 We're going to start recording. So we've got that going. Thanks, Tim. Okay. Thanks. Got it. I think I'll turn up the sound. We had it down the other day. Cause the. The webinar. Very loud. So. Are there any changes? Oh. Yeah. And as usual, we will start with attendance. Can you hit record side note from. Somebody asking to start recording in progress. Start with what? Just to start recording. So we've got that going. Thanks, Tim. Okay. Thanks. Got it. I think I'll turn up the sound. We had it down the other day. Okay. So. Are there any changes? Are there any changes to the agenda? Do not see any. Anybody wishing to change the agenda. Catherine. We might ask maybe right before my report. If there's anyone interested in joining the equity leadership team. Okay. So that would be between six and seven. Yeah. Sounds good. Okay. I was going to ask Wayne anyway. Yeah. I don't know. I haven't frozen yet. Let's go on before I freeze again. Is there any. One here to make comment on things that are not on the agenda. Madam chair. Yes. Because of the unusual nature of my service to the CCRPC. I just wanted everybody to understand that. I'm no longer the 10 outside the village as six junction rep. I'm no longer the 10 outside the village in Essex. Just so you know. Thank you, Jeff. That is important to recognize. We know you represent somebody, but it always changes. But eventually it'll be just over. I was 20 years. The town outside the village rep for Essex junction. What do you mean I change. You elaborate on that. What do you mean? I'm closing on my house. Tomorrow and show her. Right now. Right now I am homeless. So maybe I should volunteer for the homeless committee. Experience. Well, congratulations on the closing coming up though. That's always an important event. All right. Next. It would be the consent agenda, but we do not have a consent agenda tonight. So we'll move on to the minutes we were not able to do the minutes of January 19th before. So we will start with those. Do we have anybody wishing to make a motion. On the agenda on the minutes of January 19th. I'll note that we approve the minutes of January 19th. A second. Thank you. Second. Does anybody have any corrections to them? Besides me. Seeing none. Under Jericho, we have Wayne. How he should be listed as the alternative. As is the other alternates. And on page six. I'm a line 16. I may have misspoke, but what I was trying to say is there is a greater need for regional based dispatch because the UJFD was notified. It had no longer been, it had no longer been, it had no longer been, it had no longer been, it had no longer be served by the state dispatch. That's all I had. So if there are no other corrections, then all those in favor either say I or raise your hand. Well, one thing I was just going to say, I'll approve the minutes as amended. Thank you. Should have done that. Yes. Dan. Thank you. Okay. All those in favor then say I. Okay. Oh, Chris has a, oh, he's got his thumb up. That's what that is. Got it. I swear I'm still recovering from having my eyes. Moving on to the minutes of. February 16th. Do we have a motion to approve those with corrections as noted. Okay. Okay. That would be Jeff. Got it. Does anybody have any corrections as noted. Jeff. Madam chair on page five. I think lines 24. Is it. I'm just, I'm doing this lecture at 27. I realized that sarcasm doesn't come through well in minutes. I suggest if we could. Jeff said, quote, if we are only talking about $21 million, close quote. Okay. Stochastic there. And then I just asked maybe to make it clear because I talked about that the. Service. The service was poor service. And I was suggesting online 29 Jeff worries. Which tries to fund poor service. That's sustainable. That's what I said. Sounds good. I have on. Line page two line 32. I would imagine that's. Linden would drive, not Linden would dive. Yes, that is Linden would drive. I can confirm. Thank you. All right. All those. Any other corrections. Any hearing and seeing none. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Now we have Pam who is going to lead us through a presentation on transportation. Transportation. Resilience planning. Hello everyone. Are you seeing my screen? Yes. Yes. Sorry. Let's see if I can do this correctly here. Okay. So for those of you who don't know me, I'm Pam, and I'm the GIS data and IT manager for the regional planning commission. And I wanted to talk to you tonight about a new. Planning tool that. Is coming online or will be available. Hopefully this summer. It's a, it's a statewide planning tool. It's not just for the regional planning, it's not just for Chittenden County. Oh, wait. Hold on a second. Let me try this. Okay. So what I'm going to cover tonight is what the transportation resiliency tool is or. Easier to say the TRP T. I will explain the key components and go over some definitions. So the TRP T can be useful as a resource to your town. Share with you the current progress of this project and then show you a demo of the app. That is sort of in testing mode right now, although there is a live. Web application that you can go to. And I will, I will share that information as well. As it says on the slide, it's a web based application and it is aimed to identify the. Assess and identify the vulnerability of all of the roads and structures, meaning bridges and culverts in the entire transportation network for the state. So that includes both