A 71-year-old Crosby man is charged with nine felony counts of second-degree criminal sexual contact for allegedly assaulting a nine-year-old girl he knew. As of this afternoon, George Edwin Hardy remained in custody in Crow and County jail on the charges that were handed down on June 26th. According to the criminal complaint, the Crosby Police Department was informed of the accusation by a family member of the girl on June 19th. Hardy's next court appearance is set for July 24th. He's being held on a $100,000 bond without conditions and $50,000 bond with conditions.


This is one in a series of forums we're bringing you ahead of the general election on November 8th. Town Many TV hosts forums with candidates and covers all ballot items so that you can meet community decision makers and learn about issues that shape your local community. With us for tonight's forum, we have several unopposed state representative candidates running for districts throughout Burlington. I'm your moderator, Emily Brewer, and I'm joined by Barbara Rachelson from Chittenden 14, Emma Mulvaney Stanek from Chittenden 17, and remotely joining us on Zoom, we have Carol Odie, who is from Chittenden 18, and Bob Hooper, also from representing Chittenden 18. So thank you all for joining us tonight, and I would just like to remind folks who are watching live at home, if you would like, please call in with any questions. You can reach us at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and our candidates would be happy to answer your questions. And so we have a list of pre-prepared questions, but if anybody calls in, we will prioritize those. And so you can watch Town Meeting TV on Comcast Channel 1087, Burlington Telecoms Channel 17 and 217, as well as online at youtube.com slash town meeting TV, town meeting TV. With that being said, let's jump right into the forum tonight. We're gonna start with opening statements, and for our first opening statements, we'll start with Barbara. Thank you, and thank you so much for hosting it. This is, it's really great to have these forums so we can reach more Burlingtonians and let them know what we think. So I'm running for reelection, and your question was, why am I running and what skills do I bring? So I have a really lifelong strong belief that while life isn't fair, there's much that we can do to make it fairer and help more people to be successful contributing members of our community. Ever since I was small, I saw how our society put up lots of barriers that kept many people from being successful and using their unique skills and talents. When I grew up, my mother was in a wheelchair. It was before the ADA, she had gotten polio before the vaccine was available to adults. And it was very difficult for her to find meaningful work, to navigate being a homemaker and an at-home mother. And I grew up in a town that was affluent and homogeneous and saw how people of color in neighboring towns lived in concentrated poverty, in substandard housing schools. It just seemed fair and unacceptable. I went into social work, and I bring that as one of my skills to help bring about social change. I've been a lifelong pretty much since high school advocate, and I have fought on many issues related to children and families, including fighting to change the law in Michigan, to make it, to stop locking up runaways who are running away from abuse of homes and treating them like the criminal. I've also fought for other issues, including stopping to stigmatize people who are living with mental illness or are struggling with addiction. I've had the honor of working with clients over the years who showed bravery and determination in making and doing the hard work to break cycles of poverty abuse addiction. Those people were hanging in there to make a better lives for themselves and their families. They weren't taking advantage of a system or having children to take these benefits. Nearly 25% of our state is living at the poverty level, which is unacceptable. In addition to bringing my skill set as an advocate and social worker, I bring my perspective as a CEO and business person. I've been the CEO at three different statewide nonprofit agencies for a total of 33 years. I know firsthand what it's like to run a business, the challenges that come with rising costs and level or decreased funding, staffing shortages, increased demand for services, and the importance in the nonprofit sector, just like in the public sector, of spending every dollar wisely. I take my fiduciary responsibility seriously and I bring that with me. I'm running again to use these skills. Thank you very much, Barbara. And we'll move on next for Emma's opening statement. Great, thank you. And thanks again for having all of us. I agree with Barbara. This is a great chance to really talk about what we have been up to, serving as incumbents and what we would like to do as we keep going forward. So again, I'm state representative Emma Mulvaney-Stanak from Chittenden 17, which is half of the Old North End and half of the New North End, the Southern tier of the New North End. And I'm running again because I find that working families' voices are very underrepresented in state and local and federal government for that matter. I was really proud to run two years ago. Thank you for the right camera. I run two years ago because I can see firsthand when I'm serving in the state house how important it is to have people with lived experiences who have young children. I have a three and seven year old who are going through it, frankly, knowing what it's like to try to afford childcare today, knowing what it's like to try to afford cobbling together two different incomes and still struggling to keep up with the cost of living increases, especially in these times with high inflation, trying to figure out paid family leave. When I had my child three years ago, I was self-employed at that point and could only afford to be off of work for about three weeks. And that is a common story. And when I've been door knocking, the childcare struggle, the realities of working families is far and wide, at least in my district, and I know that's the case in the state. The other reason I'm running is I'm a very proud out queer lesbian woman and I ran because representation matters. I grew up in Vermont and it's still a place that we need to work hard and long to make sure it's an inclusive and safe environment, especially for queer youth. And I am very committed to making sure that we make sure state policies are responsive and inclusive and equitable for all marginalized identities. And professionally, of course, I would never like to lead with my Wikipedia page because I really strongly believe that lived experience informs policymakers best. But I do bring 20 years of community organizing experience. I was a labor organizer for most of that. That's why you'll hear me in other questions, talk a lot about working families and labor and how incredibly important that is to put in the center of our economic discussions. So I worked for the Vermont NAA, which is the union that represents public educators. And for the last four years, similar to Barbara, I have now, well, actually I didn't catch this. I believe she does a bit of this now, but I run my own small business as a social change consultant, still trying to make the world a better place. But I now have firsthand experience of running a small business here in Vermont and the struggles and tribulations with that as well, as I mentioned, paid family leave as a big one. So those are my motivators to run again. I'm excited to meet with voters and hear what's on top of their mind as we continue to navigate life out of this pandemic and continue to address the economic disparities that face Vermonters. Great, thank you so much, Emma. And next for opening statements, we'll move over to Carol. Carol, go ahead. Thank you, thanks so much for having us. So the question is about experience and what will be different for my district and for Vermont and what qualifies me to make the changes that I've been working