Okay. Well, thank you. We're just trying to struggle a little bit through this technology, but what we're going to do for the next hour or so is go through some landlord tenant issues in terms of what the status of the court orders are right now vis-a-vis evictions and foreclosures. And I wanted also, we've been mostly looking at residential evictions and residential foreclosures, but it's come to light that there's similar issues existing in the commercial area as well. So we want to get our bearings on what's going on now and what, if anything, the legislature can do. We have at least one person from the administration here. I know that they're looking at this issue very closely as well. Several states have instituted moratoriums. So we're going to try and collect information in the next hour, 15 minutes from various witnesses. And then probably next week we'll decide what, if anything, we're going to do further than the efforts that the court has been able to do. So I'd like to start with Judge Greerson. You've testified before, before our committee. I know there's been a subsequent amendment to the administrative order and where we are now. And I know I wrote you and I am a little confused between the process of starting eviction and arid of possession. And once arid of possession is on track, is there any way to slow that down and how there could be some intervention. If you don't mind in educating us a little bit, Judge Greerson, that would be great. Oh, there shall. So I will try and thank the committee for allowing me to appear today and asking me to appear the Supreme Court, although they have issued a 049 and have also amended that. I think we're up to at least four amendments, possibly five as of this morning. None of those amendments would have a direct bearing on eviction proceedings. So in that sense, the testimony I've given previously remains the same and that is the Supreme Court has not issued any directive. I should put it that way. They have not imposed any stay on these proceedings. The trial judges have reviewed their authority under the AO 49 and their position has been that eviction proceedings in and of themselves are not considered emergency hearings. So that if a new eviction is filed, they are not taking any action on that to set, for instance, arrest rent escrow order. We're talking about a residential eviction now. That's usually the first step in the process. They are not scheduling those. Either a landlord or a tenant seeks additional relief from the court, asserting or alleging that there is an emergency situation that requires the court to act. So those, to the extent those are filed, the court will consider those on an individual case by case basis. So there is no blanket order either by the Supreme Court or the trial bench. Regarding all evictions, they will continue to handle them on a case by case basis. In any of the cases that are pending, if they have gone, if they prior to the pandemic, if they have gone to the next step, which is a rent escrow order. If an individual tenant stops paying rent under that order, the landlord is entitled to seek a writ of possession for the premises, if the rent is not paid. And those orders presently under the current statutory framework can be issued without the necessity of a hearing being held. And I think that's what I had addressed in my earlier testimony, and I believe in response to the written request. Senator Sorotkin that I was just going to try to track that down. Let me see if I can find that. Well, while you're doing that, let me ask a question. I fully understand the court's position that if we were going to do any, if there were to be any moratorium on these kinds of proceedings. That should come from the executive branch or the legislature. Yes. However, it seems like the court has taken a position that would result in other than an emergency situations. Evictions are being stayed. So I was curious as to why that can't be pushed up one level to this ministerial act of a writ of possession to say that if execution of a writ of possession. Take place, but only on an emergency basis and after a hearing which hearings would be allowed. If an if an emergency was suggested. So I want to make sure I understand your question you're asking me if, if we get to the writ of possession stage that there could be a hearing. I honor and respect. You're keeping a distance from the policy. And the way you've done it so far is where the court, the administrative order has done it so far is generically saying that unless there's a trial judges have said, unless there's an emergency, we're not going to take up eviction proceedings. I'm just trying to understand why that philosophy couldn't be bumped up one level to rid of possession. The best answer I can give you senator is that the way the statute currently reads that the rid of possession is something that's already in place and it's just issued without the necessity of hearing so as we look at the scope of our AO 49. That, at least at this point is not considered an emergency. Okay, I'm not sure. So I want to, I want to make sure I'm answering your question that's, I guess the follow up question would be under a o 49 you're saying a writ of possession is not considered an emergency. And so, but no one has to ask for a hearing. And that's why Right, but you're, you're saying that. I mean it's it's sort of a what I'm suggesting is somewhat of a middle ground between a moratorium that I guess passed by statute by us ordered somehow by the executive. This is sort of a middle ground where it says, you know, there may be individual cases and trusting the judges and the judiciary to sort that through that warrant the writ of possession to go through served and enforced. But if there was a, if we could have the ability for the litigants to ask or need to ask for a hearing to get that to happen that there's an emergency on either side that would require the writ of possession to go forward. I wouldn't be shutting down all evictions but we give people an ability to continue to argue the case given the, given the virus. Some of these written possessions were in process before the virus came upon us so it seems like same kind of rationale you're, you're in. Imposing for new cases that are starting on failing to understand why you couldn't do that same thing for cases that are in the pipeline. Yeah, I'm just so I understand the question the problem is that the Supreme Court, as I've said has not weighed in on a on a blanket or state proceeding so that the decision would be left up to the individual judges. Whether it's on whether or not they determine that as a result of a filing an eviction. There are issues that create the emergency that allow them to have a hearing, or if someone were to bring the issue of the writ of possession to the attention of the court on an emergency basis, then under the a o 49. They could consider it that way, but trial in a position to issue a, a blanket position on these guidance from the court. I appreciate that so you're so I guess what I was looking for is already possible that somebody who has a crisis situation that is already subject to a rid of possession could go into court and get an emergency hearing to have that rid of possession state. That's what I've said let me let me read. I did find the earlier response I gave you and hopefully it'll give the committee some further direction as to where we're headed. Okay, after meeting and discussing this issue with the trial judges. There is a consensus and I use the term consensus because there are 34 trial judges independently appointed. They are able to exercise their own discretion. The consensus is didn't hear from everyone, but the, as a result of the limitations brought about by a o 49. They would alter their procedure this is in relation specifically to risk of possession in the following manner. If it wants to any motion for a default judgment, a rid of possession or other relief that include the issuance of a rid of possession the court will schedule those hearings after April 15. They may be continued that that's the that's the deadline of a o 49. So essentially they would not be holding those hearings or something that would trigger the rid of possession until after April 15. That gives some relaxation of the current rule but maybe not as far as other individuals would want to go. In the interim request for emergency relief filed by either landlords attendance maybe filed seeking more immediate relief motions would be handled as I said earlier on a case by case basis. So I think there's no provision. The trial judge does not feel that it's an emergency. They can refer it to me, and I determine not the merits of the proceeding, whether or not. I apologize. This is faith Brown speaking I'm the moderator on the call. Could we ask people to mute their phones. If they're not on and or their speakers on their computers if they're not on, and any people that came in that I have phone numbers we'd like to identify who is on the call. So, if we could just pause a moment to find out who five, the 3450 number is and the 6018. I apologize. 34050 is Wendy Morgan. Thank you Wendy. Thank you 6018 is Jamie fiend faith. Thank you. So, and for those of us who are not lawyers, the rid of possession is, is, is the point at which a tenant is informed of a decision. Tell us quickly what that is because you're using a term that is, I'm beginning to understand it in the discussion, but it would be helpful for those of us who aren't lawyers to understand that if the rent isn't paid according to the escrow order, the rid of possession can issue that allows the person to be dispossessed from the, from their, from their apartment. In other words, it gives the court the, the sheriff, the authority to issue the writ saying possession of the property now belongs to the landlord. Thank you. It's the, it's the ultimate relief in an eviction proceeding. In other words, it removes the landlord, removes the tenant from the property. Thank you. So, Senators Rock and I. That is, that is the sense from the trial bench that if these matters come in. Other relief that include the issuance of the rid of possession, or seeking rid of possession, the court will hold hearings after the date of this. A O 49 order. Okay, so the, the, the point in time that I am and other people are concerned with are whether a someone who's in violation of a back rent order has already reduced that order to a writ of possession that's in the sheriff's hands or on its way. We've had an intervening event here of COVID-19. And there may be new factors that would justify slowing that process down, just as there are factors that are justifying slowing the process down. So I understand that somebody might have an opportunity, even in this late stage to go ask for a hearing and say, I'm going to