 Okay, thank you. Why don't I open up the meeting? This is Senate Appropriations Committee and we are going to have testimony related to the Vermont State College study that has been submitted and obviously has some very significant budgetary connection. So, with that I would like to ask Senator Baruth to introduce our witness and any background that he wants to provide the committee, as we focus on this particular area of budgetary need. Thank you, Madam chair so to refresh people's memories who might be on YouTube. Chancellor Spalding some months back made a proposal to close three campuses of the state colleges. There was universal outcry and the leadership of the House and the Senate and the money committees in both chambers stepped in and helped through that crisis with bridging funds and also the creation of a select committee on higher education. The committee was structured in a very particular way with a steering group, and that steering groups first job was to hire, put out an rpf and rfp and hire consulting group. And then we found N gems, a great, great group with a great record, and Brian press got is with us where we stand right now in the process. Just to, to cut to the chase is N gems has drafted a report which the select committee has been through twice now. We approved it for release on December 4. We have now been through an update, but I believe the version that the committee has is the December 4 version. But the only thing I'll say before Brian starts is that the very first thing we did was to try to define the state's needs, and, and what it seeks in return for the investment it makes. And among those things we determined that we wanted the presence of a state college and institution of higher education in every region of the state. We were recommending that these three campuses not be closed, although, as you'll see from the presentation, there's a recommendation to reduce the footprint and the administrative bureaucracy, etc. But trying to keep the Northeast Kingdom online with a physical presence, as well as Randolph Center. So with that said, I'll turn it over to Brian Prescott who I believe is Vice President of N gems to go through the report. Thank you. Do you just want to introduce yourself for the record, Mr Prescott. Sure. Can you all hear me. Yes. Okay, good. I have routine problems with being heard on zoom. So in my household sometimes, but anyway, my, my name is Brian Prescott. I'm, I'm the Vice President for the National Center for higher education management systems, better known as engines. And we are a nonprofit 501 seat lease small organization, located in Boulder, Colorado, and my way of a little bit more introduction we've been involved in statewide strategic engagements around post secondary education at some point or in pretty much every state in the country. And in recent years we've been helping some other states, try to address problems that are not dissimilar to the ones that are being confronted in Vermont. And so we are pleased to be the consultant that was selected to help the select committee do its work. And thank you for the introduction center, Bruce, and for the for your engagement throughout the process so far in the development of this work. I would say my instructions are to try to outline what was in the December report briefly and leave time for questions and I'll do my best to do that. By way of a little bit more process. I would say the December report report that you have was the one that we created with considerable involvement from the select committee and the steering group of the select committee. It was also informed by a pretty extensive analysis of available data, both publicly available and data supplied by the Chancellor's Office, as well as from UVM and BSAC. And we have also with the help of the New England Board of Higher Education been involved in pretty extensive stakeholder engagement activities with the unions with members of concerned interest groups and communities, and so forth. And we have also consulted reports and studies that are relevant, most especially the Treasurer's report and report groups by Jim Page, which I think you all are all familiar with, but also the work that was done by organizations like in the drive, the board itself and the CSC drive. Sorry, in the strong. As I mentioned, we've worked intensively with the select committee to develop the recommendations, as well as the criteria for solutions that I'm here to sort of provide an overview of with you today. The December report is just the first of three where we are required or the select committee is required to produce. The next one will be a refinement of that report and Senator Ruth referenced adjustments that we are still working on with the select committee in advance of that next report which is due in February, the February, and then a final report due in April. And then a whirlwind process for everyone involved, not least of all me, but we've been pleased to, as I said, pleased to be involved in it. The conclusions that I think all of the work that we've been the analysis that we did leads to, you know, a not surprising conclusion that transformation is critical and urgent. But to be for it to take hold and be successful there will be substantial requirement for state support. If you'll indulge me, I will be referencing a little of the document on my other screen as we as we talk. And so in the report that we provided there's it. Well the report that we are continuing to work on. I'll just preview briefly. There's a growing sense of what we need to provide in terms of the case for urgency. It's likely that that without action by substantial action by the legislature. The situation that has been rooted in many years of of issues not just the pandemic is likely to worsen a closure of any one of these campuses carries substantial costs. And not only do it carries actual direct costs of closing the campus of dealing with the students that are currently enrolled and what happens to them. There's a, there's an expectation that you would presumably sell the real estate that's available but that won't happen immediately and in the meantime there will be considerable closing