 Maybe please look for that. It should be coming out shortly. And then we can move to approve those on Monday. So today we're going to go through public comments received. I don't believe there are any this week. So as a reminder to everyone, you may submit your public comments via the CCB's website. There is the way to do that. Then also we'll be talking about personal equity candidate parameters and requirements and then of course upcoming priorities. And if any of the members of the public would like to comment, that will be at 10 till the hour. And we should conclude at 4 p.m. today. All right, Gina and Jeffrey, I'll let you both step in and take it away. Thank you everyone for joining us today. So excited to be here everyone. Again, thank you so much for spending your time and your expertise with us. Thank you for the people who have come from the public. Hello to you as well. We really appreciate you joining us today. I know last time we left off with this slide. So I'm going to hand this over to Jeffrey as he was concluding with that last. Thank you. So this is from a proposed bill in Vermont that's on the table right now. And this is a way to define what a disproportionately impacted area is. Going back to our earlier conversations, we're trying to measure what the impact of community, the impact on the community that cannabis prohibition has had. And so this is something that we've seen from other states. This is a geographical approach, like I said. So number one is a Vermont opportunity zone as a way to identify what an impacted area is. And the reason my guess is the reason why that's there is because the IRS has gone through the hard work of identifying these areas around the country that have been like a lower poverty rate and a lower income compared to the rest of the state. And so this can be a way to identify what part of the state fall into that category. And as it spurs it down on B, it says, you know, 20% poverty rate. And then a free lunch program, SNAP assistance, and then the high rates of arrest, conviction, and incarceration related to cannabis. And so this is information that we still need from Vermont. What is the law enforcement approach to cannabis prohibition in Vermont? So yeah, I see Ashley just raise your hand. Go ahead, Ashley. I just wanted to make a quick note about Section C. I don't 100% understand the algorithm, but as a mom with children who are in public school here in Vermont, 100% of the children in public school qualify for federal free lunch. And to my knowledge, based off of how extensive and we utilize a lot of the fresh network farms to service the schools for free lunch. I'm pretty sure that that 75% are more children. I think that if you pulled the state, you would see that number. And I don't think that that's necessarily indicative of poverty, necessarily in our state based off of what I'm seeing for qualifications now in the state of Vermont. I agree, Ashley. I have spoken to someone about this. And especially during COVID, everybody has been receiving free lunches. We bring this slide to you based on the proposal of what is on the table for Vermont. And the following slide that you will see is evidence that we have gone through to look at the exact criteria. And then we will have our recommendation based on the evidence that we have found. So we just wanted to make clear guidance to you throughout all of it. But thank you so much because that is a really great point that you've raised. I appreciate that. And I've seen them on the slide a couple of times and I was curious. Yeah, I just thought I would be remiss if I hadn't made that note. So thank you. That's a good point to raise because it's very, very true. And our recommendation will be something different, which we'll discuss once we go through the presentation because that's one of that very reason. So the next slide, Tanika, I just see your hand up. Was there anything you wanted to ask? Actually, the only question that I had was because there's free lunch here as well due to COVID with all of our districts. Is that year round actually or each regardless? Okay, so that does not matter. Everyone qualifies. So that's a good point that everybody's raised. It sounds like maybe the free lunch criteria is not going to help us identify the community. So maybe we should just like forget that part. Yes, Jeffrey. That was kind of my point without being that correct. No, that's a good point though. So just to make sure that it's not a reactionary free lunch and it's an all the time free lunch, we need to remove it from the criteria. That is not going to be our end recommendation. We're just continue with the presentation or so. What we believe the real criteria is based on the assessment that BTH 14 has made. So one of the major things is why low income candidates? Why do we feel or the state of Vermont feels that they have suffered from the war on drugs? And in the proposal, it goes directly, which I think is a really valid, beautifully stated, you know, individuals who have residencies in areas of high poverty suffer negative consequences, including barriers to entry in employment, business ownership, housing, long-term financial well-being, promotion of business ownership by individuals who have resided in areas of high poverty, and high enforcement of cannabis related laws for the equitable cannabis industry. And we definitely agree with that statement. How does everybody feel about that statement? Are we on board with this quote of why we should be including both income candidates into the cannabis industry and the barriers that they have faced? Nader? Yeah, I'm just rereading it right now and I think it's clear and to the point when I like it. Do