be homeless and spread the disease. But how would they know that they would have that opportunity to go to a judge trial judge and say, this rid of possession is happening now and I have some circumstances here that it's not good for anybody to take me out or whatever. Is there a way we can somehow require the act of the legislature to at least get notice out to these folks directing the sheriff's before they serve the rid of possession to say to give some sort of notice to say if you feel you have a circumstances here you could always apply on an emergency basis to a superior court judge. I mean, obviously that's something that the committee has to consider how to get that type of notice out. In mind that a large majority of the individuals we're talking about are self represented litigants so their population that the most part does not have access to attorneys in many of the counties through legal aid or local buyer associations. They do provide limited representation at the beginning of a hearing in other words at the rent escrow stage at the very beginning. We have some programs that provide them with legal counsel but only for that limited hearing, which often results in an agreement to pay rent and pay rent into court. But once that order is in effect. The understanding is that the legal representation for the most part ends with that hearing and the attorneys may not continue to be involved in the representation at a point when a rid of possession could be ordered. So I'm not sure how that word would get out to individuals unless at the very beginning of the case they're given that advice. That's the benefit of counsel. Okay, so essentially, what you're saying is there's the courts do not want to get involved in this policy decision. There is nothing more that we can expect forthcoming from the courts in terms of notice for slowing these rits of possession down. You know the legis. I guess the executive branch could do this fairly clean and swiftly if they wanted to and I know they're looking at it. The legislative process tends to be a little more clunky. So I'm just trying to see what our options are so am I correct in saying that. At least in from where you sit you don't see the court able to do anything more in this area other than what you've already done. The short answer to that senator would be yes but let me qualify it a little bit. These are essentially policy decisions which as you know, the court, and I certainly don't get involved in. And although I'm appearing for the for the judiciary. There are levels of authority. In the court process and if the Supreme Court has not and has not taken that position to impose a stay in these proceedings and I think you understand from my prior testimony that they do not view that as something they can do it. They view that as a executive or legislative decision. So you go to the next level of authority and although in my role as chief superior judge. I have some authority if you will over the trial bench. Keep in mind that they are as I've indicated independently appointed judges who exercise their individual discretion and I'm not in a position to issue a blanket order as to how they should handle these cases and that's why at this point. The court is handled on a on a case by case individual basis. And I, at this point I would have to say I don't see anything changing but I will tell you that the court spring court meet almost daily with themselves and and with the the trial bench. So these, these are not discussions that are closed. We continue to talk about these issues. And we'll continue to do so. So let me just wrap up judge Chris and I very much appreciate your testimony. You've been very clear, I guess, from a lay perspective, I would say I find some inconsistency in the fact that the Supreme Court has effectively stayed these eviction proceedings in their initial stages, but has not stayed them to the extent there. And I assume that the original thing was stayed because of the virus and resources and and things like that to protect people and others. Cases that are a little bit further down the line. They have not stayed so I find something consistent here and I believe I have a big fan of the courts, as you know, an individual judges making decisions, but my suggestion, and maybe you can bring it to the court is it's not a blanket stay. It's a, there's still the still be the ability for people to go to court to lift the whole suspension of executions of the rich of possession. There could be a case by case basis it's not a moratorium on any evictions, some could go forward. And, but it would be the default position would be that they would be stayed just like you're doing for new evictions. Yeah, let me just clarify one part of what you said the Supreme Court has not imposed a stay of any kind. What they have said is, in particular with respect to landlord tenant matters. So, 49 sets forth that all proceedings are suspended except emergency proceedings and then they give a list of what those proceedings are included in that list is emergency landlord tenant hearings in the discretion of the judge meaning the trial judge. There is no stay on eviction proceedings trial judges are interpreting a o 49 and that clause to be that an eviction proceeding filed. If one is filed today. The court the trial court will not take that up not because it's, there's a stay imposed, but they will not take it up because they do not view it as an emergency proceeding that they have to take up under this a o 49. Right, I understand that I'm using the word stay loosely that's all. Yeah, I understand and I think I've been guilty of that probably myself. I guess I have one last question. How does our discussion fit in with commercial landlord tenant relationships like restaurants that are leasing property and have now been shut down. This is a big issue with the other parts of our jurisdiction. A lot of our businesses this is a big a big concern for many restaurants. I understand and I, my answer in many respects would be the same senators rock and and Senator Clarkson because the reason I mean the court is a neutral party. And therefore the the approach they take on these cases is not one that favors landlords or tenants whether it's in a commercial setting or residential setting. And that's why I just wanted to make sure that al 49 when they say, leave it to the judge to determine whether it's an emergency or not that applies to both commercial landlord tenant and residential landlord and the way I'm reading it and this would be my interpretation when it says emergency landlord tenant. I read that broadly. There's nothing in here that otherwise says this is how we're going to handle residential. This is how we're going to handle commercial scenes I view that as landlord tenant, whether your commercial or residential. If if that became an issue and I'm not aware that it has been. I mean I certainly haven't heard about it, then we could go back to the court, Supreme Court for clarification but I view landlord tenant in the context of a 49 as either commercial or residential. And judge, Michael may ask a question. Judge Greer said, how, just to give those of us who don't deal with this on a day to day basis, a notion of how far along in a rental dispute, how far along in that proceeding, would it even get to court. I mean, we're dealing hopefully with a matter of two or three months. Ideally, if there are rental issues now that have just cropped up as a result of COVID-19. What's your, what's the timing. I mean how, how far along in a proceeding is when it actually goes gets to court. Well, if the issues arise today, obviously we don't control when they come into court so if you're saying that the issues arise today and someone files an action today. So 49 of the trial judges do not view that as an emergency that would require any action at this point. Right, I get that. I get that. The question is, from the beginning of a rental problem, how many months and maybe Wendy could answer this or somebody else. I just would love, I think all of us would love a sense of the, of how long it takes to actually get to court. When you say get to court, you're talking about getting to a final hearing. Is that what you're asking? Because on a landlord tenant, the traditional residential setting. The issues generally speaking are not that complicated. A commercial landlord tenant dispute could have significant issues that take months, if not longer to resolve. Yeah. But a residential proceeding we have normally that quick hearing right away on the issue of paying rent into court. And that obviously speeds up the process in terms of how long the the tenant can continue to pay right before this rid of possession may issue. But those are the hearings that we are not scheduling. Right. I understand. I'm just trying to get a sense of timing with rent. Maybe we can ask Wendy that question. Judge, I really appreciate your time. And we may take this up again next week. I don't know if we'll have to hear from you yet again. I think we've, we've got a good picture of things where they stand right now from the judiciary's perspective. So thank you very much. Yes. I'm, frankly, I'm encouraged by what I've heard from Judge Greerson today that judges are making decisions as opposed to following a blanket rule of one kind or another. You recognize, and we should, that we want to protect people who are financially imperiled because of the COVID-19 situation on the one hand, but on the other hand, we recognize that landlords are people too. And that particularly our small landlords are faced with some of these same financial issues. We need to have balance. And I believe that that balance ought to come from the judiciary. Unless and until we do something in the legislature and that's something whether it be providing some, some set of circumstances under which an eviction can in fact be stayed. I'm not sure that we're ready to do that or need to do that at this point, since it seems that we've accomplished what we, what we're seeking to do based on the way the judiciary is currently handling it. But the thing that I want to emphasize is I think the judiciary should be the one on a case by case basis who handles these things and not us. Thank you. Okay, Judge, do you have anything more you'd like to say? I don't, Senator. I understand that, you know, circumstances are changing daily, sometimes hourly, certainly on our end. And if other information comes my way, I'll provide it to the committee. I'm available. Continue to have hearings to participate and I'm glad to make myself available. Thank you so much. So I want to move to Wendy Morgan. I know. Wendy, are you there? I am here. Okay, are you going to be testifying today this morning? No, I think you are all going to learn more from Jean Murray, who is an attorney who handles these cases on the ground and she can answer some of the questions that you have been asking. That would be my recommendation. Also, we're trying to cover House general at the same time. Is she on the line right now? I believe so. Can we hear from her? Can you hear me? Yes. Can you hear me? Yeah, speak up a little bit. This is Jean Murray. I'm an attorney at Vermont legal aid. I'm sorry, I joined your call just a little bit late. I don't. I don't know what question you was before the committee. But I would like to take the opportunity to talk about a legislative legislation that would stay all of the eviction and foreclosure actions that get filed in the courts for the period of time that is the state of emergency and for 60 days after there's language being considered in House general that we were talking about this morning. I don't know if this committee has that language in front of them. No, no. Well, instead of talking about the language per se, unless you feel a need to do that.  