on. So I have the life experience in education as a former school teacher in Vermont, also 10 years on the Burlington School Board, seven as chair being elected to the Vermont School Boards Association and being appointed to the Vermont State Board of Education. I was on that for six years and served as its chair for one. In leadership, I was, as I said, chair of both the school board and the state board and vice chair of several other organizations. One of them, the Vermont Bar Foundation committed to access to justice. I have been an advocate in my life. I'm a lawyer and on the Vermont Bar Foundation, for example, I advocated to raise money for Vermont Legal Aid which helps the elderly, the poor and the disabled and other grantees of Vermont, the Vermont Bar Foundation by working with bank and credit union presidents so that they would donate a larger portion of interest that they pay on their interest on lawyers, trust accounts to the Bar Foundation for the benefit of public access to justice. I've been on the House Natural Resources Fish and Wildlife Committee in the legislature for four years and my current assignment is on the House Ways and Means Committee. That will end, of course, at the end of December. Anyway, and then I'm on the Lake Champlain Citizens Advisory Council and I work hard for the health of our lake and I serve on the legislative committee on administrative rules for the legislature. I've put that experience and knowledge to work and for example, six years ago, I submitted a bill to fix the education formula and update it so the taxpayers and children are treated fairly across the state and especially so in Burlington and Winooski, actually and after a task force and a prolonged professional study, the weights have changed and so that at the same rate, Burlington will be able to raise more money for its schools at the same tax rate. So that's an example of one thing that I've accomplished. I listened to what people want and I use my experience and my knowledge to try to get that for Burlington and to help Vermont. So I wanna continue to work hard and make a difference. Thanks. Great, thank you very much Carol and we will wrap up our opening statements with Bob. Can you please tell us why you're running and what experience you bring to the position? I certainly can, thank you for having us here and quite frankly, after being number four, I would vote for all of these candidates. So I'm Bob Hooper. I'm also in the new North End, the new Chittenden district. I bring experience, but the first question is why are you running? And I think that after four years in Montpelier, this gets a little bit in your blood and you like doing it, you see change that you're making and it's positive and that's a good thing. So I would like to continue to make sure that Vermonters get their best bang for their legislative fund because all the money comes out of Vermonters pockets and they deserve to have value and accountability. As far as qualifications and experience, I spent my entire career in state government as a social worker or a DCF investigating dealing with child abuse victims. I currently sit on the board of the Vermont Veterans Home. Veterans issues are important to me. I've been a union advocate for most of my life. I served five terms as president of the Vermont State Employees Association, which represents everybody in state government. I think that unions help working people float their boat higher and that's a good thing. I have great interest in working folks' issues and kids' issues, vets issues and having been a small business owner. I also see what we can do to make business on the ground level, not to mega businesses that come into our state and every other state, but our friends and neighbors who live next door do better in this economy. So to be short, to be quick, that's what I bring to the table. Thank you. Great, thank you very much for that, Bob. And with that, we'll get moving on to our questions and we're gonna start with Emma and our first question has to do with education. So the legislature can make impacts on how education is funded statewide. Do you see the need for changes to how we fund education and how would you use your office to move changes forward? Well, thanks for the first question. Education is always, is a very, let me get the right camera this time. It's a very important issue because it's one that I feel like people have a lot of complex understanding or actually do the complexities have sometimes limited understanding of how we fund education. And I was sort of hoping Carol would lead off on this because she mentioned this bill that we made a significant step forward within the last session. It was S287 and it was the outgrowth of the study that Carol was mentioning on per pupil weights. We've had a pretty equitable system for many years now in Vermont, certainly compared to many other states. And yet there's still more work to be done. I am very glad that we passed that legislation because it started to, it will begin to create a more equitable system around how we use weights and the funding that is brought into school districts with a high proportion of students in rural areas of the state, poverty or in the case, and particularly for Burlington, Wenuski, English language learners. It acknowledges that it's more expensive to provide education and services and support for students with those kinds of backgrounds. So while it's a great step forward, I think we now need to shift towards looking at equity issues for taxpayers and really understanding how to move towards a fully income-based system for those folks who are paying on their primary residence. We right now have most of those folks pay on some income sensitized basis. However, it's still allowing folks who make the most to pay the least, frankly, into the system based on the proportion of their income. And that's not a very fair system still when you look at people's ability to pay into a system that benefits our entire state and community. So I think that's our next step is to, it would not only make a fairer system, it would simplify it. I think we all benefit from being able to better understand how we pay taxes and support our schools. I think transparency is a good piece for making sure people understand and can better support how we fund public education. The last quick thing I'll say that I think we also need to explore because everyone in Burlington, I swear it comes up and every other door I knock so far this campaign, is what is happening with Burlington High School. And we have many other Burlington High Schools I fear on the horizon in Vermont given what we're expecting of infrastructure and safety in schools around PCBs and other toxins in our environment. So I would really like us to go back to as before my time in the legislature, but cost sharing from the state, there was a version of it existed before but helping small communities, helping all communities really generate the capital needed to keep buildings safe, up to date, modernized so that it's never falling like what Burlington's experiencing primarily on us to figure out how to finance and unfortunately for us in a crisis situation when our building was determined unusable. So I'd like to explore how the state can partner in the infrastructure support of making sure we continue to have healthy and safe schools for the students of course, but also the staff who work there. Absolutely, thank you very much, Emma. And with that being said, we'll move on to Carol to jump in for this question next. So Carol, do you see the need for changes to how we fund education and how would you use your office to move changes forward? Thank you. Yes, six years ago I introduced a bill that said that the state should lift the moratorium on health when school districts bond for school construction. And I will work toward that again so that Burlington can have help while it's building its new high school. And so would other towns and as Emma said, other towns will be facing PCB and other contamination and it's been