 I'm doing well. How are you all? Thanks. Good to see you. Thank you for the discussion. It's very nice to be here. You have been with us before on S16. You've been one of the big proponents over the past several years with Senator Sears and others on this. You have seen an amendment that we are putting forward. We look at the amendment yesterday, and I think overall there were some questions. Wondering if you might just say a few words, having seen the amendment, support for it, concerns, suggestions that you might have, and then we can have a dialogue with you. Happily. Just a few words. The amendment, the issue of course supports the amendment. We are very interested in not only having data about school discipline, or at least allowing this commission to have the data that it needs to do the job that the legislature is asking it to do, but to ensure that all categories and things that are typically where we find disparities in school discipline are at their fingertips, and not just that information, but that it can be analyzed in a way that allows the commission to really figure out where are the connections, and that's the section about being cross-tibulated. We support the amendment. It adds a few key data points to make sure that the commission has the information that it needs to do its work. Without this information, we think that the commission is going to be at a deficit, and so we're hopeful that this information can be provided to them. Most of this information is available and has been available in previous Agency of Education reports on school discipline that I mentioned in my last testimony. They did two to this committee in 2016 and 2017 that included most, if not all of the information that this amendment seeks to include as well. I'll stop there. I apologize that I was not able to watch yesterday's review of the amendment, but I look forward to answering your questions if I can. No problem at all. Thanks for being here. That's very helpful. Questions following up on yesterday's discussion. Senator Perslick? I don't have any specific language, but it sounds like he has the support of the bill as amended, which was one thing I was just wondering of, because I think it's a little different than if you were to go through from his report kicked out, I think it was called that, that the things that was recommended in there, we might not be doing all those, but we're kind of taking an intermittent step, but it looks like we're going in the direction that was recommended. So I just confirming that it feels that we're following the reports that were issued in the past. Mr. Diaz? Yes. I think we're supportive of the bill as a step forward. We certainly hope that the commission, and we'll tell this to the commission if they bring people in, or for a part of it, that there are certain things that we hope to see recommended in accordance with what the data is telling us. But we agree that gathering data and having stakeholders at the table is important to actually coming up with meaningful solutions. So I think it's a great first step down the road towards really addressing the disparities in exclusionary discipline in our schools. Senator Hooker, please. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Diaz. One of the concerns about the amendment was about the collection of data at small schools, and I'm disaggregating the data, and therefore I'm kind of exposing personally identifiable information. Can you talk about that and maybe ways to get around that, or do you see that as a problem or not? Thanks. So as a ACLU attorney, we are very cognizant of privacy concerns, of course, as an organization that fights for the right to privacy and a number of fronts. On this issue, we think that, I'm at least not seeing a major privacy concern. I'm aware of FERPA and it is a complex and somewhat labyrinthine law, I'll say it is never really clear to me how exactly it applies when you're talking about just data points. However, my thinking is that this is just data that's going to the commission. Not all of it has to be released to the public, and so it's still within a state apparatus or a state entity. So hopefully that would handle some of those issues. I think the agency of education's lawyers will do everything they can to make sure that they're not violating FERPA. But my hope is that the commission can have all the information it needs in order to make decisions that make sense for the entire state. I hope that I know that's not a maybe a full answer to the question, but I hope it's useful. Thank you. Senator Lyons, please. Thank you. Thank you, Jay. This is very helpful. I think yesterday we did talk about the data collection, the disaggregation and what that little section actually meant. But I do have another question about the categories that are listed here for data collection and understanding that you're trying to get at the variables that might contribute to greater disciplinary actions for some kids over others. Knowing that tiered support and PBI are related to mitigating against social determinants. I'm wondering if there was any thought to including any of that epidemiological analysis of family situation, exposure to drugs, a single parent home, that information that is very informative when children have behavioral problems and including this discipline. Knowing that there is a strong interest in understanding the racial disparities of gender differences and so on. But was there any thought about, or could there be some thought about some of these other areas? I think there certainly could be some thought about them. My understanding of the amendment or the categories in the amendment is that those are categories that schools traditionally track. That's why they were included. I'm not sure because schools, as we all know, do a lot of data collection. This was trying to mirror some of that. Again, also, if the data is not there for some of these things, it may cause the commission to make recommendations about what additional data needs to be gathered if possible. But my understanding is at least the data that's currently there gives. I know we might currently be collecting all the data and we might not actually be getting down to the exact information that is going to help us understand how to change the direction. I don't know, maybe is there a way to add something in here about exploring new data categories without defining those, maybe related to social determinants, something like that? Certainly. I mean, I think that's something that the commission, you know, that you all could add and that the commission could be tasked with. I want to work on some language center lines with Mr. Demerite. Mr. Demerite, bring it to us tomorrow. Okay. We'll do that. That sounds okay. As long as Jim is willing to help me, that's it. Always. Always there. Any other questions for Mr. Diaz? Okay. Thank you, Jay. Great. No, thank you all for your work on this bill and the many others. There's a lot here all very busy. So I really appreciate the work that has been going on, especially in terms of equity issues. Thank you. And we know how to reach you. Where to reach you if we run into any other questions. So, Senator Hooker, before we go, you're on the floor with this probably Tuesday. Any other questions from you? Not right now, but I would like to talk with Jim and maybe with Senator Lyons is crafting more of our language for the amendment and just get some clarification on, you know, what we expect from the amendment. Can I maybe I could add something? I'm looking at the on page three of the proposal that we have in between the yellow and it does say recommend changes to the types of data collected and data collection processes. So I'm wondering if we if we could include in there something about data collection related to the contribution of social determinants, something like that to suspensions and expulsions, something just so it's there, it doesn't have a fully explicit or a big deal, but a little something to move along. Jim, do you need any other language besides that to from Senator Lyons? I don't. That's very clear. And I don't see any objections to adding something like that. And Senator Lyons, if this were to pop up as a question in any way on the server, you know, we'll look to you to. Sure, Senator Hooker will be really good. There's no question. It will be forehand. There's there's no question about that. And great. Anything else before we move on to Secretary French's eyes and comments on this amendment? And Mr. Diaz, if you're able to stay on, we would welcome that. Thank you for your help. Thank you for your support. And. We may be calling on you soon. