Good afternoon. Welcome to Senate Education. This is Friday, February 16th, a little after one. We're celebrating one of our student interns, Brennan, who's last day is today. And we are going to move right into S203, an act related to the appointment of the State Board of Education members. And so we're going from Japan, Mr. Nichols, Ms. Siglowski. We're going to then hear from the Chancellor. I'm going to somewhat similar issue for building, for changing. And we're going to move into libraries, and then hopefully we'll be finished by about 315 or so today, maybe 330. It'd be nice to have a little earlier. So with that, Mr. Fan, S203, and just as a recap, and all that's in regular ad, if I miss anything, this is largely reworking the State Board of Education. You were here under the, who was your boss back? Joe Cook. Joe Cook, and Joey Donovan, and I, and many Sarah Buxton. We were on this Education Committee when we first started to look at the State Board back in 2010 or so. And this, one of the things that happened during that time was we took the appointment power. We allowed the State Board, what were we doing? We said the State Board used to oversee the Commissioner hiring and firing. We said we're going to make this Secretary-level position, Cabinet-level position, and we are going to let the State Board be involved with the hiring process. We kept all of their duties and responsibility pretty much the same. So we're a little bit, I don't know if we're at a cross work road per se, but we know that the State Board is really, really busy. I know you opposed the idea of giving them money last year. Additional sort of funds. You thought maybe we should look at all the boards and commissions. Maybe not just close that, but we got to look at the State Board and just look at the Secretary's position a little bit. And this Board just, they'll kind of guess the conversation going. It may go in a couple of different directions. I think having talked with other colleagues, this is the opportunity to say, bye, State Board. Maybe this is the time to just rethink things. So the floor is yours on all sorts of topics related to the State Board. Wow, it was quite an introduction before the record, Jeff N. I'm on a DEA. And thank you for the cake. You're welcome. I'll speak after, and congratulations. I wish you all the best of luck. Is that a piece of cake? A lot of fun. Make sure. I recommend it. It's very good. So the Phil introduction to just the Game Center is not contained in this, Phil. That's slide three. I wanted to think broadly. We came out of it a little bit, and that's actually not a bad way to go. I don't have written comments on this to the bill. I'll just say, in short, we support the bill. So I'm going to be clear on that. But you do ask some fundamental questions about what should be the purview of the State Board. They have a lot of work on the hands right now. And maybe, you know, in the adage, in any case, any flight work, that might be facilitated by this board, because this does increase the size of the board, gives hopefully some representation from those who are in the public school system or in the school system generally, avoid the State Board of Education, which I think is important and perhaps lacking in all the late. So it's a good bill. I like how the transition language works. I like the appointment by the House and the Senate, and also if even the Governor's hand in the appointments. And I do like the student members of the board. Yeah, you know, it's a healthy dose. But to that point, we've had student members of the board great. But now this bill would have teachers that I'm particularly concerned about, but principals who serve a different role, superintendents, and that that makes a lot of sense, I think. Any danger? I mean, one of the things is time for all these folks does take up, you know, the board takes up a lot of time. Yes. So I don't, well, I don't know that personally. I've heard that it does. Have you ever looked at their schedule? I have not. You can go watch the meeting. Yes, I have. Okay. All right.  I'm not arguing the point. I just don't know personally. I'm not. I've not been on the State Board of Education ever, so I don't pretend. Well, that's too many on it. Well, that's clear. So I don't know specifically what the workload is, but I have heard that it's not insignificant. And again, many hands make like work, you know, so might this be a way to address that too. You know, you have more subcommittees perhaps that could be in specific issues, let's take a little longer. Thank you. So to that same point that, you know, one of my questions regarding time on this committee, or this board, I have to say, you know, I'm wondering if, you know, I'd like to see people from public schools on the board, but, you know, considering the time constraints that teachers have, the special education providers have, and, you know, there's also a requirement that a parent be on the board as well. And for that particular point, I think there should be some more just refining the definition that, you know, exactly. But, you know, for the teachers and the special education providers, is there, I guess, can you provide a bit more information as to whether or not you think it might be feasible to make it a requirement that a teacher is on the board? I'd love to see it, but I worry that, you know, to make the change and I do support the change and it, there's, you know, and there's no teacher who comes forward and says, yeah, I have so much time and I'd love to be on this board, you know, what would happen if we can't find a teacher to fill that. And so, do you have any more thoughts on that? Sure. Yeah, would you mind if I made a clarifying comment? No, not at all. If you look at the language of the bill, it does say of which expertise or experience as. So, there's nothing here that says that these folks have to be currently employed in their position. It just says expertise or experience. So, I just wanted to point that that's pretty broad and doesn't, there's no requirement that they be working. So, you're tired? So, to answer your question, I think it's, it's bad. My position about 13,000 members, we have people who are interested in curriculum matters, political matters. We've got a cross-section of folks who have varying interests and there are some who would be interested in this of the 13,000 members. Just for example, we're not needed here, so I'm not suggesting that that be the case. But I think that's the same, the same to be said for all of the boards in Vermont. We are very much in Vermont, relying upon volunteer board members for a host of things in the state. And that's good and it's challenging at the same time. So, I think your argument is not invalid. I think we've just as a state, we've come to a place where we do rely upon volunteer board members for a host of things. And I think what you're suggesting perhaps is do want to professionalize the board and I think the answer is no. That's not, I'm trying to read into your question, you know, with that help and I don't know that it would. I think people are willing to serve, make sure they're willing to serve and they find time to do that. And some people may probably go for a walk weekly, then serve on these boards and some other people may try to serve on other boards. But there's a group of people in the state of Vermont, who would be willing to serve board and who are future special care principals, superintendent of sorts, and would be willing to serve. Could you identify a problem right now with the makeup of the state board? I think what we line members, you know, are concerned about their focus being in places that don't necessarily directly affect them. Just affect your members? Correct. And there's students in the classroom. So, you know, if you see somebody who's labeled as a state board of education doing things that don't influence or have an impact on your day to day life, of course, it's obviously not always the case. But I think they might raise the question. I want to make sure that the state board of education does have at least some influence on a positive way in my classroom for my students. And I don't know that they would say that to be the case today. So, I don't know if it's a problem, but it is something that they don't know what the significance of the state board of education is today to their lives. Right. So, for example, is there something they're working on that is not impacting their lives? I'm trying to prove it negative. It's tricky. Yeah, no, I'm just trying to... I don't follow the state board that closely. So, I don't know exactly what their last meeting, for example, but yeah, that's kind of an active thing. Yeah. Don't recall what we're talking about, but I think there's something important to watch, or, okay, just wait now. Because if they're not working on things that are impacting your constituents, that's what I'm trying to understand. Well, that's so important. Right. I think so much of it's like rulemaking and all that. Education quality standards. Yeah, yeah. The Act I, that's a process that they've been working on for some time. And given the rulemaking process and the time that takes, that will affect my members in the future. Yeah. I assume I'm making some assumptions here that that will go through the rulemaking process. And there will be the way I understand it is, the way it's crafted at this point. It can go effective July 1, 2024, or effective 2025. Yes. So there's a lead in time. So will educators, principals, and attendance teachers, special educators, all folks be affected by that? Yes. So that's something that the State Board is doing right now, that they will see the impact going forward. But as to their day-to-day challenge, maybe it's misguided, but they may not see the impact of the State Board of Education today. And I think the notion with the Vieta principle on that, for example, she might be able to say, hey, we've got this problem in my school. I've talked to some of my peers around the state. Yeah. How do we address that? Is there a way the State Board of Education to weigh in on this case or something? I don't know. But right now that voices lack, I would say. I would be interested in asking the State Board first, how do they get some of this information out? In other words, how do they spend any time messaging to principal, superintendents, teachers? Or is it more sort of not closed box?  I see more of the AOE. Aha. That they're in this field memo, for example. Yeah. We may redistribute that to our members electronically. Yeah. I don't know what the click rate is for open rate. Sure. Yeah, I'm sure. I can't super that. But I don't know that the State Board of Education does something similar. I know this is a week. Occasionally it doesn't mention what State Board of Education is doing. So that might be where people have noticed some of what the State Board is doing. That might have an impact on our lives. Any other questions for Mr. Dyer? Anything else, Jeff? No, I think that's it. It's interesting. Yeah. I'll wish you well with it. Great. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Street nickels. Pretty cool. Thanks. You're joining us. Thanks for having me. Well, the record, J. Nichols, Executive Director of the Super Office of the State Board of Education. Not yet. It's true. No, not at the end of the clock. For the Vermont Principles Association, Executive Director of the State Board of Education. So a couple of things as I start with testimony in S203. One, the question, I read the law the same, or the bill the same as Senator Gluck was saying. So I would see it as, I don't have any members that are going to have time to stay full. But I've been a lot of retired members who are still very invested in trying to make sure that our schools are high performing. So I think it's going to be retired superintendents, probably retired teachers, retired principals that have filled overalls. And I actually like that idea because they're not going to be worried about just what's happening in their school that day. You know, probably be in a better position to see the big picture and they'll have years of experience actually with you. So I really like how the composition of the board is being discussed. And my formal testimony, I read it, but I do want to thank Senator Gluck for actually first looking at the roof for this bill. I think it's really good. I like the composition. I like the idea of the Senate picking three folks that, you know, you folks would recommend six, three committee committees. And then on the other side, three people from House that would be, that our six would be recommended to the speaker. I think that's a good approach. I like the idea that everyone has a little skin in the game in developing the state board. You've got the governor, you've got the Senate, you've got the House. I think it's very appropriate. And in my formal testimony, I'll just speak to Senator Gluck because you kind of brought up the state that's Senator Gluck in. I think that personally the state board of education and the secretary of education, that's what we've got right now, is sort of a failed experiment. And of course, the full disclosure. Some of you know I was going to be the testified against this back when we came to being. And as superintendents, we tried to have a statement on this and we could not come to agreement. And it wasn't for lack of trying. Do you test it? What do you mean you test it against one? I'd like to fight for keeping it in a state born with a commissioner and a department as opposed to an agency. And like that, back then that was the page or page was representing the TVA. No, I was not. I was a trustee for that. Oh, I see. Yeah. So we were asked to make it. EPA wasn't involved. Right. But trustees, we all met on it. I came up with the president at the time was the person you guys may have heard of. It was Dan French. And the treasurer was me. And there were other members. And Jeannie Collins and myself were adding about how we should keep it the way it was. Dan and a few other people wanted to go to secretary positions. And the rationale on both sides was fine. Yeah, yeah. The argument that Dan and Company made was to make the governor. And it wasn't about the particular governor. It wasn't Governor Scott when this happened. It was Governor Shumlin. It was about the idea that they felt having it tied to the governor would make the governor have to be more responsible of education. Right. So were those of us that thought it would make it too politicized, and I still feel that way. And quite frankly, the two-year governor term is always scared me. I feel like the governor is going for one year and then potentially running for re-election the next year. Now, truthfully, Vermont always re-elects. I would come then. But I just think it's bad about the costs. So I think the state board right now is in a position where the A&E doesn't work with them. The secretary of the A&E doesn't work with them. They often can't even get help from the agency of education. Because the agency that you get out of education is a part of the administration. I think it's a much more responder model when you have a commissioner with a state board that is funded, supported, independent of government entity. With three government entities, really two, the executive branch and the legislature, but Senate and House helping decide what the composition of that would be. So as you're talking about, I think that's something that should be really considered about going back to a model where it would be commissioner-driven and wouldn't be as politicized, and we wouldn't be having some of the things that are going on right now. We're almost a year without a secretary. But we can say we have an interim, and that's not an often interim. Very bright person. I like Heather a lot. We don't really feel right on this. I'll repeat it. It is interesting. I remember one of the biggest arguments was we can elect someone to fill a pot hole, but we can't elect. If a governor can run to fill a pot hole, we can't elect a governor on an education issue. And that's one of the things I think that we're all on the floor. We're just saying, you've got to have a governor out there that can at least advance, talk about if she wants to get elected for education as an issue. And I get the answer to that. I see the study going in some dissertation in the future free and post where we're sitting on Bill Doyle's knee as a young person talking about this and that. Just the argument that you would also make was it was a six-year governor term. But it's two years, it's turning all the time. It just sets up public education to be so likely to be politicized. And that's, again, not enough on any individual governor. It's just on the system. I would rather see it be much more independent, much more focused on what they really believe that state board feels is best for kids with a commissioner answering directly to state board. That's my question. It's interesting. Yeah, it's very cool. No, I agree with that. Bill does have my name on it too. But I think it's, I agree with all these points that I've been raised and everything we do in this building is politicized. Education is politicized. Sure, I think it always has been. Always will be. Yeah, but I think with the board and the role that they should be playing, it's something that I think should take input from both branches of government and provide for a more balanced approach as to who is on the board and what parts of society they're representing. So, great. Anybody else? I do agree with the comment about the term of the governor. That's a dull difference. That might be a sign of around the education committee. I don't know what's going on. Yeah, thanks. And I thought, did we not look at the term of governor? Did we not? We used to do it all the time. In the survey, I tell you, that survey, isn't it a constitutional amendment? Right. And I just had this recollection. Can we talk about it? I don't remember anything happening. Maybe, would you please? I think we might be the only state left this two years. There might be one other, but we're close to it. And then think about that in terms of organizational leadership. And the same thing holds true for the commissioner. You want somebody that's focused on education, working on the state board, not working at the loan of an individual governor. That could change just like that. But keep in mind, go back and look at the 10 years of our secretaries and commissioners, just because you have a state board report, it doesn't mean they can't get rid of somebody after two years, or one is true, all those kinds. That's true. That's true. So it is. It's interesting. It's complicated. We should have something. Yeah. And I do think, and I think you'll agree with this too, the Senate, the upper chamber of the legislation should have a six-year term. We've been told by the speaker house that there's no opposite chamber, that there's two equal chambers. Just for the record, none of those two. Thank you. All right. Thanks very much. Thanks. Ms. Siglowski. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Ms. Siglowski, executive director for the Vermont School Board Association. I submitted written testimony to you, and I won't go through that word by word, but the essence of it is that we feel that S203, the more inclusive and equitable approach to the appointment process, it does maintain executive influence in the process, but also provides the opportunity for the Senate Committee on Committees and the Speaker of the House for the responsibility to appoint a certain number of members. We think it is in the best interest of state of Vermont education to have a diverse and inclusive representation to the State Board of Education. And I wanted to also point out that we recognize that this State Board and the agency play a vital role in our education system, and we have a resolution to that effect. I'm not going to again read it to you, but it is in my written testimony, and part of that resolution says that in order to accomplish these goals, the agency of education must be properly staffed and resourced. VSBA desires to be a strong partner with the State Board of Education in overseeing Vermont's education system. VSBA believes that the State Board should include an active school board member and administrator and a teacher. The governor should consult with the VSBA in the selection of a school board member. So as such, we support the proposed new requirement that the State Board of Education members include at least one member with expertise or experience of the principal, superintendent, teacher, school board member, educator, preparation program provider, special education provider, and parent. So those are all the entities that are listed in the bill, and we agree with that. And lastly, I just wanted to note that this fall, our members adopted a resolution that came from a school board in Addison County charging the VSBA staff with convening a task force to assess the needs of our school districts, examine whether the State Board and agency of education are meeting those needs and develop recommendations for actions by the governor and the legislature. So we have convened that task force that includes one school board member from each of our 11 regions, and we expect that they're going to wrap up their work next fall with the goal of completing a report by November. And so I may have some additional recommendations after that report. So we can say again what that task force is doing. They're taking a look at the work of the agency of education and the State Board and any concerns about how those entities are serving the field, including school boards. So one of the things we've talked about in this committee and a way to overlap to that is whether or not you know how this agency has changed over the years where there might need to be new people, additional people, both focusing on force literacy. We know that there's a CTE position will likely pass as well, but also enforcement. Will this give to any of that or? I think that it may. The task force has held one meeting and they're going to be meeting once a month. We have a consultant that's working with them plus one of our staff members. So I think it will be a pretty comprehensive report. We're hoping it will be. And you're willing to share with that group that question that we have been talking about for last year and this year is does the agency are all the positions that we need there? Yeah. That would be great if they were able to weigh in on any of all that.  