more than 20 years since the state has helped with construction at schools and schools like all other buildings are in need of upkeep and maintenance. BTC, we have a regional technical center here in Burlington and Senator Lay provided $10 million in funds so that the technical center for aviation could be located at Beta Technology. But that is, we still have a technical center that is a regional technical center and I will fight for funding for that so that Burlington does not bear that burden as part of its bonding for the new high school. And finally, PCBs, we have millions in the yield bill that are set aside for us to try to access to help us to remove, I hope, the old Burlington high school and that will be something that I think all of us in Burlington will be fighting for. We need to get that old building removed and that's something that like other school districts we should have a system to help all school districts in its way and Burlington would be top of that list since we have the need immediately. In addition to that, on the other side of things is help for renters and help for homeowners to look at what the income thresholds are and what the thresholds are for value of houses and to perhaps consider a ratio rather than a flat dollar cut off since cost of living and real estate is higher in Chittenden County than it is in most other places in the state. So those are some things I will be working on. Great, thank you very much, Carol. And next for the same question is Robert. Do you see the need for changes to how we fund education and how would you use your office to move those changes forward? I think educational funding in the state is much too convoluted and creates so many problems that we do need to find a different system and income-based is obviously the cleanest one. However, we need to find a sweet spot in that formula so that people are not running out the door to New Hampshire or wherever. We're oddly enough that we'll pay more taxes probably in the total than they do here. I think that, as Carol mentioned, that I don't wanna say what other people have said before. The tech center and the aviation facility at the airport are excellent examples of what our school district and in cooperation with others are able to do. The tech center in particular is important because at this point in time we're experiencing, I hate to say too many college graduates but too many college graduates and nobody to fix your air conditioner. So we've gotten a little off kilter there. I would like to move more towards making technical education more available to people. I think that my bottom line though is that in the education as well as so many other of the issues that we're gonna talk about tonight, facilitating economic development so that we build the income that's available to the state is a key component to solving a lot of these problems. So as every time Tesla opens a battery plant someplace, I say, why can't we have done that in Vermont or any of the other environmentally friendly businesses that could be here that aren't? We need to address that and it's been a while since it has been addressed. Carol from Burlington High School, I remember when I first came to Vermont to work for the state the first time I went into Burlington High School, I was amazed at the building, freezing hallway, building, freezing hallway, building, freezing hallway as you went up the hill and that was 30 years ago and not much has changed there. It's high time that our children had the opportunity to get educated in an environment that is conducive to learning and socialization and that will play out I think in mitigating a lot of the other problems that we're having sort of in the social network at this point. Great, thank you very much Bob. And finally for this question on education, we'll finish with Barbara. Thanks, so I think here I'm gonna talk a little bit about a two-pronged approach that I am committed to. I served on the House Education Committee my first term and it was very eye-opening because I had no idea that Vermont had so many school districts. I think right now we're down to 362 school districts, give or take, and roughly somewhere around 89,000 students. So Vermont's school district sizes are the smallest in the nation by like a factor of 20. I wanna say it might even be higher than that. So when you think about $1.8 billion going to fund 89,000 students, we, if we were designing a system, ground up and said we're gonna spend that money, we could have an amazing, we could have magnet schools.  Right, don't close schools. We don't need that many supervisory unions. The amount of money we pay for overhead for each of those supervisory unions isn't helping kids. So one is tackling the structure and looking at, I mean, because for that price, I feel like we could do free childcare and free college probably. And again, paid teachers do one statewide school contract, save money on every time there's a union negotiation, people then say, oh my gosh, we'll have to pay teachers what South Burlington does. Great, let's pay all the teachers in our state what South Burlington gets. It's an important profession, teachers should be paid well. Again, we don't, so I think we have to look at the model because we're just like, as our number of students has gone down and it was I think at 1.125,000 students at the highest, we were paying, I mean, we didn't ramp down. And so I come from that nonprofit mindset of wait a minute, like we need to do this differently. The other thing is not every state links their education funding to property taxes. And I do think we need to look at some of those other options because I think all of my colleagues starting with Emma talked about the disparity in funding it that way. And it's driving a lot of people, I mean, I've seen a lot of people move out of my district. And it's people are worried. And then they're like, why can't kids stay at Macy's? How bad could it be? Like, well, Macy's is not a school, it doesn't have windows. And BHS was in disrepair when my kids were there and they graduated, I think my daughter graduated in 11. It's not ADA accessible, it's got lots of problems. So again, if we looked at structure, we might be able to redevelop some schools around the state into housing or into community centers. And again, do magnet school, like there are ways to have this be a win-win. So I will continue to introduce a bill to have one school district, Hawaii has one. And I think it will be better. We can really put the money towards program and kids and do a better job. Great, thank you very much, Barbara. And I just wanna remind folks who might be watching live that we welcome your questions at<PHONE_NUMBER>. So feel free to call in if you'd like. And our candidates will happily answer your questions. So we will move on to our next question here which has to do with healthcare. And we're gonna start with Carol for this question. So the increasing cost of healthcare is putting pressure on Vermonters and the state's economy. COVID has sharpened our focus on inequities in healthcare. What is next for healthcare changes in Vermont? And please be specific if you can. Okay, thank you. So two things here about all the time are affordability and access. So right now, if you're purchasing health insurance through Vermont Health Connect or directly through MVP or Blue Cross Blue Shield, or if you are uninsured, there are subsidies available through, they had been through the American Rescue Plan, ARPA, and now they're extended through the Inflation Reduction Act. And these subsidy amounts are based on income and both of these federal acts increased income eligibility so you can make more money and still qualify. These subsidies are already helping 23,000 Vermonters reduce their health insurance premiums and we know there are more Vermonters who could benefit. So you can go to the Green Mountain Care Board link and find out if you can also get help. Access, we've all heard stories of waiting long wait times for specialists and the lack of primary care providers