you agree that they should be included as candidates low income and we can do so around that? Thank you. And Susanna, your thoughts? Can you hear me? Yes. Okay, yes, I agree. I also think that it's a concise statement and I think that they should be included as well. Thank you. I do see that there are more people who have joined us. TJ, are you on the call now? Ashley, what are your thoughts about low income candidates? I like how this is written, but one thing I'd like to see and maybe, Nader, you can kind of touch on this a little bit of the high enforcement of cannabis related laws. So are we going to be able to see by county, by town in the state of Vermont, what sort of percentages we have that are, what are we deeming as a higher enforcement? Is that per capita? Is that, you know, obviously that's going to be heavily skewed? Is Burlington obviously a hotspot? Is the southern Vermont, Rutland area, Windsor area, is that necessarily a hotspot? What are we calling it? What's the word? We will not low income areas, but what was the slide before it was like zone? Yes, yes, thank you. So we're talking about opportunity zones and areas that have been impacted based on what they believe to be low income. So we're doing it by taxes as well. You know, is this areas of high minorities or are we going to do based on opportunities? So we're just guessing that in about one minute. But are you happy to include low income candidates for the social equity program? 100%. Okay, thank you so much. So one of the questions is, as you're saying, where is this low income? Where are these disproportionately impacted areas that we need to focus on? Some of the criteria is, you know, do we focus on just, you know, higher communities of bypass rates? So that is one way that we can determine disproportionately impacted areas as most of these counties as we already know are very low income. Another way was to focus on the 2019 income taxes in or 2020. Now, after doing much research and being able to speak with the Vermont Department of Taxes, they have recommended to us that that might not be the best way because about 17% of Vermonters do not file taxes because they do not have to because their income is below $12,400, which are exactly the types of people that we want to be helping. So if we went just based on that data, which you see here on this chart, it really would not get us the demographic that we're really after. And then we have the opportunity zone. And the opportunity zones take into account low income areas. And it also takes into these communities also have high BIPOC communities as well. And, you know, this is for the poverty rates has to be at least 20%. It's about, it doesn't exceed 80% of the median family income. And our, so I'm going to, the next slide is going to show you where sort of the opportunity zones are. And it's done by the census tract. And some counties have multiple census tracts in them. And this was a really great way of zoning those lines because it created a smaller area instead of just saying the entire county. So we have really zoned in to where the most low income areas are and who would need the most help. Jeffy, is there anything that you're like to add about opportunity zones? I think just like in the absence of a disproportionate impacted area report from Vermont, this is a good way to target communities that could have been impacted by Canada's prohibition in absence of specific data. Actually, I know that you had a big question of sort of how do we identify where is this proportionally impacted area. And based on our research and, you know, reviewing what the proposed bill was, I really do feel and it is in our best opinion that concentrating on a disproportionate area as the opportunity zones in Vermont would probably be the best. You know, a lot of research has gone into determining what these opportunity zones are. How do you feel about that, Ashley? I mean, given the definition, I think these are good. I mean, none of these are surprising towns to me. But yeah, I mean, every single one of these towns is going to have some sort of retail sales. Maybe not for gens, but we'll see. But other than that, I mean, it makes sense. And given, you know, if we're looking specifically at the BIPOC community, I mean, I think these are all well within the limits without seeing the actual report. But, you know, like Randolph, I think it's going to be tricky. I grew up there. I'm pretty familiar with that demographic. So that's the only one that's standing up to me that I'm like, mmm, that's going to be a tricky definition. But hopefully, I mean, that's one out of how many do we have here. So I feel good about it. Thank you for that feedback and also what I want to really state is because this is done by a census check, it's not helping an entire county. It's helping certain parts, certain districts within that county, where the county may not be an entirety low income, but that one point in it may, just to give more clarification as to these census tracks. And on the next slide, if you go to this website, which everybody has access to, you can see exactly where in the county the census tracks are. And then it gives you other information to understand what their average income looks like. And it gives us all of that information to really base. Okay, you can really see what that low social economic looks like for that small community. Can I ask one more question, Gina? When it comes to this kind of me coming off of the compliance and right world brain, but are we assuming that all of those towns and counties in one way or two for another are going to opt in to having reached out there? Like, I was thinking about this the other day, I was kind