Hello, everyone. I just want to say thank you for coming. No snow today. However, I can't say the same for tomorrow. So it is winter and it suns out. I mean, doesn't it feel good? I think it's wonderful. One brief thing some of you have said you're not getting our emails. So, none of them are bouncing back. So look in your junk mail or spam. And if they're in there, what we want to suggest you do to try to establish a connection with our mail team, which is what's sending out messages now or emails now. You'll see in the brochure in the website, send them to this address. I'm not expecting you to write it down, but it's info at evermont.org. A lot of you have sent emails to that in the past. Do it again. And hopefully that will work. And if it doesn't, my phone number is in there. Just call me and there's another possible. So anyway, so I want to introduce Calvin today. I think a lot of you know. You know, I remember him being in his car during the remember all the reports, and he'd be like this. So he's not like that today. We're thrilled. Yeah. So Calvert Cutler is an Emmy nominated reporter focusing on government and politics for WCA at San Montpelier. He came to Vermont in September of 2019, diving into the legislative debate surrounding paid family leave and minimum wage. He also has covered the Scott administration's response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the state's ongoing health care reform efforts and the conversation around emerging forever chemicals known as PFAS. And growing up his passion surrounding public policy and government reporting with Spark by the work of the Washington Post surrounding the Watergate scandal. We all remember that. Calvin has worked in television news since 2017 when he graduated from the New England School of Communications at Hudson University in Bangor, Maine. In 2017 he began covering city hall tribal affairs and breaking news at KNBN in Rapid City, South Dakota. He also worked at WVII in Bangor and found his publishing of Cape Cod Pass. Calvin lives in Burlington as an avid hiker skier and vinyl enthusiast. So please welcome him. He's going to tell us all about what's going on down there in my film. Thank you. Thank you very much. Can you guys hear me okay down down here right here? Awesome. Yeah, I could have put it better myself. Thank you very much for having me and taking the time to listen to a little bit about what's happening in Montpelier. I'll tell you this is a really dynamic legislative session. There is a lot going on. There's a lot of pent up energy in Montpelier with lawmakers, a lot of big pressing issues facing the state, especially coming out of the pandemic. So I just was hoping to sort of set the stage of where we are politically sort of the balance of power or where some of these decisions are being made within the state house. What some of the big priorities are and what some of the bigger pieces of legislation are as well as we know there's big pushes for paid family medical leave and childcare, housing, climate investments and weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels. So there certainly is a lot that lawmakers are going to be a factor or they already are. I should say, next week is the town meeting day break. So a lot as well will probably be voting on if you haven't already school budgets and town items and whatnot. So I'm thinking we can just sort of dive right into it. So I just think it's important to set up where we are probably not news to anybody, but the probably the biggest factor leading into this legislative session and the political makeup of Montpelier right now was the retirement of Senator Patrick late. And because Vermont is a small state, we have a small congressional delegation to senators one representative and Senator Senator Sanders and Congressman Welch at the time had been in office for so long. There's been a real backlog of political talent, people haven't been able to work their way up through the congressional level. And so when Senator Patrick late retired that essentially started a massive domino effect of people being able to seek office. Of course, as we know, Senate President pro tem Becca balance ran and was victorious in her congressional race and so now serves Vermont in Congress. And then in her wake in the Senate had other lawmakers step up in terms of statewide offices we have at least four or five new statewide office holders. And in the legislature to there's been a huge shake up in the political dynamic. We're a third of the entire legislature retired last year, or moved on to other offices or stepping back from from public service. So there is a massive seismic under a seismic change happening in Montpelier right now certainly it's a really big generational shift. So I think that said that that's sort of what leads into where we are with this, this sea change and I'm sorry if these might be too small I didn't quite know the makeup of the room but these slides will also be online. I guess I'm told as well, potentially yes. So, as I mentioned, and as everybody here probably knows in Vermont's House of Representatives, we have 150 members. In the Senate we have 30 in the House there were about 50 new members, including about eight new committee chairs of jurisdiction. So that is a really big shift in terms of who is calling the shots in some of these committees. You know, what bills, what policies they decide to take up, because ultimately the bills are debated on and voted on the floor of the House or Senate. But it's really in committee is where all of the action happens. That's where all of the deliberations and all of the testimony and all of the work really happens in committee. And it's the committee chair who decides who to bring in to testify which bills to take up which ones won't make it onto the floor. So I can't really stress how important that that turnover has been in terms of the public policy direction in Montpelier and what issues lawmakers are deciding to take up right now. And I think just, you know, one reason as to why we've seen so much turnover. I think there's three big things that I'm really hearing. Number one is burnout among lawmakers from the pandemic. We can get a little bit into it later, but lawmakers have been remote the past, I guess, since March of 2020. There's been very few in-person interactions at the State House. It was shut down. They conducted the whole session remotely. In fact, Vermont was one of just a handful of states that made the switch to try to keep staff at the State House and visitors and the press and lawmakers and lobbyists