costs. All of this estimates that we've been able to determine is significant enough that it may account for roughly one sixth of the total system life budget in the most optimistic scenario and considerably more beyond that. If you also account for the fact that letting a closing a campus likely means the loss of revenue from tuition and other services provided in the process. So there's a real clear need to act. And I think that's one of the things you'll like to see in the next version of the report that will release and the select committee will put forward in February. Senator Ruth mentioned criteria for the students in the state I'll just outline some of the ones that are in the report that the select committee has come up with, and through a pretty thoughtful and engaged process. The idea that the state colleges should become more student centered that the solution should address the sort of persistent affordability concerns that exist in the state, and in this state colleges in particular, that the results should lead to greater access to workforce relevant programs for all types of students, including adults located throughout the state. Those type of type of programs aren't just pro the separate programs but they involve the, the creation of more workforce relevant skills development and experiential opportunities, even for the liberal arts programs that are present on in BCS institutions already. Ultimately, it should result in fiscal sustainability and rely it will need to rely on greater coordination and collaboration in both the academic and the administrative functional areas of the system. And so that's the set of criteria that led to select committee to adopt recommendations and record recommendations that you've seen in the December report and I'll go into those real quickly. The first one is around restructuring. And under that recommendation the select committee has argued that the Community College of Vermont. And the maintained as a separate institution focused on some background programming. Let me back up a second this restructuring should really have as a starting point, the idea that the institutions that that emerge from this restructuring will have the assigned clear and relatively distinctive mission statements that they are able to follow. So, the part of that would be that the Community College of Vermont focus exclusively on some background programming expanded to have a greater focus on workforce relevant education and training and services to a particular, including non credit programming. So, meaning three institutions, Hamilton, more than Vermont, and Vermont tech would be unified into a single, single accredited organization with a single leadership structure, and in the process serving a mission to provide affordable and accessible education, limited master's programming in level programming in areas where the need for such programs is geologically dispersed so you need teachers in all throughout the state and you are left place to find them among the populations that already live there so providing a master's programming education to southeastern Vermont, let's say, is a sensible thing for an institution to that has support in the Northeast Kingdom should provide. And then, in addition, some limited technical sub baccalaureate credentials such as the pipe that Vermont tech already provides in in partnership with CCV as a way to create greater efficiencies there. The structure would include improvements in administrative coordination and sharing to in particular the sharing of academic programs. One of the key changes that I that the system is being encouraged to pursue is the idea that as the enrollment staff declined and fiscal conditions have declined. The institutions and some of their departments have shrunk to the point where quality becomes an issue. Part of the solution to addressing the need for providing access to quality programs involves the sharing of academic programs across these, what are currently independent institutions. A mixture of program modalities whether that's some online instruction, some mixed with some face to face instruction with adequate student support programs as well as some other more innovative approaches like periodic on campus experiences, limited residency that kind of thing. So that that will be a significant change in one that the institutions are likely to need to do, regardless. And we think that it makes the most sense and is the most efficient strategy to coordinate that across a seemingly credit institution, where the leadership structure can make those changes more aggressively and help them stick. So that's the first recommendation. The second recommendation relates. Sure. I just want to, regarding first recommendation any questions or comments, before we move on. No. Okay, I just wanted to ask to do a single accreditation. Are there fiscal advantages to that as well. Do you believe that that coordinate. Yes, that we believe that putting that in the longer term putting the institutions together will have some cost savings and we have some some evidence from other institutional consolidations that suggest that is, that is, that is likely the case. Now whether they turn into actual savings or reinvestment opportunities. Well, sure. Yeah. Understand that. Thank you. And that which is not to say that it doesn't come without costs or without challenges right I mean, it would, it would, it would take some time, it would, it would have some costs in terms of trying to create the project infrastructure to move that effort forward, which is why in the third recommendation we talked about the need for the state to help support and stimulate the transformational activities that are needed. The other questions, yes. Yeah, back to you, Senator balance. Hi, and in terms of the section C talking about really trying to serve students of all different types including working adults and underrepresented, you know, population. I'm wondering, to what extent did you look at how incumbent workers working adults right now as a student population. What's the, what's the percentage of those students on the campuses now. I'm just wondering when you talk about expanding. Do you