state and local roads. It also looks at these, this infrastructure and how critical it is. And then it assesses the risk of flooding and helps in identifying some mitigation strategies. So this is a pretty big project that was. Led by V trans is policy planning and research bureau. With funding from several federal and state sources. In addition to V trans, the other state partners include the agency of natural resources, emergency management and agency of commerce and community development. All of the regional planning commissions in the state have been a part of this project in various different phases. And then we have a whole group of wonderful project consultants that have really been the driving force of the development of the app and a lot of the. Analysis that took place to develop the outcomes. So. The key components of this application. As I mentioned, it looks at vulnerability and criticality. The vulnerability is looks to the extent that a transportation asset could be exposed to a threat. A flooding event threat. And that could be in the form of inundation. Erosion or deposition. And then criticality looks at, you know, how important is that transportation asset. That would help to, you know, determine, you know, if it, if the road was closed or if the bridge was to blow out, you know, what sort of effect would that have on your transportation network? You know, how close is that road segment or that bridge to critical, essential facilities. And all of this vulnerability is taken into account by looking at the different sizes of storms. So it looks at models of 10 year, a 50 year or a 100 year flood event. And all of that information is taken into account and compiled to determine the risk factor for every single road segment, bridge and culvert in the state. And then another piece of this whole application is the mitigation strategy that helps you determine how to alleviate those potential vulnerabilities. So again, the vulnerability is looked at in three different ways is a road segment vulnerable to inundation, you know, like the ponding, the flooding of a road when the water comes down so hard and fast that, you know, the whole road is inundated. It looks at erosion, which is, you know, just the undercutting, the falling apart of the roads. And then deposition, which I always think of in the form of culverts, but there's other ways that deposition can happen. But that's like when the water is flowing so fast and the debris gets clogged up in a culvert or undercut. And it causes issues. And so this deposition, so just to point out that both deposition and erosion results in a little bit higher vulnerability score than the inundation. I think in the severity of the damage that could happen. And as I mentioned, that all of this is looked at in the three different types of flood, three different levels of flood events, the 10, 50 and 100 year. When you're looking at this web application, it always defaults to the 50 year, but you can change it. You can adjust it if you wanted to, if you wanted to see what the 10 year or the 100 year would look like. Just to give you an idea of how much goes into this vulnerability score, every single asset, whether it's a road segment or bridge or culvert is looked at for all three types of vulnerability and all three types of storm events. And so it ends up there's like 27 different vulnerability scores that go into that final vulnerability score for each segment. And so the information that's used to determine those scores comes from past damage reports and as well as local knowledge. When we worked, Jason in our office and I worked on this project, we touched base with the towns and talk to the road foreman and town managers to get information about what roads do they have a lot of repeat damage to. And then it also takes into account the topology, you know, how close is the road to the river bank. So then, so that's the vulnerability score. And then there's this criticality score and the criticality score has to do with that. So that's criticality score and the criticality score has three different pieces of criteria used to determine it. This is an example of the network criticality index, which is modeling that builds on the network robustness index, which was developed by the University of Vermont Transportation Research Center. And this is just some examples of what how low criticality, you know, if there's another alternate route, then if a culvert blows out or a road is inundated in water, if there's another road, another option to travel on, then the criticality is considered low, whereas it's high. If there's no other parallel routes or if both roots are damaged, then it would be considered high criticality. And then there's the critical closeness accessibility, which is another model that was developed by Novak and Sullivan at University of Vermont. This was this model was run on the entire state transportation network. It's its own standalone GIS layer that is available. And it looks at the roads, access to key destinations such as like hospitals and fire and police stations, things like that. So the third component, so you have this, you have the, these two models that are looked at, the criticality network criticality index and the critical closeness accessibility. And then there's what's considered the locally important index or not really an index, but this is where it's allows for a little more