safe from COVID. So it's been everything's been done online. And then there's also this emerging discussion, which isn't new, but it really has come to a head during the pandemic about support for lawmakers and what it means to be a citizen legislature. Many of the lawmakers, as you know, we are a citizen legislature. And so it's a part-time legislature. It goes from January until May. And a lot of these people work everyday jobs in the off season. So lawmakers work very long hours, unlike other states, they don't have support staff. And there's a very low pay and low reimbursements for meals and travel and rent if they live in Brattleboro and they need to rent an apartment in Montpelier or Barrie. So some of those financial supports for lawmakers are very low. And that's one thing that we've heard of why lawmakers have been stepping back. And then the other part, you know, anecdotally I've heard some step back too, because there's a feeling of increased partisanship. You know, there's this saying that all politics is local. We're seeing this trend now where all politics is national, where there's a lot of things that are happening in Congress and D.C. And on the national stage, which are sort of seeping into local politics on the state level and maybe even into the local municipal level, if you've seen that in some of your communities as well. So I think that was one of the other, the third reason I think that there was some some turnover in the legislature. But that said, though, having, you know, a lot of new lawmakers brings new energy, new ideas, fresh perspectives. As I said, it's been a really big shake up at the State House in terms of what policies they decide to tackle and the energy in the building as well. And then I think the other big part of this too, which also can't be understated is the reapportionment process, right? So every 10 years, as you know, the census goes through and they, you know, reevaluate the, you know, voting districts for the House and Senate to make it more proportional to make sure that everybody's vote in every senator and representative by and large has the equal amount of power. But as we know, we've seen a shift, a population shift from the Southern and from the Northeast Kingdom, more people are moving toward Chittenden and Franklin counties and people are leaving the Northeast Kingdom and more rural parts of the state. So that's also led to a shift in power as well at the State House. So those are some of the underlying currents, I guess, that are leading to this massive shift in demographics at the State House, so to speak. Good. There we go. And then I guess we already talked about this a little bit and I've spoken with some of you today of just how, you know, you can tune into the legislature. So some states are already doing this, not everybody. But now that lawmakers are back in the building full time, one of the I think one of the best things to come out of the pandemic is challenging as it was is we have this new remote format where everybody's there in person, but they have big TVs and on the middle or in the middle of tables they have these cameras with a fisheye lens that can see 360 all around. So this is the House Human Services Committee. I think this was like last week or two weeks ago. I don't know what they're debating, but you can see everybody that's in the room, it picks up their audio, you can see who's in the room, who's testifying. And one of the best parts is if you are, let's just say, a service provider down in southern Vermont or you're somebody from out of state and lawmakers want to hear what you have to say about a specific bill or a policy, you can hop on Zoom and you can testify right in front of the legislature, and everybody can watch you on YouTube. So it's really been incredible to see the access and the transparency and at times the accountability as well to see that happen in real time. That's a technology that Vermonters have never really been able to interact with in real time, but I think that's one of the biggest changes that's shifted at the State House too is lawmakers know they're being watched, but also more people can participate in the process. So it's really incredible to see that. And of course you can, it's not just all committee meetings, but all House and Senate meetings, and those are stored in perpetuity on YouTube as well. So it's really exciting stuff. So just briefly, as I mentioned, talking about the balance of power and where we are politically in the House and Senate, there's been a big turnover and in November, the Democratic Party at the State House did very well in a lot of elections. Democrats in the House with 150 members, they now hold 104 seats. Republicans hold the fewest than they've ever held at any point since reapportionment back in 1964. And they hold 38 seats, progressives hold five, and independents hold three seats. Now this 104 number is key though, because to override a veto from any governor, you need two-thirds of a chamber to vote to override. What that 104 number is key, Democrats no longer have to lean on independents or their progressive allies to try to override a veto from Governor Scott or whoever, whichever governor I guess comes next if they hold those numbers. But, you know, and a lot of Democrats have said, this is a good thing, we're really excited about this. But I think it's also worth pointing out that just because there is 104 Democrats doesn't necessarily mean everybody is always going to fall in line, lock step, vote on the same party or as one voting block, so to speak. Depending on the issue, there are some more moderate Democrats or others that might have a fiscal philosophy more so aligning with Governor Scott or others in the legislature. So just because it's 104 Democrats doesn't necessarily mean it's a slam dunk to override vetoes. And I think it's also worth pointing out though that in both the House and the Senate, leaders have told me that its overriding a veto is never their first instinct. You know, that's always the last line of we need to get this policy over the finish line. They always try to work with the governor, with the administration, with Republicans to try to pass those policies in a collaborative way and to try to iron out those differences. But that said though, 104 is a really significant number in the House of Representatives. I wish I had a similar spread graphic for the Senate, unfortunately I don't. But it's kind of the same story in the Senate as well, which is as I mentioned is made up of 30 senators from all 14 counties, 22 Democrats, seven