But it would certainly we don't get an opportunity or the financial support to do an audit. Having that as the beginning of a process that might go forward would be great. Yes, happy. I'd be happy to pass that on and just also wanted to mention that they're approaching this from a growth mindset from the role of being overly critical. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yes, Senator. Thank you. Are you suggesting a change in the bill? Because it seems as though on your second page, the second paragraph, do you want an active board member? Well, that is that is the resolution. That resolution is quite old. Oh, we have this. So yeah, sorry about that. Yeah. Okay. So we're you're okay with. Yes, okay. The length of the bill. Yeah. Thank you. Yes, thank you for your testimony. Just a general comment for the committee. You know, this this is something I really support this bill and I something that we're able to move forward. And you know, in looking at it, you know, I do want to stay true to what my beliefs are, which is that there needs to be a balance on it. And that we do have for better or worse than what your views are, we do have a we have a unique ecosystem between public and private schools. And as I'm reading the makeup, I don't see, I do see, in my opinion, pretty substantial number of folks who would have originated from the public sector or public school sector. And I think that's great. But I don't, I am not saying that there's at least one spot that does represent approved independent schools. And I do think that there should be at least one because again, regardless of what your thoughts are on approved independent schools, there is a relationship between our public schools and approved independent schools and to stay true to that balance that represents the diversity in this ecosystem. I think there should be one position from there. No, you're not. Listen, I'm getting too old. No, you're not. He has, you can stop. Senator Telegre, please. So I don't, there's nothing explicit here about these being public school people. So I don't know where you're seeing that. So this expertise has a principal and superintendent, a teacher, a school board member, educated front program. There's no, it's not explicit that it's a public school or an independent private school or independent, what's it called? Sorry, independent. So I don't know, I mean, they could be from anywhere. Yeah. And they would you absolutely could be in under the current system if you have a governor. I'm not referring to our current one, but any governor who could say we're going to load this up with principal who was from an approved independent school, a teacher from an approved independent school and a special education provider from an approved independent school. So I guess to that point, maybe there needs to be more, it needs to be more explicit in general as to who is representing public schools and who is representing approved independent schools. I'm just, Yeah. Throwing it out there. You do have this hybrid system. There should be at least one person and again, whether, you know, regardless of your thoughts, not used specifically, but anyone's thoughts on approved independent schools, they do exist. And there are students who attend them and this board does create rules that affect those schools as well as public schools. So I think that we should figure out how to make sure there is some equities for who's being represented on the board. So you want all these positions to be more explicit? I think if we're going to be markup, which will be definitely should be markup and, you know, look more, yeah, look more explicitly as to what type of balance we want to have on this. Yeah. To your point, so if it's not exclusionary language, but it's not inclusionary language, it will be helpful given our hybrid system. I'm sure they'll release one C represent this unique hybrid system represented. That's what's mine. And it's interesting, right now, on the board, there are two current school board members and two current principals that are here. I believe there are any current school board members of state board right now. I'm just reading that. But wait, excuse me, there is one. There is one. Yes. Thanks. Just a curiosity, as we gain testimony on this, any intention of bringing the chairman of this board in? Yeah. I mean, she's been in a lot, but we can certainly have her it's interesting. They didn't seem, when I reached out to them about this, they felt as though they almost wanted to stay a little bit out of it, but we can move back to them. So it would be interesting to learn, you know, kind of the mechanism state. Yeah. Does it work? Is it not? Yeah. You know, will they change? Yeah. Yeah. To change. Yeah. So, you know, do we want to have somebody from therapeutic school on there? How about the depth? Are you hearing depth line? You know, are you going to get into that kind of detail? I think I agree that we have a special education client. Okay. It's on there. Yeah. It's on there as an option. Oh, yeah. The nod is over. Right. Just follow up. Yeah. Well, we can look like center she said we can work on some of the details during Marca, but I think the fate is required the way I'm reading it. Yeah. You have to have a such an education. Oh, for the other sub category. Whatever. Okay. I get it. I think the current chair school board member also. Correct. Yes. You're right. I'm sorry. There are two. Yeah. Yeah. Yes. Anything else on this? Helpful. Please. Possibly just again find balance in this conversation. Invite one of the governor's staff to come in and talk about their perspective on shifting from a governor's budget system to again, might learn some lessons there or or again. Yeah. I know. Okay. Thank you. Thanks a million and thanks for reaching out to that group that's doing that work. I will do that. Tori. Okay. We're just waiting for the chancellor to arrive. So we'll take five minutes, Morgan. Welcome back to Senate education. We are shifting gears now. We have the chancellor of the state colleges with us. Chancellor Mouck. And we're so happy that you're going to come back in. When you first arrived, you were here maybe two weeks. I think you're about six weeks. We'd love to hear how things are going. Just a little bit. And then we can also transition into the bill itself and discussion around thoughts on faculty and staff being on the university support and this shared governance conversation is one that I think has been happening in the state for a long time, probably at the institutions you've worked at in the past. And so we're involved in the conversation. With that, anything you'd like to share around your tenure thus far? That's my now. Six week tenure. Six week tenure. Yeah. Well, I have had just a wonderful six weeks getting to know more about the system of being able to now get around to all but one of the campuses for the newly formed one-state university. It's been very exciting about indeed a number of our students in all kinds of fields watching them as they are participating athletically, academically, just earlier this week. I was able to see a student who's been working on some research on techs in the state, which is so important. I was just with the Secretary of Agriculture at one of the buildings outside of Randolph. And they are also doing tech research. So it's very important for our students to see everyday applications of research and what they might be able to do in the future. We were talking to a DMV and Dr. Benjamin Anderson and she asked the question how is it that we get more students in the state to be interested in working with large animals as opposed to small animals. And so certainly as we have moved to fewer and fewer folks having a lot of experience with farms, having opportunities for our students to see what it would be like to work with large animals is very important. So a lot of these experiential opportunities are just very, very important to them. So it's been very good. Next month I'm going to get to CCB's campuses with Joyce Truthies. So I'm very excited about all that. So great. So been good. Yeah. This has been very good. Yeah. Learning all the nuts and bolts as well. We want you to be successful. So if there's anything we can do to be helpful in any way I know you know where we are. Yes. We elected as you know re-elected in a different situation yesterday and elected a gentleman named Mark Mahalry. Mark Mahalry hopefully will be a good addition and if not we'll write on. I'm sure he'll be fantastic. I've been able to already work with him just a little bit and at least a couple of weeks and I think he'll be very good certainly having folks that are dedicated to the system and you know the students that we serve I think is very important to be clearly as demonstrated that's important for us. Any questions for the chance Slater before we move into our conversation about folks on the University for Trustees? Yes. So last one. Your predecessor asked about your positions within Chancellor's Office that are outside the state for actually you got to ask for some kind of data on how many positions have been created at the positions expanded because I understand there were some positions in the Nebraska or Missouri some other states and I asked for some funding you know kind of spreadsheet I won't put you on the spot for that right now but but also we're asking about the strategic plan I know you've talked about creating one of those so have you had any progress on that? On the data I'm sure yeah that I'm sure we can get to you over you know here in the next little bit I'll make sure you get that Senator Williams just to confirm you're looking for the Chancellor's Office financial makeup budget and you had heard she's I should have taken your advice and not eat it in front of the Chancellor you had heard that there might be some out of state positions that are being filled for people living out of state but working for the state colleges yes I will find out about that book I think the reason I'm asking is because of the funding obviously we're looking for money to keep things going a talk to a group of people if you're out of Cassington University and it's like you know trying to convince them that they have to they have to help it's well I look at it like a business you know they're the product of their business and students coming in the door and then going out to the door too so you know what could they do to actually help help to that process and I know our interim president Matt with them recently and I would also like to be able to get to meet with them and talk with them and hear you know some of their thoughts I have been able already get around to talk to some external groups and you know I just found that the more information I have the better decisions I can make and so I would look forward to that as well I've heard good things about your your meeting to think oh good I'm glad to hear