I don't know if you heard the back and forth that I have a judge gris and but one thought short of a moratorium on evictions was somehow to to get further notice to people who may be subject to a rid of possession that they do have the right to go ask for an emergency hearing and stay eviction on a case by case basis at that point. So, this is, this is what I, I think and why we would ask for a stay of all risks that have already been issued and ask that the court suspend issuing any new risk. It's because case by case basis means that people will have to get up out of their house and figure out how to get documents into the court and perhaps go for a hearing in the court although some hearings are held by phone. And having to adjudicate something in a court right now is incredibly difficult for my client group which is low income people, because just think about how difficult it is for us to communicate with each other. And we have phones, and we have conference lines, and we have computers, all of which my clients don't have. What, and just a little bit of background and the way I think about it is in the usual course of business. There are about 1800 evictions filed a year in state fiscal year 19 there were about 1800 evictions filed. That's 150 a month that's in the usual course of business. And evictions are filed for more than one reason. Evictions are filed, certainly for non payment. But they are also filed for no cause, meaning that the landlord wants to resume possession of the property, sometimes to renovate it sometimes to move back in themselves. And then there are evictions for cause where tenant just may not be a good fit for the building I know I'm downplaying that but sometimes there are reasons that landlords want the apartment back. For all of those reasons right now during a public health crisis, there should be no evictions. And because in Vermont. All evictions go through the court. There is no self health eviction. There is no landlord calls the sheriff. All evictions have to go through the court. So the court, making a temporary legislation about saying all evictions and foreclosures is the way to stop people from being involuntarily removed from their home. During a public health crisis. There, there isn't a can't we have this exception and that exception, because everybody should stay home during a public health crisis. And so, in terms of the lay of the land. If it were the usual course of business, some, you know, the course would be processing 150 evictions a month, those are the ones that get filed right now. And for the state of emergency and while there's a public health crisis. None should be processed, everybody should just stay put, just put a pause on the whole thing. What we have thought about is, once the state of emergency is lifted, have a 60 day period after where everything is still pause to work everything out. There's other legislation there may be federal assistance coming for rental assistance money. There's more money for services or hard to house tenants. And it could, we could use the period of time. The couple months after the state of emergency is lifted to get everybody sorted out and house appropriate to what they should be some landlords would be happy to keep tenants if the tenants can keep up with rent payments. People will be able to find a place to move for those who can find a place to move. Right now, no one can find a place to move. I have clients in my caseload who had agreed to move. They can't find apartment, because nobody is meeting them an apartment and showing an apartment, because everybody has to stay home. As I say, there is language been legislative language been drafted in a bill that is before House General that describes the details of what exactly what cases should be stayed in court. And another thing that I want to mention is litigation about eviction and foreclosure requires sheriff and constables at certain points of time to go out and do what's called service in hand. During a public health crisis service in hand does not sound like a good idea. So, nothing in hand. So, the idea would be to not require service in hand to start a case that that a case could be started by filing and then postponed the deadline for getting service accomplished until after the state of emergency. Just so we're doing what we can to keep people apart. So let me ask you a question. Is there any way to know or approximate the amount of eviction residential eviction procedures that are. Judge Pearson doesn't want to refer to what the Supreme Court has done as a stay but I think it's pretty much effectively a state at least till April 15 on new evictions. How many are past the period where there's no more need for any kind of judicial intervention. I think you said 150 a month is what have been filed but do we have any idea how many are out there in the state of Vermont that haven't been executed on. Well, no, we don't know. One way to, there's other people at Vermont legal aid who are trying to figure out that information right now. Because there are people who would be willing to count through docket entries to figure out what is currently pending but that would mean. Everybody would have to share a massive amount of information with us so we can comb through it and figure it out. But there is really, there's not like a ticker. There's no data that somebody keeps on a day to day basis. It would have to be literally comb through by hand to figure out where all the cases are. You said something about the new federal law, providing rental assistance. I had read somewhere, even before it was passed yesterday that it sounds at least in terms of housing and homelessness monies. It seemed like Vermont might get a nice share of the pie there. And I asked this question in the sense of if there was some relief forthcoming whether it's to pay the back rent or to shelter somebody after they got evicted. It may make the problem lesser in the term of duration in terms of like, if we did a moratorium, it sounds like you're potentially asking for, let's say the declaration is, is last for three months and then you have 60 days after you're a five month stay and we might find ourselves in that period of time with new resources to deal with this problem in a slightly different fashion. I believe that's true. I'm not the person to talk about the more exact sources of federal funding. And my understanding is that the numbers of what federal funding is coming for rental assistance, etc. Those numbers are not definite yet. So, believe Earhart is on the call, and he could probably talk about how much money is coming and and or the state of understanding about how much money is coming. But yes, the idea is using assistance, get everybody's housing issues sorted out and try as much as possible to make essentially landlords whole for the time that they've had would have to wait through the state of emergency. Okay. More you would like to add because we're running late at this time we'll probably be taking this up next week again but if you had some more thoughts, we'd welcome them now otherwise we'll move on to the next witness. If I can send what I've said to I can email it to you in written testimony I made some this morning. And if there's no questions of me. Good to go. That would be great to send that in does anybody have any questions for Jean. Michael can can we get the language from the house bill. Yes, sure we can. I have a question that Jean. It's Allison Clarkson. Do you, could you give us a sense of of the timing on an eviction for a business or you know for commercial or for residential. I mean, how long does it rise. How long does it take to rise to the level of court action. I can only speak to residential eviction. So the, the landlord tenant law, the residential rental agreements act. If you want to look at it, it's at 9 vs a 4451, I hope, has different periods of time that are required to terminate tenancy. So termination of tenancy is a written letter sent by the landlord to a tenant. Prior to the tenancy being that terminates tenancy. It's an official thing. If it's a non payment of rent case, the, the time that the notice has to be is 14 days. If it is a for cause eviction, it has to be 30 days. And if it is a no cause eviction. It has to be somewhere between 60 and 90 days. Depending on what the, if there's a written rental agreement and depending on how long the tenant has lived there. So that period of time has to pass before a case can be filed. And once that period of time has passed, then the landlord can file a case. And that would be one thing that the legislation that we propose would preserve the landlord's right. If they have already sent a notice of termination, and the time has passed. They can go ahead and file, and then everything just stays in that status. And that's how the state of emergency happens and then they can pick up where they left off and wouldn't have to start over. And then once something gets filed in court. It depends on a number of things. There could be if there's non payment of rent, there could be a preliminary hearing that happens. It's generally within three or four weeks to order payment of rent into court, but for cases where the rent is currently being paid. My sense is the first time people usually get into court is around 30 to 45 days when the court sets a status conference, and then anywhere from 45 to 45 days later they may set a merits hearing. The reason it takes that period of time is because the court encourages parties to do discovery to have negotiation to try to resolve the cases themselves. Generally, but it's from the time of case gets filed. I believe Angela zike house key from the tennis association. I mean the landlord's association is on and she'll correct me but from the time the case gets filed until the court makes a judgment of