manual determination. And again, this was where we spoke with the towns to find out, you know, is there a, you know, a local detour or a shortcut that many residents use that would deem a road segment to be really more important than maybe showed up through either of these models. So it gives a little opportunity to adjust the score a little bit. So those three combined to determine the criticality. And then, so then the criticality and the vulnerability are combined to determine the risk. And that risk can be a zero to a 10. And it's the, it's actually the average of all of the vulnerability and all of the criticality scores for each segment and structure and network. So the entire math will show every road segment and structure in a color of green to red, basically showing the risk level. So once you have a view, once you're you're looking at your town and you see all of these colors and you find the highest risk and you want to know some mitigate mitigation strategies. There is they've grouped the mitigation into four different groups. And the slide identifies the four groups. I'm just going to read a little bit of a description of each one. So the first group focuses on fortifying road embankments, bridges, or culverts to resist erosion. This, these mitigation strategies tend to be applied in high risk settings where damages due to erosion and deposition are likely. The second group, the conveyance of flood flows is in general the purpose is to increase space for water, sediment, large wood, and ice downstream during flooding. The third group is to protect the space and flood plains and river corridors to keep permanent infrastructure and private property out of areas where inundation, erosion and deposition are taking place. This strategy group reduces river and road conflicts in the future. Some examples include adjusting road alignment, conserving river corridors, and buying out flood prone properties. And then the fourth, the improved vegetation mitigation strategies are used to naturalize the river banks and repair and riparian corridor to provide the many benefits of vegetation such as increasing bank stability, creating near stream habitat for birds and insects, and filtering stormwater runoff. It's pointed out that this group of strategies or mitigation strategies alone at sites with high flood velocities, they need to be applied with other strategies, but they can always stand alone to lessen the erosive environment. So then when you're looking at the strategies, you can also filter based on whether, if you want to know what sort of an impact a mitigation strategy would have on a river, whether it's a low or a high impact, the same for the transportation network, you can also look at the strategies based on whether it's a short-term fix or it would be a long-term, something you might have to plan for over a five-year time period, as well as what is the scale of the mitigation strategy? Is it just this one culvert or is it a whole river reach or is it the entire watershed? So it's a lot of information and hopefully when I get to the application it'll kind of come together a little better. I just wanted to give you some background and as well as ideas for how this application could be useful to you and your town. It can help provide a fuller picture of what infrastructure is vulnerable in your town and what it's vulnerable to. It can help, it can be useful in ways to think about different mitigation strategies, of course, but it can also be helpful in your budgeting process and in grant applications and capital programming and also in hazard mitigation planning. So I have this slide, but I think I'm going to switch to, well, I'll just point out that this project has been conducted since it started in 2017 or 2018. The first, the pilot phase was completed in 2018 and then phase two in 2020 and now we're in phase three. And this map here, the darker gray shows that was the pilot phase and then these, the lighter gray, all these watersheds were completed in phase two and now the rest of the state is being completed in phase three. And I'm going to see, now are you guys seeing my website with three different maps? Okay. So this is, as of today, I believe the current progress of phase three. So you can tell that the vulnerability is complete. The vulnerability analysis has been complete. The criticality index is in progress. All the green and the darker gray, all the grays and green have been completed. I believe this purple area is all that's left to run some of the criticality models. And then uploading all this information is in progress. So I wanted to show you can access the current application if you just go into your web browser and type in TRPT. You should get this link that would bring you to VTrans website. It gives a little introduction. And then a link to the application. And so I'm not going to spend time on this one because I want to show you what it should look like once it's all up and running. So you can search for a town right from here if you wanted to. So I'll just put in Richmond and it'll zoom right here to that town and it will load in all of the information. You can also filter. You can filter by an RPC. I guess I probably have to go back out and start over here so I can zoom right into our region. And all of the roads show you can easily see where the higher risk roads are. But if you wanted to dig down into just one town, you