Republicans and one progressive. One progressives, I say, but anyway, but it's kind of the same dynamic, right? You know, Democrats have that that two thirds needed. But again, depending on what the vote is, it doesn't necessarily mean it will be veto proof. Just looking yesterday at the Affordable Heat Act, which I will get into in just a little bit. But that was a pretty close vote where there are some Democrats that voted against that as well. So again, just because you have the numbers doesn't always mean that everybody's going to fall in line. Everybody has a different philosophy of governance and, you know, represents their different constituents ideas in many different ways. So then I guess the other that I'd be remiss if I didn't mention Governor Scott too. So you have the Democrats who received many, many seats in November, but Governor Scott won by his largest victory by his largest margin yet. He won every single town in Vermont and he secured 71.3% of the vote. And even recent polling is show that Governor Scott continues to be one of, if not the most popular governor in the country as well. And so I think that talks a little bit that shows a little bit about how Vermonters like balanced government, right?  I think those are some of the governor's key components and some of his core values. So you have this interesting dichotomy of Democrats in the legislature, but a Republican governor. But again, you know, Democrats could override vetoes if they want. But as I mentioned, it's that's always the last resort to have a veto or a veto override. The governor likes to try to reach out across the aisle and work with, you know, the legislature as well. So he says so. We can ask that question too. It's a good one though. And then I think it's worth noting to, you know, in terms of leadership in the House and Senate, Representative Jill Kroinski of Burlington, she's serving her second term as House Speaker and Senate President Pro Tem Bill Baruth. He's been in the Senate for about 10 years now, eight to 10 years. He took over for Becca Ballant, who, as we know, is in Congress. So each one of them, though, brings their own leadership style, their own priorities to the table. Certainly Representative Kroinski has really made childcare and paid family leave two of her biggest priorities this session. As is Senator Phil Baruth, but also he's wanted to focus a little more on gun policy as well and trying to, you know, restrict guns in the hands of younger people and try to reduce gun violence and suicides in the state. So each one, each leader in the House and Senate has their own priorities. And so that's interesting to see the leadership between the two and the relationship and how that squares with each other. And then I guess before we dive into some of the specific bills that lawmakers have been working on, the state budget, as we know, funds everything that lawmakers, you know, the budget is a reflection of the priorities of the legislature and of the administration. As we know, the governor crafts a budget and lawmakers use that as a starting point and they craft their own budget. Then at the end of the legislative session, he can sign it into law, let it go into law without a signature or veto it. But this year, though, coming out of the pandemic, we're in a really wonky economic moment. I guess to say the least, you know, so because of Senator Patrick Leahy and the small state minimum, which he helped us, you know, achieve, Vermont really made out well in terms of appropriations to Vermont between extended unemployment, direct stimulus checks, PPP loans, business grants, the CARES Act, the American Rescue Plan. Through all of these different pandemic relief programs, the state of Vermont has roughly about 10 billion with a B, 10 billion dollars that's coursing through our economy. Some has been spent. Some money is still in the pipeline waiting to come down and there's also federal infrastructure money as well. So there's a lot of federal money that's coming down the pike and that's playing out in many different ways throughout Vermont's economy. And that in part, you know, there's been a lot of debate, there's been a lot of, you know, debate of what is driving inflation and federal spending is part of it. That's one element to this conversation surrounding inflation. But as we know to try to, you know, tamp down inflation, which is having a real impact on services throughout the state, whether it be people going out buying groceries, having work done on your car, rent. The cost of living is not just in Vermont, but nationally is rising. So to try to tamp that down, the Federal Reserve is raising interest rates to try to cool down the economy. So the way that the legislative economists, and I was the one that took this graphic from MIF to attribute this to Tom Kovett in the legislature, but what the Fed is trying to do is raise interest rates to cool down the economy. So we've got one foot on the gas and one foot on the brake, essentially, where we still have all of this COVID money that's flowing through. Towns have American Rescue Plan money for infrastructure, for you name it. But we've also got, and that's fueling the economy, but you've also got interest rates which are rising to try to cool it down. So we're in, as I said, a very wonky time right now in the economy, and that's leading to a lot of uncertainty in the state budget. But we're forecasting, though, for that money to essentially go away in a couple of years and the economy is going to cool off. We still don't know exactly what that downturn will look like. The Federal Reserve keeps talking about wanting a soft landing, but we'll see what that looks like. But there will be some type of landing. And so because of that, the legislature this year is really looking to make key investments in things that will help Vermont through any type of economic downturn and beyond. So things like childcare, infrastructure, broadband, workforce development. They say that these investments are going to be key, really, to try to strengthen our economy, strengthen our demographics and our workforce for this downturn. But also whatever comes next. But again, the biggest question, though, that we get with any state budget year over year is how do you balance or to what degree should you put money into programs that's one time spending versus ongoing appropriations. For example, there's a universal school meals lawmakers are looking to try to find funding for that about 15 to anywhere from 12 to $15 million. I think it's the price tag of an ongoing appropriation. So