eviction. It could be anywhere from two to six months. Thanks, that's helpful just as we look at the arc of this crisis. So, thank you, Jean. One, I guess one. Last question you guys represent folks in foreclosures as well. Not, not at this time. I don't think we're actively representing people in foreclosure, but certainly legal aid and legal services Vermont when people call having received foreclosure process we give them a lot of information and so we have in the past done foreclosure representation, we ran out of resources to do that. But when people call we still give them information and people can find information about how to defend themselves and what steps they can take on our website, which is BT law help.org. Thank you. Okay, so I'm going to move on to Angela or Chris, unless you think you have different things to say I'd rather you decide among the two of you, what you're going to say and I'd prefer it be Angela because I can't stand looking at that view behind Chris. It's really unfair. Thank you. Yeah, Angela will handle this for us. Okay. So Angela, if you can talk in general or I mean I assume you've seen the, the bill that we've just been sent. They're dealing with in the house and what are your general thoughts if you could give that to us. Thank you for allowing me to come testify regarding the situation. My name is Angela Zajkowski. I'm the director of the Vermont Landlords Association. I'm also a practicing attorney and the primary focus of my practice is representing landlords throughout the state of Vermont. So I have been in communication with many folks around the state and I will say the primary concern for landlords right now is their rent payments and whether they are going to receive those rent payments or not or how that is going to look and work. I know the bill that every house bill that everybody's been talking about has a pretty substantial. I know it's a placeholder allocation but a pretty substantial allocation that would allow tenants and presumably landlords depending on how it ultimately is crafted to request funds to have rents paid while this crisis continues. And for you know landlords are need many times that money to pay their mortgage to pay their taxes to pay the carrying costs and maintenance and any you know emergency repairs to two buildings. And so that's a critical component here. I will say that the legal aid proposal that is in that bill is actually quite fair to all of the parties. It sort of breaks out by category various points in which an eviction could be at any given time. I do have some specific feedback on some sections that I am working on crafting and can circulate that as well just related to some specifics but I think overall the sentiment of the bill is incredibly important. You know with the governor's stay home stay safe order. We can't have people being moved out of their housing right now but we need to find a mechanism so landlords are protected so tenants are protected and we have some balance for both sides. Okay. And what is the balance for the landlords as you see it in that bill given that it sounds like there is a there would be a significant stay on any evictions going forward at this point. Well the balance for the bill for the landlords is sort of twofold one it doesn't relieve tenants of their obligation to pay the rent. So the bill is very clear in that regard. The balance also comes with the funds that would be made available to tenants and landlords to help with this rent or rearage or rent or rearage issues. It also doesn't prevent landlords from sending termination notices or filing cases. So landlords can still take advantage of those processes. It just wants it hits the courthouse it stops. Okay. Okay. So it sounds like your position. Is that you recognize the public health crisis here and you want to do right by the tenants in the community and not spreading the disease but you also need some assurances that you're going to get paid. Correct. Right. Okay. Thank you very much that's helpful. Do you have anything else you'd like to add? No, I think I think this is a difficult issue and sort of unprecedented that any of us have ever dealt with or seen. And it's challenging and there's a lot of issues and there's greater issues at play here with public public health and safety. Michael, could I ask a question? Angela. Are you been saying that there is a need for us to go through with legislation as opposed to just report the care of this with their rule? I think what would be incredibly helpful is to have a customized and uniform approach. I appreciate the judiciary's administrative orders and I appreciate what they are attempting to do. They do have lots of other cases that they deal with. But sort of a piecemeal approach county by county and judge by judge doesn't necessarily help us in this situation. We need a statewide. This is what the rules are. This is what everybody needs to do. So we have consistency. And is your association talking with the administration about implementing this? Well, this bill is brand new. The most recent draft was only available at 9am this morning. But my association and I have been in communication with members of the associate or with members of the administration about housing related issues. Members of the administration, you said. Yes. Specifically housing and economic development. Okay, we have Josh. Okay. Well, I appreciate your time and we're going to move on with a few more witnesses that I'd like to get in in the next 20 minutes. I may jump around a little bit here. Mayor Weinberger has joined us. And I know he has a particular concern. I think that may have a little bit to do with local control. So I'd like to hear from him next. Mayor, are you there? I'm Senator Shrekin. Good. So we've been talking about the pros and cons of a moratorium. Some hybrids of that. I think you might have a slightly different local take on what you might want the legislature to do so. But you express that to the committee now. Well, great. Thank you for including me. Thank you. I think that these things are unusual and remarkable times. And so we're all moving quickly. And so, Senator, what I was mostly prepared to speak to was a related issue, a little bit longer term. I hope you do ever whatever needs to be done to ensure that evictions just cannot go forward in the immediate term while we figure out this new reality. I just think this is absolutely the wrong time for anyone to be being evicted for non payment, given the public health crisis that we're facing and the fact that people need shelter and need to be staying at home in the exact order to stay at home. We don't believe the city has the ability and our municipality to stop such evictions or it's not clear to us how we do so we've set up a resource center so that anyone who is imminently facing eviction we've asked them to contact us and we would help them on an individualized basis we haven't gotten any such calls so far I don't believe. We don't think we have the legal ability to to actually stop evictions for non payments so we are looking to the state to do that in some way I can't advise you on the best way to do it. I do have some other thoughts about that look out a little bit longer term to June and then August on and if you that would be helpful at this time I can kind of bring you into what we're thinking about on a little bit longer time frame. But if you could do that in five minutes that would be great. Great. Here's what we're thinking we think that our constituents have been hit very hard many of our constituents, maybe a majority of our constituents have been hit very hard by this economic crisis, and we would like to take bold action as a municipality to to assist them. Am I still, you guys can still hear me. Yes. Yeah. Okay. Sorry. The actions that we are considering is basically saying to any person that owes us property taxes in June on June 12 we are thinking about saying to them if you will sign an affidavit claiming. As you know stipulating that you have been impacted by the coven 19 emergency we will give you a deferral without any interest or penalty until August 12 to make your property tax payment. And this is coming back to the runner issue in a moment but let me just lay this out. Further we're looking out a little bit further and I say this this is real time I'm giving this to you we have not completed our financial analysis I'm not convinced we will be able to do this as a municipality but we're trying to do this. We would we then are looking at the August payment we think some people are going to be in no position to make a double payment in August as a result of this emergency and so at that point. We would work out with them a payment plan where they could pay off over some number of years and we haven't set the years yet. These two tax payments. And the way we would fund such action would be to go into the credit markets right now where my understanding is money can be borrowed very inexpensively. And we would borrow millions of dollars maybe tens of millions of dollars in order to fund these payment plans we would it in the August payment I envision we would require some documentation that would be means tested if you will at some level because people would have to show us that they actually you know document that they had been hit by this. We would Pat we would need to charge I think as a city for these essentially multi year loans at that point but we would do so on a very low and we would pass along our low interest. We wouldn't be borrowing we would we wouldn't try to make any money as a municipality on this so we think we could get much lower loan rates than constituents would be able to otherwise get on their own and like likelihood and so it could be valuable to them in that way. The final key piece of this that we're working out is I think we would make it clear to any property owner that had a tenant, whether it's a residential tenant or a commercial tenant a small business if they want to take advantage of this city program these deferrals and payment plan. They would have to make a binding commitment to us that they could not evict a tenant for for non payment. They could not be filled the city was made whole. Lots of details to be filled in there but that's basically what we're thinking and I'm optimistic about it seems to me like it should work, given the city's authority powers to ultimately ensure that we will be able to get payment because we have significant rights as we get paid before any other creditor so we think we could do this pretty safely without putting other property taxpayers at risk. And I say all this to you. I know you're aware we're thinking about it but I also we it would be an even more valuable and meaningful benefit to people. If we could do the same with the states Ed fund portion of the property