can just type in the town and it will zoom. And so you have the map. And this is just showing road segments. You can add, you can turn on the bridges and the culverts if you'd like. But just for this example, I'm just going to leave just the road segments on. And if you notice over here on this chart, it will change as I zoom in and you can either identify like so the higher the risk. So the more critical the road segment and the higher the vulnerability. You can click on here and it'll highlight the road segment that is that high risk. Or you can click on the road segment itself. And when you click on the road segment, it adds in some more over here and it will tell you so the vulnerability score for that road segment is a four out of 10. The criticality is a seven out of 10. You can find out what what gives it these scores. So let's try this one. So inundation, it got a five out of 10 erosion of one and deposition of two. So the biggest vulnerability is inundation for this segment of Harbor Road. And then you can look at the criticality score. And it was medium for both, but it's locally important. Town garage wastewater treatment plants is right here. Ambulance is right here. So I could see why it was locally important. And so then you can look at the strategies. The mitigation strategies. And here are the four groups that I mentioned. So you've got the conveyance of flood river road. And so there's nothing to offer for river road stabilization, but there's some conveyance of flood flows. Strategy suggestions. There's improving the vegetation. And river corridor conservation. And you can see it gives some cost estimates. These aren't exact, of course, but it helps with budgeting to have some cost estimates. And then so we were defaulted to looking at it as the initial river impact. You can change this to look at short or long term. So these are long term strategies. The vegetation are the only ones that are short term. So then you can clear that. As I mentioned, you can turn on bridge data. And they're color coded the same way. So anything yellow is considered medium risk. The reds are the high risk culverts. So there are some culverts that are high risk. And you can see which ones. They'll identify that way. And then you can click on it. There's other data that you can turn on. You can, you know, turn on buildings. You know, watershed boundaries. There's a bunch of information there. Oh, I also want it. You can. So this is showing the 50 year. If it was a 50 year event, you can change this to see the 100 year event. And numbers, the colors, you'll see things change. If you go down to a 10 year event, you get a lot more greens, very low risk for those 10 year. And then when you get to the 100 year, you can see there's a lot more yellows and reds. I think that might be it. Oh, one other thing you can, if you were going to use this information and wanted to share it with somebody or include it in a grant application, you could zoom in. And you can get a, a link that you can then use and share to somebody and they, they could click on that link and it would bring them right to that same spot that you were looking at. Oh, thanks Regina. Any questions. Pam, I had a quick question. I was trying to obviously. Tinker around and pull up South Burlington and went to the site for that, but it seems like I can't even pull up the data that you have for Shelburne. So I must not be doing it. No, no, you're, you're right. So I'm showing you something that's available. Not to the public yet. So the, the. What is available for. To the public is only really going to show for our region. It's really only going to show the Richmond Bolton. Yep. Huntington area. So that's all part of the upload that has. Yeah. Yeah. So our hope is that this summer it will be available. So yeah. Coming soon. You're it. You have a question. You're muted, Garrett. I just had to click the right button. Somebody muted me. Can you hear me now? Yes. Yes. And I'm sure y'all wish you couldn't. Pam, this is a wonderful looking tool and knowing something as you know about software development. This is impressive stuff. I have to raise an objection to what it's called. This is road transportation. Transportation implies trains and planes and the like, and it doesn't address anything about them. So, and I know this is all your fault because you developed the name yourself. I'm thinking, can you email Joe. Send me an email address and I will because I think it's, I mean, great tool and I'm not complaining about that, but it needs to be clear that it is purely a road transportation tool, nothing else. Okay. I will, I will let that comment be known to. And I'm happy to. To echo. If I need to. I was going to say, first, it is really cool. And then I was going to say, in addition to Garrett's points, you know, there's planes, trains, automobiles. There's also ferries and pedestrians and bicycles. So to sort of ride on to that a little bit. And I realize we have a vehicular obsession. And that is what it is. But I think it is where it is. You know, in a broader sense, it's not really a criticism of the map, but I think it's probably the naming convention and to think of other. Okay. Thank you. I will bring that to the group. Thank you. Any other questions or comments? Amy put Joe's email in the, in the chat for you, Garrett. Well, I don't see anybody else with comments or questions or whatever. So thank you very