Good morning. It is Friday January 21st 831 a.m. This is the first half in the morning for the Senate natural resources and energy committee and today we're returning to bill s 148 and actually the ladies environment justice in Vermont. And continuing our conversation from last week. So in order to help us before we really get into the regular mode of reviewing a bill and doing edits, you know, section by section taking testimony section by section. I really wanted to set up the bigger picture for why we're doing the bill and hear from some of the folks who have helped participate in shaping a draft legislation that we would use as part of doing a committee strike all. Just by way of process centered around spill but she's also participated in these discussions that have happened since the bills in original introduction last spring. And she's entirely open to the strike all pathway to move forward. We're hearing from a group of people who helped participate in developing alternative language. Melding together. As always, both material from the original bill from the language we hold today and I'm sure the other people will be bringing forward additional new language. So we'll be in sort of normal editorial mode, starting next week. But for now, we really wanted us to pause and spend time together to better understand the challenge in front of us and the opportunity for us. And so now we're going to hear from folks who have participated in the language that Miss Mahali will present to us later on this morning. So with that, like to turn to a colleague of ours from previous sessions and welcome. I'm going to take the floor to the committee and you are, I understand you need to be going, you need to be gone by nine so it's great to have you, you're the lead, the lead batter in the lineup here today. So good morning. Welcome to the committee floors yours. Good morning. All I appreciate the opportunity to be here with you today. I hope that you can hear me well. And I do appreciate the willingness to adjust the schedule to support my participation today. I what I want to begin with for the record. My name is Kaia Morris, and I am the movement politics director for rights and democracy Vermont. Comments are somewhat limited in participation, just as I'm recovering from the novel coronavirus and one of many thousands across the state that are wrestling with this pandemic right now. And the spread of the virus and its variants has been a glaring example of the disproportionate impacts on particular populations, which are amplified by many of the factors that also create undue environmental burdens as we're going to discuss and define them today. I'm sorry to hear that you've been ill and I hope you're feeling better and really better soon. I appreciate that very kindly. So for introduction for those who are watching today so my rights and democracy is a member led people's organization that works in both New Hampshire and Vermont. It is to shift the political landscape through electoral and community organizing to ensure that the values and the needs of our communities will guide the policies of our government. So we're doing this by building a popular movement to advance human rights, dismantle economic inequality, racism, sexism, and to build a real democracy. Our environmental justice campaign is part of what brings us here today is focused on environmental justice and it includes our work as part as the anchor organization of the Renew New England Alliance and the Vermont Renews Coalition in its efforts to combat climate change and adjusts an equitable manner. So the Renew New England Alliance just to also give you a quick background as to why we're here today is a new and growing coalition of more than 150 leading grassroots organizations, labor unions, racial justice groups, frontline communities and environmental advocates. And so we've come together to address the overlapping crises which include mass unemployment, racial injustice, the coronavirus pandemic and climate change, each of which is trying to be addressed within this environmental justice bill language right. So Vermont Renews itself has a robust statewide partnership that is collectively advocating for bill proposals in a number of areas including this one. From this and central to this work is the Vermont Renews BIPOC Council, which includes more than a dozen members from across the state. Now this advisory council was established with Vermont Renews because black, indigenous and people of color or BIPOC as we've named before are those and those as well who are facing systemic inequalities are disproportionately affected by environmental injustices including climate change. The members of the Renews BIPOC Council have co designed this bill with other witnesses to bring a vast body of expertise and voice to efforts that impact all of Vermont. Now, in April of 2021, the Vermont Renews BIPOC Council said the letter to the state to express our concerns and disappointment in the design and implementation of the state's efforts to address our climate crisis, absent a racial and environmental justice or an equity praxis. The letter itself outlined a number of vital considerations and demands upon the state. As a reminder, I'll read some portions to you of that letter in particular. In 2020, the world was shaken to the novel coronavirus and the experience of COVID added an additional layer to the cumulative burdens disproportionately placed on BIPOC and low income communities. The pandemic also affected our approach to doing this environmental justice work in significant ways, one of which being the most crucial is the ability to actually share space to dialogue and to come into community with each other. Deliberative intimate dialogue is central to different ways of learning, listening to each other and