and mental health providers and nurses. As with everything, the pandemic has exacerbated the fragility of our system. And during the last session, we worked to expand access through workforce initiatives. Such as nursing and healthcare grants, nursing faculty grants, forgivable loans, nurse preceptor grants, mental health worker, forgivable loans and healthcare apprenticeships and training. We expanded telehealth. We had, we worked with the Office of Professional Regulations so that if you are trying to get mental health or telehealth services, excuse me, including mental health services that you can be licensed if you're an out-of-state provider so that we make sure that we protect Vermonters and out-of-state providers meet rigorous Vermont standards. We've got a new 988 line for the Department of Mental Health put together and this is something that is a national suicide prevention and a Vermont initiative has added its work to what's happening nationally. So now you can call one, excuse me, 9888 if you have a concern about suicide, if you have any mental health issue or if you're the family of mental, someone who's dealing with mental health issues. So we are renewing the all-payer model. We are working with hospital system transformation and budgets and we continue with the work with the blueprint for health and long-term home and community-based services. All these things are designed to make healthcare more sustainable over time and more affordable over time. So the work is being done, it's hard and it takes a while. Thank you. Thank you, Carol. And next for this question on healthcare is Robert. What is next for healthcare changes in Vermont? That's like a very good question. Carol mentioned accessibility and availability and a couple of things that we had done through the office professional regulation. We also, I serve on government operations and we oversee sort of the Secretary of State's office. And we change the licensing requirements for people who come in from out of state that might have a nurse's license or a PIA license or something like that, so that they can expedite particularly military service to get on the ground running here and be eligible to work. Accessibility is a lot to do with a number of professionals that we have available to do the work. And in particular in the time of COVID, we cut that off to knees. The other thing, affordability, I know this is an often beaten to death subject, but if you're on Medicare or if you're working through the VA or if you happen to be very low income on Medicaid, your affordability index is pretty good. The person that doesn't find healthcare affordable through the insurance network is the person that's working and the average Vermont citizen and that's because we continue, I think, to maintain a system where companies, insurance companies basically do little more than pay our bills and manage our service by saying you can't have this or you can't have that. But we essentially put a pound of extra sugar on top of things and that's called the profit for them to do their work. I think that healthcare would advance a lot in terms of availability and affordability. If we move to another system as a state employee, I was a member of a self-funded system. We did not have an insurance company. We put a bunch of money in the bank and as claims came in, we paid them and as it needed adjusted, it got adjusted and it was fairly simple and my rates went up generally at the rate of 50% of what commercial insurance went up. So I think we have to have the guts to look at this. It's a strong lobby that will be pushing back against it but some hybrid or state run system that deals with this were small enough that we should be able to manage it. In the past, federal government brought projects to Vermont because we were a state that was small and could test in the field a lot of the programs. We shouldn't be afraid of doing that again. Great, thank you very much, Bob. And next for this question on healthcare is Barbara. So what do you believe is next for childcare changes in Vermont? So people have talked a lot about what we are currently doing, having served on the fletrol and board several years ago and just hearing situationally from like employees who had family members who were trying to get jobs at the medical center. Vermonters have balked at paying competitive salaries to professional doctors. And it's like some of the salaries are like you've got to be kidding, especially coming from the type of work that most of us do. But we have lost out on, not only have we lost out on bringing people here, I had an employee who, her son-in-law was a resident here and he wanted to stay here. And the offer was like three times as much in Colorado was here. And he felt like he had to take it to draw down those loans. We spend a lot of money on traveling nurses. And again, some of the programs Carol talked about can help lower the dependence we have on traveling nurses. And I think we need to do some more partnering with like Dartmouth or other places because frankly, trying to get into certain expertise, I and my spouse have both tried to get into C specialists. And people are very kind, but they laugh. They're like, you can't get in before January. It's like, okay, but this could be serious. And people can get into Dartmouth or other places. So let's partner. We just had friends visiting us from Georgia that really want to move here. And when we were telling them about some of the shortages of access, they're like, you're kidding. We don't have that in Georgia. So it, yes, it is a national problem, but it's really exacerbated here. And I think we have to be open to paying people competitively and really ramp up nursing programs to keep those traveling nurses down and get people into specialties in the meantime. Great. Thank you very much, Barbara. And finally, to finish up this question in healthcare is Emma. Thank you. Well, good thing healthcare is a complex issue because there's a lot one can talk about same things for education. So I think we just have to say the elephant in the room that the system is completely broken. It's failing Vermonters. It's failing people all over this country. And it's really at this point going to need to take some bold. I don't know why I can't find the right camera. I'm here for comedy relief as well. Because healthcare is quite depressing when we really want to get into it. But truly, I mean, it's a broken system. And we have to boldly in this state, I think become to terms with that and stop nibbling around the edges and making tweaks. And while we all do the best we can as legislators figure out what are we can do, what can we do within the constraints of federal government and what we can stand up here in the state. But we really have to put principles forward around it being patient centric. It's a human right. It should not be a commodity to Bob's point around the profits and how much money is swirling around between insurance companies and prescription drug companies. We have to just call it end to it if we're really gonna make significant change in the lives of Vermonters who are crushed in the middle because they make a little too much and not enough to really find an affordable way forward. One of the biggest values that I look for and principles I look at is how can we uncouple it from employment? That will always put people in this working people in particular in this impossibility of trying to find a job that provides affordable health care. And it puts also a lot of pressure on employers to be shouldering a huge expense that continues to creep up in double digits often. So in terms of tangible things we can do to move forward, I think we should start with looking at primary care system here in Vermont and moving a universal primary care system so all Vermonters can access a publicly funded primary care system. It would not solve everything like the specialist issues Barbara was speaking to. But if we can get a baseline on people's primary care and have everyone have a relationship with