of like up in the middle of it. Okay, let's say we create these opportunity zones, we create this applicant, this amazing qualifications for our social equity applicant, but if the town is going to allow sales, is it all kind of our weight? So do we know specifically that these towns are going to say yes? The town does not need to opt in. This is allowing anyone who resides in these areas the opportunity to apply for a license or be able to be considered a social equity candidate and whatever resources that we have, whether that be in getting an entry level position or getting a license, that they will be able to operate anywhere in the state of Vermont. So we're not, thank you for that clarification. Okay, perfect, thank you. The areas where they need to build, but that these communities need the most assistance, you know, how can we lower that bar of entry and make sure that they are supported through their journey within the cannabis industry for the first few years? Great, thank you. Thanks. Suzanna, how do you feel about Vermont opportunity zones being used as the disproportionately impacted areas? Thank you. And Nader? I support that as well. Wonderful. Is there anybody else who has joined us that is part of the subcommittee that I'm not seeing right now? Okay, great. So, great. I think we have a really good consensus of what that looks like. I think, you know, this information here really supports and gives us the information that we need. On last call, we discussed what it's impacted families would look like. As we were saying that that would be one of the criteria of being a social SED candidate, was if you or your family was impacted on the war on drugs via incarceration or arrest. So I'm going to hand this off to Jeffrey. We have gained this impacted family from Denver, but there are other states that use very similar criteria. Jeffrey? Thanks, Gina. So this is kind of in answering to the point that Suzanna raised on the last call of what is family. And so this is an example just from the Denver, marijuana code that the impacted individual be the person who had the interaction with law enforcement. And then that could be the parents of that individual, a legal guardian. So not just limited to a biological family, but also anybody that takes care of that person. A sibling spouse, a child, or if like a minor in the guardianship to like a younger person who's taken care of an elder who was impacted. And then I know we have we have some similar stuff here in California. And this also we could also open it up to other things based on how Vermont extended family looks like. And that's information that maybe the advisory committee could supplement with this slide right here. So looking at these different, these different folks, I get to say a relationship to the person who was impacted. Are we missing anybody? I know Suzanna you raised this last time and you said you were going to look into it from the Vermont state level. What are your thoughts about this slide? Yeah, I like this one because I think that it's tight enough that there's a genuine nexus. Great. And I'm wondering if, I know that we have legal guardian which could include grandparents, but for multi-generational families who maybe don't have legal arrangements, I'm wondering if we can add them as well. If maybe there's some, maybe not legally binding, but some other evidence that there is like a guardianship relationship between a person and a grandchild. Great additions, Suzanna. We can add or proof our guardianship. How, or how would you define that? Is that just saying and or proof of guardianship? Like how would they need to prove that on the state level? Well, there might be documentation that they submit. For example, are they the ones who are always signing forms for school? Or are they the ones who are routinely paying for things? Maybe there's records of payments that cover certain necessities and other needs. Okay. Or address of rent to you or something like that. Right, yeah. To Nika, can we add to this slide and or or proof of guardianship? And then I'm Suzanna. I'll have a call with you offline where we can determine what that criteria will look like based on the state level. I've got it, Gina. No worries. Thank you so much. Yeah. And also providing proof. Does this take into account individuals who may have been in the foster care system where there's very little documentation about their connection to a particular parent that may like maybe the parent was impacted and they're in the foster care system, but they may not have any direct documentation. Well, I, the one thing I would say is maybe perfect certificate records that they may have or any other documentation that they may be able to prove that. But Julie, that is a really great question. And I think, you know, Suzanna, when we're discussing this, I think we should address Julie's question and how we can provide proof. Enforced care situation. Yeah, I agree. Thank you, Julie, for mentioning that. Ashley, how do you feel about the impacted family side with the reflection? Julie read my mind. I was thinking the exact same thing and knowing a lot of the folks that, you know, I have heard expressed interest in wanting to get into the industry are also foster parents. And so I think that's an excellent addition. And I do think that this is good. I think this is inclusive enough. But I think, yeah, I think there's a couple rabbit holes will go down once we do a little bit of research here for, you know, foster parents and so forth. I am going to hop off this call and I'll look for those minutes. And then certainly if there's anything else, Gina, we're all meeting tomorrow and we can pick up from then. Yes, I will fill