honoring our very cultural norms and ways of being. And so what we found is that the pandemic has thrown our best laid plans into a really challenging space that increases the pressure to continue on the accelerated timeframes that the crisis has placed in front of us, but have also been determined and enacted without due public engagement of those most affected. Now we feel that our communities have made it clear that no decisions about our lives should be made without our direct engagement. And so this demand requires that the state be responsive to procedural justice, which means being inclusive, responsive, intentionally listening and engaging in dialogue, self care and the healing of our communities as we're trying to navigate all of these challenges. And although we don't wish to slow down our response to these issues, the processes must move forward in a way that centers meaningful engagement of the communities that are most impacted. We are also in the midst of reckoning around systemic racism and white supremacy within our nation. And so understand that this work is challenging. It's mentally, physically and emotionally taxing for us to manage. And it is for this reason that we have to raise some concerns around the way that the state has responded to environmental justice demands and its engagement with BIPOC experts. Understand that the demands place an exceptionally high toll on BIPOC individuals because of the lack of commitment to effectively engage our communities and by taking the input in a meaningful way that would lead towards solutions that furthers the most disadvantaged communities and populations in the state. So we have to ensure that the work is actually healing for us and is not just extractive. We also need the space to explore policy demands to ensure that they reflect the needs of our communities because there's times where the differences in all of our varied communities may produce competing desires. And so we believe that it has it takes time to have deep conversations and to build these relationships. And most of the experts in these spaces are actually asked to provide significant labor on behalf of the state to meet the state's demands while being unpaid or deeply uncompensated for this very labor. So we wish to state the following expectations for consideration that that meaningful pursuit of procedural justice exists so that our subject matter experts can engage in these processes in ways that enable us to take better care of ourselves and our communities. And that we do apply a racial justice vision policy and leadership in addressing climate crisis with the same responsiveness that we did to COVID. We also ask that we continue to prioritize the needs of most impacted communities as we're thinking through the ways to come up with these solutions. And that we also make the unequivocal commitment to the cessation of many of the ongoing environmental harms that are actually being identified through this work. And might it be further recognized? Well, actually a quick sub note about the nomination processes to what we have to recognize is that these nomination processes have to be more significantly inclusive, allowing for true representation and decision making roles from most impacted communities. And might it be further recognized that the continued segregation of these leaders from most impacted communities within advisory roles? It upholds the narrative of white supremacy and stifles the ability for us to effectively arrive at impactful decisions that also protect those same communities. So I share these words with you again as a reminder that many of these requests and demands were not realized within the work of the Vermont Climate Council, which is the state's most recent effort on a large scale to try to address these issues. Recognizing the incredible power that the legislative body will hold in determining who will sit in these seats is crucial. And the frustration of once again being relegated to an advisory function to appease political sensitivities in order to pass this vital piece of legislation, it continues the harms as discussed. We need to be honest about the reticence to give this body meaningful authority and why that is the case because it builds a sense of distrust amongst the communities who are looking for this opportunity to finally be heard. This build comes before you and the definitions they are audacious.  And so we must meet it with equal measure. It is my hope that as we see this we continue to edit and modify and adapt this bill as a yes and and not an either or because too much is at stake for us to live in a binary space within this. Rights and democracy is committed to continuing to be a part of these conversations and to support any deliberative dialogues in any ways that we can to help ensure that we'll be able to actually achieve environmental justice for the state of Vermont. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any committee questions for Ms Morris. I have a couple. So I know on process. You know you were lamenting the loss under coven of the ability to gather in person. And I think you know we sense that last spring when we were doing work and you know one of the one of the realizations that the committee was that the committee process in and of itself, no matter how well intention was a problem for people who had to be working for instance all day and they were and here we are meeting it during business hours. So one solution is to get out of the building, go meet people where they are. And then, but that opportunity is not present at the moment so on a practical level as the committee works. Do you have suggestions for how we can do our best despite the fact that it is difficult right now to gather and no matter. I think the problem is a great tool, but it doesn't have the