that's one of those line items that lawmakers are trying to dig into where can we find this money year over year, but then also have those one time investments too. So I just briefly wanted to get in a couple pieces of legislation. I don't know what we're doing on. How am I doing on time? Oh, perfect. Okay, great. Awesome. Wonderful. So as I mentioned, and I'm sorry if there's too much text here, I haven't made a PowerPoint in a very long time, but I'm more of a video guy than a graphic designer. So, you know, two of the things that law that especially Democratic lawmakers and House have been working on our paid family leave and universal childcare, both of these policies are still in the works. They're working through committees. So this is how it stands as of right now. None of these are final per se, but for paid family leave, you know, they're hoping that this is a real critical piece of social infrastructure that, you know, employers can use. To incentivize people to come work for them and bring people to the state of Vermont. Ideally lawmakers would like to see up to 12 weeks of paid time off to care for a sick loved one or a newborn or recover from a personal injury. And that would be for every worker across the board. They'd like to see full wage replacement up to a living wage. And that would be funded by about a half a percent payroll tax. But again, we sort of run into this philosophical debate of what is the best way to serve Vermonters and how do we fund some of these programs. The governor Scott is opposed to new taxes. He says that Vermonters are already overburdened with taxes. So he is moving forward with a voluntary plan for employers while lawmakers are going with a mandatory plan. So this has been one of the bigger political discussions of this legislative session. We're on this to come after town meeting day. And the other thing with the universal childcare. This has been, you know, a lot of the state's challenges are really interlinked. Housing, childcare, workforce, our demographics, all of these interplay together to to say it. All of these issues are very interconnected and they play out in a very real way in communities across the state. Lawmakers are hoping to make big investments in childcare because we need to bring in more people to our state and employers need people. But also we want people to have families and to be able to support those families so they can be part of our workforce. But the problem is, as we may know, finding childcare slots is very challenging. It's really hard for young families to find childcare slots. And the wages for childcare workers are very low. So there's a workforce challenge, but it's a supply and demand essentially that isn't being met. So lawmakers are hoping to, you know, chip away at the problem. There was a report that was put out saying that childcare would cost well over $100 million annually to try to set up a universal system. So lawmakers right now are trying to, you know, bring four-year-olds into the public school system. They're in create, opening up those slots for other families, for kids. And it would also extend subsidies to more families. Again, this is still a fast-moving conversation, but it's another really key policy that lawmakers are working on that they see as a really critical piece of social infrastructure to support and uplift families. There's that. Everybody's favorite, the Affordable Heat Act. This one is, it's very complex, and there's a lot of lawmakers that are still trying to wrap their heads around it. But essentially, in 2020, and I'll try to boil it down as best I can, but in 2020, Vermont passed the Global Warming Solutions Act, which mandates that the state reduce its carbon emission levels by certain levels, by certain dates. We have one coming up in 2025, we have one coming up in 2030, and another one in 2050. To reduce our carbon emissions, you know, we have to enact policies that will help people transition away from fossil fuels. One of the climate action plan, which is this, or the Climate Action Council, or the Climate Council put together recommendations, and one of them was for a clean heat standard. Essentially, a performance-based standard which would help wean Vermonters off of fossil fuels and reduce our thermal emissions from businesses and from homes, which currently make up about 30% of Vermont's emissions comes from our homes, and from home heating, oil, and propane and kerosene, et cetera. So, for a lack of better words, and I'll try to sum it up as briefly as I can, the clean heat standard creates a marketplace of credits that fuel dealers can earn by installing eco-friendly forms of home heating. I think cold climate heat pumps, wood pellets, you know, efficient water boilers, things that will help reduce our carbon emissions. And the idea is to wean Vermonters off of fossil fuels, but the challenge, really, with this policy has been for a lot of lawmakers, is what is the upfront cost to Vermonters? How will this affect people in the pocketbook, and what will it do to individuals' home heating bills? And as of right now, we don't have that immediate answer. We know that in the long run it will save the state $6 billion by 2050. So weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels is going to save money in the long run, but we just don't know right now what the immediate impact will be on Vermonters and their home heating bills. So that has played out. It's been one of the bigger issues of this legislative session. Yesterday, there was a really big vote in the Senate where they voted 19 to 10 to advance the Affordable Heat Act, but this time, though, they're taking a bit of a pause. They're going to spend the next two years studying and trying to assess the impact. How much would a clean heat credit cost? How do fuel dealers obtain them? What should this new marketplace look like?  