a doctor and make sure it's funded so that doctors will go into primary care in Vermont, which is another shortage. I mean, my own parents are struggling because their doctor retired and it's impossible to find a new primary physician anytime soon. And that is, you're really kind of juggling life and death around people being able to have that connection because that's your key to then go to see specialists, et cetera. It's so unnecessarily complicated and people are really struggling in between. So I think universal primary care is really important and then really looking at accountability within those parts of the system that are making profit off of people. That should not be a piece of how we run our healthcare system. And I think we need to look at large healthcare providers. We need to look at insurers and look at the economic disparities within how much certain people are making at the top of these large institutions and ask, is that really how we want to fund our healthcare system? So I'll leave it at that. Thank you so much, Emma. And we are gonna move on to our next question which has to do with criminal justice reform. We're gonna start with Robert for this question. And so how does Chittenden County address crime? Is there a problem with policing that needs reform and how would you address community safety? Number four, number three, number two, number one, carrying on a tradition of challenging questions. I think that reform is probably not the word that I would use. There were a couple of things going on that I recognize as frankly, training issues. I think we are asking and have historically asked police officers to do things that they are maybe in error not trained for but certainly not necessarily dealing with as a professional would. And when we went through the defunding the police discussion and it turned into getting rid of patrol officers in order to fund mental health professionals, it clearly has backfired. But the intent I think was good. Mental health professionals have a role in policing and law enforcement and the society as a whole. So integrating those two fields was probably a good idea. It's not the original intention, I don't think. We have a lot of problems in Burlington in particular right now because of what has previously been identified in one then places to our south as out of state influence. I do, if I had a dollar for everybody that it says when I talked to them on the street or in the grocery store that they don't feel is safe in Burlington anymore. I would be buying pizza for us all. The town has definitely changed in its general attitude since we started to lose the people that patrol our streets. I have a fundamental thought that laws actually do nothing to prevent crime. They only give you a way to deal with the aberrant people that their behavior steps outside the norm. So without the fear of being apprehended, I think the attitude that has been pervasive at the federal level has worked its way down here and people are just sort of getting out of controls and the norms and more rays that we once respected are sort of gone. So I really think we need to boost up mental health treatment and mental health availability. And that would deal with a lot of the issues that we're dealing with, but it won't deal with people walking up to each other in the middle of city hallmark and putting a bullet in somebody's head, which is a shame as well as a crime. Thank you, Bob. And next for this question on criminal justice reform is Barbara. Thanks. So one, I'd like to give a shout out to my intern at Champlain College who is working on criminal justice and crime prevention issues this year with me and found me a great article, which I'm happy to share the link of from the Brennan Center that recently came out in July, myths and realities, understanding recent trends in violent crime. And basically, this is not just a Chittenden County problem. It's not just a Vermont problem. Crime rates changed dramatically across the U.S. in 2020. Murder rates rose sharply by 30%. The rate of offenses of assaults rose more than 10%. And despite it's happening in jurisdictions of all kinds, it's not linked necessarily to police reductions or not being able to fill positions.  So maybe that's the key. Thanks, Barbara. But they're saying don't jump to conclusions yet because we're still really analyzing it. It's very complicated. We know that poor and historically disadvantaged communities are most impacted and that there's not a lot of great evidence yet that's strong enough in terms of prevention programs or some steps that people can take. But there is evidence that shows social support for at-risk youth and their families can keep youth out of the system and positively impact crime rates. So again, I hope that we will continue to look at evidence-based legislation and not law by anecdote, which is how a lot of Vermont's juvenile justice system was formed. And there are clearly racial and other disparities. So we must, I'm excited we did a data bill so that we can get better data, but we have to look at where these things are happening and try to address that with training because it's a huge problem and I don't wanna brush that aside because that's so key. Absolutely. Thank you very much, Barbara. And we'll move right on for this question on criminal justice reform to Emma. Okay, thank you. I'll look at the right camera this time, I promise. All right, well, again, a complex issue, but I think the thing that's most important around criminal justice and our system of policing and corrections and understanding all the pieces that go into it is it's not in a vacuum. There are so many intersectional issues that have compounded, especially during the pandemic that I likely will see in articles, this is my assumption or my theory here, is that we will start to see the other trends that are happening in these last years in particular and why we're seeing a spike in crime. But I do truly think that we're not gonna be able to prosecute or punish people and find our path to the solution, frankly, on crime rates. If we dig a little deeper and we understand all these issues that are these crises that are multiple crises that are sort of colliding, you'll see economic disparity, you'll see the opioid crisis issue, you'll see people struggling to find housing and support services. I live very close to Battery Park and you'll see when people are living under strained conditions, it heightens tensions, it heightens reactivity, it heightens people really struggling. And so I think first of all, we have to see how many of the systems are failing people and it's been brewing for a long time. It didn't happen overnight and a pandemic has really just compressed a lot of things into place. So while teasing all those pieces, I think we have to look at the easiest to access firearms in the state. It has, we have very loose gun laws in the state and that is known and I think that is an issue that is contributing. We have a lot more to do to support people in addiction and becoming to terms in the opioid crisis. I think we have a question on that. We'll probably not get to it, but I think that's an important one around getting real with that. And then looking really at the social services, the mental health services, the social services needed to keep people in secure housing, that is a piece of it. I think we haven't quite cracked. We can build all the house that we want, but if people who are trying to house, who have various needs are not supported in those, you know, in mental health or other services, we're still failing people at the end. And just briefly on policing, I think we have to name the fact, especially as white identified people here, the incredible racial bias that exists. It's not immune to Burlington, but our entire policing system in this country needs a serious review and a rethinking and understanding of the history and knowing how the bias shows up, not just in the individuals who are policing our communities, but also the system itself and how that has made communities