energy of sitting in person. And so what recommendations do you have for how we might do our work in the coming months in a way to address that process challenge. And I can speak briefly to that I believe that Jennifer burn who's also here as part of the rejoice project and their whole work was based on working around the coven crisis itself within impacted communities. What I want to take a step further of what we need to consider the numbers the sheer spike of this coven pandemic, the amount of people who are being impacted. It's going to mean that a number of individuals who might be interested in wanting to engage in this work are wrestling with many other challenges that are happening in their daily lives that may pull them away from engaging in this work, which because of just the nature of the way that environmental justice work has rolled out through government systems. It's not to say that communities have not been engaged in environmental justice work, even though it hasn't been written up in a report or been directly mandated through any, you know, specific policy. It is to say that in this moment for some this is this is one more thing that might be difficult for them to engage in, even if it was in person. So, when I think about that those are those are going to be those considerations that will have to come into play. It's going to require, I think if the state as a whole believes this work should take place, whether or not this happens within this month time frame that we might need to look at some of those discretionary funds perhaps that come from a community engagement as this is a priority as well within the climate action plan and have was named as something that the climate action plan did want to see be put into place that you may need to use funds to be able to help support individuals and engaging either in storytelling and gathering, or obviously not in testifying directly here but they're in order to get that it's going to require that people can see that the work is worth the it's worth what it costs because there is an imbalance in between what is given and what is received. At a time when you're just at the edge. So I hope that makes some sense. It's going to require folks within those communities trying to have these conversations which some communities are still again wrestling with what does environmental justice mean because those aren't the words that we use to speak of our lived experiences. So, those are things that come to my mind. The other tension you identified is the need for timely progress I mean that's the nature of what a legislative session requires because it's a pretty narrow window to work in, but the, you know, the moving at the speed of trust part of the process is a much different pace. So, part of the answer in my own mind I don't quite know what I mean by it yet is that we don't need to. We don't need to solve everything now but we should set up a process that continues to work on it as well as make meaningful progress, but try to put ourselves into a framework going forward. As COVID ways we hope, et cetera, that we'll have an opportunity for meaningful ongoing work that isn't driven by a legislative counselor. I appreciate that. And I think that you the moving at the speed of trust is a challenging thing that it can't necessarily the legislative process is not one that's conducive to that. So, I don't know that that will be able to be remediated. I believe that this bill puts out different effective dates in a way that hopes to build time and space to continue to build that trust that trust will not have necessarily been gained by all groups. I'm sure you're already getting letters about this. So, recognizing that there's folks opposed to this already so building that trust is going to take time. And I think that this bill does build out some meaningful effective dates to try and create that space in the hopes that also the directives for state government to do that engagement will help to build that up. That's kind of my initial, you know, thinking through of how this bill is going to try to help support that in the ways that they can. The composition of the people within those bodies as well within the advisory, within the body itself. I don't want to call it advisory. It's just too much brain trust to just say, oh, just please give us your opinion and we'll think about it. So I do appreciate that there will be an incredible brain trust that you'll have there. So they may have connectivity back to particular constituencies or communities that can help. Okay, great. Before we go on to miss burn. Any other questions from members of the committee for Ms Morris. Okay, Sarah McCormack. Thanks. It's good. It's good to see you again. In the interest of time, maybe just quick cliff notes answer like the coming attractions. I recognize we have people in positions to make decisions, and then we have excluded populations. And if the excluded populations were better represented. First of all, some of them should be in positions to make decisions, but even people who are already in that position would learn something. Okay, so heads up. What, what would, what would we learn that we haven't already heard. What, what are we missing. I think if you were to look at some of the work that happened and I'm speaking a little bit as well I didn't disclose this because that's not the hat that I'm wearing today, but also was the equity consultant for the Vermont Climate Council. The community, the committees that had diversity, and I wouldn't say was deep diversity, but it was individuals that are definitely not been heard of and many of these space heard from, and many of these spaces and really deep deliberative dialogue. We learned about traditional, we've learned about more indigenous traditional ways of knowledge, the relationship