you in on everything else we discussed on this meeting tomorrow. Wonderful. Thank you guys so much. Thank you so much. Ashley, appreciate you. And Nader, how do you feel about impacted family with what we have written here and the before mentioned items? I support the language as well as the additions that we've been talking about in the next step. Thank you. And it looks like we're ready to define what a social equity candidate looks like. So, based on Monday's call and our call today, it seems like that we would like to have a social equity applicant meet one of the following criteria, which lives in an opportunity zone. A member of BIPOC Minority Race Ethnicity and then three is impact of cannabis prohibition. So, if they have ever been arrested, convicted or incarcerated for a non-violent cannabis offense. One of the things that we will need to discuss, which might actually change this. And I might just have it right now as this cannabis offense is we will be discussing expungements of records and at that time we'll be going into non-violent and violent cannabis offenses. Or if you are a member of an impacted family and with the success that termination of family and based on Monday's call, it seems like where the residential requirements, you must have lived in Vermont for one year before submitting your application in order to qualify for as a social equity applicant. So, Nader, how do you feel about that? So, I like this definition that we have these three points and the one year residency requirements. Thank you, Susanna. I just do, I appreciate the way that we built the third one as well. I'm comfortable with this. Right, and I'm not sure if I know Ashley saying she was going to get off the phone. I just want to see if she has exited or not, actually. Okay, great. Julie, I know Susanna is on our board as, you know, help from the state of Vermont, which she qualify as a quorum or do we need to have this bite again on Monday? No, I don't think so. No. No, the attorneys in the room say no. Oh, I'm muted. And if we're uncertain, we can do it on Monday. No, she does not qualify as a part of the quorum. Okay, so we will discuss this on Monday, but thank you so much for the feedback and we will continue this meeting with presenting information but not making any decisions about what we determine now. And the next criteria that we are going to be discussing is supporting documentation that is needed for a social equity candidate. What I have in red, we will take out because we are determining low economic income, like low social income based on a opportunity zone, they do not need to provide us proof of income. So we will be able to take out that requirement. However, for the other points that we have made for a social equity candidate, we would need obviously the first one is proof of conviction, you know, do we have court documentation, probation, Department of Corrections documents. And one question that I would like to give to Nader is, I know that we, there have been a lot of expungements of records that have actually been erased off Vermont State government records. How do we, or how did a person, if we have wiped their conviction, be able to show proof? That's a great question because, you know, in theory, the theory behind expungement is, as if the arrest never happened, but we know that it did happen and they're dealing with the collateral consequences of it. I was just thinking of the second note that I was reading this, is that there are ways maybe to get to have the candidate sign a release and have their information from their attorney if they're willing to let it go in order to prove that they did go through a process. That's one thought. Obviously the candidate would have to be okay with releasing that information and that's if the attorney still is in possession of it. The candidate may also have their old paperwork, you know, old reports and old citation. Those are some of the first things that I'm thinking of that are coming to mind. Just on the technical side of this, the legislature did think about this issue a couple of years ago and did a provision in the statute such that somebody who has had their record expunged can go to the court and get a record from the court of that expungement for precisely reasons like this. So it is possible for people who have had records expunged to show proof of that with a court document. That sounds much easier than what I said. David, who just answered the question? I think that's the answer, yeah. I think it's the easiest. I'm sorry. What is your name? Are you David? Oh, yeah, sorry. This is David, sorry. Yes. Yeah. Okay, great. Thank you, David. So that's David this year. He is the general counsel for Vermont cannabis control board for those of you who are wondering listening to this recording. Thank you so much for that. So we will add that as the way to get proof of expungement records. Let's add that to the record. So that would be a supporting documentation that a social equity candidate will need to deliver. With that being said, if they were not the ones who were arrested or convicted, then we would also need proof of family relations. So that is part B of this, which we need to add to the slide. And then we need to, as we've said for any of the categories that they fall into, we need proof of residency and especially proof of residency if they are in an opportunity zone. Which I will hand this off to Jeffrey to go over proof of residency with everyone. Before I do so, Nader, you have a question. Yes. It has to do with the proof of residency specifically to get assigned lease agreement. And, you know, there are a lot of, I just wanted to keep in mind that there's a lot of living situations