 Good morning. I want to start by thanking this group for being here with me this morning, including General Knight and members of the Broad National Guard. Dr. Rush and his team from the US Department of Veterans Affairs and Mental Health Commissioner, Sarah Squirrel, representatives from our hardworking congressional delegation, including Tracy on behalf of Senator Leahy, Catherine Van Case on behalf of Senator Sanders, and Ryan McLaren on behalf of Congress Welch. We're all here today to bring attention to the serious issue of suicide. We'll just share details on what's available for help to those who need it, because suicide is preventable, and we all have a role in preventing it. Suicide is a public health issue that does not discriminate. It touches people from all walks of life, in every community, and unfortunately, that includes too many veterans. This is why General Knight, Dr. Rush, and I have joined together to reach out to Vermont's veterans, service members, and families to ensure they know the resources available to them and their loved ones if they're having thoughts of ending their life. We'll be signing a letter today which provides that information. The message we want to send is that there is hope and there is help. Those who step forward to serve our country are the best amongst us. The Alvin Put Their Lives On Fold gets sent thousands of miles away in order for us here at home to be safe and enjoy the freedoms we have. We hold our veterans so much, and that includes providing the support when they return from battle and care need when they come back home as well. Because we're all in this together, and no one should feel alone in times of crisis. This group will be sharing more details and a list of contacts and resources will be sent with our letter today. And I just want to encourage anyone who's having thoughts of taking their life or those who know someone in crisis to use these services and know we're here for you. I now invite General Knight to share more about the guys' work in preventing this from happening to one of our own. General Knight, thanks for having me. Governor, thank you for hosting us here today. And thank you to everybody who made the track. I know the roads can be a little bit of a challenge this time of year. Suicide is a sobering topic, and it's not one that I'm safe likely. I wish I could say that I'd never known someone that committed suicide, but I can't. I've lost soldiers, friends and colleagues to suicide, and countless others of our brothers and sisters in the Vermont National Guard share similar experiences. I understand this problem is not unique to Vermont, and it's a concern that reaches across all military branches and components. It's important to note, in 2018, the National Guard had a higher suicide rate than any of the military component within the Department of Defense. It's unacceptable. One death by suicide is one too many, and we're working to prevent it from happening. Not minimize it, prevent it. We must do better, and we will. We consistently work to communicate available resources to service members, veterans, and their families. As leaders, we must be ready to recognize when someone is in need of help. And know how it really ends. We must seek that need and understand it, even when someone may not want to reach out for that help. First-line supervisors, soldiers, and airmen have and will continue to receive the training necessary to look after their colleagues. Every soldier is also required to receive resiliency training. This training provides tools to help soldiers cope with difficult situations, and identifies their strengths and weaknesses, and helps them to improve their overall mental strength. We do, however, need to improve the availability of resources for those facing challenges. There's much work to do, and Vermont simply does not have a robust network of specialists that focus on post-traumatic stress or adjustment disorder. No one comes back from deploying with the same, and those changes impact everybody differently. Our vet centers are a great resource, one in White River and one in South Burlington. When I returned from Ramadi, Iraq in 2006, that was where I went to work through some of my life-changing experiences. I, the adjutant general of Vermont, have personally sought help to cope with the stress that comes from military service. Seeking help does not make someone weak. And I don't believe it had any bearing on my military career. We need to work hard to eliminate that stigma and recognize that there is no shame in seeking help. I'm here with Lieutenant Trevor Pitta, who's the Vermont National Guard Resilience Risk Production and Suicide Prevention Coordinator. His team provides multiple resources for those in need, and they're included in the letter that we've drafted for today. Additionally, the National Guard Offices offers a national suicide prevention lifeline at 1-800-273-8255. This is not a problem we can fix overnight, and we can't fight this alone. I'm thankful to have such great resources and people, in addition to our own, to help solve this horrible epidemic. For those struggling, I encourage you to reach out for assistance. You have options. Tomorrow won't be the same without you. Now, my pleasure to introduce Dr. Brett Rush from our White River Junction VA. And I'd like to take the opportunity to thank you very much for what you do for us. First, I just wanted to say thank you to Governor Scott and General Knight for joining me on the stage here today and giving us this opportunity to speak together as a unified voice, as a psychiatrist, have spent my life working in the realm of suicide and mental illness. It is hard to overstate how unique and special this is to have the VA and the state of Vermont and the Guard and the all standing together in unison with a single voice, bringing a message like this together. Suicide is a national public health issue, and as General Knight just told us, Vermont has more than its fair share of this struggle. The tragedy of suicide is not limited to the person that dies. It affects our families, it affects our towns, it affects our communities. And so this really is something that affects all of us. I believe that Vermont is actually really well equipped to take this issue head on because of the way our communities are constructed. Our communities are tight knit. We have relationships that are the foundations of these communities. It is on that foundation that our efforts to eliminate suicide will succeed. We're here together to show you that we care, that treatment is available, and that it works. Over 45,000 Americans died