have a, have you thought about a target for what, what that population would look like in order to make it financially feasible. Yes, we, we have talked a little bit about that, and for, let me, let me take this sort of in, in some kind of sense, hopefully sensible order, the, the proportion of student enrollments among adults is largest at, at CCV, and to a slightly lesser extent, Vermont tech, but among the other institutions, there is, is much more head predominantly a traditionally student population directly high school residentially based students, and the Vermont tech and to, I think to a lesser extent CCV they, they also have. They also offer programs or they coordinate services for adults in the workforce right now they're not captured in most data. And in fact, Vermont, my, our sense of Vermont is that there is not a clear sense of the degree to which non credit and customizable training programs and other things like that are actually being carried out throughout the state because it's so heavily decentralized and not particularly well funded. So, we are continuing to try to gather information and, and refine recommendations around that particular area, but we do think that the Vermont between Vermont tech and CCV there's a real need for real attention to, and expand some there is already some but an expanded attention to reaching that population. Now, on the last point last question you had. We do have some, some, some data in the report that probably makes sense to this discuss under that third recommendation that suggests there would be some additional tuition revenue to be reaped from better outreach to populations not currently being will serve. But with the data being what it, what they are, it's what we've done is we've tried to say it's not it wouldn't take an awful lot of additional outreach to generate some tuition revenue to help close some of those structural deficits the system is Thank you. Any other questions. All right, so we'll go on to recommendation. Number two, I guess that's where we stopped the second recommendation. Thank you very much. The second recommendation is to the system should move aggressively to coordinate administrative service operations. This is an area where I don't think that there is really any. There's going to be really a disagreement from various sources that that more efficiency can be gained on the administrative side within the system itself and the, even the, the labor task force has suggested improvements in that regard. And this agreement is how to actually carry that out. And in our case we've argued that it's not missed. And I think this is so far been somewhat of a misperception of the recommendation that the select committee is forward. We are not advocating for a substantial increase in the chancellor's office size. We are however recommending that the chancellor's office move aggressively forward with the support of the board to ensure that that that process. It's rolling and proceeds speedily the coordination of the administrative services does not have does not necessarily mean centralizing all those functions with it under the leadership of the chancellor in an office and not failure. Instead it means that the, for example, a function like financial aid services the policies and procedures to be used around making sure that compliance is sorted out that students get their funds, etc. can be coordinated and if expertise exists at Castleton to carry that task out and to create the leadership for how that gets done, then that can happen at Castleton students at NVU will still need access to a financial aid counselor. Now they can get that through online engagements where there's a person in an office in London and in Johnson to actually meet with students about their financial aid needs, but that person is this is a frontline individual they're not creating policy or implementing policy in a different way from what's going on across the system. And that same approach can be used across an array of administrative services, generally speaking. I think that it's fair to say that the board mark our experiences at the board and the chancellor's office is moving forward in some areas with regard to that. They have to, and it's, it's going. There's, it's not, it's not easy to do it. They did it around payroll. I think last year that did not proceed smoothly. So one of the key elements we're talking about here is the real need for effective and professional project management. There are really I think high quality people in the chancellor's office and scattered around the system. There are many, many tasks on hand, and they're not necessarily trained project management folks. So, we're arguing that in order to get better outcomes and better transformation, there needs to be resources to support the acquisition of really good project management services to carry out these kinds of consolidations. Okay. Any questions on that one. Recommendation number two. Yes. Okay. Senator ballot. Not so much a question as a comment I think it's really unfortunate that the consolidation of the payroll went so so roughly because it just didn't instill a lot of confidence about additional consolidation of services going forward I just want to sort of state the obvious that we're not building on something that works smoothly and there's still a lot of hard feelings around that so it's a challenge. On the other hand, we know her least I know from faculty in my area that they add the. There was a lot of animosity toward the chancellor's office and you know just get rid of it save money give it all back to us, make the world go back etc so in some ways this proposal to look at this more as a distributive kind of administrative function, assuming that where it's large can implement it well across the system helps kind of mitigate that that those feelings that the chancellor's office and administration is growing and that our expense which I'm sure you picked up it was certainly a very strong message that we were for those of us who live in the areas where these colleges are located we're certainly hearing this is that that the that project management activities it sounds basic right but it really