You know, Governor Scott has said that his biggest opposition is he worries about rural and low income Vermonters. But at the same time, as we mentioned, there's still a lot of subsidies coming from the federal government. There's a lot of help to make this transition. So supporters argue that if we were to make a transition to electric heating and transforming our grid, now would be the time. So again, it's still a very much a work in progress in the legislature. It's definitely one of those bills that's incredibly complex. Just like Act 64, I think it was, was the school merger law. It's a complex one for policymakers to wrap their head around. But that said, though, it's moving forward and we'll see how this plays out in the House of Representatives, which it will move over there after Town Meeting Day. As I mentioned, another one of the big policy priorities, especially on the Senate side, has been gun reform. As we know, there was a couple of laws signed into law last year, but the biggest sweeping gun reform happened back in 2018, where the governor worked with the legislature to pass a red flag law and several others. But this year, lawmakers are looking to continue that work, especially looking at it through more of a public health lens, certainly with suicide prevention, but also looking at some of the uptick in gun violence that we've seen in some communities across the state. Because it is a statewide phenomenon. Lots of communities have dealt with it.    That's been a challenge in Burlington. An expansion of red flag laws, straw purchases, essentially buying a firearm in one person's name and then having another person use it, and then removing of serial numbers as well. So these are all pieces of legislation that lawmakers have been looking at in terms of firearms. But one of the biggest challenges this year, you know, to this or one of the biggest questions I should say is the Bruin decision. It was from the Supreme Court, I believe last summer it was issued on the same day as when Roe vs. Wade was overturned. And two really big Supreme Court decisions without getting too far into the weeds, but the Bruin decision really has thrown a lot of current and proposed gun reforms for a loop and has put them in doubt. And so I think that's something that lawmakers have really had to contend with this session of what can we do, what can we put our energy behind, but also what won't get challenged in a lawsuit going forward. So that's still an ongoing conversation, especially in the Senate, but it's definitely, it's a fascinating one to see. Everybody's favorite, healthcare. There is a lot happening in the healthcare arena right now. It's a very complex intersection between mental health, long-term care, skilled nursing, our healthcare workforce. There's a lot of challenges facing our healthcare system coming out of the pandemic, but there's also a lot of opportunities as well. I mean, certainly the biggest thing that the legislature is trying to tackle right now with our healthcare system is stabilizing the cost of healthcare and to bring it down. Right now, just about every sector of the workforce, there's big shortages in our healthcare sector in nursing, in long-term care, mental health, you name it. And because of that, they have to bring in traveling nurses or temporary staff, which they pay more. And so that is driving up the cost of healthcare, plus general inflation, as I mentioned, is services and medical materials, physical space.  And also, there's an underlying challenge of, you know, right-sizing Vermont's healthcare system. There's a long-simmering conversation as well at the State House, which is actually going to be playing out in a few weeks this summer about what should Vermont's healthcare system look like? Should the state be funding, I believe it's 12, 13 hospitals, I think? Should we have full-service hospitals in every county of the state and be offering every type of service? Or, you know, should most of the services be offered at UVM or in the Chittenden County area and have, you know, more clinics and be able to refer people? And again, I mean, if that's a longer, simmering conversation about what should our healthcare system look like and what should the footprint of it be? But that's another really big conversation that lawmakers and the Green Mountain Care Board as well, healthcare regulators will be tackling this session and probably next session, too. And then, of course, you know, challenges that are also out of our hands, too.  So that funds a lot of really critical services for Monters, everything from housing to healthcare to food assistance in some ways. So Medicare reimbursement rates have really posed a challenge to Vermonters, and there is definitely stress on the Medicare budget or Medicaid budget, excuse me. But lawmakers are looking to make strategic investments. And again, that's another long, simmering conversation with no easy answer, so to speak. But that said, you know, there are a lot of bright spots to our healthcare system right now. You know, Vermonters, by and large, we are one of the healthiest states in the nation. We have one of the oldest workforces and oldest demographics in the state or in the nation, but we also have one of the healthiest and one of the most active. So that really helps, you know, bring down the cost of healthcare. And also, as, you know, Vermont, as we've talked about, we have declining demographics. People are growing older. You know, there's a bigger conversation happening of what should the state's plan for aging and supporting, you know, older Vermonters. What should that look like to make sure that everybody ages well, is engaged, is plugged into their communities, has, you know, mental health needs addressed. Has nutrition, housing, to make sure people, you know, live with dignity. So the state is working on a comprehensive plan, which is the result of about six or seven years, I believe, of work. The Vermont Department of Health Access is working on a really comprehensive plan to show what does that pathway look like. And then, of course, there's also our healthcare reform efforts as well. I won't get too into the weeds with that. I love talking about health systems, but we're basically switching over how we pay for healthcare from single, or from a multi-payer system to a all-payer system, where we're flipping how healthcare is paid for on its head, pooling Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance, and instead paying doctors flat monthly rates, as opposed to having them charge for each individual procedure. So when you think about it, doctors are paid to keep people healthy, as opposed to keep people sick, or not keep people, but treating people that are sick. So there's a lot happening in our healthcare arena right now, but I think some of the bigger ones, definitely right now, in the immediate are about workforce, staffing, and mental health needs as well. So there's certainly a lot to work with there. And then I guess one of the last ones, too, is housing. This has been a really big, really challenging policy arena for lawmakers to wrap their heads around. And there's a lot of philosophical debates about what should the future of Vermont look like, what should our communities look like, who should have access to land, to