by suicide in 2017, and of that, 6,000 of them were veterans. These are preventable deaths. Suicide prevention is the VA's highest priority. We've made great strides, especially in crisis intervention. However, we need to go beyond engaging mental health providers in the community to move forward on this. We need to engage everybody to join together in this mission. We want to reach veterans where they live, where they work, and where they thrive. As a national leader in suicide prevention and as the nation's largest integrated health care system, the VA cannot do this alone. We encourage veterans to seek and use our services and our benefits. However, the reality is maybe 50% of veterans are getting services through the VA. If we want to reach every veteran, we need your help. We need to work together. To serve all veterans, we have to build effective networks of support, communication, and care across the communities in Vermont where veterans live and where they work. And again, this is where I believe that Vermont is uniquely well equipped because of how our communities are built to succeed in this mission. No one organization can tackle veteran suicide alone. To save lives, multiple systems must work in a coordinated way to reach veterans. The VA is broadening its efforts, and we need partners from like-minded groups from all sectors, not just health care, but also faith-based organizations, community organizations, state and local governments to work with us in reaching all veterans wherever they may be. Coordinated resources across our state will help to prevent these tragic deaths. As the 86th Infantry Brigade Combat Team begins ramping up for their likely 2021 deployment, please know that we are here as an additional resource to support soldiers and their families. For our next speaker, Megan Snick, and a suicide prevention coordinator from White River Junction takes the podium. I want to leave you with one final remark. We are here today, united for you, the state of Vermont. Together, we will be an example of how a community prevents suicide. Thank you, Governor Scott, General Knight, and Dr. Rush. I'm honored to be here today to talk about suicide prevention and the VA and its resources. As the previous speakers have said, suicide prevention is a public health issue that we're dealing with across the state and in our own communities, and it's affecting veterans in our own states. As Dr. Rush mentioned, suicide prevention is a top priority for the VA, and on average, across our country, we lose about 6,000 veterans a year to suicide. So here in Vermont, I want you to know that the VA is here as a resource and as a community partner in this effort to prevent suicide. So I want to mention a few things about the VA. As Dr. Rush said, it's an integrated healthcare system. I like to think about it as a holistic healthcare system. We don't just serve your medical needs and your mental health needs, but we have a social mission. We work on things such as housing and transportation, financial resources, employment, peer support services. These are all very important to us and very important to serve the whole person so that they can have positive coping skills and move forward in their life. Additionally, we have an entire suicide prevention team, and as Dr. Rush said, the suicide prevention coordinator for the VA. I coordinate services, I provide education, I work with you all in the community. We have a dedicated team of case managers at the VA who are there to provide ongoing support and resources to you, to our veterans, to their families. They reach out to families, they reach out to veterans to keep in touch, to keep them connected. They help coordinate their care. All the services they need to live a healthy and productive life. Additionally, the VA has seven outpatient clinics, five of which are spread across the state of Vermont. They're in your communities, close to where you are. They provide many of the services that I mentioned earlier, in addition to walk-in mental health services. So that's one of the things that I want to say is that we have easy access to care. You do not need an appointment to get mental health services, and I'm gonna give you a number that you can walk in, but the best way and the easiest way to get connected is to call 802-295-9363 extension 6961. We screen for suicide at all access points in the VA. So if a veteran were to come in and end up in our emergency department or on one of our inpatient units, we screen for suicide. We think that's extremely important so that the veterans can get connected to the care and resources that they need. Additionally, we've been expanding access to care to a program called VA Video Connect, which is essentially a program where veterans can be in the comfort of their own home or in their car or on vacation, and they can connect with their providers through their smart device or through their computer. And I also want to share that, and I believe that General Knight mentioned this, but the VA has a 24-7, 365 days a year, Veterans and Military Crisis Line and Text Line. This is a wonderful resource for veterans who are struggling, family members who are concerned, community members who need support and consultation and resources. That number is 1-800-273-8255, and you would press one to reach the Veterans and Military Crisis Line. They also have a text option, and that number is 838-255. And I'll share that the Veterans and Military Crisis Line has a very strong connection with the VA medical centers and outpatient clinics, and if somebody's calling that crisis line and they feel like they need to get connected to care or they need follow-up, even if they're not connected to the VA, we get a message at our VA and me and my team follow-up with those veterans or family members directly. And lastly, this was mentioned earlier, but I just really want to share that partnerships is a critical piece of this approach to care. As partners, we're able to expand our reach and deliver care and support to veterans where they live, work, and thrive. Why is this important? Because we have 20 million veterans nationwide and only about 30% of those veterans are accessing VA health care. This makes it extremely challenging for the VA to identify veterans who may be at risk for suicide and to connect them with mental health care, peer networks, employment, and other resources to help with coping and restore a sense of purpose. So we know that reaching beyond the VA system of care and into the communities is one of the key ways that we can support all at-risk veterans, families, and caregivers across the state. So