tax, I think it could similarly be done on very safe low cost low risk basis. You would, we couldn't do that without as I understand the legalities I don't think it would be legal or appropriate or feasible for us to do that without state agreement. But I guess I didn't want to say if this was something that the legislature wanted to consider doing together or doing on a statewide basis, we'd be very interested in those conversations. So thank you very much for that and your beginning comments were appreciated as well. At the end, I was assuming that the Ed fund portion would be borrowed and paid for by the city, as well. Is that something you, is that a financial complication that obviously is more challenging but the legal problems long as somebody pays the Ed fund what what they're do. That. So my concern there is just about at some point we would probably start to run into limits of what the credit markets would be willing to lend to us. If it was, you know, we're talking about a lot of money. If you know if it's just the municipal side. You know, it's more than twice it would be a trip. We would be borrowing three times as much. If we were borrowing for the education side as well I'm not sure we're going to be able to do that. But, but I also think there could be. I think we have obligations. I don't understand all the legal obligations for you either. I think we have obligations to make payments to the state. Regardless of whether we've received the payments at a certain point. And so how that all works out would require additional work. Right. So I appreciate your time. Thank you. Can you keep us in the loop on your thinking. Because maybe we can spread that idea around the state I know in our finance committee we're looking you know we're looking at all different elements of people's debts and property taxes one that we just talked about yesterday so this is a pretty creative idea. I would like to keep abreast of what you're doing. Yeah, excellent. Each municipality is beginning to be in everybody's beginning to be in touch about this big issue and everybody sadly has a different payments schedule, but it your narrow your spot on this is the next huge issue other than income that people are facing financially. So I'm going to let you sign off, and thank you for coming. Okay, thanks. Bye from winter County. Yes, I send my best all of you down there. Bye. So, is Michael P check on the phone. Okay. Hi Senator I am.  I was not entirely sure whether we invited you or to talk about vis a vis this issue whether it be foreclosures or evictions or forbearance, but I always welcome the opportunity to hear from you Michael. Well, thank you very much and I appreciate that I welcome the opportunity to speak to the committee so maybe I'll just be brief and talk about the perspective from from DFR is viewpoint. So we at DFR along with our federal counterparts did issue guidance. Probably we can have to go now to our member institutions our banks and our credit unions, providing them flexibility to defer loans to, you know, have scheduled missed payments to waive fees and all of the flexibility that they need to serve their communities. Without any regulatory consequence, we also encourage them to be flexible to obviously all industries but in particular, the industries that were hit the hardest by the covert 19 pandemic obviously, you know what those industries are. So we have seen our banking and credit union institutions respond I mean we have seen that response in terms of flexibility for current clients and members. We've seen a number of institutions respond with new loan options also for new clients or new members. So that is certainly encouraging that as it equates to this issue certainly gives residential mortgage holders more flexibility. It certainly gives landlords more flexibility, and then, you know, hopefully they are passing that flexibility down to their tenants as well. So certainly on the mortgage piece, there is a willingness on our lenders and our mortgage servicers to, you know, beyond just the Vermont banks to provide flexibility. Another thing that we're doing is analyzing the federal actions to date. So there has been a moratorium on foreclosures for loans that relate to Fannie or Freddie Mac. Those we understand are at least 60% of the market nationally probably at least 50% of the market in the country. So there's already moratorium on foreclosures. I understand the federal stimulus bill will expand that to include evictions as well for 100 or I think it's a 90 day time period. So we want to get a better sense of what's happening at the federal level from that standpoint and then also what type of stimuli like I want to say those a 90 day stay on evictions. So if you are, if you're, if the loans, if somebody has a loan relating to, so if a landlord has a loan relating to Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae, or various other federal loan loan. Those entities, okay. Yeah, so it's not sort of a moratorium broadly but basically if you are having your loan with any of those entities, you know, you get I think certain for you get certain flexibility so long as you don't evict. You know, that's something that we want to understand more clearly as well. And then, I guess as we view this. Oh sorry one other point on the federal action so the federal stimulus will also have, you know, obviously direct money into people's hands, potentially but also some loan forgiveness around rent and and landlord payments and costs that they might occur related to COVID-19 so we want to get a better understanding of that and how that might impact renters and landlords in Vermont. And then last, I guess we view, you know, the fact that the judiciary is structured themselves in such a way under this emergency that the normal process for evictions and foreclosures, you know, really can't proceed as it normally would. And I think that would likely keep individuals in place during the shelter at home emergency as a practical matter, but I do recognize the chair's point about foreclosures or evictions in particular that might have been underway prior to COVID-19 being declared a pandemic and the state declaring a state of emergency. Those are just the considerations that we're taking into account. I think the governor obviously is very concerned about individuals having a place to shelter during this pandemic. And, you know, we continue as we continue to get more clarity on some of those points. I think the decision making process will become more clear in the short term. So I think that's code for the fact that a moratorium is still being, is still under consideration by the administration at some future time if it's warranted. You can break my codes now I guess. One of the reasons I asked that is because I also have Josh Hanford on and trying to save some time here and that was the question. I was going to ask him but you're both representative of the administration so I just wanted to know that that's still being looked at. So I appreciate that. Okay, I appreciate your time we're going to move on to you have anything, does anybody have any questions or do you have anything more commissioners you'd like to say. No, I think that covers it but happy to answer questions here offline as well. Can you, when you get a better idea of what the federal law says vis-a-vis barons and foreclosure and victions. If you could send a summary along to us that would be great. Surely make a note of it. And also Michael any protections for landlords that are coming through the either the fed through the state. Absolutely. Great. Be well everybody. Thank you. Thank you. Jed Davis you have you hung in there the whole time. I am here yeah. Hi. My name is a CEO of the farmhouse group in Chittenden County I think I don't know if you go broader than that but he's written me a couple of emails, and I wanted to give him the opportunity to testify from perspective of a restaurant owner who has leases I guess with landlords. So, why don't you take it away yet. I mean, as we all know restaurant small business owners are in a state of panic and I'm really, I guess speaking for people other than myself, although I am in a state of panic too but there are people out there who situations are more dire than mine. Restaurant small business owners. I have a question about timing. Right now, there are restaurant owners that are coming to the very quick realization that they are out of cash there they're done. They will not have cash to reopen. They will not have cash to pay rent. Therefore they will be in default of their leases that will happen. Most leases have cure periods 10 days 14 days. But if you're out of cash or out of cash commercial leases as you all know are personally guaranteed generally.  It can be a truly a life altering financial event for someone, particularly as we likely enter a climate where there's not going to be a lot of market for vacant restaurant spaces. So I can easily imagine a situation where someone's paying rent to a landlord for quite a long time. I know the solution. But I do think that we just have to view this as an unacceptable outcome to be forced to close your business rightfully because of a public health concern but nonetheless to be forced to close. And then just imagine continuing to pay rent until, until you can't until something happens. All the stories are coming in. I'm getting emails from friends that are saying I got nothing left, you know, and April 1 is coming. And I just think it's, if nothing else I just want to bring to all of your attention the urgency of that, of that issue. Thank you. Our own constituents and businesses in our areas are making this very clear to us. So as I understand it, it's probably unlikely that any kind of eviction is going to start or proceed going forward as the court's order applies to commercial evictions as well. And that at least goes forward until April 15 and I assume will be extended to the extent the COVID-19 issues continue, which sounds like they will. So, one of the dilemmas we face obviously and you face firsthand is, it's really hard to understand at this point, a few arrows after I don't even know if the bills been signed yet but there's a lot of pieces moving pieces of 600 page bill. And I just hope there's some relief for for small businesses like your own in there but until we get a real handle on that. It's hard to see what if any role states or municipalities might have in fixing the problem but rest assured that we're aware of it. So I thank you for for writing and for staying in the loop and encourage you to stay in touch. Thank you. Does anybody have you. Anybody have any other questions for Jed. Chris you're our last witness, but three of us have already heard from you in finance and you're getting in the way of our bathroom break so I think we know what