resources. Those have played out in many different ways this session. So one of the biggest policies that lawmakers are working on is this housing bill, which essentially would help build more dense development in our downtowns and urban centers. We want more people to move to the state. We want more housing, but of course we don't want urban sprawl. That's something that, you know, the state, it's, we, they're at a little bit of a crossroads in terms of what should Vermont look like. And so there's a number of bills at the state house, and one of them essentially looks to take zoning, flip it on its head, and incentivize more downtown development, and modernize Act 250. As you know, that's the state's landmark land use law. And part of that they're looking to get rid of some of the Act 250 exemptions. So there isn't a duplication of efforts. So if I'm a local, if I'm a zoning or a developer, I want to build an apartment building. I have to go through a local development review board and a Act 250 district commission. They're looking to get rid of that, that duplicate step, which some might say is driving development away. But on the other hand, there is, there's definitely some are cautious about over developing and bringing too many people into Vermont's downtowns and, you know, tarnishing the way that, you know, rural Vermont in many of these towns look and feel too, because that's why in many regards we love Vermont, because you can go to somewhere like Hardwick or go to Newport or fill in the blank. Each of these communities looks really unique. So that said, there's, there's a lot happening in the housing arena. And I think there's a statistic. Oh, yeah. And then the Vermont Housing Finance Agency as well has estimated that to bring down the cost of housing and to really try to meet the need of housing right now, we're going to need about 10,000 units over the next five years. Units of all shapes and sizes from single one bedroom studios, two bedrooms all the way to single family homes, duplexes. So there is definitely a lot of need for housing, but also there's a really big opportunity. There's still lots of money from the infrastructure funds that will be coming down the pike in the next couple of years to help us build out water and sewer broadband infrastructure, those types of systems. So there's a lot of opportunity when it comes to housing, but there's also a lot of challenges too. So those are some of the discussions that are playing out at the State House. And that's, I don't know if I went over or not. Oh, great. Wonderful. Anyway, but yeah, no, thank you very much. I mean, I'm more than happy to answer any questions and thank you very much for having me. I hope I was able to hit on some of the bigger policy topics at the State House. But as we all know, I mean, there's always fun going on and feel free to reach out. My email is right on the screen. You know, I always say we're best when we can hear from as many people as we can to hear the stories of Vermonter because ultimately what lawmakers do at the State House matters, but it's about how the policies that they pass affects the lives of each and every one of you. So I think that's always really important to keep in mind. And whenever we can tell the stories of folks and how public policy affects them, I think is always really critical. So yeah, thank you very much. Thank you. So can you hear me? Yes. So Zoomers, we need some questions from you. Okay, we're looking for quite a few. Okay. All right. Most of you probably heard a couple of us laughing up here at the idea of the governor collaborating with the legislature to avoid vetoes, which has not been characteristic of in the past. Have you noticed in view of the veto proof quote unquote veto proof majorities this year? Have you noticed any change in the attitude of the administration? That's a great question. Yeah. Thank you for asking. I think there has been a little bit of a change as opposed to last year, last legislative session with Speaker Kroinsky and Becca Ballant in charge. They always said that the governor was a little bit late to the negotiating table that, you know, he didn't always show up. Or sometimes he came in at the last moment, they said, with, you know, certain requests or, you know, when it was too late, they alleged at times, you know, when it was too late to, you know, work or change pieces of legislation. I think at this point in the session, we really haven't heard a lot from the governor in terms of weighing in on public policy. Certainly the other day we heard him really come out swinging against the clean heat standard or the Affordable Heat Act, I should say. So he is pushing back on that. But in terms of outreach to, you know, the House and Senate, he says that he has meetings with them biweekly. But I'm not entirely sure what those, those meetings and what those relationships have looked like to date. But also there haven't been that many pieces of legislation that have made it to his desk yet, too. On the clean heat, on the clean heat standard, that envisions a massive change in Vermont here without 20 degrees, we wrote you a meeting today. You would see the redundancy of electric power in the state out there. Anybody been doing this? Any plans to increase the electric grid redundancy? That's a great point and great question. That has been floated. I know there has been, I don't know of any specific piece of legislation where they're looking at, you know, increasing the resiliency of our grid. I know that, as I mentioned, there's a lot of money coming from federal infrastructure funds that they've been, you know, talking about investing it and building it up. But I think you're right. I mean, there are challenges with a cold air heat pump and that cold snap we had a few weeks ago when it was negative 15.  