where people may not have assigned lease agreement. They may be roommates with somebody and that other person has the lease agreement. So just wanted to throw that out there as something to think of as we do this. That's a great point. Nader, what I would specify in C is that an assigned affidavit is of living situation if it is in a case of a roommate and or you're in an apartment that doesn't have it with whoever is leasing it or with a landlord. I think it's a good, another way to prove that you're living with that person. Yes, Zenika. Is there any reason why we couldn't follow, maybe what a school district would follow for proof of residency, especially because that's done in multi-generational. I don't know what that is in Vermont or what it might be by district, but I do know where I live. We have a lot of multi-generational family homes and so that's definitely something that is taken into consideration is the school district and how they do it. We can certainly look into that. This information of proof of residency is what I found within Vermont State's got-it legislation. So that is actually what I'm using. Is that on each 414? The way that they had to, okay, great. But that is something that we can look into as well. And, Jeffrey, you have your hand raised. Yes, thank you, Gina. I wanted to have a question back to the expungement question for David. Will these applications become a matter of public record once they go through the CCB and that's something to consider when somebody wants to disclose a past expungement. I'm just wondering, David, do you know if these are going to be public record applications? It certainly is something to consider. At least parts of them would become public record. There's parts that won't already under the statute and we'll have to think about how to, we'll have to define by rule something to deal with this issue because that's a good point. We wouldn't want those papers to come out in public record. So we'll think about that. Thanks, David. And then on to the approval residency. So we cover, I really like the unique idea about the school district criteria is using a way to say, okay, how does the school district figure it out? Looking at this, okay, you have the driver's license identification card, disability identification card, a voter registration card, the silence agreement of the voter registration card and the paycheck stuff. What are some other ways that Vermont has to establish somebody living somewhere? I know here in California, the library card system is pretty, is it how do you have to put your address in to get the library card or to have a PO box or some other way to documentation? Go ahead, Nader. Can you answer that question? You know, we could also use proof of utility bills. I know that as far as I can remember when I had to go get my license, I needed to bring two utility bills, one or two utility bills to prove that I lived in my address. That could be an additional thing to add on there. Utility bills that are in here. Yeah, that's a great addition. Thank you, Nader. And Susanna, what are your feelings about this? Yeah, I would agree. I just think it's important to allow enough pathways so we can think creatively about that and I think that would make it more inclusive. Gina, I would add a tax return to that as well, even though they may not all have tax returns. If it's a tax return in a year, that also can assist in that area or a recent one. And do we have a bank statement on here? And again, I know not everybody will have bank statements on from that world, but at the same time, a bank statement is often indicative of residency requirements as well. Yeah, in Vermont, when you have a bank account, do you need to show proof of your residency upon getting it or are you just able to put a bank account on there? Or bank and credit card statements now just allow you to put an address and if you don't update your address and you're no longer living there or haven't lived there for several years, you just get e-statements now? It still will physically have an address on it and if you ask for something recent, that would also be worth consideration. Okay, so Megan, are we jotting all these notes down that we've gotten utility bills, tax returns, bank statements? Correct. I just wanted to share that my school district also allows for a public aid card as proof of residency. I'm not exactly sure what that looks like in the state of Vermont, but that's one of the things on the list for at least my school district. Thank you, Julie. Okay, so we will update this slide and show that to you next week with these final additions and we will also be looking into some school district zones and what they require for residency. Which brings us to what we will be discussing next week and some other additions of what is some upcoming priority. So we will be discussing reducing or eliminating licensing fees, ways to use the cannabis development funds, how to make an inclusive industry and justice reform. Really talking about expungement of records and automatic expungement of records in this case from state of Vermont. One of the things that they were discussing earlier today in the marketing committee was about special licenses that we would like to make for social equity. One of them being a potential courier delivery license that may only or have priority for social equity or maybe only go to social equity candidates. Now we're seeing this in Massachusetts where they do a delivery business license that are only allowed for social equity within the first few years of the program. And then we're also seeing that with the city of Denver. I wanted to get people feel about that right now so we can. And I will