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, I'll be here. Thanks, Secretary French. Good afternoon. Very much appreciate you coming in. We know you're equally as busy this time of year being pulled in all sorts of directions. We are continuing our work on S 16, which is in appropriations and where we're hoping to get their support. We appreciate all the work you've already done on S 16 and your support and moving in this direction. We do have an amendment that I know was shared with you where we the pro tem and Senator Hardy came to a few of us asking to disaggregate some of this data. And we've just heard from we've heard from our Ledge Council, Mr. Diaz, the ACLU and now eager to hear your thoughts on this. So with that, the floor is yours. Yeah, good afternoon. I appreciate the opportunity to testify. I have not seen the amendment. So I just I just received the invitation to testify about an hour ago. So I'm I'm unfamiliar with what's being proposed. I apologize. I couldn't find it on your website. The apology is mine. I'm just looking to see if our committee assistant is low might have it for us or might it be on the website? It is there. It is there. But it's under it's under S 16. I don't think it's on the on today's document. Probably on yesterday's document. I don't know where. See if I can find it. I can I can change it. Can you put it on today's? Yeah, thanks, Jeannie. While while we're doing this, I can just mention a little bit, Mr. Secretary, what we're trying to do is specify and collect, you know, what kind of data are we looking for? You know, our concerns. I know you share them around. You know, our students from the bypass community are disabled students are other students who is experiencing these suspensions and expulsions. We're trying to get information more specific information that will inform this commission as it moves to do this work. And gathering data and and having this data in front of stakeholders and those involved. We feel as I don't want to speak for the committee. I feel like we're leaning in that direction of finding that to be an important thing. Yeah, I'm still having trouble finding the amendment. I just because it takes a while for the system. So it's actually by enough to show. Oh, OK, thank you. I'll look for it there. Yeah, I got it there. Thanks. If you want to take a moment and go off screen, Secretary French and read it, we are happy to take a quick five minute stretch. No, I can read it pretty quickly. And when you say amendment, so this is just read through. The yellow. Yeah. So much for the stretch. Problem with having such a smart and talented secretary. Well, no, I wouldn't go that far. Yeah, so. So you're specifying to desegregation. That's what I'm picking up on. That's correct. Yeah. All data was desegregated by minimum following subgroups. Shall be cross tabulated. Five seconds. So this is prescribing some reporting format, basically, is how I view it. Is that is that fair? Is the end? Yeah. The task force will make it to end suspensions. OK, define the best practice, compile. Available data and the data collection regarding suspensions. Total number of this total. Yeah, I mean, I don't see a problem with that. It's, you know, my concern just to reiterate previously, I've read through this whole thing now, you know, is about prescribing data elements. I'll call them that, you know, that might or might not exist in the federal federal data dictionary. So I don't see that concern here from what I'm reading. It's certainly, I think, appropriate to have a group make recommendations to improve data collections if they're insufficient. And I know that that claim was made in the earlier vision of the draft, which I think is totally appropriate. I was concerned about that group then defining what those data elements were or what should be without, you know, they certainly could make recommendations in that regard, but to actually do it is, I think, is problematic. And my other concern was that they would also be involved in the collection of the data. What I read here is more about reporting, making sense of the information and making recommendations. So I, you know, there's nothing here I think that would be problematic from the agency standpoint. I think the reporting format would be improved because I know that's been an issue. But we certainly also as I make the point last time, if the reporting, reporting systems that we have or the collections that we have are deemed to be insufficient for Vermont purposes, then we should, we should endeavor to create new data collections. But it needs to be acknowledged firstly that there is a world of universe of data elements out there. And I know Vermont's a very special and unique place. But I find it hard to imagine that there aren't somehow already defined in that larger data dictionary the elements that we would find useful. And I did. I think I circulated to you anyway, Senator Campion, the report that the the AOE was asked to do in 2017 on this issue on exclusionary disciplines that sort of talked about some of the the data elements that are available in the small n size and and so forth. But I think as amended, this is an improvement to the concerns that I had previously. OK. And I, you know, I've circulated written testimony to you as well. Yeah, no, yeah. Appreciate that. And we can go back and. And I just underscore the point to that. I'm willing as secretary as any secretary should to be held accountable for the data reporting requirements. That is one of the essential responsibilities of the secretary and the General Assembly should expect and query the agency to produce reports and so forth. My earlier concern was like you were setting up another group to have responsibility over specific data collection. And that that's just one of those contributing factors that undermines our capability to actually do what we're supposed to do. If we're not doing something well, then you should expect us to do it better. But to to add on some other group to cross purposes actually distracts us from from doing what is an essential requirement of our our function. Mr. Diaz, while you're here and Mr. Demeray, any any concerns or questions, committee members, of course, first and foremost, as we can just have a conversation about this. We're at this stage. I just want to address the comment earlier from Senator Hooker about concerns about privacy. There was to say subject to state and federal privacy laws. So it would not allow the release of information even to the task force if that release would violate federal or state privacy laws. Questions. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Appreciate it very much. I don't know if you're able to stay on with us for a little bit. We are going to just take a quick break until 245 and return. And we'd love to just have 15 minutes of your time to talk about what we've been talking a lot about this this session and that is sort of COVID recovery. Yeah, sure. I'm I think my schedule is good till three. So OK, so we're to have an