But I guess in terms of, you know, how some of these investments will be built out on the ground, I think we'll still have to see. I hope that answers your question. You have a couple of Zoom questions. I do have a couple of Zoom questions. Unless you've already covered it in your presentation, what are the provisions of a bill recently introduced to provide subsidies to preschools and daycare operations to help these businesses which are on tight margins? That's a great question. I unfortunately don't have the bill in front of me. I don't know if I'd want to speak to each one of the individual points. I would say broadly that there is that sweeping childcare bill that's moving through and they are looking to increase subsidies for both families and for providers as well to really write the financial ship, so to speak, and to make it sustainable. But I'm sorry, I don't have those numbers in front of me, so I don't know if I can speak directly to it. Go ahead. Will the Affordable Heat Act apply to existing houses as well as new construction or just the new construction? Both. If it applies to construction, will there be subsidies for upfront costs to cover heat points? Yes. Okay, so there are subsidies available for both new construction and existing structures as well to help people transition. Commissioner of Public Service, yeah, Department of Public Service Commissioner June Tierney said that there is grants available and there also is money to help people with their electric bills as well. When we make this transition, there also is help. I don't know if it's unclear whether that will be enough or what the need will be there. There's still, as I said, a lot of unknowns with this bill and lawmakers are looking to spend the next two years to study some of those questions. But in short, yes, there are immense subsidies for, you know, for cold air heat pumps and water boilers and that type of thing. I have two questions. Number one, about 10 days ago, Governor Scott came forward to say we have surplus money. He would like to see that not all spent, right? Because he wants to match some of these incoming federal outlets so that Vermont can get that money. That's number one. And what's the reaction at this point of the legislature? Number two, please define for me as best you can or as it is understood now, what is affordable housing or is it a shifting thing? Two fantastic questions. I think I'll take the second one first. And I don't have a textbook definition, but the definition that is most widely referred to is it's up to 30 if affordable housing is a place that you're living where you're paying no more than 30% of your income. So if you're making $1,000 a week, well, you wouldn't be paying rent weekly. I'm not very good at math, but it's up to 30% essentially of, you know, exactly. That said, though, you know, there is a lot of confusion about what does it mean to have affordable housing? What does affordable mean in each community? Because affordable means something different to everybody, right? But that's kind of by and large the kind of ballpark definition. And I guess to your first question about the federal match money, you're right, there is an immense amount of money coming from the Infrastructure Act for roads and bridges, broadband, water, sewer, et cetera. But a lot of these projects require a state match as well. So the federal government might provide 75% of a bridge funding or funding for a bridge project or a road, but we need to spend 25% to match that. The governor would like to see, I think it's 150 million in this current budget set aside for that. So we'll be able to meet some of those projects coming down the pike. Leadership in the House and Senate, Jill Kroinski and Phil Baruth, they haven't weighed in on that specific, you know, on the governor's ask as of yet. But there are also some in the legislature, not just Democrats, but there is also others that, you know, say we have some really pressing needs right now, like childcare, like housing. And so some of those surpluses might be better spent elsewhere. So again, it's this philosophical discussion of, you know, how do we best use the resources that we have? Supposing we do need 10,000 more units at once. I wonder how many housing units there are in our state right now. What percent of increase would the 10,000 units be for our existing number? And if our population has remained so long, who would these new units be targeted for? So I guess the last question. So there is, right now in our housing market, there is a lack of what we're calling, what some housing developers call the missing middle. Think of your single family home, two or three bedrooms, places where, you know, you and your partner can move and start a family and not live in an apartment. There is a cute lack of that housing and because of that, that's like, it's a ceiling that some renters and some people are hitting and they can't move on to that next stage in life. They can't have that white picket fence or that yard, can't have a house. So there's an immense amount of housing that's needed here in Vermont that, you know, people that already live here will use it.  There's at least in central Vermont alone, I know in the Barry Montpelier area, there's 300 people that are unhoused. And so there is an immense need for housing up and down the income spectrum. But also, we want to, you know, help bring new people to the state, but also, you know, do it in a responsible, equitable way. I have a brief comment. It seems he says he meets with them quite simply, but I think he sends his aides. Okay, is that better? Perfect. I think he sends his aides and they must not tell him anything because every time he gets asked about a bill, he says, I haven't seen the bill yet. You'd think someone who looked at the bill and his administration had talked about it with him, but apparently he wants to wait until it's right on his desk and then it gets to be too late, right? So, but my question is, in regards to mental health care, the governor likes to say that he's, you know, this is a big priority of his, but every year he puts nothing in his budget for a raise for people who take care. He doesn't take care of people with mental illness and intellectual disabilities. And so he's put in some money for a program here and a program there, but nothing for the people who they have so much turnover and vacancy rates at Howard Center and the other designated agencies. It's incredible. You know what those rates are. And the only way they, you know, if he wants our health care so important, people are getting out of health care because they're not getting paid enough. And I think the agencies every year have to ask for the phone and they have to put several years where they got no raises at all in the Medicaid way. And so I think that was a big place. He never puts that in the budget to the legislature fights for, which is very fortunate for me to do. And briefly, too, about the housing. The city of South Burlington got rid of 44 acres, had to get rid of 44 acres of affordable housing in the Chamberlain district when the F-35s came. And they're supposed to put that back into housing when this supposedly the F-35s are supposed to leave at some point. But I know. So I just, you know, as a neighbor there, we've had to fight to keep them from expanding. They