we need to partner with you, with veterans, with caregivers, with family members, with community organizations, state and local government as we're doing here today to reach all the veterans across the state of Vermont. We need all of your support and collaboration so together we can and we will save veterans' lives. Thank you. It's now my honor to introduce Vietnam veteran John Tracy from Senator Leahy's office who will now say a few words on behalf of the senator. Good afternoon. I'm here on behalf of Senator Leahy in appreciation of the client effort and that will take me on suicide prevention as a public health issue. When you enter the military, your life changes. When you go to basic training, you're already in the subsection of society that the general population only has no idea. When you're deployed, you experience things that you just don't experience as part of the general population. When you're deployed to a combat zone, it's a different lens, depending on what you do when you're in that combat zone, it's a different lens. And the transition back is hard for people. Your lens and how you view the world is a perspective that the general population doesn't have. An additional challenge we have in the National Guard in particular is while we don't have a major military inflation in Vermont, where other states do, I remember seeing when they came back from Afghanistan after the families, troops gathered, they departed, they got into their individual cars and literally drove off into the midst. They didn't have a compound they were going to. Now, the delegationists worked very hard with the Guard and the military to work on how to reintegrate troops when we get back from deployment, spend time, trying to find out, do an evaluation, see what's going on. But when you go home to the private life and your community and your family, it's a different world. And so the fact that there's a focus on the prevention is significant. Senator Leahy has worked direct funding to the National Center for Post-Communic Stress Disorder, which is located at the VA Medical Center Campus down the White River Junction, where they work and run evidence-based practices to help treat people with PTSD, including funding for a brain bank. As often as the case, there are medical advancements made on the battlefield that have benefits to the civilian population down the road. This will be another example of the fact that we're identifying veterans but for the broader population. And so on behalf of Senator Leahy, thank you very much for this combined effort of putting a face on it. And we all have what work we can do. It's how we treat each other as young kids, as young adults, as seniors. A lot of this interaction is from off to small state. They're only two or three degrees of separation on a good day. That's a benefit for us. But thank you for this combined effort. We appreciate it. And I'd like to introduce Catherine Beck-Rangles from the Center for Children. Thank you, John. Thank you, Governor and everyone else who's here today. On behalf of Senator Sanders, I just wanna highlight the importance of this conversation that we're having here today. Back in 2007, Senator Sanders saw this need that John was just describing about our Vermont Guard members coming home and dispersing to every corner of the state. And working with the TAG at the time created the Vermont Veterans Outreach Program. We have a couple members of that team here today. They are a phenomenal resource that I just wanna mention. They are folks who can go into the homes of our veterans, our Guard members, and talk to them where they're at. I know from their stories, they have literally stopped potential suicides with a gun on the table. And their work is so critical, which is why Bernie has always fought to continue that funding year after year in Congress. And we look forward to continuing to do so for years to come and making sure that more states have this same resource. I would also say that we know how important it is to have the data from the VA on suicide and one of the best ways that we can do prevention is to know what we've seen in the past. And one of the things that the most recent national report on suicide shows is that one of the groups at the highest risk for suicide are members of the National Guard who have never deployed. Think about that. Members of the National Guard who have never deployed. That means because of Congress's rules, they are not eligible to receive care from the VA. In Vermont, we are working hard to find ways to bridge those gaps for those folks and get them to care. And it's one of the things that Bernie is working on in Congress with both DOD and VA to make sure our guard members who go through training shoulder to shoulder with their colleagues who have deployed have the same resources available to them. As we prepare for deployment, it's also absolutely critical that our community mental health providers are able to sign up for tri-care so that those mental health providers can see our guard members as they get ready to deploy. Having those resources in the community, in addition to the resources that the VA will make sure that access is available when it's needed. I wanna commend the VA for their tremendous mental health access. It is some of the best in the country, not just in the VA, but in any healthcare system in this country. It is absolutely phenomenal that you can walk in and get the care you need. And in Congress, Bernie is working hard to make sure that the VA has all the resources it needs to meet the promises that we've made to the members of our military and to our veteran community, including the families. I just wanna close with one request because we have so many members of the press here today. There are guidelines put out by the VA and by the CDC in terms of how to talk about suicide. This is all evidence-based research that's very important in helping make sure that we talk about suicide and justify suicide in the right way. This is evidence-based, scientific, federally funded research. Please use it to make sure that your reporting is done in an accurate factual way that makes sure that we help prevent suicides. So on behalf of Senator Sanders, thank you to everyone for being here today. Thank you, Governor, Evan in general, Dr. Rush, Megan, my colleagues in the delegation. This is really an impressive effort that we're all here together on behalf of such an important issue. It's my now pleasure to turn it over to Reverend McClaren for the Pongington Street or Welch's Office. Thank you, Katie. I'm really happy to be here. And I think Governor Scott mentioned