unsafe for people of color. And I think that's something Burlington still needs to grapple with, was how people are experiencing a very different relationship to the police department and the whole conversation around changing funding priorities. I think we really have to have some hard and clear conversations and hold leaders in our police department accountable for harmful ways. We're talking about that piece of understanding our policing system, because we can have a safer community. We can have a community that's based on really core safety values that builds community without othering and these racist undertones, frankly, that I have seen from police leadership in our area. So there's a lot to unpack there, but I really think we would do a disservice to this question without naming the history and the systemic elements of racism within our policing system. Thank you very much, Emma. And finally, to finish up on this question, we will go over to Carol. Thank you. Well, how does Chittenden County address crime as one of the sub-questions? I think more or less each town is on its own. And I envision all towns in the county working together to share resources. It's quality of life for the region. And I hear people talking about how they're concerned about the vitality and safety in and around Burlington. And I'd like to see what we can do to work together on that. Is there a policing problem that needs reform? Well, every human being deserves to be treated with dignity at all times. And we just passed H546 that creates a division of racial justice statistics. And that division will collect data on individual interactions with law enforcement, state's attorneys, Vermont courts, the Department of Corrections and other entities so we can uncover and remedy systemic racial bias and all disparities in our criminal and criminal justice system. And the city can use that data, that the local data from that to inform its policing decisions. And as a state legislator, I feel I need to listen to what the city's needs are and respond, that's my responsibility. An example with the shootings downtown, there's no reckless endangerment statute so that no one could be charged as a result of gunfire downtown. And so I think we should consider a reckless endangerment law. And then what I address community safety, I think, again, here's this, we have to hold ourselves accountable in the state for funding mental health services. That's for our city streets, that's for our hospitals. Neither places are safe places or healthy places for people with mental illness to be for days at a time in inclement weather or in a room in a hospital. It's not the right place for them to be. And one big issue here is housing. We have to have housing. And I envision a system where we would have something like when you're older and you have a independent living, assisted living, and then nursing home care, that we would have something where those of mental illness who are currently on the streets can be in something where they can live quite independently if they can do that. If they need more help, they would have wraparound services in this living situation or the most help they can go in and out of these would be kind of the nursing home or the intense mental health care. And in this way, people can fluidly move from area, from the amount of care they need and still be housed. So those are some of the things that I think we have to move toward for criminal justice reform. Thank you so much, Carol. And we are getting towards the end of our forum here. We should have just enough time to do one more question for everybody and closing a chance for everybody to do closing statements. So with that being said, we'll go over to Barbara to start us off with this question. And it has to do with a couple of ballot issues. So two constitutional amendments, constitutional proposition two and proposition five will be in front of voters this November. Do you support or oppose? I strongly support them both and have voted for them both in the past two bienniums. Great. Thank you. And next for this question is Emma. Great, thank you. So proposition two, because some people are not made up. So proposition two is an attempt to update archaic language in the Constitution around slavery and dentured servitude. And so while it is a language change, I think it is a very important move by today's current government and hopefully the voters of Vermont to make sure that we're very clear about where we stand with the issue of slavery and indentured servitude. And language matters when it comes to policy making in the Constitution. So I'm a strong yes on that. Proposition five is the reproductive liberty question to Vermonters at this point. Both of these took about four years to go through the entire legal process. And that is a right to body autonomy in terms of reproduction, no matter your gender identity. This is not just a women's issue. There are multiple people who have uteruses and also reproductive needs, of course. So it's a right to choose around your body, contraception, pregnancy and abortion. And I am a very strong yes on that as well. Great, thank you very much, Emma. And next for this question, we will head on over to Carol. And Carol, do you support or oppose proposition two and proposition five? I support proposition two, which is the taking slavery out of the Vermont Constitution. And it's a needed language change. I support proposition five. Vermont has had reproductive healthcare, liberty and access to reproductive healthcare. For more than 40 years, we have put that, what we're doing can practice into law and pass the law that protects that. And now this would put this enshrine this in the Constitution to protect it from any erosion. Thank you. Great, thank you, Carol. And finally, to finish up this question, we'll head on over to Robert. Do you support or oppose prop two and prop five? I support both of them. We fielded prop two question in government operations and heard from a professor from the Vermont law school that argued that the Constitution already with no ambiguity outlawed slavery, although indentured servitude was somewhat of a question, it being partially voluntary. But I think we need to step up and make sure that everything is crystal clear as to our intent. And not able to be misinterpreted at any time in the future. So I think this is a good move. As far as prop five, I feel guilty even commenting on it because it's sort of none of my old white guys sitting in a chair somewhere business for governing what happens to a woman who is dealing with healthcare issues. So I think that everybody should have the right to autonomous decisions about healthcare. And whether it's someplace in the South or someplace in the North, state government should not be impeding or impairing the ability of a woman to do something like that. And I would urge everybody to join us in supporting it on election day. Great, thank you very much, Robert. And I believe we have enough time, if everybody quickly wants to, I'll jump down to that 30 second question about the opiates and addiction just so we can get that in there and then we'll do quick closing statements before we wrap up. So starting with Emma, just really quickly so we have enough time to get everybody in on this question and have closing statements. Do you support safe injection sites in Vermont, in Chinden County? Yes, great. And actually, well, we'll just move over to Barbara since we're here. Yes, absolutely, very strongly. Great, and there's been great data that's working in Canada and other places. We need to do it. Great, thank you. And Carol, do you support safe injection sites in Vermont? Yes, and now fentanyl is an issue that the hub and spoke model is not dealing, able to deal with the way we were able to deal with the opiates before fentanyl became the major opiate or the major drug substance at issue. And I have spoken with Mayor Murrow Weinberger and he's working on a plan and I'll be working with him to understand Burlington's new needs and getting