're supposed to. So, if I'm missing somebody, Larry, could you help and call on them if I'm missing a hand up? Yeah, you're good. There's no hands up that I can see right now. Okay, great. So looking at the timeline, and this is the timeline that there was some conversation the other day about breaking it up into phases. And these are the phases that I'm fine with the phases. Anybody else? It's like, oh, there are not much I can see hands. I assume that that's just sort of, it's a potential. Right. It's not like that has been put into a bill, does it? Joyce, does that go into the bill? So it was my understanding that this proposal would go into the bill. And I could be wrong about that. Maybe Jim has an idea. So I'm having a lot to talk to you. No, I think having the phases, the way this is set up is potential phases. But I think you want to have more definition around phases if you want them. Which is just to me, you are phases in the bill. So you have different deliverables. I agree with calling for deliverables, which it does with the interim reports that are due on certain dates. Yeah, Caleb has his hand up. Caleb. Thanks. Yeah, I just, at this point, the phases I think are a little too much in the weeds for me. I tend to agree with Larry that I don't think there, I don't see a point to this just yet. For me, I can't really have an opinion on it until I know, is this about Vermont State Colleges? Or is this about college in New England and Vermont? Both of which are important, but to me, Vermont State College is the much greater emergency that needs all the focus and all the triaging and all the resources right now. So if I wasn't sure this is really about VSC, it's hard to support. And if I feel it's too duplicative of VSC work that's happened not to mention the new group that we hear Dylan's on, it just seems a little much. Anyway, so I need to know kind of a little more, what is this for in terms of addressing it? And is it gonna be VSC specific? I'd say the answer is no. And I think just given the time, I'm gonna suggest that folks take an opportunity to read over the draft proposal because I think some of those questions are answered in there in relation to it. I have read it. Okay. So this, I don't think we can get to, I don't know, does someone wanna respond to Caleb? So I can talk to Dylan? Yeah, who was that? Was that Joyce? That was Dylan. Oh, I'm sorry. This is Dylan if you can hear me. Yes. Sorry, I'm just having some technology issues today. It must be the new Zoom version or something, but I'm not here to rebut Caleb's comments, but because you asked for a response, I will say that given the significant impacts of COVID-19 disruptions on public higher education, while I don't disagree that the recent news has more focused on the Vermont State Colleges sustainability, I think that all states would be wise to be examining the current public configuration of systems because there are likely going to be some outcomes that will impact all public institutions. And in this case, that would include UBM. And I also just wanna remember that we have the Vermont Student Assistant Corp, which provides that financial support for students, which is also part of our public higher education expenditure. So I'll leave that with you just for some thought and contemplation as we put down our thoughts and share them with the chair. Right. So if folks could send me their thoughts on this document, that would be great. I'll see what I can do. I'm probably gonna try to pull something together either tomorrow or Friday morning. If anyone would like to help participate on a small group in terms of looking at this, as you know, lists are not my favorite thing to work on. But nonetheless, when you're creating a group, you can create a list. So. I'll make one suggestion in terms of thinking about the list. Maybe divide the thinking into people who will make decisions versus people who will give input. So people who will give input to make decisions, you can have a short list of people to make decisions as on the steering committee and they separately can collaborate with whoever you want them to collaborate with to get input. That's the way I think of carrying it down, but keeping it focused. I think that's a really good point. I think that's what the large list is, isn't certainly to keep in mind people that could provide input. And I think we want all of them to be providing input. Chair Webb, could I please say something about the timing and why we have the phased timeline? Yes, please. So when we first started thinking about this process, the appropriations committee wanted a full report, the final report by January 15th. And as we sorted through the issues that had to be addressed in this process, we realized that it's really way too much for any consulting group to finish all of this work by January 15th. So then the question was, could we get useful information for attacking some of the problem by January 15th and then allow the consulting group to extend their analysis into other issues that would extend into summer of next year and maybe even through December of next year. So that's the reason why we now have a phased timeline just to break up the work and to get some of the more urgent pieces available sooner. And to recognize we didn't need all of it by January 15th as well. Yes, correct. Thank you, Joyce. So Kate, just speaking of timelines and the timeline we're on and the fact that it's two, I think your idea of people sending you thoughts is probably the best way forward at this point. I don't think we're gonna decide anything here now since I've been aware of this since Monday and I'm still digesting it with everything else that's going on. So I think that's a good way to go. I also think that the idea of dealing with a long list has given me a headache. And so maybe a smaller group dealing with that, Peter Fagan and approach seems to have a very strong interest in this, Katie does as well, Mike Marcotto in commerce and maybe a select committee to select the select committee. Might be a good approach, but we're probably not gonna solve it today. Correct. Let's agree that we're not solving this today. We have plenty of time. We have until Wednesday, otherwise to have input. And I do think, Kate and maybe I might, since I'm supposed to be the liaison to approach, I think the question's about money and is this really gonna go anywhere if that includes $150,000 for a consultant? Are we doing per diems? And just before we get to ahead of ourselves, we're sure approach is still wanting to go in this direction now that they've had some time to digest it as well. This wasn't their original idea, having a committee they wanted to just do a consultant. I would say that when we spoke the other day, the three members from appropriations were interested in this model. Yeah, exactly. And also saw this as a really significantly important undertaking for the state of Vermont. Yeah. Okay, if we could get back to that, we could take the document down. Now that we've solved that, I thank you everybody. Why don't you send information to me? I would probably wanna check in with you, Candice and Michael and maybe Jim wanna check back in with you and Joyce as well. And do send me information as soon as you can. If you could do it right after this meeting, that would be great. Let's rush. I would appreciate it. Okay, can you reiterate what type of information you want from us? I'm looking for, one, your thought on the select group. Two, your thoughts on the timeline. And three, your thoughts on the work with the study. About the study, what the study should include. Yes. Response to it, I think that there were four focus points for example, look at the areas of focus, look at the purpose. But I think the main thing is the areas of focus and the rules of responsibility. Okay, I again wanna thank so much Candice Candice and Michael for joining us today and helping us with this, given an incredibly unreasonable timeframe, but that happens. Sometimes it's our best work, who knows. Not to worry. Yeah, so I will be in touch. Okay, thank you. And with that, I will let you know if I need to pull the committee together again before our floor on Friday. Currently we have our meeting after floor from two to four and we'll see where we are if this is gonna be, if this will have already sailed or whether we have time. So I thank you all. I will see you tomorrow on the floor. So to speak. And I look forward to hearing from you. And with that, we can go offline. Thank you.