requires a unique set of skills and capacities that that are not necessarily they're they can be kind of uncommon and it and if they're not they're not necessarily going to be something that somebody can take on the side of an existing full time array of jobs so it is a a cost to try to help transform the system to and in order to coordinate these administrative functions, there's a cost associated with doing that effectively and well in a way that sort of addresses the concerns that the payroll experience created Okay, so if no more questions will go on to recommend the next recommendation. The third recommendation is probably the one that that you're as appropriators, you're most interested in this is the one that talks about strategic funding of the system overall and and it includes the substantial additional ask for funding resources to the to support the transformational activity. I think we've outlined in this report that start to be outlined in this report and for which there will be more work to be done as this select committee continues this work, but also, we should be mindful, and this is an area where we at the board are trying to be clear but also members of the select committee that the job of the board is is really where a lot of this work is going to get carried out in the chancellor's office or at the direction of the board. And so, what's clear is that there's that that the the opportunity to create this changes is is is clear and present that the pandemic has created a whole bunch of additional costs. And of course the the legislature has been generous and trying to help the the system sort of manage the current fiscal year with help from the from the cares act, but as it goes forward to try to put the system on good financial footing, there is a timeline this isn't going to happen overnight. And the idea that's represented in this transformation is that this, the legislature, the state would provide substantial additional resources in the upcoming fiscal year, and I'm quite aware that the state budget, state budget situation that that you all are going to have to be wrestling with us as you go forward. The that funding support to to to to allow for this transformation to happen will be required. And the way in which the, the, the sort of the ask the structure is that there's more money requested on the front end. And as it as the system is able to find cost savings, or it savings they can redirect towards improve the portability. But the subsequent years the money requested from the legislature would go down. Paired with this, I should probably mention is this idea that we have not found a clear and clear articulation of what the state wants out of its state college system. I think it's done a bunch of work to sort of outline that that's sort of in the criteria, sort of mixed into the criteria for recommendations, but in order to know what you're paying for lacking a clear awareness exactly of what you're paying for I sort of led to a sort of. So we provide $30 million a year to the state colleges and hopefully we'll go forward from that but tuition have generally gone up. So we, in addition to the transformational request there is a request to provide some additional funds to support affordability concerns, as I think you probably all are all aware, Vermont is the state in the union that is far and away. It expects the most funding support for public institutions to come from tuition revenue than any other in the country. I thought New Hampshire was be worse. It's, it's, it's now it's like 87% for Vermont and about a two or somewhere between 80 and 82 or thereabouts for New Hampshire, but you all are sort of in regular. No, I know I always used to get a little consolation. We were really bad but our neighbor to the east. Okay. Can I just point out that yes. First of all, we have the lowest birth rate in the nation, except for New Hampshire. So we got that going for us. The second thing is, I spoke with Senator Campion about, you'll see in the report to connect with what Brian just said, it asks that essentially we draft some language for title 16 that lays out what the state wants from its state college system, and Brian seemed receptive to that. So as the committee puts together kind of final report recommendations, I told Brian that I'll, I'll bring those ideas to him and I don't think Brian that anybody anticipates a lot but maybe a where there are now two paragraphs, maybe a page and a half of of guidance. One of the, you had used the and looking at the system where in fact efficiencies that then free up money that can be reinvested or help support the transformation. But on the setting aside tuition increases, other ways of looking at revenue generation. And the example is we have a very aggressive Southern New Hampshire University, and they actually have gone into Vermont high schools their credentialing Vermont teachers, and they are, you know, moving very quickly. Those students are the ones that you want to create the pipeline or if in fact we want to make make a better pipeline so to speak to our state college system. So did, did that come up in your deliberations in the extent to which maybe the state college systems lunch is being eaten because of this very aggressive, you know, academic entity that is right at our doorstep and in on in and marketed services to our own high school so when we're using public resources at one level that in fact might work at cross purposes for the support of higher education. I just was wondering if that was part of your examination. I think that we, we didn't spend a ton of time on the competitive environment that the state colleges are in because it's well understood that that kind of behavior from Southern Hampshire it's happening but it's not just them it's a whole array. The part of the country that you're in is is saturated with, oh yeah with institutions they're all facing the same demographic picture, and a few of them have thought figured out how to type to try to transform themselves in ways that are in keeping with the kind of academic programs and opportunities that appeal to populations that are there including adults. So the idea that the state colleges