much. It's, it's really just the cool looking thing. It really is. Yeah. The consultant team is, is quite amazing. It's been really fun to work on. So. Thank you for letting me share it. Thank you. Next on the agenda is a charge to the board development. Committee for the fiscal year 23 nominations. And the chair of that committee is the immediate past chair, which is. Mike. And then myself and Jeff have been on there for a very long time. And I'm going to go ahead and share it with you. I think Dan was interested at one time, but I can't remember who is there. Yeah. Catherine in October. We pointed the three people you mentioned in Dan. As well as Andy. Okay. And he gets to stay. Isn't that exciting? He's been there a long time doing this immediate past year. Right. Yeah, so there's five people on that committee. So I will reach out to the committee to set up a time. Mike, I'll work with you to find a time that works for you. Or for all of them. We'll see if we can get everybody there. And I get that schedule over the next few weeks. Sounds good. Sounds good. Yes. Terrific. Based on the change to the agenda, we have an opening on the equity leadership team for a board member. So we're looking for volunteers. If anybody wishes to join the leadership team. Please. Should they let Mike know, or you, Charlie, or. Let Charlie know. I was hoping they might just voice their interest tonight. I'll check it. This is Wayne. I'll check with Catherine tomorrow night at our meeting. Just to see what's involved, but thank you. Yeah, thank you. I was busy getting the email address. Which position is it? Yeah, sorry. We're seeking like one more person from the board to serve on the. Equity leadership team. Oh, equity leadership. Yeah, equity. And so thank you. Yep. And Wayne in partial response to your question. The committee hasn't met in a couple months. But it probably is getting to a time where we probably need to meet a little bit more regularly and start working through some issues and making, you know, recommendations back to the executive committee and board. So there's, there's, there's, you know, there's definitely some more work to be done at that committee. As well as talk about expanding, you know, are we going to get some external folks on there. That have more lived experience is a, is an open question at the moment also. Yeah, I appreciate you saying lived experience. That that seems important. Okay. Thank you. I'll talk to Catherine. Thanks. Thank you. For the interest. Moving on to that. We have our executive director reports starting with the financial reports. Yeah. So, and I'm just rolled in off of vacation. So apologies for that, but I'm going to let force. If you don't mind jumping in with the financial reports. Okay. Sounds good. Let me, let me pull it up then. Sorry. The financial report, I think is about page 17 in your packet. Yeah. Sorry. Just get in there. Yep. Yep. That's all right. Everybody. Everything's fine folks. Yeah, everything is good. Thank you. So you had a memo and the. Revenues over expenses report. So this is for the first half of the fiscal year. Overall, we are in decent shape. You don't have the balance sheet. In your packet. But the memo lays out some of the cash balances, et cetera. And the fact that our current assets over current liabilities is 894,000, which is a, which is a good ratio to have. And then also just laid out how much. Municipal match we have left. So. Through December, our unaudited surplus deficit is. Negative $9,000. Again, this isn't fantastic. Of course we'd love to be. A perfect zero. That's sort of our. Our goal here may be a little more than that. However. Negative. Negative. Negative. Negative. Negative. Negative. Negative negative. Negative negative. However. Negative 9,000 is not a bad place to be happy to use this. Generally the second half of this year. Works out a little better. I believe our. Updated. Budget. At the near as about. Negative 24. 25,000. So. result leads me to believe we'll get close to that. So the memo laid out some other details about that. Basically what I mentioned before about the latter half of the fiscal year generally being a little better. And a dynamic that we haven't had recently, which is I expect that we will probably extend all of our municipal dues before we get to the end of the fiscal year. This is something because we have a lot of large regional projects. This is something we haven't experienced recently. So often we have a $30,000 influx of revenue over the last couple of months. I don't expect we'll have that this year. So the end of the fiscal year could look a little different than the last recent years where all of a sudden our results look a lot better than we were looking. So we'll see how that plays out. And the cash flow we are, you didn't have the cash flow statement in front of you, but our cash flow is actually ahead of projection at this point. So that's what we're going to do. Any questions or Jeff? Yeah, there's one thing that the board members should know is that we had a good discussion on our risk to price increases and how that might impact our costs. And we're going to be very careful about monitoring that. And we haven't had this kind of an upward pressure on cost environment in about 20 some odd years. So it's something that we need to be aware of not necessarily for the next six months, the second half of our current budget, but when we do next