that folks have to thinking again, a different practice. But for example, hearing, like there is no translation for weatherization in many languages. That's not how people think about their homes. That's not how they think about what warm weatherization isn't a concept that comes into many communities. And those aren't voices, those aren't considerations that come forth, if it is a homogenous group. There's always greater, richer, much more in depth work that can be done when you are hearing from voices that do not normally, are not normally given the space. And again, as you said, everyone will learn. Everyone does learn if they're willing to and given the space to. And sometimes you find that folks will dismiss some of the information because they have to move forward procedurally. And so that which takes too much time to understand gets left behind. So there's just these are the things that you don't. And as I kept saying to the Climate Council and thank you for the time, I feel like I am taking a bit of time here. But as I kept saying to the Climate Council as you're putting forth this work, this is your pop quiz for the general public. So if your seniors living in mobile homes and Milton are not able to relate to this work, then those are the folks that you're missing, right? Those are the folks who are going to have concerns and may protest against and may raise resistance towards this work. If you are not connecting with, you know, communities that are not normally getting access to labor opportunities, new business entrepreneurship or workplace initiatives, those are going to be the ones that are going to come and they're going to say, why are you doing this to us? I think we need more down our throats because we didn't co-create it together. So it creates a space where everyone kind of more folks know what's actually going on, and it's not just happening behind closed doors. Thank you. Senator Campion. Ms. Morris, great to see you. Thanks for being here. What you just said is a really important point. And I think, you know, your time in the legislature, I suspect you also have had this experience where we're always bringing in folks, you know, what you mentioned about the trailer home and Milton. You know, we're not bringing in the folks that are living there to help, like you said, partner and create the legislation, you know, getting the buy-in. And, you know, we've seen it also with other bills. I'm sure your time in the house also. And I guess I'm just, when you mentioned it, I'm reminded of how important it is, how can we do more of that? How can we do more of the public outreach?  Well, it's not easier on Zoom if you don't have a computer. And if you don't have, you know, and so how can we be a state that goes to people and stops also saying, come to us and, you know, invest, maybe, you know, put dollars into things such as, this probably isn't the right way to do it, but, you know, knocking on people's doors and saying, hey, this is what we're thinking about. We'd love your opinion. We'd love to have you partner with us. And so I just appreciate you bringing it up. We were talking about a little bit with Act 250 yesterday also. How do we bring folks in that, you know, again, related to, you know, something else, but they want to develop here. They're trying to develop. They've failed. We've heard that they've failed through different people, but we really need to hear from them. So I just appreciate that. Any thinking you have on that, I'll continue to appreciate to hear. Thank you. Well, it's recognizing in this moment that many different state agencies are trying to develop real deeper levels of community engagement and community engagement plans. So there is going to need to be a point where all the minds come together and come up with some best practices around what that means. One of the things that I've noticed from many of the different bodies that we have within the state, even as a chair of the Vermont Commission on Women, those folks that are sitting in those seats are not often treated also as ambassadors back to the state. People don't know you can come and ask questions that you can engage with them. They are placed in these places to just kind of get this work, but not to engage. And I think many people come to this work wanting to be able to be that support for their communities and to hear that back. So those might be some things you might want to consider within this. And that is also the recognizing that it's bigger than what any one entity within state government can do, and it's going to require public and private partnership in ways that we have not done previously. So that's one area very specifically in thinking about the body that this is trying to establish that that might be something to consider. So in the same way that the state departments are receiving complaints, how does this, how do folks living and working in this state see this body as an individual that can also help support intake of those direct stories, those concerns. You know, as you know, PFOA came because it was somebody living in New York that contacted us and said, hey, I don't even know you, but I think this is something you should pay attention to. And that's how we began this process of investigating PFOA in Bennington. So that's the type of connectivity I think it's going to be necessary in multiple places in state government. So I do appreciate you. And I appreciate the time. And you have such an incredible group and I can't wait to watch the tape. You're better. In my family, if you just slipped away from a party and didn't say goodbye, it was called an Irish goodbye. So we're not having an Irish goodbye, but we know you need to leave for your next appointment. So thanks again for coming in. You know, to me, this is the, we're opening the door to