can carry on as they have been serving primarily not exclusively but at least in view and castles and primarily residential traditional age students from a dwindling pool and an increasingly populated market. And with with with a wider way of programs that are duplicative doesn't work, and increasingly there needs to be a an approach that is more contemporary and competitive that involves I think the leveraging of the good resources that exist in new ways across the the enterprise, including, you know, programs that are offered in theater, our meteorology at Lyndon that can be consumed by students attending at Castleton or whatever. So the idea is to ensure that those that that set up in a way that works, but, but creating the transformative changes is going to be difficult and in SNHU is not going away. No, no. Okay, it's under star. Yeah. And then that we fund our high schools in our public education schools, very, very well. Maybe we could incentivize our high schools by if they send X number of students to the state college system they get an extra percentage of some type in state aid, so that our money that we push to them will come back to us in the state college system as students. Yeah, I think we ought to put a little muscle on them if Southern New Hampshire can go in and pick up students and they aren't putting in any money into the high school we ought to be able to put our muscle our way in and see and we're giving them this money. We ought to increase their efforts and putting sending their students to our state college system. I think I think that's a great idea. Yeah. I think we might get some, some pushback from UVM, who would want to be in on the deal but a lot them in to I think that would be fair. Okay, so other, I'm just looking. I don't see any other hands. Oh, I'm sorry center Sears. Pretty silent. Are you okay. It's just trying to be silent. Say something about everything, but I just can't keep my mouth shut. I get, you know, and maybe it's been covered in the discussion but it worries me about the state of public, the state of college, or higher education in this nation, not just that state university, the state college system, but throughout the nation. And particularly here in the Northeast. I mean, we lost Southern Vermont College here. And are we, are we rescuing something that is, unless it completely transforms itself is not going to be the, you know, the Southern New Hampshire University. I see advertised all the time on television down here. The North Adams State, but used to be North Adams State now so North Adams College of Arts. Those are drawing a lot of my constituents, kids. And I'm just wondering if now what is the outlook for higher education. In some of these smaller schools and we've seen so many of them. They're all private to be sure. But we've seen so many of them close around wings. Not just a Vermont problem. And I understand that we've under that we can talk about a little bit that we put towards that the, whatever, the 89% of the funding has to come from other sources than the state. Even if it was changed to 75%. Is it, is it going to work. I guess that's my question. Okay. Presuming that's addressed to me. Yes, I think it probably is. Yeah. I think that that that it's, it's a, it's a, it's a good question. The answer to it I would say is that with the limited access with limited data that we are able to access. The graduates of the Vermont State College system. They tend to be coming from Vermont in much larger numbers than students attending UVM, or otherwise, and they're more likely to stay in Vermont than graduates from UVM. They're also, they also tend to be the students who are more marginal in terms of the degree to which they're likely to enroll. Or as adults, UVM is a quality institution, but it serves. Generally a much more traditionally a student population from around the region and across the nation. Northern Vermont University serves students who likely would not attend college in the absence of having a presence up there in that. Which is why we've encouraged the select committee. And I think that it didn't require a ton of encouragement on our part to ensure that one of the criteria is that students from all parts of the state are able to access a quality higher education experience. And when you have a presence that the state assets is already there. The question I think the obvious thing to do is to try to leverage it the most effective way. 20 or 30 years from now I would expect that if you rescue these institutions they will they will be dry they will remain as thriving institutions. And I think that there's more work in our report to be done on how these institutions are economic engines of their communities beyond just being employment centers. But together with UVM and other state investments help to bring individuals back into Vermont who might otherwise be leaving the state. It's really tough task that's maybe on the on the marginal edges of the select committee's charge, but I think that it goes hand in hand with the criteria that they've laid out that says we, you know, a presence in these places is important. And it's important not just because they are often the biggest employer in the area, paying the, you know, the best wage or paying above average wages. We actually, there's actually an intent to try to leverage these institutions for for, you know, and I think it's fair to say that they, in making these statements I don't want to imply that they aren't an economic multiplier, they are. They are the key, or at least part of the solution to trying to change the the futures. And so, but, you know, 45 years from now, it's, you know, higher education is certainly undergoing a change driven by places like SNHU by new technologies. And, in fact, what we're what the select committee's recommendations are saying is we ought to, as an order set of institutions, organize ourselves to take advantage of those similar opportunities for outreach for engagement and for impact. Senator Sears is thinking ahead 40 years out. Well, I'm not going to be in this position 40 years. Well, but it's in car. No, it's encouraging to to hear that you have confidence that they