be talking to Ashley tomorrow and DJ about this matter as well. Nader, what are your thoughts? So we're talking about creating special licenses for delivery is what you were saying, correct? Yeah, so for social equity candidates only or maybe getting their first year or for having, I see there are two ways to do delivery licenses. Now they could be delivery as a business, which is how they have structured it in Massachusetts where they have to have, you know, multiple automobiles and they have to have a dashboard can and to two body. They have to have a body cam and then they have to have two people at all times and this can become very extensive and very expensive. But then there is also a courier delivery license that we can have where you are delivering on behalf of dispensaries using cards that we can make exclusively for social equity licensee. So my recommendation would be doing the courier delivery license, which just allows for an easier ability to start because it's much more low cost for a social equity candidate. Yeah, I think having a courier license for social equity candidate is not a support that I'm just also thinking of how this would be received in the legislature with, you know, there is likely be contingency of legislators who would audibly gas at the idea of cannabis being delivered to people. But I think if you balance that by saying it could prevent people from, you know, going to dispensaries, smoking somewhere nearby and then driving that could mitigate the apprehension that might exist. But when it comes to your question, I support the courier license for social equity candidate. And that's a great point that you raised, Nader, about, you know, having delivery would use someone having to drive there who may already be using the substance. Yeah. Zizana, how do you feel about that? Yeah, I agree. It's going to be, I don't want to use the word controversial, but I think yet audible gas is expected. I like to disagree. And, you know, on a proceeding call, we will come up, give you some more information around this and how we can support this license. Another license that we were thinking about is having a co-op license so that a social equity can join other people in trying to build, you know, cultivation or maybe a dispensary with each other. How do you feel about that, Zizana? I think it's an interesting proposal. You know, we would have to do it right in the sense that, you know, making sure that the rest of the infrastructure to support a co-operative model is in place. So, yeah, I would like us to be able to envision really concretely what that would look like and make sure that we're setting it up for success. But, yeah, I don't see why you want to. Thank you. And, Nader, how do you feel? I also support that. And I think Zizana brings up some pretty good points about it as well. But the idea is going to support it. Thank you. And one of the things that we will be discussing next week, especially around the co-op model or, so to say, an incubator program is having co-op. Come together and possibly using some of the funding to have, you know, a subsidized state land and equipment. But we will be discussing that possibly at the end of Monday or on our Thursday call. So we will get into further special information about that. But I just wanted to make sure that you guys were receptive to those two special licenses for social equity so that I can allow the marketing subcommittee know about that. Tina, where, yes? You got it. Never mind. You hit it. We're at public comment. Do we have public comment? I've said a couple of words. No. Does anyone else have? I just want to make good. Okay. Go ahead, Mark. You okay? You okay? No, I'm fine. Okay, excellent. Thank you, Mark. And keep me brief. I will be briefed myself. Thank you, everybody. Jeffrey Pizzatillo, Vermont Growers Association, Vermont Cannabis Equity Coalition as well. Just a couple quick points. I think that we would encourage not postponing or staggering the licenses of particularly the courier license. If you guys do move in that direction, it's incumbent on Mark or Rollout to provide as much access as possible and give our monitors control over price. A couple points within that. Regarding delivery, we deliver cannabis right now. Our medical dispensaries deliver cannabis. So we have precedent. We've been doing that for, I want to say almost a year now in this state. There's no reason to why we can't apply that hopefully to others. That being said, the courier license also in Massachusetts should not require brick and mortar location. And I would also add, give them the ability to run a website. Just more access points for customers. That being said, just put it on everyone's radar and it does dovetail into delivery licensing. And that is the importance of making sure that we're addressing consumption and consumption sites. Getting back to home ownership, getting back to equity, looking at recriminalizing this and we want to avoid that. As we know, arrest rates and disparages in race and in arrest rates regarding cannabis persist in commercial marketplaces. So please think of consumption when we're thinking about equity in this case. Thank you. Thank you. How are you doing? I'm doing okay. Mark Hughes, Racial Justice Alliance, also Cannabis Equity Coalition. Hi, you must know. I am. It's good to meet you. It's good to meet you. I appreciate it. I'm sorry. Can you repeat your name? I'm sorry. I missed it. Mark Hughes with the Racial Justice Alliance and the Cannabis Equity Coalition. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Great work, Hygiene. The disproportionately impacted areas was a term that we used in 414 to talk about disproportionately impacted areas. And so it was a combination of a discussion on opportunity zone. There was a 20% discussion. If you recall that, I'm going to try to be brief, as well as the 75% free lunch. I would encourage folks to take a closer look at the numbers across the state on free lunch and also correlate to Title I. Because, you know, we already have all this stuff in place. And also SNAP, what we were trying to do was in 414 to create a correlation or a confluence of something that identified areas. Why? Because people live in certain areas. And the reason why they live in certain areas is because it's where they can afford to live. And that's why they go to school and in places that they go to school. You know, gentrification notwithstanding. I would just say that it is really important to take a look at the combination or a confluence of all of these things when we're talking about areas. And it's also, it's very important to talk about areas because it's also, it's what we want to improve upon at the end of the day. We're not just rolling out a market. We're also revitalizing a community. So that was what we envisioned in the whole of 414. So there is in 989, section 989 of 414, there's a component called Community Social Equity Program. And it was created to directly address the impact of economic divestment, violence, and historical overuse of the criminal justice response to our communities. And individual needs by providing resources to support local design and control of community-based responses, community-based responses. So I can assure you that I would be much prefer than I anticipated because my computer just died. But I'll just tell you that with that approach, I think I just wanted to make sure that I was understood the context that we were defining Opportunity Zone. It was just one of four components that spoke to an overlapping or a intersecting area impact. I think it's important to understand that at the end of the day we're talking about, we're also from a community perspective, we're talking about poverty. And we know that systemic racism has generated not just generational wealth but also poverty, generational poverty. And that's what we're trying to get after, which translates to our applicants. So there was a full list of criteria in 414 as far as the identification verification, I think there was some discussion about proof of residency. They're all listed in section 986 of 414 as well. I think you did a fairly decent job of ultimately arriving at them, but they're all there as well in 414. The conversation on the marketing subcommittee, I want to thank the consultants and the subcommittees for the work that you all are doing in finding intersections with the other committees on social equity at this point. Our recommendations will traverse all of them as well. The social equity recommendations will traverse all of them. There will be one that's focused on social equity, but they will also traverse all of them. We are actively engaging in discussions on couriers and co-op licenses as well, and they will be largely supportive of the direction that you're going as a committee. So thank you for being out in front on that. As far as the courier is concerned, not to be the spoiler or anything like that, I hope that we would be just mindful that the arrest rate for cannabis for Black folks in Massachusetts went north after the taxation and regulation. And I think that cannabis courier pieces in the afterthought, I think they sought to address that. So that was one thing, and my only concern is that the police really want to get to know you if you're Black here in Vermont, and I know it's just like that perfect storm, it's just something to consider. Okay, so we want to tax and regulate marijuana, and the folks we want carrying it around is the Black people knowing that police will help. Do I need to say more? So, David, I think you're going to appreciate some of this being part of the racial disparities in the criminal juvenile justice system advisory panel and the attorney general's office up until now. That is all I have. I appreciate the time, and we'll continue to be a part of what's going on. We really wish we could just dial in, and it's like everybody else, because it's kind of a little bit of a trip down from Burlington, but we'll continue to do it if we need to. Thank you. Other public comments? I think that's it for public comments. Thank you so much for your public comments. Those were very helpful and insightful. We also want to let you know that you are also able to write written public comments, and we do a summary of those before every single meeting. So, if you are not able to attend in person, that there is another way for the committee to hear it. We do a summary on the committee call, but every single committee member gets your full comment that was submitted just to give further explanation about public comments. Susanna, Nader, Jeffrey, Danika, anything else you would like to add or have questions or comments about? Nothing for me. Thank you. I do actually just want to say I do appreciate both of the comments that were made by the members of the public, particularly about how do we not just focus on the narrow aspect of, you know, logistical issues like delivery without also incorporating the broader context of public safety and permissions on watching the intersection points. I think it's really important. So, I appreciate both of the speakers. Thank you. Do I have a motion to adjourn? I don't think you have a quorum anymore, so you don't have to formally adjourn. Okay. Well, Nader, Susanna, are you okay? I'm good. Yes. Okay. Great. Thank you so much for participating today. This meeting is no longer being reported or transcribed.