two reasons why we're here today. And the first is help. And it's actually fairly serendipitous that I'm here today because in just a few hours, the House Committee on Veterans Affairs will be taking up the Improved Well-Being for Veterans Act, which is aimed at utilizing a public health approach to help connect veterans with existing community resources in an effort to provide key services before a veteran reaches a point of crisis. So this bill is really written to address a lot of what Dr. Rush is talking about. Connecting veterans with resources already available in the community, and strengthen coordination and capacity of community-based organizations that veterans serve. So we'll be doing outreach to community members to give feedback on this bill, but this is exactly the sort of community-based and public health-based approach that Peter has supported throughout his career, and is critical to rural communities in Vermont and across the country. So we really need to be reaching into, reaching, we need to be all-in, reaching out to veterans and addressing their needs at any opportunity. So with the VA's leadership and with partners across the state, many of which are in this room, we hope to reach veterans where they are and prevent tragedies of hopelessness and isolation that we follow way too many veterans. But the second reason we're here that Governor Scott mentioned, and I think the most important reason is hope. It's to honor the service and sacrifice of our veterans. I really feel like it's our duty as civilians to bear witness to their experiences and make sure they know how much we value their commitment to us and that that commitment will be reciprocated in kind. So what I want to say from Peter is that you're not alone. And I want to say thank you to Governor Scott, to Agenda General Knight, and to everyone else here for spreading that message today and every day. Thank you. I signed a letter from this point. I mean, if you have any questions you might have, if we could stick to on topic first, and then I have other questions you may want to ask. If we could do those first, I would appreciate it. Dr. Rush, you mentioned faith-based organizations. As we head into the holidays, as it provides for families and also perhaps more connection with churches, what can faith-based organizations do to help you and health veterans? So specifically as it relates to what we're talking about today, which is the risk of suicide and that tragedy, the driving factor in suicide in many cases, if not most cases, is loneliness and isolation. Faith-based communities are perfectly suited to help veterans see the extent to which they are not alone and that they are part of a community. And those are, those are powerful communities that carry a tremendous amount of meaning in people's lives and to see one's connection and that you are not isolated through the caring of a faith-based organization is a tremendously powerful response to that feeling. The questions, it seems like way back when all of the decade or more ago when all of the soldiers were coming back from one of the deployments were on the top of our mind. There were so many programs like this that I remember being talked about over the time with too many communities in separate, but did those work? Are they still in practice? Are they still being used? Had a young man with a little bit of, I can speak to my personal experience. When we got back, it was very difficult to get soldiers who just returned to speak about their experiences. So the guidance that we received from Colonel Coffin was our stake psychiatrist at the time. He was very gracious in sitting us down, knowing what we've been through. It wasn't a formal program, but he encouraged us to keep an eye on each other, keep an eye on ourselves, and know that it manifests differently to everybody, and you wouldn't see things for five or six months down the road. I think what we've done since then, and of course my experience is dated at this juncture, I think we've just made exponential leaps forward with communicating all the resources, our outreach specialists, within family programs, the VA, our vet centers, then we're gonna continue that. I think it comes down to communication, ensuring people know there is hope, and they have an avenue for assistance. General, on that issue as a veteran, and there are several others, we always talk, the guys who aren't talking are the guys that saw this action, or saw the relief, and it's the same with the guys that have come back, and they're pretty starved. How do you crack that now? I think people will be able to be the example, and if I can be that example, I will. I will share my experiences. As I said before, there's no shame in it. You've gotta get rid of that stigma, and ensure that at least within our own organization that when somebody seeks help, it doesn't have an impact, a negative impact on your career. We give them the options they need to seek the help that they require. That's our responsibility. We've asked a lot of folks, and I will go back to what Katie said about the number of suicides that happened in veterans, and after guard veterans, particularly in heaven, you've gotta get after that as well. Being in the guard is different, and we ask a lot of folks, and they have pressures outside the guard, and being in the guard is at times stressful. We ask a lot of folks, so we need to give them all the assistance and resources they need to make sure they know how to communicate. Any other on topic? With that, anyone? Anyone want to move off to the side? Lady, yesterday, your Secretary of Human Services said that you had instructed him to thoroughly investigate allegations that Saturday's published about the Chinatown Pressional Facility. I'm wondering if you can describe in more detail what precisely it is you're avoiding the Secretary will do. What is the nature of this investigation? How long do you hope to take? What specific things do you hope he will look at? Yeah, first of all, I want to thank you for investigating and writing the article. I read the article was a lineman and eye-opening, and I felt that there was enough evidence there that we needed to move forward and do something. So having a new Secretary on board with his background and turn around in operations and so forth, I thought he was the right person to take a look and gather facts and see where we go from here. I'm hoping that this won't take long. When I say not long, I would hope within the next couple of weeks we'll come to some conclusion as to where we go next. The Attorney General reached out this morning as well, offered his