legislative help for our city. Great, thank you Carol. And finally, Robert, do you support safe injection sites in Vermont? Yes, I do with caveat where they are needs to be critically analyzed too. We used to have something similar that in the old North End and people in the corrections lawn care crew had to come up to the cemetery next door and clean up bags and bags and bags of needles. So there has to be some, we can't just say there it is and let it go. There has to be something around it to protect the citizens from it. Perfect. Thank you, Bob. And that'll wrap up the question portion of our forum and we're getting right to the end here. So I wanna give everybody a chance to say their closing statements to folks watching. So we will start out our closing statements with Carol tonight. Thank you. Well, thanks for holding this forum for us. I would like to be reelected because I listen, I hear your concerns about cost of living, about taxes and property taxes. And I hear that you want a strong economy with jobs to pay. So our children and grandchildren can choose to live here and afford education, housing, childcare, student loan repayment and healthcare. I hear that you want a quality of life that's good, a clean environment and a clean lake, a mental healthcare system that works and public safety and always support for our veterans. With the legislature, we've succeeded in making progress over these years. And I'd be honored to continue working for and representing Chittenden 18. Thank you. Thank you so much, Carol. And next for closing statements is Robert. Thank you again for doing this. I also appreciate the support of the people in Chittenden 18. I'd like you to know that whenever you bump into me at the grocery store or flag me down someplace, the conversation that we had ends up on one of these little papers and it becomes part of the fodder for me creating the legislative agenda that you want. I really urge people to contact all of us more than you do. Every time I write in Front Forge Forum or anywhere else, I ask for your opinion on things that a lot of people give it and are surprised that somebody asked. That I think is our job. I hope to be able to continue to do that, represent you well. The only way I can represent you well is if you tell me what you want. Doesn't necessarily mean you're gonna get it, but. Thank you so much, Bob. And next for closing statements is Barbara. Thank you. I hope to be reelected and work for you again for the next two years. I take this job very seriously. I do my research. I try to look at the evidence and the facts. And I hear loud and clear that we need to spend our tax dollars efficiently and effectively, keep them on affordable, and I will do everything I can to protect people's civil rights and privacy and bring in business and help support new initiatives while, again, protecting the most vulnerable and those that don't have a lobbyist. Thank you so much, Barbara. And finally, Emma. Great, thank you. Thanks again to Public Access TV. I think this is a great way again for us to really have democracy and accessibility to everyone in Burlington and beyond. So I'm Emma Mulvaney-Stanik. I'm running, again, in 17 for reelection. And I do, and I'll be very brief because I know I'm the last one, but I really do think that it's important to have working people and folks who have young children in our representative democracy. And so I'm looking forward to being reelected so I can bring that strong lived experience that I'm side by side with these families every day in the struggle to make sure those are priorities in Montpelier. And that's why I always bring an economic justice lens to the work I do in the building. I prioritize labor issues so that we can make the lives of working people easier. And a thing we didn't really get into too much is on firearms and as a mom of two young kids, in particular, I live in fear every day about where we've gotten to in this country. And that is going to be another clear priority of mine this session. And I hope that my colleagues join me in Montpelier of knowing why we really have to get serious on firearms in Vermont. Thank you. Thank you so much, Emma. And thank you to all the candidates for joining us tonight for our forum. This has been part of town meeting TV's ongoing election coverage. Thank you so much for watching tonight. Don't forget to subscribe to us on YouTube if you haven't already, youtube.com slash town meeting TV. Have a great night.


Hello and welcome to NewsClick. The word jishin in Japanese connotes two different meanings, one a frequent occurrence in Japan ranging from the mild to the moderate to the occasionally devastating as was experienced on the 11th of March this year, the earthquake and the other what is repeated to be a characteristic of the Japanese self-confidence. The Japanese have made an art out of converting adversity to austerity and into opportunity. Do they have the jishin to convert this jishin into opportunity? We will ask that question to Professor Britshtanka. Sir, this earthquake registered a mark of 9.0 on the register scale and the impact has been quite devastating. Would you just appraise our viewers as to what measures has the government taken in the form of relief and also recovery? Well, first of all, thank you and I think you made an important point by playing on the word jishin, the idea that the linking self-confidence to dealing with natural disasters. Certainly, the Japanese have historically shown remarkable resilience, but I think in this present case, this earthquake, the tsunami and on top of that the triple disaster of the nuclear reactor, the third disaster, I think has put an extra burden if you will on the people's psychological makeup if you will on the social structure, which I think will have a very long-term impact and at present, it's a very, I would say, a somewhat confused situation. The political leadership seems to be getting a lot of flak for its handling, the manner in which relief has been given to the victims of the earthquake and the tsunami and even the botching up of what's happening in Fukushima. Well, yes and no in some ways. I think the political leadership has got flak particularly, I think the prime minister personally has not shown leadership that was expected of him in such an occasion, but on the other hand, relief has been much better than it was, for instance, in the earlier Kobe earthquake. Goods have been transported, roads have been cleared much faster, there is actually no dearth of food supplies in the shelters that have been created. If anything, there's problems for people whose homes weren't devastated, who were living in these areas because getting them foodstuffs can be a little more difficult, but I think the real failure was the inability to provide quick information. There's been contradictory information coming out in dribs and drabs, different voices, the industry saying one thing, politicians saying one thing, then retracting and I think that's one of the major problems. So the DPJ government really got its first chance at the party, actually got its first chance at an extended running power, bucking the trend that has been keeping the LDP in power in Japan for quite some time. Already that Bonhomi when it came to government lasted very short while, there was instability immediately, Hato Yama was removed. So has the handling of the earthquake and the flak that the government has received made it even more difficult for the DPJ in some sense? Yes, I would think that this combined with I think the earlier infighting that was going on after all the problem with Ozawa predate the earthquake and so the Ozawa-Karn relationship was problematic to begin with. The handling has created a different set of problems. To the nuclear disaster itself has created other problems I think which will bring different pressures to bear which perhaps will strengthen the LDP. After all, industry still supports and large numbers of people still support the nuclear industry. Fukushima is a disaster area but workers from