can survive if we can be proved and not gonna that we're not just throwing money away by trying to have a bridge to the future. What's happened at higher education around the typically New England. I'll just stick with New England right now. Well, but, but it's been more New England, smaller colleges closing and the globe Boston Globe did a number of stories about colleges. I think Senator Baruth and then Senator Westman. Yeah, I just wanted to speak to Dick's question quickly and then say something about the money side of it. I do think Brian makes an excellent point. All the research shows that if people go to school in Vermont, we're like clear to retain them. It's an information economy. So if we're not providing the higher ed. For instance, if we had three campuses close, people will have to go to get their higher ed somewhere else. Or they don't get it right where they don't get it and they will be lower paying jobs that they inhabit if they have jobs at all, or they'll be moving out of state so we would be compounding the problems that we have currently. In terms of the money. I don't want to sugarcoat one piece of the report. And that is, there's a table that lays out the projected needs over the next five years. And then later in the report, it calls for the state of Vermont to identify a funding source a permanent funding source, in addition to what we've been supplying for general fund dollars. That's how you get to that more sustainable piece. Now that's a, that's a fraught discussion. But I don't want to make it seem as though this isn't built on that ground. When we talk about sustainability where we talk about those three campuses, remaining where they are. And I think that is that the general fund contribution remain at least the same, and that there be an identified source added to that. So, the committee in its wisdom could figure out all sorts of ways to get to that, but that's what it's all built on. And you have, of course, advanced the proceeds from the sale. Wasn't going to say that but I'll say it for you. Senator Westman you had a comment or question. Yeah. The comment was that the student that you described that drive to school that stayed is exactly where I was almost 40 years ago. The definition of the school always centered around that in the report. The feeling it in some places is that the, the, the system as a whole has drifted away from that. And that drift has put it has put more pressure on the system itself and created less buy-in to the system. And we, and, and so I hope the report and what comes out in February will put a highlight on how we as we appropriate money can continue to shine the light on that particular area because that's where we need to concentrate our efforts. So, how do we put the money in to make sure that that focus remains on that group where the term social justice came up numerous times as it relates to providing access to Vermont kids who otherwise wouldn't have the wouldn't really go on to higher education, but all this discussion really brings home how compartmentalized in some ways. Our discussions have been relative to higher ed and what it means because we never, we always look at economic development and how we import people to the state. And yet, and at the same time failing to say how do we develop and how do we provide the opportunities for the kids that are already here and how do we assure that access to the higher ed whether it's a degree or sometimes certification certificate programs and how to make it affordable. And so I see some of the techniques that fall within the typical economic development sphere, totally disconnected from the investments and the value and the role that our state colleges should play in that workforce development in that keeping our young people here increasing skills and providing that kind of geographic access to educational services. And when we get into our committees we get you know the agency of commerce and community development and they've got their toolbox and is all focused on employers and I think we've got a really focus on broadening that discussion that that that they're that there are other ways of looking at these challenges to the state whether it's our demographics or workforce or whatever, and make sure that we're not just sort of myopic about it which I think, you know I think that maybe back to center development is the way in which a lot of this has been done it's not under my committee purview so I'm going to focus on the department so the agencies that, you know, are, are my policy areas and not think about that the kind of the larger systems. So, I'm hoping that this whole discussion will broaden the perspective around the role of this publicly funded investment in higher education, in fact has very significant impacts on the economy and business and, you know, the well being of the state which I think historically has perhaps not gotten the attention that it needs. So, Senator Ballant you had your hand up. Yeah, I just, I wanted to echo what you just said Madam Chair, it's something I've been thinking about a lot having served on education and also having taught at three different rural K to eight schools. You can identify pretty easily those kids who are going to graduate from high school and never go on to do any additional training or certification and we have got to do a better job we do a great job. Senator Bruce as you well know we do a great job graduating students who are very high rate of graduation but it's that section of kids who never go on to do anything and and we know, as you said it speaks to economic development it speaks to workforce but also speaks to the health of families in these rural communities when they don't have a ladder to that next good paying job and I do think Vermont State College is a critical part of that. Back to. Oh, sorry. Senator Westman then Senator Baruth. Or it's just, they have the ability to do it, they have the, and, but they don't have the family behind them that can push them to do it. Because that school was close. That was my case exactly. And my life is better because the Johnson campus was there for me in that. So, I'm interested in putting money in but