about that well there should be more there will be more and I also don't believe in just one off so I would love to meet with all these folks again well you know as soon as we're ready to but you should know if you don't watch this committee every evening that the president of UVM was also very complimentary of you well he was in last week and once I worked to working with you I did I was very impressed with it as well I am hopeful that the two of us could work together just for all of them on because he he is just just very very good ideas yeah so he said that he was looking forward to working with you yeah probably so you could share some of his money with me too oh did he? no he looks okay well I think both institutions play an important role in the future it's all excited to hear about that thank you anything else so this conversation ongoing conversation for shared governance and governance and having a voice from faculty and staff often and money you might say if you person of that sure and let me actually I had prepared sort of just to talk about our board and sort of get you a backdrop for whatever works for you with what we're doing I think it'll help sort of set an understanding for the conversation so first I know Sharon Scott spoke a little bit about this board but to your so the board's role is on system governance and strategic oversight they are responsible for developing the mission the vision and policies of the institution to ensure financial sustainability and accountability and a point evaluate and if necessary remove the chancellor of the system the chancellor's relationship with the board my report directly to the board of trustees it is a relationship of mutual accountability and I'm responsible for the day-to-day management of the systems however major decisions do need board input the board is focused on ensuring high quality rural education for our students transformation success is a result of the board's actions so this transformation success that we have been experiencing over the last three years really has been through the action and commitment of our board they've made some really really difficult decisions to preserve the system and frankly this has been a time of uncertainty for our students faculty staff and communities I was not here when those decisions were made but I do know that we would not be succeeding right now if it were not for this board I do want to talk a little bit about transparency because this is one thing that I have heard since I've got here in recent years we have certainly made a concerted effort to improve the transparency of the access to the work of the board a couple recent activities certainly implementing virtual live stream meetings which obviously were first a result of COVID but we have continued those so anyone can at any point either watch the board live or on YouTube afterwards and we have moved public comment to the beginning of the board and I just want to say that as a new chancellor I really am committed to an open door policy with faculty with staff with students and our community members when ideas came to us from our communities when they do we want to hear them if there are changes we can make to fulfill our mission more effectively we want to make them and if there are blind spots we want to address them one of the things that I know there have been concerns about this lack of transparency in the board and our office's decision I take those concerns very seriously I am looking at how we have engaged with our students faculty our staff and our communities in the past and see how and where I can improve upon it we recently added two faculty members and two staff liaisons to what we call the education personnel and student life committee we call it EPSL to the board that model has been very successful so as I've been here I see then more interaction with faculty and staff regardless of what happens with the bill we're talking about we are looking into expanding that practice to the rest of our committees the committees frankly are where the bulk of the work gets done so when you see a board meeting at that point the work has occurred and the board is just accepting recommendations from these various committees but I do believe that if we're able to add more faculty and staff to these other committees that will just deepen further the input that faculty and staff have along the board just a couple of things they can decide to pursue as 238 it does propose adjusting the composition of the board of trustees and we've cut the number of legislative trustees in half from board two frankly our legislative trustees make up a critical component of the board's make up so we don't support reducing the number of legislative trustees frankly the Ramon State Colleges was created in 1961 by the legislature and so we do need robust input from the legislative body if we are to be successful and it has been my experience and my understanding that our legislative trustees have served the system well we believe that their contributions are essential to the health of the system moving forward so I you know I certainly do want to tell you that I appreciate you taking some time to talk to me today and I'm grateful for this shared vision you know and then I'll just add as a person who has been in higher ed for now nearly a quarter of a century I am very supportive of shared governance and the shared governance model in higher education does involve the board through what is simply the president or chancellor in the system and in particular the faculty that has been the model that has occurred I am a great proponent of it it's one of the reasons when you asked why am I meeting with these folks in that I'm meeting with them because that is it has been my experience over these past 25 years that one needs to get engagement from those various groups so that we can ensure that we are doing what makes them those sense the one thing I've often said someone said to me well when you hire an English faculty member you know that would not be my expertise so one of the things in the shared governance model is that we have to respect and rely upon the expertise most particularly of our faculty when you talk about shared governance the faculty role of that so that what their expertise is you rely on and your respects and so that is something that I've done around the United States but I would take questions and I'll put them down please Senator Wheat Pauli so you mentioned that the inclusion of faculty or staff and students on the committees is something which you're supporting my assumption is though they're they're non-voting members they're they're there to represent communities and what have you express insights but not obviously they're not voting because they're not on the they're not on the board right just as I'm an expert this year though okay so okay so to that point though I may have messed it in your testimony but do you support in some the inclusion of staff faculty students on the board as a principal well however it turns out in the concept right so certainly we already have a student trustee on the board like that has been long-standing you know I would say that that really is the purview of the legislature and legislature in this committee the thing I probably suggest is that we look at other systems and our other boards just to ensure you know what you know do do research to our due diligence what what does that mean you know what would it mean for others but that's that would be a suggestion but so right now their students are not are not our family staff and students are not on the committees the only they're actually I don't believe are students on the committees the only committee that we do have faculty and staff representatives on are the what we call the ASL committee basically the education that it's it's got learning of some academic programs and student life programs of the board the other committees that I would recommend this to strongly support would be our finance and facilities committee our audit committee and I will not think of the third one that there's a there's fourth committee that I would these are committees this is something you're interested in taking this because this it is yes so this that is not the legislator that's just something yes he would like to build out if if if if thank you Senator you'll like so when I saw your your includes I don't think so oh okay did anybody else see Senator Beal's handle up the those who just made just made just made everything something in the case it's not anything that's a lot of good right Senator Sheen any questions thank you thank you okay well thank you well thank you all have a great weekend yeah if the sun is out enjoy thank you very much right again I'm not trying to keep anybody here longer I guess I thought that was going to go a little longer than I thought but I will just in closing just want to summarize for my own right here you're all going to move forward with adding voices ex-official positions to the some of the committees that we just mentioned yes as it relates to but formal positions on the board you are all saying that's will be left up to all of us dare I say call it neutral your position okay but right Drake do you want to add anything no the only thing I would say that the chancellor mentioned is that we do think it's really a part to have those four let's go for let's that would be the takeaway and and that the rest are really policies as recommended just an issue cross paths with Mark as you're being I'm not saying one never never never gets me so I'll give you a head stop you don't need to show up next week yes yes no no so I I always believe that it takes your year to figure out what your job is we certainly figure out how to do it and then I hear it so do you have a get well date or a lot of city universities in life get well due get well we'll be we're going to have a lot of students coming through the front door and we'll be able to keep all the positions viable that we have right now with faculty and staff I don't know that I have a date I hadn't been thinking about that though I certainly you know through all of the challenges that I have seen I see an awful lot of opportunities I see a variety of paths that I think that we can take on I'd like to you know in the spirit of what I've just said I'd like to really talk more to faculty staff and students to see what are some of the pieces that they are very interested in doing but I think what excites me the most is that there are a lot of avenues and I expect that we will take most of those avenues to get back to a a healthier position but without the support of this legislature none of this would be possible you know as I mentioned I think my first into your committee our students are 50% hell eligible they are 50% the first person in our family to go to college and what that means is that we do need legislative support and we need an appropriation to ensure that those students can stay in college and so that would be very important and so thank you all for all of that we'll come back and talk to us before the end of the session oh yeah good great thank you thanks a million thanks I