assistance in working together on this. Inevitably, I believe that there's going to be enough evidence here that we're going to have to move forward with something. So his assistance is greatly appreciated, and I'm sure we'll be working together, as well as with the legislature when we come back in January, if there's anything that we need to do in that regard. But whether it's personnel, whether it's procedure, there are things that I believe we'll have to change in the future based on what I've read, such as what? Well, I don't know yet. We have to gather the facts, make sure that we know where we're going, and then take the actions needed. There's all kinds of things at the Art of the Brotham, and I thought it was, again, interesting, and we're taking this very seriously, and I guarantee we'll get to the bottom of it because it's unacceptable. You received weekly reports from your cabinet members, pretty detailed ones. Have you ever heard any of these allegations that any of these things have been reported to you in the time it's covered? I have not, and that's concerning as well, and so that's one of the areas we want to make sure that we get to the root to the bottom of this so that we can take action to make sure that I'm getting the information that I need in order to make the changes that I think will be necessary. I want to read you if I could. I apologize for springing this on you, but I just received it about an hour ago. This is a copy of a formal complaint that's filed by a corrections officer directly to Mike T. Shedd at the time of his deputy commissioner in June 2017. And it's a lengthy report. I certainly want to be the whole thing out for your staff afterward. In this report, the corrections officer alleges to the deputy commissioner multiple instances of suspected retaliation against guards who are reporting various things, silly. And I'm going to just read one specific thing as it relates to a focus of the story, the alleged actions of Daniel Sorzi, the second shift supervisor who guards and inmates say was using drugs on duty for years. This person, this corrections officer reported it again to Mike T. Shedd in June 2017. Several second shift staff have noticed a huge increase in corrective action being taken against them that correspond with making allegations of second shift supervisor using cocaine and virulent while running shift. Staff have reported seeing white powder around the rim of his nose and behavior consistent with the use of stimulants. When officers initially pushed myself here, there's stewards about the observations. We reported to management on their behalf and management, the superintendent, the assistant superintendent at the time, advised us to have the staff report the incident. First of all, is that they were not a violation of mandatory reporting policy. It goes on a bit longer, but essentially it alleges the people who reported that behaved as suspected behavior were retaliated against for reporting it. What do you make of that, given that the person who received this report is now your corrections commissioner? Again, concerning, we want to investigate this, get to the facts and find out if anything, what action was taken as a result of situations such as that, but I can assure you I had not received any weekly report with any of that information. Do you still have confidence in the commissioner? Well, again, we'll go through and gather the facts. We'll learn a lot over the next two to three weeks and we'll make determinations at that point. Some prosecutions against former corrections officers at that facility have fallen apart for multiple reasons. We don't always know why it seems that it may happen to you with whether the victim was, the electric victim was able to testify. In one case recently, just last week, prosecution was dropped because the electric victim died of an overdose. Do you believe that any action should be taken in the law enforcement realm against these officers who have not been fully prosecuted? That's something that I'll be talking with the attorney general about, but personally, I believe that we should continue to make the case so that their general public is protected and action is taken, but again, I don't know about that particular issue, but that's something that I'll be talking to the attorney general about. The Chittin County State's attorney said yesterday that she plans to review the sentences of all of the inmates serving that facility who her office has sent as the facility and she may seem to reduce their sentences if she deems that appropriate. What do you think about that? I think it's perfectly appropriate to go back and take a look at some of those cases, including I think she had a couple of the correctional officers as well that were dismissed taking a look at those, as well as those females who were incarcerated to make sure that when they're under the supervision of the Department of Corrections, that there wasn't anything that would prevent them from coming forward or in terms of their rehabilitation, affecting that in a way. So I think it's appropriate for them to take a look. Do you believe that the employment department for correctional officers in Vermont are appropriate? For one thing, there are no drug tests required out of COEs. Yeah, I thought that was, again, something that I learned from your article that I didn't know that previous to that. It's something that we'll take a look at. I'd like to see what other states do so that we make sure that we have the best there that are overseeing our offender population. Does that mean you use sports? I would like to see what other states do, but I was surprised to see that it wasn't there. And I'm not sure why. And that's part of why one of the areas that I'd like Mike to take a look at as well, to see how we stack up against other states and why we don't have some of those provisions. Well, I mean, there's two separate issues for my standpoint. I still believe the facility's outdated. We need to move forward with something at some point. But we're looking at different models. We've looked at a model in Maine, a step down kind of facility, as well as Connecticut. And we'll take a look and see where that goes. But they are two separate issues. I wouldn't want to use this as a reason to move forward with a new facility because that's not the problem. I would say it's more of a personnel problem and maybe a adjudication problem. Final question for me. I swear all that for people who haven't asked questions. And this is actually more of a statement. A number of the people that I've spoken to about this situation in Maine's and