I'm interested in making sure that when I put that money in. And that's where we laser focus the money. So I'm, I really need some help thinking about how do I create that net that connection between my money's going in to help those kids and help those families move ahead. That ties into Senator Sears and we do it in such a way that we're building future fiscal sustainability and not not simply maintaining sort of the status quo. So, it's, it's, it's, there's a lot of thinking and a lot of work ahead Senator Baruth you had another comment. Yeah I just wanted to go back to Bobby's point because the more I think about it the more sense it makes. I did an event with Senator Ash and the rest of the Chittenden delegation at Milton High School and very big high school. And we went from group of them to group of them. And we had about 20 minutes with each group. And so I talked to 500 kids that day I think a big number of kids. And my first question to all of them was, do you plan to use the dual enrollment program that the state has set up for you it's, it's about $5,000 worth of college credits, that's basically in the bank for you all you have to do is ask for it. And zero of them were planning to take advantage of it. But to Bobby's point, if the high school had had an incentive where sending kids to dual enrollment sending them to the state colleges, accrued to their benefit, all those kids would be hit up with that proposition. Same way free and reduced lunch. They go aggressively to have people fill out the forms because they get the money for that so I'm going to talk with Senator Campion about what what incentives could we provide that that could be even a side bill. But it seems like a good direction to go. Because obviously it's not, we put those opportunities in place but they, they have the, we haven't been able to realize the full potential of that. And so it, to me it's just another way of connecting back to that to the, to the state college system. We're kind of off on our own discussions Brian. Do you have other information I don't, the, we got to recommendation three, and then you really stimulated a lot of conversation. Well, sometimes I do. Do you have other other presentation for us or testimony. I think that's the, I think that's the core of what I wanted to say, I would go back and echo Senator Bruce encouragement from about 10 minutes ago that if there are questions regarding the schedule of payments that we, we included in the report which I think Chrissy can put on the screen if that's helpful. So I want to make sure that any, if you have any questions about that, then I answer him but this pretty this illustrates that you know that there's a structural deficit at different state colleges that it's substantial and it's grown a big chunk of it is largely due to costs incurred from COVID, but even after that there remains a substantial structural deficit that's that's far larger than it was even a couple of fiscal years ago, and that this table suggests that that the transformational experience that the SC needs to embark upon is going to yield reductions. We have, we've, we've estimated that it's possible to, to create reductions of $5 million per year over the next several years until the structural deficit is eliminated with the help of funding from the state. That's pretty significant. And to Senator Westman's point a little bit. We did talk about the need to address the, the, the size of the physical footprint at the Vermont State colleges there are a number of buildings that are that are largely underutilized or they're obsolete, renovating them is is not likely to yield additional revenue and come at some cost. So they're unlike most capital expenditures this includes the idea that you get some savings from not having to carry in costs of utilities and securing spaces that are not likely to be effectively used in the future. So we've suggested that some of these savings that the Vermont State colleges can realize relatively quickly is by figuring out which of the buildings they currently own need may need to be eliminated from their inventory either through removing them all together or leasing them out to some partner as, as Vermont Tech and NBU have been trying to do, but at any rate there is a, there is a little bit of detail about focusing the kind of investment the state's being asked to make here, in particular around the physical footprint component of this. And I think I've heard that that they're working on that now of divesting some of that property or so seems like they're moving quite quickly in that area. Okay, we've seen this summary before and obviously this is going to be a point of a lot of discussion as we go through the appropriations process. And I would like to say the pinnacle of your success and the investment that you got through the state college system is reflected in your appointment to this committee. Oh, right. The new federal bill that just passed the COVID bill directs. I think 12 or 14 million to the state colleges and 10 or so to the university will we have some idea of how that affects all of these numbers. I think joint fiscal will help us on that. Yeah, well, I, you know, um, yes. So I think that in this table we've assumed. And I think we put this together. Well, we did it in advance of the December meeting when there was no, I don't think there would have been any discussion about actual, any meaningful discussion in Congress about actual. This doesn't include any at the time the idea was that these numbers would be brought down by any. I'm not, I'm not, I'm not particularly saying these numbers. I'm saying that if we get further upgrades on this report in February, will that be factored in. Yeah, we have, I have honestly, I'll be honest, I haven't had time to really look at that, but I think that it makes sense for us to try to to include that, that information where it's clear enough for us to make sense. Yes, that was my understanding was the FY 2020 2022 numbers were where they are now with the idea that it was dependent on what came from. So they do not anticipate that that revenues, which can help on the demand on the state side, I think is what you're saying exactly