you're going to say and we thank you for the forbearance that your members are showing and we'll probably be taking this up again next week and we can have you and then I hope that's okay with you. Yeah, that'd be great. I would really like to visit with the committee and give you more detailed information foreclosure is completely different from eviction. This is in Vermont take a heck of a lot longer, and I can assure you we're not throwing people out on the street. So blanket moratoriums become a little bit of a challenge because we're now not able to direct resources to where they were absolutely needed so I very much would like to meet with the committee. I'm going to take it up next week because there is a lot more information that's happened since we last met with the finance committee so I appreciate it. Thank you. Yeah, so committee. Why don't we take 12 minutes to 135. I guess, faith of you on we just hang up and diet go through the process again. Center circuit did you want me to try to be available again. This is Commissioner Hanford. Well, we can hear from you now, Josh. I was basically going to try and ask you about the administration's position. I think that that from Mike. So sure. Well, I think we have some, you know, spoken directly about it quite a bit. I know that the EO is still being considered the governor's and looking at it as well as thinking about how to add in this commercial lease piece, but the legal aid proposal that's in the house bill. There's a few concerns that we want to make sure is addressed. It's for all evictions. There's a public safety element to this that we've been receiving issues daily from someone running a mobile home, you know, with unsafe person that's, you know, destroying other people's property and how are they going to be evicted so there's concerns that for some public safety, there may need to be evictions that proceed for lack of payment that that's completely understood. So that's an item I just wanted to put on the table that should be considered as well as the language from the federal bill that just was approved. There's a 120 day suspension of all landlords prohibiting initial legal action to recover possession of a rental unit to charge a fee penalty or other charges related to non payment where the landlords mortgage on the properties are guaranteed supplemented or protected or assisted in any way by HUD Fannie Freddie rule housing voucher program or violence against Women's Act. So there is a potential that there's a number of properties that will be protected by that federal issue. As well as the funding that may come through. The other piece that we're concerned about is many of these programs that come from federal funds or that even the house 5 million that's there that probably is not nearly enough. How those get transferred to the 80% of rental property owners that are the smaller private that, you know, during this period of not collecting rent, you know how they filling up the oil tank or, you know, just necessary repair some sort of program to offer assistance, you know, 0% loan grants, whatever it is, it needs to be developed to go along with the rental assistance that looks like some of that is coming in the federal relief, it probably will go out as housing vouchers, which has a process through the public housing authorities and state housing authority that would need to be developed. So that's sort of my high level just adding on to what you've already heard. Josh, that's very helpful. And we'll definitely will have you in next week. I mean, we've gotten some emails as well from neighbors of tenants that are like creating a nuisance or party house or things like that that have nothing to do with non payment of rent where they, you know, in some ways are causing a health issue of another kind so there may need to be some flexibility built into this though, obviously, it's a balancing act. So we'll hear from you next week and we'll see what the also what the house is planning on doing as to whether they're going to send something over, or we need to act first. But I appreciate your time and everybody's all the witnesses times. And if we could take 10 minutes now and be back at, let's take 13 minutes and be back at 140. And that means you got to get back on at 135 for all the time. You could just stay on. You could just keep it going and then go off and do it whatever you're doing. Faith told me she didn't want to do that.  Right, so you don't have to resign in.


I was working with a client recently helping her to figure out how to describe the work that she does with her clients or the work that she wants to do. And the exercise was so simple and helpful that I thought I would share it here with you. This is a short version of it. If you want a longer version, go check out my Facebook live video from March 15th today, March 15, 2019. Anyways, so it starts with very simply this and I'm going to give you a few seconds after each question to pause if you want to and comment below if you like. Who knows, somebody watching this video or seeing the comments might actually be your ideal client or be a referral source. So the first question is, imagine the person who is so meant to work with you as a client. They are just at the right time and place in their life. They're struggling with certain issues and challenges or they have certain yearnings and they would resonate so much with just who you are.  You just really enjoy working with someone like them. So what is that person like? Describe that person in any way, whether it's gender age, profession, whether they look like, what do they sound like, anything that helps you to imagine that person. So I'm going to give you a few seconds now to comment below, to pause this comment below if you'd like or just to reflect on it, go ahead. So now that you've gotten this person in your mind and heart, now the question is they come and work with you, now they're your client and you are so happy and they're really happy because you're just the right provider for them and they seem like the perfect client. Now you're doing the work with them. So what are you actually doing with that client? If you meet with them in sessions, talk about what you're actually doing with them. What are you helping them out with? What exercises are you working on with them? What are you talking about with them? What are they doing in the session with you? Talk about that. What is it that you're actually doing with them? Again, I'll give you 10 seconds now to reflect on that or to comment below. Alright, now imagine that this client is now completing their work with you. Maybe it's been a year of working with you, maybe it's been three sessions, I don't know what your ideal package is, but they're now completing their work with you. How would they describe, gosh, I am so grateful for you and this work that we've done together because, fill in the blank, how are they talking about gushing about the work that they've done with you? Go ahead and take a few seconds now to reflect on that or pause and comment below. Anything else that you've noticed is different about them? Is there anything different about their life or their work, their relationships, their health? Anything that came out of a result of working with you? Was there a particular problem that they came in with that you're now realizing they resolved it now? A goal that they've achieved that they may not even have realized that they've achieved that goal or they know how to do something now and it's so obvious to them now that to them it's so obvious, but now you can see that change in them. So what is it, any other changes that you want to comment about? Note that below. Go ahead, I'll give you a few seconds. Finally, let's talk about what that client was going through before they came to work with you. I know it's a bit strange to put this at the end, but sometimes it's hard for people to think about the ideal client, what they were going through before, but now that you've journaled about all these things, hopefully the before picture is a bit easier for you now. Tell me about why that client decided to come and work with you. What was the, was there some kind of triggering event in their life, in their health, in their relationships, in their, was there a particular conflict? Was there a realization that they had? Was there a new goal, a new dream? Was it the chronic issue that finally got to be too much? What was it that got them to finally say, I need to pay for this service? I need to do something about this. Again, I'll give you a couple of seconds to reflect on this. Okay, so what you've done now, if you've been writing this stuff down, is you have just drafted your work with me page, webpage, or your services webpage. And this is just the first draft. So I invite you to put this first draft away for a day or a week, and then come back to this exercise and do it again, the second time, without looking at the first draft, so that you might have any new ideas that come to you. It might be some of the same stuff, then that's okay too, but do a second draft without looking at the first one after a day or a week, okay? So you've done the second draft, answering the same questions again, put that away for a day or a week, and then come back, and the third time, you integrate the two drafts that you've written. You some phrases or sentences you like from draft one, great, put that into the third draft. Something you like from the second draft, great, put that into the third draft. And as you integrate these things, you now have something that you can work with, you can reorder things, I've edited some more of course, and then present it to your audience and get their feedback on it. Your ideal clients, your potential clients who are open to giving you feedback that you don't mind asking them for feedback. Well, put this into a Google document, for example, click on share, anyone with a link can comment and just invite their comments. Or just put it on Facebook post, simple and say, hey, what do you think about this? Is there anything in the way I describe how the clients resonate with you? Do you have any questions? Is there anything that's confusing? Is there anything you would suggest changing? And try that out. And you might even get a couple of new clients this way, but certainly it will help you to hone how you describe what you do. And it's something that, you know, this is an exercise that I do encourage you to come back to over the years, because your authentic business, the thing that you do that is your calling is going to keep changing, at least a little bit. It will keep changing over time as you evolve yourself and as the market evolves too. I hope this is helpful and I look forward to any comments you want to put below and may this be helpful to you. All right, take care.