guard who are still working there are quite fearful of being retaliated against for speaking to the press about this, about these matters. What can you do to ensure that there is no further retaliation or retribution against both employees and in Maine's? I think it's important as we move forward to set up some sort of a way for people to voice their opinions anonymously in some way. Because when they're reporting to their superiors, that doesn't always get to the conclusion that I think is appropriate. So we have this. We're going to make sure that nobody is retaliated against. We're going to pay attention to this. And we'll get to the bottom of it. You will personally ensure that nobody is retaliated. I will personally ensure that anyone comes forward with factual information on this is there is no retribution. What's happening today is we're taking the resources to make sure that none of the current unions that we're looking for are being subjected to countermeasures. Well, again, we're in this first 24 hours here. I looked at it. Right, the next 24 hours, what's happening right now? Yeah, Commissioner or Secretary Smith is probably, I'm hoping, will take action on this. He has his plate full. But we want to make sure that, again, that this doesn't continue. And then we do, again, research as to how we got to a position for him today. So I'm sure he's taking appropriate action to be sure that this isn't happening as we speak. He's having more to watch the agency of his services, under the law to do a governorship, duties, opportunities. Watching the competence in an internal probe that you're making are the same people who are controlled and all that. Yeah, and I understand that. And this is just the first step. Maybe this may lead us to another, like the Blue Ribbon Commission of some sort. I don't know. But we have to first understand what's happening and then determine what steps we take next, which may include some sort of a neutral body that would take a look at this to give everyone the sense of trust in the government, so to speak. But first of all, we need to figure this out and make sure that it's not continuing to happen. Well, what's your specific direction between what it's meant to be? Get to the bottom of this. This is unacceptable. If your investigation verifies the allegations that it's reporting, are you going to still have any documents of the current leaders of the USD and of the President in particular? I mean, we should step back. And I read a couple of the comments on the article. And there was one person who was incarcerated and talked about, or previously incarcerated and talked about the fact that there are some good COs, correctional officers, and some bad. But we don't want to throw everyone out with this. We have good people there. And we have some bad ones as well, apparently. And that's what we want to find out who the bad ones are and make sure that we prevent them from continuing in that position. So we need it's on us to reinstall the faith and trust people should have in any government agency. And this one in particular is something that we're paying attention to as we speak. Is this what we're going to do now under the leadership of the people at the top? Well, again, we'll see when we take a look at this as to how far this went. And we'll go from there. Another topic. Do you think the President should be in charge? I've said before that I think there should be a process. And they've opened this process up. I thought it should be transparent. And they're doing that at this point in time. It appears the House will take a vote on the impeachment. I would imagine that this will happen in the next few weeks, but we have a long ways to go. I look forward to the Senate, their hearings, and how that will go from there. And to determine from my standpoint, I think the President took some steps that were inappropriate. And I think it's up to the Senate after the House takes the action that I think they will to investigate further and convince us, the general public, as to what should happen from there. After the Senate hearings, I'll continue to watch. But the House will be. Well, they bring the allegations, and they cite the President in some respects. And then it goes on to a trial after that. So I don't want to get ahead of the trial. Eva, you've heard of a new Supreme Court justice today. You've been in the past criticized as your short-nominated board for failing to send enough female credit that's for the judiciary. Unstruck by the fact that, in the point of the mail, you've returned, of course, to a male-dominated body. Can you address that? Yeah. Well, first of all, I want to give great credit to the Judiciary Nominated Board. They've turned the corner in a lot of respects. We're seeing very diverse group candidates at this point in time. It should be noted, just last month, I appointed two Superior Court judges who were female. And we had some great candidates in this round for Supreme Court justice. Wasn't easy. A lot of good, qualified candidates came forward. But I had to, at the end of the day, I had to pick the person that I thought had the background, the temperament, and was connected enough to Vermont to do this in this position at this point in time. And I thought Judge Cohen was the appropriate person. What is it about Cohen's philosophy, individual philosophy that? He's just a common type of person. He explains things well, so the average for Monarch can understand it. And I think that his upbringing in the Rutland area and, again, his humbleness, I think, will suit him well in this role as Supreme Court justice, he doesn't take himself as being any better than anyone else. And I think that's important for anyone in the position of power. It's actually, you just cited largely personal characteristics. Nothing about his legal record. Is that? Well, he's been a judge that's been well respected for over 20 years. But I just didn't describe in your process our personal attributes, the way that we'll conduct ourselves where they're from. That's part of it. You probably heard my foresees, right? I heard foresees. All right, so I mean, that's what I use when I try and hire anyone and look to see if they have the talent and the capability needed. And they have to have that character integrity. They have to be competent and they have to be committed to the process. It's difficult being a judge of any sort and particularly a spirit court justice. But then they have to have the chemistry. The chemistry needed for the team that they're going to be a part of and be independent enough. But yet, at the same time, see what the court