wanted to see you appreciate it thanks great it's like our next guest has arrived why don't you join us at the table let's get right back and see the idea let's see I was not sure you know there's not a little bad that I'm bullying you up from the book oh the long weekend she's going to be to get invited it's starting it's a two thank you very much thank you thank you thank you thank you thanks great thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you before we move forward any questions or comments or anything who's wanting to know as it relates to the chancellor's testimony the bills we have so found in the state colleges and universities what else do you want to hear from our people sounds like a ball's question yes I mean I've asked you before I've been asked everyone I don't understand the issue with having legislative trustees on on these four I just don't understand what the problem is some conflict with having legislative trustees on our higher education boards and I just don't if someone could yeah yeah articulate yeah so I'm not sure what I don't remember Senator Westman articulated what you wanted to remove Tuesday I can say historically some have felt as though those spots perhaps and I'm not a hundred percent sure on this could be better used by people who might have the proper capabilities might have abilities to throw right out different kinds of talents give the authority to this to the board itself let itself perpetuate in a way there's always been I'd say Senator I would characterize it in the Senate that's a minority position I would say not party wise in any way but that dispense some folks so do you think or do folks think there might be a conflict of interest I don't I don't think well yes good question I do remember some people saying well the legislature is responsible for appropriating but I'm not really sure I would fall into that category conflict of interest in some ways I think it's been helpful to be able to call on legislators who are in the building to come down to talk to us about certain issues sometimes but I also understand where a board might want to self perpetuate and get you know different talent for different reasons and sort of create their own flow or flow and sort of talent pool but again I would I and I don't hope I'm not mischaracterizing anybody else's thoughts but I'd say that's kind of maybe a question for people right and it doesn't seem like the boards are suggesting changes no I don't think we've ever heard from someone maybe tough to do to come in and say we'd like this but to your point well taken we haven't even uh yeah sandwiched so just from a personal perspective my my understanding of the initiative was not so much to remove legislators but to include staff faculty students so that there's a more balance more insight into the actual to to the Chancellor's point day to day kind of you know what's really happening on the campus and I'll leave it at that that's yeah and I was yeah my question wasn't specific to this bill I've just been hearing like you're in the in the 80s or yeah yeah that there are some legislators who were like oh yeah I don't think there should be trustees right you know so I was curious and I think Senator Westman is his bill takes two legislators off which again I don't think that wouldn't pass the Senate or I don't think I think there are still people that I'd say it's the minority that feel as though okay don't want those leaders there but I think both well people see it as a good thing and so I think the question before us that everyone will have to decide is as the Chancellor is moving forward with putting back with staff and students committees as not voting great that's a great step but do people want people as limiting members on the floor and that I think to all of you to decide whether or not you want us to forward that piece of the and then the other pieces of the bill we've discussed a little bit which is Chancellor Altogether or that's 216 has it's the same component exact so we think it's 238 exactly so so we you know one is just a you know calm or debilitating the other one is Richie Westman at least then he's on the appropriation committee so fair enough and I'm fine with however we might want to move this piece of those bills putting it on either bill I prefer not to give comp or credit for anything but that's just a guiding principle I have or case he's watching there okay and now comp or credit however you guys want to do it yeah yeah so any thoughts on that people still do people want to do it do people want to move in that direction so for general the number what's that of reducing the number of blood no adding a faculty and staff member to the board or that and I can put it on the the agenda for next week just as a conversation but something we've got to kind of move on or not yeah yeah just to find balance I'd love to hear from the board chair so for the member of the board just kind of okay get their perspective yeah absolutely we'll have I believe that the board is still Lynn Dickinson so I'll ask Morgan to ask Lynn Dickinson to come down next Monday Tuesday for 20 minutes can we also get the general board education board state education board coming targets Jen Jennifer Sanderson sure sure yeah because I get some different perspective down on what she does and oh everybody next to Senator Eulik's bill working on this yeah we can ask her to come in again I do remember we asked her once the board said hey we'd like you guys to handle that but you can always try again see if they want hello nice to see you good to see you too thank you for having me yeah so Christopher Kaufman deputy director of the Vermont Humanities Council you came in last year I believe well also it made and said have you do all of us I did very briefly great and you wanted to weigh in on SQ 20 the library bill I do great so please the board is yours all right before I get started on that I I have been kind of comment but I do so you probably have seen this already if you want more to take home for your constituents until meeting we tell me today this I believe the pages are coordinated with the secretary of state with our partner producing this book I always love free comic books free comic books the free comic book day is coming up and this has been presented this is created by the Vermont Managed Council this is a collaboration with Vermont Humanities the Center for Friction Studies and the Secretary of State and how long has this been out about a year and a half terrific we went through 20,000 faster than you could blink and we have ordered another 20,000 so this is the second edition so those are now ready to go for tell me today this is also our spring season of public talks so so now I'll talk about SQ 20 so I again my name is Christopher Poppinill Strip I've been the executive director at Vermont Humanities for about six years now so I probably can't claim that I'm new and this year marks our 50th anniversary as an organization for those of you who don't know we are the state affiliate of the National Endowment for Humanities and based on Washington DC and the Library of Congress also serving as the Vermont Center for the Books we're a very close partner with the Vermont State Department Libraries I personally was a proud member of the legislative working group on the status of libraries in Vermont and I believe I may be the only member of the working group who is neither a librarian nor a trustee a library trustee but I do have 30 years of experience as a community organizer in the cultural space and hope that I brought some some level of expertise to the table we work for and with libraries and librarians every day and every county and in every season we run lifelong learning programs across the state we do summer humanities camps with public libraries in schools for teenagers and tweens we run professional development programs in early literacy for early educators and with support from the Vermont Department of Libraries we are the coordinators for the Vermont Early Literacy Initiative which provides convening technical assistance and mentoring support to libraries and communities across Vermont generally speaking lower income communities and their libraries we also with the Vermont Department of Libraries run run a series of young adult author residencies that is coordinated with the Vermont School Library Association last week's Farmers Night with Keckler Mcmuth was part of one of those young adult residencies Keckler also visited Mead Street Middle School Montpelier High School and Spalding High School from there everything really glad to be here today to speak in support of S220 what I call the Omnibus Library Bill I don't know what you call it thankful for Senator Hardy for introducing that contains many of the recommendations of the working group we're grateful to you all for your due diligence and your support of making the working groups recommendations and totally aware that it's Friday afternoon so I don't have a lot to say but I well happy to answer as many questions that can actually like but this is overall you're supporting the bill overall we're very much supported the bill for our takeaway yeah that should be the takeaway and I just wanted to know a couple of places where I know you have concerns and say our perspective on those concerns I you know first of all the e-book section recommendations we know you have some concerns about whether that would actually cause more problems than it solves we've removed that section and I know you've removed it for now and I would just like to say that as a matter of equity and access if I think it's very important that that the legislature continue to think about that issue over time and now might not be the right time to think that in this legislation but it's not going to go away and particularly in relation to those issues of equity and access I think about people who are reliant on e-books or audio books in order to be able to read and to access and I think and we'll take a little more testimony on this but we did as I recall are running up against federal copyright laws on this issue so but I appreciate it and we'll be ongoing conversations complicated the intersections of capitalism that they have done had access moving on I'm really delighted that you're supportive of providing more guidance to public municipal and school libraries on collection development and retention policies this was a really critical piece of the working group reported for being to provide consistent model of policies and requirements around the collection development is going to be so important in the coming years especially as we see what's been happening in other states around bookbands book challenges migrating towards Vermont as we've seen libraries and often very specific librarians have come under undeserved fire or curating a collection both represents and serves the needs of the entire community the language in the bill as it stands now would really help to clarify what a good collections policy is and what a reasonable book challenge is and I think that's very very important that are largely part-time librarians and certainly volunteer trustees have the option