what I'm trying to get it. Yeah. All right. Other comments or questions. I'm just looking. We've It's around three so I just thought I would. Bobby's got a question. Yeah. Okay, Bobby. Yeah, I'm hearing. You know, sometime in the near future. We should talk with Michael in an economic development in regards to the straight state training grants and all that money that he disperses try to coordinate that with with this to some degree so that the colleges get in on this training. As much as possible to help them earn money, or our own money, but it would go in a different a little different form and I think Michael would would be very willing to cooperate and try to push that in this direction, as long as we got to him soon and Well, don't forget we already went to the Vermont training program to look as a potential funding source to match to support nursing programs that are administered through the state college system. So that's an example of I think what you're talking about to leverage that money in this case, because we can get the Medicaid match then it really helps add more into the system. But that. Well, the program is, you know, it's just floundering along. I know. I know and the Vermont training program was created with a real focus on supporting employers. And so this is getting back to kind of relooking at investments in the system and how we, what might have been a good use 20 years ago, we may want to assess other comments or questions for Brian or center Bruce Before Brian leaves, I just wanted to say sometimes you hire people and they're not good at their jobs and Chams has been fantastic, very professional very nimble. They, as Brian said they've been operating on three or four fronts simultaneously public comment, as well as crunching the numbers and, and coming up with the report itself. So everybody that I know on the select committee has been extremely pleased with their work. Thanks, Brian. Thank you very much for that. That's good and we do appreciate your being available to us on really pretty short notice. Unless there are other questions, I am going to move on and we can let Brian. And you're, you're in Boulder you said. Well, it's too expensive to live in Boulder for, for people in nonprofits, but I live in Lafayette not far from about eight months. Oh, my, my son was in for Collins, which is a little further north and but that whole front range is just. Yep, it's lovely. Yeah, but there's no open prairie left. Not very much, no, no. And the, and the traffic to get in and out of the mountains is gradually getting worse there. There are a lot of roads you can put those those tiny spaces. No, yeah, yeah, and they had that huge wash out to through the canyon. Yeah. Oh, well, okay, thank you. And committee. I just want to touch base tomorrow. Thank you, Brian. I, I'll work with Stephanie around how to give us a draft on some of just trying to get some of this stuff cleaned up and resolved and move forward in light of the fact that we aren't getting a budget adjustment anytime this week. There's certain things I think we can just say we want to do it and move it forward. I know that. Senator Westman and others have raised questions about the conversations the treasure is having and so forth and and if Senator Ballant, maybe can give us a quick update tomorrow as well. Are there other areas that committee would like to do since we've got this time available before we start, you know, before we have the budget adjustment to work on. So it's center Bruce. I've still been curious about, I think it's 10 to 30 million and CRF that now with the date extended, there were reconsiderations about where the money would go. Will we will we have a unit on that somehow. We will in terms of what is out there and whether it be reallocated the other question is that 127 million that's now going into K through 12 and how does that fit. That money flow. And ultimately, there's no question that there's a desire to use these funds in a way to reduce that 9 cent tax rate increase that you know that first letter would suggest we knew that was the high because it had just assumed that every budget would go through the way it is and there's no offsets for some of the CRF money that went in so we will be taking a look at that in terms of whether more of that with the extension on time in fact could be spent for the for K through 12. And we're going to certainly if there's money that we did not obligate in broadband before December 20. I think committees will be discussing how the remainder would go out. You know there's obviously a lot of discussion around the satellite versus you know the line extension, and that's that will probably tie into discussions next door. I think that we just need to get an update in terms of where we are in terms of what has been allocated. And now with the federal extension for a year will give us time to use it for the purposes that we allocated it. The other part I guess is that understanding better the new money coming in and the extent as I mentioned before, we can use those dollars to free up CRF, which are more flexible and allow us some capacity to use them in ways that advance Vermont goals. And the ultimate is, we know that we can be using CRF dollars for payroll for corrections and public safety and so forth. So the ultimate method to convert to general fund which gives us the greatest flexibility is also part of that discussion. I did see Stephanie was on but then she left. Anyone from joint fiscal Chrissy there but you know just me. Well you're pretty important so we'll take you. So tomorrow then we'll start at 130. After the floor I think we'll be off the floor by then Becca. I believe so it's pretty straightforward. Will we be voting on that bill tomorrow. Yes, our expectation is to vote on it, get it through all stages of passage get it to the governor so there's no anxiety in the town's about town meeting. So I'm then I think what we'll do is we will meet at the fall of the gavel so if we're done, and it tends to if it's a little bit later a little bit earlier, we'll just let that be controlling. Anything else for today. Otherwise, we'll call it a day this has been an easier day I've said