Joy to the world, myself does reign, cause it lives with God-resty, merry, gentle persons and non-binary alike. We three non-gender-specific people- ah man, you know what, no, scrap this one, scrap this one, we ain't doing this.


When my patients come to me, they're often impressed by how I'm often to piece together these weird symptoms that don't really seem to make much sense. And they certainly don't when you go to a traditional doctor. But they often fit into a certain organ pattern in Chinese medicine. Because again, Chinese medicine is very concerned with the relationships between things and how the connections create illness or create wellness. Now in this video, I thought I would share three common and weird symptoms I hear from my patients. And they're often very interested when they hear where it's potentially coming from in Chinese medicine. Hey guys, Dr. Alex Hying, doctor of Chinese medicine and licensed acupuncturist. So before we jump into this video here today, two links right below this video that are key. The first is if you'd like to become a patient of mine locally in Los Angeles or virtually via telemedicine, there's a link right below this video to my private practice contact info. There's also a free guide for daily rituals that could potentially help you add years to your life with Chinese medicine. Weird symptom number one and where it likely comes from is tinnitus, i.e. ringing in the ears. So often when patients come in, they say they have high-pitched tinnitus or low-pitched tinnitus. And what's interesting is that tinnitus often has some interesting biomedical correlations as well. So most often what you hear in Chinese medicine is that more high-pitched tinnitus is related to the liver and more low-pitched tinnitus is related to the kidney. There's a biomedical precedent for this because there's a study. One study done on more than 69,000 women found that aspirin, Tylenol and NSAIDs substantially increased the risk of tinnitus and basically the greater the NSAID use, the greater the risk or the chance of tinnitus happen. So these kinds of medications that are often hard on the liver and sometimes the kidneys are correlated with tinnitus even biomedically and a huge sample size, 69,000 is pretty good. And in Chinese medicine, generally what I see is that more acute tinnitus like for example, tinnitus is common in post-COVID infection or post-viral infections, I've seen people with it. But more chronic tinnitus especially in Middle Asia when someone is currently in a very run-down state is usually considered a kidney sign. Now the kidneys don't always overlap with the adrenals but some of our kidney treatments are adrenal stabilizing treatments so to speak, the HPA axis. But tinnitus when it's more chronic, when the person's older or when they're more exhausted in the course of long illness is often more of a kidney problem actually. So the second weird symptom where it comes from likely is itchy ears. So I'll tell you, I see a lot of patients with digestive problems, right? Bloating, yeast problems, SIBO, candida and a very high percentage have a cluster of other symptoms. The other symptoms are sinus problems, stuffy noses, chronic sinus issues, frontal head pressure or headaches, brain fog. Ear issues and then general yeast issues as in bloating for women there may be vaginal discharge but the ear one is very interesting because the ear one, the ear symptoms are most often what people comment and they say, you know, this just sounds weird but I get this thing in my ears, itchy ears or full ears or crackling ears and very often this is I'm going to say a yeast symptom as someone who's not a big believer in this whole yeast thing but this idea of gut dysbiosis being a primary cause because the formulas that I use to treat their gut or their SIBO or the bloating or the discharge will often resolve the itching in the ears. So weird symptom but very common. If you look at just that symptom it makes no sense but if you look at the cluster what we call the pattern in Chinese medicine makes a lot of sense. The third weird symptom is waking up at 3 a.m. This is the most common time my patients say they wake up it is by far the number one time referenced in insomnia and in Chinese medicine one of the theories for this is that people who wake up at 3 a.m. are waking up at the transition of liver time. So there's an organ clock in Chinese medicine that each organ has two hours where it is I guess fulfilling its function or something about it is particularly active and as these organs the clock transitions to the next organ one of the ones that's most common is the 3 a.m. wake up because that is the liver time. So that is the time the liver is transitioning to the next organ. So what's also important is that we really stress sleeping certainly before midnight if you can but preferably before 11 because that's one of the best times to get that deep quality sleep where we say the liver stores the blood and you could just visualize this as a deeper resource that will help you feel more rested and have more energy throughout the day. I know even people who anecdotally talk about adrenal fatigue or HPA access dysregulation will say that even if you fall asleep at one and you sleep well you are still potentially draining yourself more because it's not as good quality sleep as it could be. That transition 11 to 1 and 1 to 3 1 to 3 being the liver time is very common for patients to wake up wide awake and then even just fall back asleep or sometimes can't fall back asleep. So one of the reasons this is that we call this liver cheese stagnation the liver being one of those organs that buries the brunt of stress. So if life is very stressful you don't have good ways to discharge it like exercise being my number one pick then often that liver cheese stagnation will create almost like a pressure in the body and that's one of the reasons why when that organ is going through its cycle it's waking you up there almost like you know ding the chicken's done but 3 a.m. most common time I see patients say that the time they wake up and very often it's correlated with reflux what we call liver cheese stagnation liver or gallbladder problems whether it's digestive reflux burping burning or it's something more bowel related alternating bowels but in general that can often be helped with formulas or with regular exercise if it is related to liver cheese stagnation. So those are three weird symptoms where they come from in my experience I thought that would be unique and interesting to share and again before you guys go check out that links below the video and I will catch you in the next video.