year's budget, we have to be very sensitive to that. And then the other thing I'd observe is on any municipal dues increase, just remember a good chunk of our municipal dues are also used for matching funds for our transportation projects. And they don't necessarily fund overhead of our commission. Absolutely, yeah. I mean, that's a large majority funds that match what I'm trying to say about this. And thanks, Jeff. That also reminds me too, the other thing I should mention was that we were considering lowering our indirect rate reimbursement requests sort of through all their different funders for the latter half of this year. And after seeing these results through December, we decided not to do that. We're keeping our indirect rate reimbursement at just below 80% because lowering it would return even potentially lower a bigger deficit than we're anticipating. So it didn't seem wise to do that in this case. And we think the risk of over-collection, which would require the... And next year's overhead rate is a lot lower than we originally thought it was going to be. Right, so that's the balancing act. Exactly. Thank you. Catherine, just one point if I can follow up. Just on the dues conversation and the MPO funding in particular, I do think it's a good time to kind of plant a seed with you that it's very likely that we might ask for a dues increase that might be more significant than we have in the past this fall. We usually vote on dues in October. And the reason I'm saying that is the point that I think Jeff was starting to bring up there, which is we're getting like a 30% increase in MPO funding. And so, which is great, but that's the 80% of it. It's going to cause more pressure, both on the state and our members to look at how we match that. And so, and there may be more solutions than just raising dues. We may have more partners and things like that. The UPWP committee is wrestling with some of that right now and we'll be wrestling with that. What the next year's budget looks like is going to be a big factor in that too. So just a little preview of coming attractions I expect. Thank you. Are there any other questions or comments to be made? Not seeing any. We can move on to, which has already started the UPWP update. Yeah, sorry, there was a little clunky transition there, but yes, UPWP last committee meeting is on March 30th. We're really at a point now where the staff are doing a lot of work in the next two weeks to really figure out what our staff capacity is. This UPWP budget does have, I think probably another $500,000 of federal funds and that's a big chunk. It looks like there's enough demand from our communities and partners to consume that, but there's a kind of a staff resourcing question that goes along with that. Are we able to manage all those projects with existing staff? Or find different ways to get those projects done. So I think we're not just limiting it to the way we've always done things, but there's a lot of work for us to do. Stay tuned. I hope by your next meeting, you should have a draft of the UPWP and our FY23 budget. So again, another just a preview. Any questions on UPWP or Chris, is there anything you wanna add as the chair of that committee? No, I think I'm looking forward to the meeting on March 30th. I don't have anything. You're right. I mean, we have talked about, there's just so many arms on the octopus and we need another eight. And so we're in a great position for that, but I don't think we're rushing out and hiring new people at the same time. No, that is not our intent. And then moving on to my report, the equity engagement manager hiring update. Last time we met, we were trying to have a deadline to start looking at applications at the end of February, looking at how that first few weeks went. We've extended the deadline to March 25th. I think, you know, we probably have somewhere between 10 and 20 applicants at this point. You know, we'll kind of do another review to see the quality of that. And then in parallel with looking at who's applied, we also had a healthy discussion at the executive committee about the job description. And I think we need to do some more work, maybe with the equity leadership team and the executive committee to kind of refine that job description and make sure we have clarity about our expectations before we hire anyone. So I'm kind of in a little bit slower mode on that effort at the moment, but there's a bit of work to do there. Did that raise any questions or anybody want to make comments, particularly from the executive committee where we had that discussion? All right, you'll let my version of events lie there. Yeah, that's good. Oh, sorry, Katherine. I said it sounds good. Okay. All right. And then legislative update, I guess there's one very parochial effort in the legislature to get RPCs more funding. So sorry, that's been a little top of mind is that house appropriations is finalizing their version of the budget before it goes over to the Senate. So there's active conversations going on today, tomorrow. I think that's probably gonna get voted out of house appropriations by Friday. So we'll know a little bit more what that looks like and we'll probably have to do a little bit more work in the Senate on that issue. But there's a little bit, sorry, I'm not sure I have the right words, maybe a little tired from traveling, but there's a little funny dynamic going on in terms of