needs, what the judicial system needs because they oversee that. So I thought he had 20 years of experience in the spirit court. And again, I thought he had all the legal background in all the attributes and the other. I mean, he had even, he has a degree in environmental studies of some sort. I thought that was good as well. I thought that was an attribute. We heard this morning about the bottom-of-the-type work for them. And I'm going to ask you about another of those in Vermont's public health homes. Last week, some days, NDPR published findings from the investigation. It's primarily on the state-of-the-art records. And those records show dozens and instances of harm, abuse, and blackness. State-regulated facilities, as opposed to these five medical deaths in the last five years. And scores of homes that have failed to meet some basic regulations, since I'm a tech resident. It's like conducting background checks before you hire an employee. Yet the state-of-the-art state-regulated is only checking on these homes once every two years, even as they are enabled to watch over some of the most frail people in the state who are hundreds who would fall back from nursing homes. And even in the vast majority of, even repeat violations are going unpunished on fine, are otherwise un-sentient in these homes. I wonder if any of this is surprising to you and what anything you plan to do? Well, no, we're struggling in the state on many different perspectives. Our demographics are shifting. We're getting older. There are more people in care than ever before. We're struggling to find the help needed to be a part of these facilities. So I am, again, disappointed, maybe not as surprised, but as well, I haven't circled around with our folks at AHS determine what the steps are next in trying to make sure that we protect the most vulnerable, the seniors that have given so much to us. You can say, can you give a better answer? Obviously, we can. I mean, we should, because we have an obligation to make sure that we protect those across the board for monitors of all walks of life. And our seniors are amongst the most vulnerable. Do you think it's worthy of consideration of additional funding, whether to, so regulators can go on the frequency? We'll determine that. I'm sure that there'll be provisions that move forward with the legislature work together in order to provide the oversight needed. It sounds kind of passive, especially when you compare it to what you were just saying about the department of corrections. I mean, the reporting that the DPR in seven days had found that there were at least five preventable deaths during the day of working out. I would say it's a much different situation. We have people in power that are using their power to take advantage of someone in their confines. And I think it's a totally different situation than in some of our elder care facilities. But are you going to take action? Well, obviously we'll take action, but this story that came out yesterday about the abuse of power in some of these facilities is concerning to me. I don't see the same abuse of power in some of our elder care facilities. You said you were concerned but not surprised about the findings in elder care. Only because we have so many people, our demographics again are shifting. And as I stated before, we're having trouble of hiring people in all different sectors of Vermont, that included. So now I know they're struggling in that respect. So we need to do better. We're trying to do whatever we can to attract more people to the state. And we're trying to do whatever we can to make sure that we protect people. But I'm sure that the steps that they will need to be taken in order to do so. We're willing to expand the Division of Licensing and Protection's majority to issue sanctions or fines. I mean, we retaliate 150 repeat dollars at homes and the other state will need you to fix fines for people without the $8,000 in the last five years. Is that something you were willing to take a look at? Obviously we'll take a look at anything that will help rectify the situation. I mean, I get a fine for getting to the quarter and a meter on the street. It's a calm suit, like that. It's residents usually this, you know, some penalty is that. You, I mean, we are not fearful of analyzing people in the state with fines in all different areas. So I would be surprised to see that there isn't fines that are being issued. You think the state is just telling you that they're not? I know, I know. And I'm saying that we haven't, I haven't looked into that enough to know whether we have or should or haven't followed through or what the issue is. But I haven't done that. The state has a years signal that we're going to send you a note and then wait for your life. And may I clarify, I believe it will help you pass it to the technical office. But if that makes your, what will your response be to those fines? Well, again, probably no different than before. I believe that supply and demand will work in terms of the minimum wage. I think they already have an effect on wages that we don't need to artificially raise the minimum wage. We're already one of the highest in the country at this point in time. We have a state right next door that has a minimum wage of 725 and their economy is doing quite well. In terms of the pay family leave, I think we both, we all agree that this would be helpful. I have a different approach and I believe a voluntary approach is the first step necessary. It could create the structure needed as we move forward with whatever we do. Even if it's in the future, they've determined it to be mandatory. I believe that this is the right approach. So I'm going to continue to work with them trying to argue our point, convince them that this is a better step in the right direction without payroll track. Tax it could be anywhere from 20 to $80 million for paid family leave. When we are already seeing pressures in so many different areas, whether it's in education, another $80 to $100 million of new expenses in education as our student population continues to drop. I mean, this is at the stage of work-time setting. Well, probably no different than any others. We have our differences of opinion. We'll try and work through them as best we can. We'll disagree on many. I'll look for opportunities to work together and common goals. So that sounds like they've settled. Leadership has settled on a minimum wage increase in the $12 to $13 range. Before we were talking about $15, is any mandated increase in the minimum wage in on-starter? Again, we'll take a look at whatever they pass. I haven't seen anything in