to get really good information on what a collection development policy should look like and what a book challenge policy should look like so thank you for your support on it moving on to the next part we are strongly supportive of lowering the patron confidentiality age of public libraries to 12 years old in an alignment with the age that minor children can make medical decisions autonomously especially related to mental health drug abuse and alcohol abuse treatment and we know you've heard this from other advocates but I just want to say it again I think this is critical we know from our work at Vermont Humanities with middle and high school students that their public in school libraries are vital important sources of accurate information accurate being key on a wide variety of topics that you know people are concerned about that they may not yet feel comfortable or ready to talk about with their adult caretakers or authority figures lowering that age of patron confidentiality assures young people that the library will be a safe environment for research and learning on difficult topics it steers them towards reliable again accurate information sources rather than Google or YouTube or heaven forbid TikTok right we can assure you that if younger patrons can't safely and confidentially access library resources they will seek the information they want elsewhere and that information that they find may not be good so this piece of the bill to lower that confidentiality age to 12 is really important to us it can speak from my personal experience growing up in for gens in the 1970s and 80s that the Bixby library was an extraordinarily important resource for me to look for information that I could not ask my parents about regarding the appropriations in the bill I know that the state librarian said yesterday that she supports the governor's recommendation and I will not gain say her position on that but I will say from remark humanity's perspective certainly from the perspective of the working group that we asked for appropriation for two additional staff people in the department and one additional staff person at the agency of education for very big reasons they had a full day of discussion on staffing libraries around Vermont including the state library and we learned of course that the state library has been shrinking for years and years and years and is much smaller than it was even 10 years ago restoring two additional outreach positions would actually make it possible for the department to do the work that we're asking them to do in other parts of the bill rather than simply titleing that onto a small and overburdened staff it's not normal money I know that I know you're trying to make very difficult positions but it's not a lot of money to support two additional positions there and the one at AOE we did hear from school librarians that they are lying out to have that AOE positioned back I'm sure that many of you know that school librarians are often quite part-time and they often are splitting their position on several different libraries so to have an AOE consultant position to help them would really add a lot of value for a relatively low cost so that's really important to us the last thing that I really want to address is this issue of the criminal threatening penalties and my organization and I don't have a particular position on whether or not enhanced penalties for criminal threatening is the right solution that is what's in the working group report and it was thoughtfully put in there there may be other approaches that work just as well for helping libraries to become safer places I do want to say that the testimony that we heard in the working group about public safety was really disturbing that we heard story after story from big libraries and small libraries about the impact of the ongoing especially the opioid crisis on their operations as well as people with general mental health crises coming into the warm, safe, public open space and then having difficulties that created security safety issues for the staff and for other patrons I think it's honestly only a matter of time before somebody gets hurt if we don't use something so whether or not enhanced penalties for criminal threatening is the right thing I don't know but I don't think you can ignore that our public spaces are really struggling with safety right now one of the other pieces that we heard over and over again which was frankly a little bit devastating was from librarians who said I've got somebody in my building who's having a mental health crisis and I can't get the police to come and help us and we are not 20 to do this we do not know how to keep our staff and our patrons safe and not release them so it's a bigger system by thing right this is not something that's just specific to the libraries but it is something that's really changing last week I think maybe some of you know the chair of the national endowment for the humanities was here from Washington she was in this building for a day I also took her to several libraries around the state and one of the librarians told us that they had been attempting to provide harm reduction services in the library including having sharps boxes and vacuums and things like that and they recently found that their sharps containers had been broken into by people who were looking to reuse the fields very we have to do something about this it's hard to hear that story I'm going to close here it was really truly an honor to participate in the working group I was a lot of work over many many months sometimes I think we felt like it would never end but I personally really grew in my understanding of the challenges of the opportunities facing Vermont libraries and I can't tell you how appreciative I am of Senator Hardy and all of you for taking that report seriously for crafting not just this legislation but several pieces of legislation and moving it forward it really gives me a lot of faith in all of you that you care about the work that we did so thank you I'll stop there and happy to answer any questions so thank you no I'm not worth it no I'm sorry there were no actual legislators working group is that right? that's fair any questions first I really like your sticker Shakespeare yeah it's really great it matters I want one I really want one I want one here keep them below keep them below I want it oh my gosh I guess I have to approach this I just wanted to say that I did really understand the importance of the AOE liaison because I happened to work in a school that was really well staffed and had a had a party healthy budget but I have I've since learned that that's not the case around the state and we have a lot of schools that are rural that have one librarian or a part-time librarian and those folks often feel very isolated and alone and my experience in the library we're talking a lot about mental health issues with kids and I get a little bit emotional when I talk about this because it's so important and one of the things that keeps coming up here and I've read the Surgeon General's report on loneliness and isolation is that kids and people need to be in spaces where they can get together and they can gather and they can connect with each other and I think that school libraries are one of those places and when I was a librarian back in the old days I worked really hard to create a space that was welcoming to all kids that was a safe space that was a creative space why I need this I turn this old newspaper storage closet into a maker space and kids would go in there and do part and do science and so if we're going to put our money where our mouth is if we're going to really do what we claim we want to do which is meet the needs of kids in terms of mental health create spaces that are safe for them and welcoming then I think this position is really important and I've done like 180 degree turnaround because the more I I understand how all over mob works not just my little bubble and chipping county the more I I think this is a really crucial position so I just wanted to thank you for your work with the group and for putting that in particular provision in there I hope we can find a way to make it happen and especially I was thinking especially if somehow that position could also speak a little bit to all the literacy work that we're doing you know that would be fantastic because I mean reading the literacy you know go together and libraries play a part in all of that so anyway thank you and that was a long commentary but I appreciate you listening first sermons the question so you I received an email yesterday from the constituent asking a question about library for positions in the bill specifically and and going to revert back to your comment that libraries have changed over the past 10 years certainly over last 20 years isn't this may not be a third question for you specifically but since we have the chief of librarians commission of librarians I know I will happily throw it at her isn't there a possibility if libraries if library usage is contracting even a bit isn't there an opportunity to redistribute somewhere the manpower to you know for those positions that are being the library message is actually expanding quite a bit is it yes then if you can revert back to your comment about how those libraries have changed over the past 10 years that would be helpful because short libraries are doing a lot of different things now right when when I was young perhaps libraries were places where you went to get printed books and you still do that right you go and get printed books but you also go there for lots of other reasons sorry a lot of people go to the library for access to the internet but don't have internet at all some librarians are serving as job counselors and resume writers and helping people to get unemployment benefits for example that's just some of the top pieces that are happening in libraries right now you can just walk down the street to Kellogg Hubbard and you can see that the number of kids accessing that library after school is enormous and libraries are in many cases serving as uncompensated childcare facilities for parents who don't have the resources to pay for after school programs right almost everything that happens libraries great so there there are many ways that libraries are are expanded I would say usage is not going down if anything it's becoming more important especially in our smaller communities where a library might be literally the only public space available in the community safe space yeah and the only warm space in the winter right for people who might be starting with the shelter so that's really critical as well but if you add anything to that if I could add after del now I'm a state librarian and the commissioner of the department the work that's going on is shifting in libraries and I just I'm not asking for additional FTEs you know this is an area where the the legislation the bill has FTEs for the department but when I hear the question I become concerned that there's an idea out there someplace in your constituents mind even if not in yours that the department should shrink further and I have to speak to you about that because