a vast space to work in and we're, we'll get some work done now, but there's a lot of work ahead. That's going to continue. So look forward to future conversations and staying engaged. So good to see you again. Mr. Chairman. Yes, sir. What you just called an Irish goodbye in my neighborhood, we call it a French goodbye. Okay, well, maybe, maybe every, every group claims it is their own law. All right. With that, not seeing any other questions like to go to miss burn. Good morning. Good to see you again. Thanks for coming. Good to see you. My family is very Irish and a little French and we have the longest loudest goodbyes so I review. Good morning, everyone. I'm very honored to be here today, introducing proposed revisions to s 148 and acts relating to environmental justice in Vermont. My name is Jennifer burn. I am a fellow in the environmental justice clinic at Vermont law school. And today I'm here representing the rejoice project. The environmental justice clinic represents and partners with environmentally overburdened black indigenous and people of color or BIPOC, and low income communities throughout the country. The clinic seeks to enforce civil rights in the environmental context, while providing technical assistance and sharing resources to develop and implement legal strategies. So I will be starting things off today to give you some history of the groundwork that went into developing this bill, and we'll highlight a few key components of the bills connection to the deep community engagement work being joyfully undertaken by many people throughout Vermont, and the role of what you'll hear from today. Environmental justice is a term that until recently was seldom used in Vermont. The demographics and rural setting of this state can hide environmental injustices in our communities. There are issues of water quality, indoor air quality, energy affordability, transportation access food insecurity and associated health bricks still disproportionately affect low income and BIPOC individuals in the state. Community focused groups across Vermont have been organizing for five years to inform the creation of s 148. We believe the environmental movement should be led by the communities who have the most at stake. We support and rely on community knowledge and expertise to co construct interventions policies and transformative approaches toward building sustainable just and resilient futures for overburdened and underserved communities in Vermont. We know by studying the history of the environmental justice movement in our country that the act of ensuring meaningful involvement of all people means actually building processes to enhance public participation in decision making. We also know that in rural areas environmental and health impacts may affect one small community far greater than a community just one valley over. We need to identify how environmental health, housing, transportation, energy and food policies, overly burdened low income and BIPOC populations, and to eliminate structural barriers to entry in public decision making processes. Over the past five years we've heard directly from overburdened and underserved communities to identify shared experiences with unseen environmental injustices in Vermont, all pointing to the need for the fundamental procedural justice protections as 148 is seeking to establish. I would like to now introduce you to the rejoice project. And I'm going to share a few slides with you rejoice is a collective of academics, activists, nonprofit leaders and community partners rejoice is an acronym as you can see which stands for rural environmental justice opportunities informed by community expertise. Our fundamental purpose is to craft environmental justice policies for Vermont, based on the testimony of those who have been systematically excluded from the mainstream environmental movement. We strive to deepen the democratic process by creating a space for BIPOC working class and digitally underserved Vermonters to speak out for statewide change that centers most impacted. Rejoice partners include representatives from Center for whole communities community action works, CV OEO is mobile home program, the environmental justice clinic at Vermont Law School and University of Vermont Rubenstein School for environment and natural resources. We have expanded our network and partnerships to include other groups and individuals which I will put on. Over the past five years, the rejoice project has been conducting surveys, interviews and focus groups around the state, forming connections to Vermont's most overburdened communities and isolated communities in order to inform iterative community led policy in In the months before the pandemic rejoice began implementing deep relational methods for community engagement, working with and compensating community liaisons to co design and facilitate meetings, paying stipends and providing food and childcare to participants of the community conversations, working with interpreters and hosting fully accessible meetings as appropriate and inviting agency partners to attend as witnesses to the meetings. During the pandemic rejoice continued to engage communities extending these practices to an online context. In the summer of 2020 rejoice held 17 virtual conversations with 77 participants from digitally underserved communities across Vermont. We drew on established relationships to hold focus groups with members of the boot knees Nepali Somali bond to migrant farm worker senior rural deaf and hard of hearing disabled and mobile home communities. Our aim was to produce evidence based account of environmental justice in Vermont. The driving questions behind our work were, what are the key environmental and health issues of concern to frontline communities. How do ethnoculturally diverse and low income