expectations around, and you name it, housing issues, economic development, climate, energy issues, broadband and whether, how to what extent RPCs are involved in that work, which lots of times we do get somewhat involved and then how much the legislature wants to directly fund that work. So there's just a lot of conversations going on. I don't have clarity on that yet, but so that one very parochial issue. And then there are definitely bigger policy bills. I see, and I'm kind of looking at Regina a little bit or she may have a little bit better update than I do, but I think Senate economic development and housing voted out the housing omnibus bill and that seems to be moving. There's some things in there. Yeah, maybe we can, well, we'll send out a little summary from, at least from the Vermont Planners Association, but we get a chance each week. And Regina, anything you want to add on that? Nope, I'm about to send that email right now. So there's lots of other bills all around that are sort of hard to know whether they're really going to move very much, but definitely seems like there's something's going to happen in Act 250 and something's going to happen from the housing perspective. So, bye. Well, crossover day already occurred, right? So we know what might happen this year, but not necessarily in the second year of the biennium, right? This is the second year. The second year, okay. So we know what's going to happen. Yeah, it's either going to happen or it's not, right? This time. And there's a couple of bills that they've given some exceptions on the crossover date. The budget always lags a little bit. The other one is, there's an economic development omnibus field coming out of Senate Economic Development and Housing Committee. That one is lagging a little bit as well. And then I'm hearing just like on Act 250, Regina just mentioned, Regina, is that H-492? Um... Anyway, the number's not that important, but they're making, looking at some changes that came out of the house natural resources in Act 250. And there's a lot of moving parts there and it's also not clear the governor's position on some of that yet. There may be one or two of those bills maybe heading for a veto or there's an opportunity to revise it as it switches houses to get it into a place where it doesn't get vetoed or... So anyway, there's a lot of negotiation going on on those policy bills as well. Yeah, there's a couple of Act 250 bills. H-492 is definitely the process appeals one. Thanks. Any questions or particular bills or issues that you think we should be paying more attention to in the legislature? I get one other, one other... Oh, sorry, Regina. I was just gonna add that the budget adjustment bill which folks might have seen as a pretty big adjustment in compared to past years does include additional funding potentially for DHCD to fund all of the municipal planning grants that they got in the fall. So if you've got a town who didn't, who submitted an application and didn't get one, you might look out. And one last issue that was on my mind that has been dispatch for public safety services. The state police are definitely pulling back from some of those services, but thankfully the legislature is going to provide some money to help municipalities band together in regional dispatch services and they're gonna provide some money. And so I think we were a couple of million dollars short in terms of getting the Chittinac County Public Safety Authority regional dispatch center up and going. I think maybe the legislature is gonna close that gap. So I'm pretty optimistic that that is going to be in a good place to get started here in the next year or two. I'm sorry, Bart. Just an observation with governor signed budget adjustment today. Oh, good. So whatever it says, you'll know what it says. Yeah, thank you. I think that's all I have, Madam Chair. Thank you. Thank you. For those who wish the committee and liaison activities and reports are either available for printing in your packet or via link for those who wish it that way. So moving on, we have future agenda topics. Yeah, so next month we do have to do the warning of the UPWP and budget hearing that we'll have in May. We'll get those board development committee recommendations for the officer nominations. We don't need to hear about the transportation resiliency planning tool again. Sorry about that, we'll take that off April. And then we'll give some other updates and we expect the hazard mitigation plan to be coming your way for action soon. We have it tentatively scheduled for April. It's possible that that may stretch out to May. We're not exactly sure yet. And also looking at digging in a little deeper to the I-89 study recommendations, probably in May. And are there any other ideas or issues that people feel like we should get on the agenda? Okay, and in June, we are still, I think, looking at having our annual meeting in person with a virtual business meeting option. So just hopefully we'll be in a place where that will work. Yes, looking good so far. It's me knocking on wood there. So okay, thank you. Thank you. Do we have any other business or members items? I don't see anybody's hands. So we know what time it is then. It's time for it to adjourn. I'm not making the motion this time. I'll move that we adjourn. So second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Thank you, everybody. Have a good evening, all. Thank you.