wanted to put something else there. And they're trying to get the city council and the planning board to give a commission to put some of their stuff, warehouse or something in these places for housing. And if we could replace that housing, South Burlington and Chippin County would be better. So I don't know if, you know, any of that has been talked about in the legislature or not. You know, I haven't heard, I mean, I have heard in South Burlington with this ongoing discussion about housing and where to build it and smart growth development. You know, there has been some conversation in South Burlington dealing with like the land trust. I know there's swaths of land that they would like protected, but it's also a zone for housing or could be developed for housing, I say, because there's water and sewer there. But in terms of the F-35, you know, I don't know if I've actually heard that word uttered once at the State House this year. If I'm being honest, Chamberlain District, I'll look into that. It's interesting. Yeah. No, yeah, that's a good story. One more question. Yeah, no, that's a great question. As of right now, I do not believe there's any big broad investments in broadband right now. The CUDs, the Communication Union Districts are working through some of the money right now. Vermont is in a really good spot in terms of the broadband picture because before there were supply chain shortages and inflation and whatnot, the CUDs went out and bought a lot of the raw fiber, the big spools of fiber. But the big challenge that we're seeing right now is having the qualified staff to string that fiber and to install it and to build that last mile, so to speak. But even then though, I don't know the exact percentage, but there is still even with all of the immense federal money that we've had for broadband, all of the money that we spent last year and the year before, there is still quite a ways to go in terms of making sure every Vermonter is hooked up. Thank you so much. This has been great, Calvin. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Yes, thank you.


That was better it was better, huh? Yeah, it's good you're getting there still pulling this around a little bit So I would definitely work on that to lock arm stop drill. That was better That was a lot better. That was a lot better. Do you feel that initiating with the foot? That was a better throw I like that.  You definitely pulled the shoulder around a little bit more stretch a little more more Yep more Yep, there we go Yeah, and then it's gonna force you to move the everything forward into it to keep the hips back still a little bit Yep, chest forward tiny bit Yeah, so see how we see how we didn't get much push off the left That's why when we stretch it out It's gonna force you to kind of rock back onto it and get off and push and go push pull and Feel the feel the foot always initiate for you because I think you've been thinking knee and so you might turn Okay, but you're not really getting that's gonna really allow the hips to come through so much better That looks a lot better turn that foot That was a lot better feels better, huh? I wasn't bad. I like that. That was that was better. Yeah You see what I'm talking about. Yeah, we want to feel that length and stretch That was better just think a turn in the foot push pull turn the foot much better. That's gonna be good So here's the deal you're doing the right We want to just go squat turn angle the left foot Turns ahead so you're gonna crank it right perk of it. Yep. So see how I do that and then when you're here. You're reaching long That was pretty good. It was better, huh? Close you see how you definitely get more pull on the throat. Oh That's a miss Again it was everything I liked on that throw was pretty good There's this no pillar for no rewrap just shoulder just keeps moving Lock it reach long Hmm. We're gonna really that's is very good because your habits right are on your full throw So when I put you in the pillar to it by default just kind of forces you into a new pattern. I Was a lot better. Oh Kind of you know what you tried to look to me like you tried to rewrap, but it was too late You were already into pillar five That's all right. So you can see you went out of it shifted instead of here So you can feel that not bad See how you use you don't you don't go across the ring as much Interesting so you're basically just trying to keep it connected to about right here and then it opens up Okay, so try that Yeah, so your transition from one to two is what we're gonna continue to improve lock That was way better faith. Oh Not bad though. Look at that. That was a good miss. That was better. I like the pull. I like the movement on it. That was good


The Tiger, Financial News Network. Welcome folks. We have the Dow Industrial's finished up $22, Nasdaq up $12, S&Ps up $3.5, Gold contract down $26.20, trading at $19.92 an ounce, we have Silva down $0.27, $25.32 an ounce, Light Sweet Crude up $0.39, $77.76 a barrel, notes and bonds. Ten year note, down $6.00, trading $1.1415, the third year off $13.00 at $129.29 and $King Dollar. $King Dollar, where are you, $King Dollar, there you go, down $141.00, trading $101.00, $6.98, the Euro is out here at $109, the Yen is trading at a price point. This is so weird, I just missed this thing, how do I do this? Anyway, at $134.00, the British pound is at $124.00 to $1.00 at U.S. dollar. We get over and take a look at the S&Ps folks, what do we have out here? Let's see what we have. Come on, baby. Okay, so you get a sideways move. Yeah, the spy's up $0.28, that's on, let's look at the weekly here. So the daily's not telling us much, weekly, oh watch this, this is subtle, oh man. So the high of last week was $4.1509. The high of this week was $415.72, so you did, this week you did $327 million, last week you did $374.00, you're going into $458.00, you know, this doesn't have enough juice to get up and over these highs. We've been here a long time though, man, we've been here a long time. Let's look at the queues, do the same exercise on the queues, put this on the weekly, so the queues actually went to a low, a low, it had volume, but let's put this on a weekly, see what this looks like. Well, this is interesting with the queues, I don't think we ever hit that high, let's see, $321.17, $321.42, we did, we did, okay. So the $321.17 had $272 million versus $248, that can get tested again. Folks have a great weekend, have a safe weekend, come back and visit Tommy Monday morning, kicks us off 9 a.m., great show folks, have a great weekend, have a safe weekend folks.