all over Japan are flocking there because they're getting jobs and many of the areas where nuclear plants are located are strong supporters of nuclear plants being located there because they get huge subsidies for long periods. So the labor unions which work with these workers are often supporters. Industry says well wait a couple of years things will quieten down it'll be business as normal so there is that pressure but I think it's given there isn't certainly a growing discontent and worry about the impact of the radiation and whether it's sensible to carry on relying on nuclear energy. I mean they use one third of their energy comes from nuclear resources. So that's been questioned and Karn and the party have of course said that they will put a moratorium and they're now going to build more reactors. So that is creating a bit of discontent among the workers. Let's talk about the economy specifically. Japan as at any industrialized nation or even developing countries also suffered during the global financial crisis but it did show some recovery following that but the earthquake has again put a spanner into the works. Yes the economy has been in the doldrums for a long time within Japan there's employment issues and huge numbers of temporary workers and so on so forth. So that's been that's certainly been aggravated. I think in first of all immediately after the disaster a lot of workers from China for instance in other countries left students left. Now many have returned but for instance some 50,000 students haven't returned so it you know they were fee paying students in Japanese universities. Chinese students are largely or mainly single children so families are worried and so forth. So that that sort of impact of you know fewer people etc working there but on the other hand certain sectors will benefit after all construction is about hundred billion dollar damage and it says estimated to be over hundred billion dollars so construction would benefit. Some areas will benefit but there is a problem because and this will have a ripple effect on other economies after all if they can't supply high-end components which they manufacture it will affect China or Taiwan you know semiconductors or flat panel display screens. So but having said that the proverbial conversion of adversity into opportunities being played out in the manner construction would now get a boost and also the finance that would be pumped into the economy in that sense. Yes certainly I mean there's I think I read a recent report in one of the papers that the Yakuza are going to benefit a lot because they control construction and politicians have close links with construction companies as well so certainly there's going to be certain sectors which will benefit but overall I think is a problem particularly in energy generation because Tokyo has turned down its lights in the evening you know formerly skyscrapers were all lit up all night now you'll have few lights on escalators have been stopped so many stations and you end up walking quite a lot because they just that have turned off escalators and lots of stations. Adele were a little bit more into the nuclear issue now the word nuclear connotes a far more deeper meaning for Japanese because of the Hiroshima Nagasaki legacy than anywhere else you mentioned in passing that there is a contradiction in the sense that workers in Japan want the nuclear establishment to continue while the incidents such as what transpired in Fukushima is forcing the government to take a serious re-think on the nuclear issue. How do you think this will play out in the near future? Well I've always seen this idea that Japan suffers from a nuclear allergy as somewhat contradictory because after all they have developed you know over the years a very strong nuclear industry sector and it's been an integral part of the Japanese infrastructure for quite some time now. It has support and yet on the other hand of course there's a strong peace movement anti-nuclear movement which seems to function on its own without affecting policies as it were. A good example would be the Japanese Communist Party. They are supporters of nuclear energy and have been quite rightly I suppose seeing it as a way for providing energy and growth and so forth. Now they have come out with a statement against it. So I think Fukushima has changed attitudes for a large number of people. Of course immediately there are job generations so some groups of workers these are temporary workers mind you. They'll get a better wage rate than they would have otherwise and they'll get you know long-term employment as it were because it's a disaster. It will take a long time bringing it under control so but people living in that area farmers particularly for instance Fukushima in that area there's a lot of dairy farming vegetable farming they've been very badly affected. People living on the coast who fish for a living have you know their towns have been devastated they may never get back to they can you know carry on their livelihoods so that has I think had a deep impact and I think in that sense it has strengthened a wider range you know made the anti-nuclear feeling stronger among if you will the middle class and the ordinary Japanese. You know not the politically conscious Japanese may have been against nuclear weapons and support of peace movement. Secondly I think I think even more important thing is that civil society has become very weak in Japan and I think this disaster is in some ways perhaps regenerating a strength among people that we should do something. So voluntary effort has increased I think in Kobe there was some display of that and I think hopefully this will help to strengthen civil society and its actions in you know in setting the agenda for the political agenda. That's interesting because after the DPJ came to power the expectation was that there will be greater flowering of democracy in the sense that move from a single party system into a more plural kind of a political system and now coupled with that as you say the incipient you know regeneration of energy among the civil society. So this also augurs well. Yes I think well you know the political parties and that how the number will play out is one issue but to a large extent the Japanese public has accepted policies and for a variety of reasons is too complex to go into now but I think there is a you know a sense of the need for greater participation and need for social action and even dissent in some sense. Yes exactly so you know questioning putting forward different agendas demonstrating and also going out and helping. There are large numbers of Japanese who are spending their own money to work for the displaced people in that region you know as doctors or just providing whatever help they can.


11-year solar cycle influences on winter climate over the North Atlantic European region have been studied using lead-lag multilinear regression technique with a sliding window of 44 years over the period 1751-2016, and results confirm previous analyses showing a statistically significant 2- to 4-year lagged mean sea-level pressure response centered over the Azores region. Stronger SC signals tend to appear in periods when the SC forcing amplitudes are relatively larger, an individual month analysis indicates that the consistent lagged response in December, January, February average arises primarily from early winter months associated with ocean feedback processes. This article was authored by Hedy Ma, Aishin Chen, Leslie Gray, and others.


Grand Rapids also opening up their postseason at home, hosting Princeton. First set, nice shot here by Andrea Markovich. She puts it out at a reach for the point then moments later, Lizzie Bowman blocks this shot from Mallory Dordahl and finally Kayla Walsh tries to return the favor but to no avail, credit Breanna Suller with that kill off under Hawks and their postseason opener they win in three straight. If you've enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax deductible contribution to Lakeland Public Television.