communities identify prioritize and integrate health and ecological concerns. What are the challenges to access inclusion and participation in state environmental and land use policy. How do these challenges contribute to existing environmental health issues. And what factors contribute to structural racism in Vermont and thus contribute to environmental justice issues. In our pandemic era focus groups we asked questions about access to information and resources relating to the pandemic and challenges to accessing healthy food, safe housing transportation healthcare and environmental information and resources. Rejoice is commitment to valuing the time and expertise of affected community members is central to ensuring equity throughout this type of community engagement. Data from these conversations has been collected and analyzed by rejoice in order to understand community health and environmental concerns. How community members access information and participate in government systems and programs and what barriers and gaps exist in current policies and procedures as experienced by Vermont. I encourage you all to browse this database of the community identify findings and recommendations relating to environment health food transportation economy, education, housing and equal access. It's very important to note that members of communities who had strong ties to service and advocacy groups or case workers were less likely to express concern about lack of information because they had trusted sources of information and support for our next phase of work. Rejoice partners and member of Vermont renews coalition are currently contracted to develop the Department of Environmental Conservation Community Engagement plan. And recently received funding from the EPA to develop the environmental justice network, which will serve as a bridge between communities and their government. Improving communication between historically marginalized Vermonters and state decision makers, while fairly compensating BIPOC and low income residents for their lived experience and expertise. Please visit environmental justice vt.org to learn more. I'll click on one of these links just to give you a sample of the database as it in its current form. You can scroll through see a few charts based on our qualitative analysis. Each report is full of quotes directly from the community. As you scroll down, you can click through the different topics that were discussed in each community. I would like to turn now to s 148 and give some very brief highlights of the bill. For context, the EJ clinic at Vermont law school is engaged in a multi year effort to document environmental justice laws and policies across all 50 US states and territories. This slide details the building blocks of EJ policy. We can say with confidence that s 148 as revised incorporates the very basic fundamentals of effective EJ legislation and is a starting point for ensuring substantive procedural and distributed justice in environmental decision making in Vermont. So what does s 148 do. It sets an environmental justice policy for the state. So that no segment of pop of the population should because of its racial cultural or economic makeup very disproportionate share of environmental benefits or burdens. It defines environmental justice and environmental justice populations based on race, low income and limited English proficiency. The definitions for environmental justice and meaningful participation were developed through a participatory process led by Vermont renews by pop council. It commits targeted spending of at least 55% of environmental renewable energy climate mitigation transportation and climate resilience funds in designated EJ population. It establishes an EJ advisory council and an interagency council. The advisory council is comprised of community members from EJ populations. It commits the state to building an EJ mapping tool, which will be useful to communities and agencies to aid in information sharing and decision making. And it establishes a date for compliance with title six of the Civil Rights Act, meaning that all state agencies must develop meaningful community engagement plans. I would love to wrap with some legal context for the necessity of including the deadline for title six compliance. One of the driving missions of the environmental justice clinics work at Vermont law school is to enforce title six in the environmental context. You will know in the legislation that we establish a deadline for all state agencies to attempt to come into compliance with title six of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by developing and adopting meaningful community engagement plans, also known as public participation plans. Title six provides that no person in the United States shall on the ground of race, color or national origin be excluded from participation in be denied the benefits of or otherwise be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity administered by a recipient of federal funds. In effect, according to federal guidance in order to show compliance with title six recipients of federal funds including any state agencies that receive federal funds must establish and implement meaningful public participation and language access plans. Most Vermont state agencies are grossly out of compliance with this law by enforcing civil rights law in this way we are dedicating our state to incorporating key principles of environmental justice, including the fundamental right to political, economic, cultural and environmental self determination of all individuals and the right to participate as equal partners at every level of decision making, including needs assessment planning implementation enforcement and evaluation. Developing a clear public participation and community engagement strategy can