we have 18 staff right now and actually our work is expanding we have now got a grant program for building projects and we we're paying for those consultants for those not throughout consultants but those professionals to run that program state employees limited service so we are actually now up to 20 because the need is so great for support our department of libraries provides centralized services to people around the whole state of Vermont when you request a book and it gets to your library through which your library loan we did that that's our career system we have a statewide contract when you log on to the Vermont online library that's my team we got that and that's when you talk to the state colleges about their databases any of those databases we got those those are our Vermont online library we use the appropriation from the general fund and our IMLS money we grant federal funds that make up about a third of our budget our staff we need staff to do that work and 18 staff is many many fewer staff than the department had and I know the report it's very long so I can point you to the chapter on structures and organizations our research show that the department used to have 68 people they were distributed around the state multiple buildings we're all now centralized there are 18 of us please do not cut us further there's we are working to the tilt I will to the hilt I would love to show you my calendar it's crazy there's we're doing so much work and we're all functioning really really well and at high volume so please do not do not take anyone who who says something else very seriously without a further conversation which I'd be happy to tour you all around and show you what we do if he does it that would add as it just makes it hard to say that's Senator Beats most public no I just wanted to say it's it's better for constituents to hear it from you than they heard from us yeah with our filters and our you know various various degrees of sensitivity of you know knowledge background and just one more piece you know a lot of what's happening now people point to well things are online to maintain the statewide online resources requires staffing behind the scenes so our online databases our ebooks and the audio books we're actually building a platform for all of our monsters called the palace app so for every remontor to have a baseline of collections that no matter what their local library can afford we get everybody these resources that's the type of work that we do granting out federal funds for summer reading for participation in the career we need some staff to kind of get everything working well with resource sharing and that's that's the real function of our department at this point we don't typically provide in person service although I might be doing story time on the library advocacy day here at the state house which I'm very excited about so if you know children bring them to story time with state library but we don't typically do that kind of service so all 16 year employees are state employees all 18 of our employees are state employees yeah how about municipal libraries they're not none of the municipal libraries report to us so there's an inequity in pain of our cases with most because I'm hearing the same thing from my municipal library she's got two prior time employees that don't even qualify for the municipal of insurance from over and that is that is a big issue that I don't know that it can be address statewide legislation because right there in the municipal libraries in their private nonprofit libraries and that all runs slightly differently and issues of equity among 100 maybe three libraries that's really important and pay is certainly something that we heard all a lot about as well as health insurance right that most library staff don't work enough hours to get health insurance any final questions or comments or okay thank you very much great thank you for your work thank you very much I appreciate it so we are just waiting for alleged councils to come down to finish our work for the week and so whatever you take five minutes welcome back to senate education friday February 16th two forty three two last sections on the library bill sections 16 and 17 so three sections returning to the backside h2 of the outline that strainer since provided us with and then as we've talked about we just there are some things that are settled but there are a number of things that aren't settled that we have people coming in next we have to talk to us about everything fire arms to questions about municipal authority etc so so yours great good afternoon talk to Anderson legislative council we're going to start in section 15 and for purposes of the outline I grouped 15 16 together and has authority of the department of libraries the first piece in section 15 would have meant to give me some functions of the department of libraries to add mandatory duty for the department to adopt a collection development policy that reflects diversity of race ethnicity sex gender identity sexual orientation disability status and Vermont's diverse people and history so this is mandate to adopt election development policy so basically those classes of people take that into consideration when advancing adding to collections etc yes sounds okay and making it's like it's kind of that's so frantic by sorry here we go second page that's that that is your library step here five section 15 six oh gosh maybe yeah yeah um it's great for your section one I don't know the the the um um oh yeah not we yeah this is good this is good good stuff have a say all right moving on to section six to preface the discussion of this section the report from the working group suggested that the departments should go back to his rules governing minimum standards republic libraries and the public that would not have required anything to be in statute if that authority had existed and first of this and when I looked into it and pulled up those rules that were adopted re-adopted in the 80s after the initially adopted yes five years earlier than that perhaps um there was not a delegation of authority for those rules to be adopted but they were approved by Elkar so wanting to make sure that the department could review them revise them and have them have some sort of force of law moving forward this was put together to reflect what the working group had set out as areas to be covered by the exhaust but from what I understand perhaps it is not the desire of the department to actually adopt rules with the force of law at all so this may be something that it's unnecessary that they may be doing instead of through policy here or something else that would be not binding and of course it's down there thank you Catherine down there on the state library and so the working group did wish for the department to update the minimum standard so I do want to be sure if as as council just said that that is the case when I look at the section here my it's not that the department refuses to go through the process but I think that saying may rather than shall and giving us a purview that's a little bit less specific might be more helpful and there are some aspects of what is enumerated here that even the senators in your own committee would probably be reluctant to take on such as setting the amounts of money that municipalities should pay through a rule-making process so I would request perhaps that this be broadened that the department have the ability to engage in rule-making to update the minimum standards but that those be written in a that this be written a little bit more broadly so that it's in matters related to public libraries there are some aspects of this rule-making portion including requiring collection development policies so it if s to 20 goes through that's already required by law so us including that in rule-making wouldn't make very much sense for example but I also do wonder if there is anything necessary for us to just continue making recommendations every single aspect of the prior iteration of rules is recommended the department didn't actually require anything in the in the earlier rule-making and if all we're doing is making recommendations and guidelines I don't think we need this part so it's really I think a policy decision for you all would you like us to be setting standards that then municipalities have to try to meet would you like us to and if we do that are there specific things you really do want us to determine and then I would look at each of these very carefully and I would probably beg you to take out the part where my department is responsible for telling municipalities what the per capita amount of money they ought to spend would be is that D minimum municipal funding for public libraries yes that seems like it would be possibly better placed in the legislature than in the department but I would defer to you all on that distinction I like an idea of all change or shall be made because I'm here and you know people get tired of state mandate what they do you know because they because they are well you know at least it's on if you recommend it and it works for them then you then they adopt it then that's good we can all really start with the mandate something that doesn't start well particularly with the climate out there right now not no happiness both their taxes going around to me if I please say one of the show please please I do want to say that the reason that the working group made this recommendation is that many libraries in the state of Vermont do not meet the 1986 standards today the standards include things like that they need a collection development policy and a reconsideration policy that's why we suggested you put that in actual law rather than leaving it in these minimum standards that have no teeth so you know I would say if you would like the department to have the ability to with some discretion and with some conversation go forward and begin the rulemaking policy of the rulemaking process on certain topics then I would I would say maybe delineate exactly which of those you'd like us to provide rulemaking guidance on of just this ABCG yeah or you could leave it broad and and trust the department I think that you I hope you can see that we have a good group of staff who are in close connection with the library community and that we could that we would be judicious and that we're within the agency of administration and I don't think any agency of administration would want us to start dictating every little rule at the local level yeah please go ahead so would Senator Williams's suggestion of just using the word may instead of shall with that cover it for you we leave all the A G C D but we put a may in and it's made the proper legal standard that we could use so to be clear that would be granting the department the discretion as to whether or not to adopt the rules period right and then this enumerated list is going to be the scope of the delegation of your legislative authority to the department right the rule making process is actually a legislative process and it can't take place unless the general assembly says what may be legislated and what the channels of that legislation seem to be from