writing at this point. I haven't seen either body that has agreed to that. So we'll take a look. Your tax emissions forecasted a 6% increase in property tax rates next year. Do you see any proposal from you to produce or anything? Yeah, based on projections as we see them today. That's what the letter is, is notoriously obligated to do. You know, I vetoed three budgets over property taxes over the last three years. So suffice it to say, I'm sensitive to property tax rate increases. I've offered, we've taken different approaches. In the first year, we tried to force through something that they weren't willing to do. In the second year, we had a whole list of different approaches that we would like them to consider, and that didn't work. So I need a willing partner. We're willing to have the conversation. I believe we're going in the wrong direction. We're spending over a billion, seven now, or probably over a billion, eight at this point for education for about 75,000 kids. So we have a structural problem on our hands that needs to be addressed, and we can't continue. Even with everything that's been done in terms of finding different alternatives to the property tax increases, sales and use and so forth, and even with the grand list growing because of all the new building improvements that we're doing across the state. I think that in itself, the grand list is growing by $50 million. So that should take care of the ongoing increased expense, but it's not. So that's why the property tax rate will increase if we do nothing, and I just think that we can do better, but I need them to work with me in order to do so. So who would be able to do that? I think there are going to be some of the same proposals we've seen before. Healthcare is one area that is concerning. I think that's driving some of the increase, not all of it. I think the inefficient system is really the culprit, but we have some ideas, but again, they have to be willing to work with us on that. I can't drive this, obviously I've tried that three times. So we'll do what we can to work with them to try and give some relief to robotics. And then back to the Derrick slide question. One of the others that I just want to see your own map, is there a plan of action right now in your administration to address some of the issues that we're probably going to investigate? I am not aware of what we're doing, but I'm confident that we're doing something, but I haven't addressed that personally myself at this point in time. This week there's two human items that are connected with sci-acrypto-less hold information. Can you still stand by your administration's proposal to shut down this site? Yeah, well again, it's a facility that is geared towards having a population of 30, and so the problem still exists. So that's an area that I think that we'll work, we'll be able to work with the legislature on. I think we're both at the point where we think the Woodside should close. Maybe not everyone, but many in positions of leadership have signaled that they think we have to do something, so we're willing to work with them on that, but we have to take some other approach. I mean, we do have a need in this state. I have not spoken to Commissioner Tuchette. I have not. I have not spoken to Commissioner Tuchette. You mean in the last 24 hours? No, I have not. Is he remaining there? He does. We're not studying partner motor vehicles that have been making a lot of money selling personal information. Do you support that practice? Well, it's been going on for a long time. Some of it is in statute, actually, interestingly enough. I did take some action last week and told them to stop with private investigators accessing that information. So when we put a hold on that for now, that seems to be the biggest sticking point. The rest is some from insurance companies and so forth and determining rates, and they have to make sure that those with licenses agree to that before they can access the information. So some of it is in statute. There's no choice, but I am a little concerned about privacy and the private investigators is an area that I think we should take a step back and take a look at. So I told them to stop that practice. Why does that answer you? Well, it's just that, you know, I'm not sure what they use the information for, and I just think it's an area that we should just, you know, let's take a step back and take a look and make sure we know what we're doing with that and talk with the legislature to see where we want to go from there. Besides private investigators, there are other corporations that receive this information from certain non-insurance companies. Are you interested in reviewing this practice I'm sure it will lead to that, but that the private investigators was an area that I was most concerned with. I'll be making that determination in the spring after the legislature is out of session, but I always want to be prepared, we never know. So we want to get started whenever we can. People who are not willing for elections don't raise money. Oh, I don't know that for sure, but I haven't seen any data on that. Senator Verruth, he's going to be introducing legislation banning send automatic firearms and some of others' thoughts. Put your thoughts on it. Yeah, well, we'll see. I mean, I think we've taken a lot of steps in this regard over the last few years, as you might recall, and I think there's an opportunity for us to take the laws that we passed, make them better and make sure we're putting them into practice and making sure that we're educating people on how to use particularly the red flag laws. So I think there's a lot of opportunity to do better with what we have right now, rather than stepping out and passing the legislation. So you're both getting it, Senator? Well, yeah, I'm not sure what the issue is that they're trying to solve, but again, I'll listen to anything. We'll see where it goes in the legislature, but it should be an interesting session. Is there a solution to a problem that doesn't exist? Don't know that. I mean, that's something that we'll take a look at, and I'm sure it'll be debated within the legislature themselves. Senator Mori, you said TCI might not be a carbon tax if your proceeds are allocated for economic development and affordability, is that right? I'm not sure. We'll see when the proposal comes out in sometime in December, I believe. I'm not sure what it is at this point in time, but we have a seat at the table. We'll reflect on that. I've been consistent in my belief that a carbon tax isn't what Vermont needs, so I would not support it if it was a carbon tax. Okay, thank you very much.