Hi everyone, Joe for Jaspy's casebreaks.com. That's me coming at you with that 2022 Panini Obsidian football, six box, half case, pick your team, 10. Second half of the case, we popped open the first half last night and made those little squiggly marks here so we know they're all from the same case. Big thanks to this group for making it happen. Pick your team, 10. Joe, you ended up at the last spot in Mojo before we pulled the remaining teams out for that R&B, that random number block. And there are the results of that random number block right there, which we, did I post that video, which we posted in a separate video, which I did not post. Let me just do that right now before I forget. Just so you can see how the randomizer went down to be curious. We'll put R&B, random number block in front of it. And I don't have to monetize that. It's public publish. So once again, there's a serial number break involving just those teams for Pick Your Team 10. What do we got in here? Let's find out. Good luck, everybody. Now, we did see the color blast on the other side, but I don't think we saw a big RPA or anything like that. So that'd be nice to see. All right, we got DeMarvin Lille to 100 for Pittsburgh. That'll go to Pittsburgh zero. We've got a Russell Wilson die cut 62 at 99. That's goes to Yusef. And here's Aaron Jones. All right, and your hits. First hit is Davis Mills, atomic material for the Texans. That's for Joshua and Houston. 10 out of 75. And we got Sam Howell, unbreakable rally. He's been hobby hot lately. Gonna go into, should go into the season. QB1, 71 out of 125. Joshua, one of the commanders. And we got Magnetic, one out of five, Tua Tungovaloa autograph. Nice one for Miami. Natasha picked up the Dolphin straight up. Nice. And out of fives and under. All aboard the Big Head Express. Woo-hoo. And we got a Chris Olave RPA. Nice. That'll be for the Saints. Saints are a number block team. Goes to Saints zero. Yeah, Logan, we've had some 2023 product come out already baseball wise and there should be more as the season goes on. Chad saying, nice card, hope he plays again. He will. Tua will play again. I think it's been all but confirmed. I think the Texans are gonna draft a QB. And Rex saying they just got blackout cake Oreo. I don't even know what that is. One out of 25 Jalen Naylor. Goes to the Vikings, Joe Andreessen. Cadarius Tony to 75. That'll go to the chiefs number block. That goes to Kansas City eight. And there's Bailey Zappie for the Patriots.  So that'll represent our non numbered cards. Right there. All right, and the hits. We got Danny Gray, three out of 25. Two color patch, Niners. San Francisco three goes to Chad. There's Bailey Zappie 14 out of 25. Four color patch, a nice color there for the Patriots. Number block team. So that goes to Patriots four. To me number, that's for Steve Herrick. There's Derek Stingley Jr. 160 out of 199. Joshua with the Texans. And we got a nice Jameson Williams. Rookie Jersey and Otto. Charles saying Texans QB is Zach Wilson. Not true. Not yet anyway, but currently no. They still got Davis Mills. And I think with that two pick, they're gonna take a quarterback. I don't think they're gonna go for Zach Wilson. Detroit, Aaron Salinas with the Jameson Williams. Nice Jameson. All right, there's Jerome Ford. 44 out of 100 for Cleveland. That'll be for Howard. There's Alvin Camara, three out of 50. That's for the Saints. Saints three for Chad. And there's Devo Samuel. And there's T-Law, Trevor Lawrence. Equinox gear, two color patch. That's for the Jaguars. Jacksonville one. That's gonna be for Brian. Brian with Jacksonville one. Robbie Anderson, 35 out of 100. Lightning strike, autograph. That's for Howard and the Cardinals. And we got DJ Moore, three out of 10. Another lightning strike autograph. This is Carolina edition. Low number, Carolina three, Chad Cromwell. There you go, Chad. I think these guys, you should be teammates in Carolina, I wanna say. And then we got Kyle Hamilton, seven out of 99, for Natasha and the Ravens. Dual Relic and Otto. Right, Texans have picked two and 12, Logan, that's right. And so they're in good position to get some high quality players there. Probably quarterback at two, some defense at 12. All right, there's Mack Crosby. Hopefully Raiders will find him. A pass rushing buddy for him in the draft. That goes to Howard in Vegas. And we got Ray Lewis.  And there's Snoop Conner for the Jags. That's another number block team. Yeah, I like Cadarius Tony too. I'm surprised that he was a giant, right? I'm surprised they gave up on him that early. So soon, it felt soon. Rookie eruption, one of one. Aaron Salinas and the Detroit Lions. There you go, Aaron. Was feeling a little eory yesterday, but keep getting your at-bats in. This is the kind of thing that could happen, Aaron. Thanks, man. And all aboard the Big Hit Express. Woo-hoo! Nice. There's Arnold, a Big Hit TA, 99 out of 199. That goes to Falcons nine, that'll be for Steve. We got more Lions. So we got that Jameson Williams RPA. We got the one of one eight in Hutchinson. And now Aaron gets a Lightning Strike Auto of Monro St. Brown, four out of 50. And then we got a Danny Gray rookie, jersey and autograph for the Niners.  And that'll be for Aaron W. Aaron S, Aaron W, the Aaron's hitting. Got Aaron Rogers for Green Bay. Got Shaquille Leonard, five out of 75. Colts five, Steve H. TJ Watt, Pittsburgh, 64 out of 100. Pittsburgh four, also Steve H. Got an unbreakable relic, Garrett Wilson. Rookie relic for the Jets.  Aaron W. Zachary Carter, 69 out of 99. Bangles, Brian. Got the Bangles straight up. Another Bengal, 26 out of 75. Galaxy autograph, Chad Ochocinco. Nice Chad Johnson. Brian Borenberg, got the Bangles straight up, thank you. And for the Bills, James Cook, two color patch and autograph. Buffalo. Daniel P. with the Buffalo Bills. 18 out of 50. You know Chad, going back to Tua, did I see some news where, yeah, there was an article back in late February of 2023, recently, you know, a couple months ago, or months or so ago. He's taking lessons in martial arts. So I'll drop the link, it's an interesting article. So he's training in Judo to reduce concussions. I'll be, he said during, it was during the Super Bowls Radio Row. I'll be doing Judo on Fridays, just so I can kind of get to figure out and understand of my body and how to fall. Which I think that's proactive. It's a creative idea. I like it. There you go, Trent, you're welcome, man. Hopefully he's not falling on his head, James, that's right. Until he'll be using that as training until he gets a concussion doing Judo. And then after that, no more after that. And it's Tray McRide for Howard, Michael Carter for Jets four, number four, Steve Herrick. He's got to do something in a Samariture, one out of 10 for Joseph K. and the Packers. He's got to do something. It's Justin Jefferson, cutting edge piece of the jersey. Remember the movie, The Cutting Edge? Pretty underrated rom-com, if you ask me. 42 out of 100, pretty underrated sports movie. If you want to go out and put it in that category. Joe Andreessen with the Vikings. There's Jeremy Ruckert, bringing the Ruckert, 41 out of 99. That's Jets one, Brian Croft with Jets one. Final two, we got a Zach Wilson, 21 out of 49. Magnetic autograph, another one for Brian Croft. Is he a backup? Aaron Rodgers, does he marinate behind him for a couple of seasons? Does he move on? I don't know. Let's see. All right, and the final one, Matrix material. Brandon cooks to 90. No, Brandon cooks to 196 out of 99. Texans edition, Matrix material, jersey and auto. He's been putting up some really nice numbers with not so good quarterbacks. I think he's in Dallas now, so that could be an interesting person to watch. Maybe even for fantasy purposes. Joshua with the Houston Texans. There you go. There you go, ladies and gentlemen. Now, there's only two, I think there are only two non-numbered cards. So we'll randomize those to one person in the number block group. Yeah, I don't know. That's a scary situation, Chad, but yeah, if Tua takes another hard concussion this upcoming season, you know, I think that's seriously, he's gotta talk to his doctors. That's gotta be seriously discussed, whether that's good for, you know, if it's good for his career or not. There are some, I saw some, I saw some medical, some Twitter doctors, like actual doctors, not Twitter doctors, but actual doctors who are on Twitter who are calling for him to just retire now already. So we'll see what him and his doctors and personal docs and team doctors say. All right, this is for the two base cards, five times, a little consolation prize for somebody here, two, three, four, five. So a couple extra cards going to Steve Herrick. That's gonna be a Bailey Zappi rookie card and a Snoop Connor rookie card. There you go, gang. That was Obsidian 10. Some nice stuff in there. Thanks for watching. Thanks for breaking with us. I'm Joe. If you want more football, we got limited football brand new release coming up so we can pre-order now. We'll see you next time for the next one. Bye-bye.