you define what the power is by describing it here right so changing shall to a man makes it discretionary it relieves the department of the duty to cover each one of these faces gives that discretion as to what rules may be adopted you would likely have to put some sort of description of what the rules would cover but that is one road to take I will know that if there's no intent for this to have the outward force of law if there's not going to be a mandate in the rules for the public libraries then it may be even better just to clarify that the department has discretion to adopt procedures under the administrative procedures act and then that would essentially be guidance and recommendations governing the department of libraries on process and essentially encouraging the public libraries to meet the standards miss don't yeah miss don't tell me again why you really don't think it should be shall I mean this seems to me well yeah go ahead let me let me try to explain they're actually forward yeah there are two shells in the sentence right and one of the shells I think that the department is very open to engaging in rulemaking okay if rulemaking is actual rulemaking yes if rulemaking is only going to be guidance then rulemaking the procedure of rulemaking is quite onerous yeah and as far as the items on the list to answer senator Felix's question the department is not in favor of establishing continued education requirements for public library trustees for my earlier testimony that was not a working for recommendation I would not want to see that be something that we must do we also are not the right people to be in charge of the right experts to be in charge of the regular inspection of library buildings and property these are places of public accommodation that are already inspected they should be inspected already by the towns and then under 5D the minimum municipal funding for public libraries those are the types of things that we would recommend but we wouldn't actually and we have no enforcement mechanism for any rulemaking and so I just want to be sure that we that you all have this conversation and that you know what it is that you're asking us or that you're directing us to create rules around because remember one and two have already been taken care of in an earlier section of the bill now we're down to minimum standards for the public availability and information technology of public libraries we did a survey it's included in the working group report they're all providing this except maybe five libraries and almost every library also has Wi-Fi all the time so my question is how much is just really needed for any of it really needed thank you for saying it so simply yes so based on what you just said that one two and three are already taken care of and then section five B and D aren't you're interested you know you're not even interested in pursuing that well they're important but they're being done elsewhere in regular inspection we've had that conversation of minimum municipal funding for public libraries that really leaves whether or not you should establish recommendations for libraries building specification meeting room yeah it just seems like maybe we yank this whole section or if there's some I mean perhaps council can suggest a different way to phrase it so that we have the authority to develop statewide guidelines or the other entities that we can but my what do you want to do in terms of statewide guidelines we'd like we'd like to kind of show where what the what a good baseline might be for more capital spending but not required for capital spending uh-huh we'd like to have baselines for program for libraries of different sizes but not take away somebody's tax exam status if they can't provide that have a baseline for hours a lot of this is really just a recommendation it's not a since there's no state you could do that tomorrow right I I believe we could without us doing anything I think we could now Senator Williams loves to put things in law and then all of us that would be a fair score if you were going to call Audrey is who do you really work are you under the agency of education no I so what authority do we have to to tell her what what she's going to have to do oh well you'll be happy to know we have a lot of authority and yeah so we can but what to your point and I think there's a lot of it she can do right now we're on her own so I was also mandating and then yeah and for what I hear from my library yeah library she wants she likes the guidance that she gets would stay worth it okay that's good to hear but my select board yeah now I get because she comes back to the select board says hey right you got you got a responsibility to be doing this and you're not funding me so I can do it ready right so there definitely seems to be some conversations of tensions there so maybe somewhere in between yeah making a mandate and making a guide to structure Senator Gilleth I was just going to suggest if you're okay any if you're blessing that maybe the two of you could come up with with council and a step down there come up with language if you even want language in this section that we could use I mean it doesn't in some ways it doesn't hurt to have low making authority over certain things if we need it then we could do it but at the same time what exactly that in what we would direct these entities that don't respond to us that aren't responsible to us that there's no direct line of authority that's a little bit trickier other states do when they give state aid have requirements to receive state aid we don't give state aid and so then these requirements upon them right while they serve as a standard to me and that is very helpful there's no there's no carrot there's no stick there's a lot of extra work what if we were building up with Senator Gilleth said take the session out and then if there's a need if you find during our conversations over the next week with this do you need something included around anything related to this if you work with Ledge Council on it we'll I do want to go on the record saying we plan to update guidelines but I think we can do that already and that's what we thought we were doing we didn't realize we needed this authority okay I just yeah go for it I just I don't think I don't mean to speak for the committee but I don't believe we have like real strong a real strong sense of what we want to mandate you to do I think the purpose of this bill was to take the report and sort of try to put into action the recommendations in the report so yeah if that if this recommendation isn't makes sense germane or to the report then yeah yeah the only you have to say the only question I would have and I'll talk later with you is is there any utility to putting into the chapter on you know it's chapter 22 that we have the authority to set guidelines on these topics is that would probably be helpful in some ways because then if a town says well who says they that the municipal library and librarian and the trustees say well it says right here in statute that the department may set these standards and I might actually I think that's right might be something we can put in but it might have to wait until next year actually also depending on on what folks and so you too will work on this or now work on this at some point or maybe not but for now we're for section 16 yeah thank you thank you 2017 congratulations these appropriations $500,000 to the department of libraries and it was a $112,500 to the agency of education that level will probably primarily release to the positions so that will change depending on what you want to do with that section so the $500,000 to the department of libraries for programs and services that there are no positions connected that amount that is actually going to be $275,000 yes and there's no positions connected that was figure yeah bill is introduced to support all of the different asks and duties here's the first the week is still due to that right I mean we can still go back and tell them that yeah you know definitely yeah does that number change at all given that we have to do some sections of the bill like the copyright yeah like okay if pulling out a lot of those pieces we may want to get some updated estimates from with your fiscal offices yeah it actually would be very helpful to understand what that does help is that of what's left otherwise so rationalization with those changes which you might coming back next week with that new version yes and if you if you're not comfortable doing so I'm happy to do so but if you are comfortable copying Julia Richter on it and saying here's a new version going to see Senate Ed would you be willing to update the fiscal folks? I really enjoyed working with uh Mr. Harrison to join the fiscal office and especially with Julia so yeah such a and more we'll find I know we're getting packed but maybe when would you have time to update this by Thursday? Oh yes absolutely beautiful so maybe we'll find up 30 minutes on Thursday great all right thank you thank you welcome for having me again thanks yeah treat it the last next week yeah can you go off you go off we'll


This just in August is hotter than ever at Appalachian Wireless as they are slashing all normal contract pricing on all smartphones by 50% when you sign up for service. Better service, bigger saving, serving you for the last 25 years at Appalachian Wireless. After a week's long battle, the senior citizen centers at Phelps and Marlbone are slated to reopen. The other senior citizen centers in Pike County, however, are paying for that decision. The Pike Senior Citizens Board voted last week to reopen the centers. To do so, the schedules for the other centers in the county will be reduced to three days per week. We didn't find any funding. We shut everybody down to three days except for Pikeville and we left it at five because the state makes us have one of five days a week and see Pikeville gives them like thirty thousand dollars a year at Pikeville. So we decided to leave Pikeville at five days and everybody else three. Most of them was like four days and Marlbone was already three days and the rest of them were at four. The situation has caused controversy and hot tempers, but Taylor said it's time to move on. He also said the other victims of the situation are those receiving home delivered meals.   But when you have to do budget cuts, you know, you have to do what you've got to do. The saddest part about all this deal is, you know, we're opening them back up, but we will be losing home delivery meals to the people out of these centers that we shut down the three days. We will be losing five thousand four hundred seventy meals won't be going out a year for these home delivery meals that we're delivering. That's the sad part of all this. You know, I hated that to happen, but at least we've opened the two centers back up. Taylor said home deliveries have continued at Phelps and Marlbone following the initial closures of those centers and he anticipates Phelps and Marlbone will be open again in about three weeks. He also said a new director at Phelps has not yet been named reporting in Pike County for EKB news. I'm Chris Anderson.