be partially informed by census and geographic data as a starting point. However, in Vermont, we have seen the lingual geographical, transportation all and technological barriers to participation are so varied data must be supplemented by the expertise of community members in order to understand community experience needs and desires. So, information. We believe the environmental movement should be led by those who are most affected by the impacts of climate change and pollution, both as a matter of principle, and also to ensure that any policies developed to address environmental and climate challenges will benefit from and incorporate the perspectives of people from all corners of the state. We believe in upholding community members as co designers of environmental and climate policies and defend communities rights to self determination in decision making. Community perspective should be sought out value and incorporated into policies and programs that affect community health and environment. By doing so, we are confident that this level of engagement will result in stronger, more effective and more resilient policies programs and communities. We're grateful to all for taking up this bill for consideration and hope you will consider us as willing partners in the effort to create an equitable future for all the monitors. You look forward to it. Thank you very much for your time today. Thank you. Any committee questions from his burn. Okay. I have one, you know, it's interesting to me. So title six doesn't say in the area of environmental law title six applies it's for every agency receiving federal monies right and so what I don't think I appreciated a year ago, we've started this conversation was that that accountability of title six is across the board. And I'm not sure if it's sort of the concrete nature of, you know, the tangible ways of looking at environmental impacts like air quality water quality that's led to this being the first area in which we're talking about it Am I, is it correct that we should be thinking okay we're in the natural resources and energy committee talking about environment and sort of an expansive definition of environment to include things like health health access transportation food. But that really, we should be thinking about talking with our colleagues about how this will eventually flow into every area of work. Yes, it absolutely does flow into every area of work and I think it's the nature of this phrase environmental justice and and how broad a reach and you know the I guess I've heard it in terms of an umbrella it encompasses a lot of people's lived And so it does bridge across many agencies per views. In regards to title six, just so that you know and I think it may be helpful in the future. The federal agency has its own title six guidance for, you know, through the EPA, there's environmental title six guidance there's guidance from the DOJ, there's guidance from the Department of Transportation. And so it has been applied to all the different agencies, and there is plenty of guidance out there actually but what it comes down to is the people on the ground and the state really investing in the people on the ground to do that meaningful engagement work. Thank you. And when we get to Commissioner walk or secretary gender, we'll, we'll have a chance to talk about why, why it is that we've got a and are here but as, you know, and how the, what the connections to other area operating areas are one other quick question is as you were speaking it curse me you know we have representative government so here we are it you know theoretically in the State House with 180 people working on behalf of 646,000 people. So how do you see the balance playing out between what we're talking about here, right down to the person to person door to door level. And how does that flow back into a representative government in a way that preserves sort of the best features of both. So we're really excited that we're launching this environmental justice network, which is a group of our of paid liaisons in the community who will really be that bridge where, you know, community members can go to them and give them information to give to you and vice versa that this the state and agencies can use them as a bridge to get information and resources to community members. And so we see that as a really effective way of getting democracy on the ground and and building out decision making processes and sharing relevant information, especially relating to health and the environment with the community. So, I think there is a way to to grow what we're what we're currently doing and and what we need now is more. So I think this is a way that we're trying to invest in that. Sure. Thank you. Okay. Senator McCormick. Thanks. When I look at our environmental protections, as with most issues of racism. I see a lot of sins of omission of just not paying attention. I don't see a lot of aggressive assertive racism per se it's, it's the neglect it's been just not thinking about it at all. And just likely going ahead as though it weren't an issue. So I say a sin of omission. I mean, I'm not just a paleon upbringing.  And I'm wondering where where you see. As far as neglected you actually see real aggressive racism as well. Well, well you're you're touching on a really fraught legal issue is trying to show discriminatory intent behind these this type of decision making. This is why we see that, for instance, the far and away department of transportation is more advanced in their compliance with title six that's really burst out of lawsuits and and being able to prove that communities were selected for highways, you know to be built going through their communities for instance, you know, based on their demographic data that it's a bit easier to prove intent in those cases it seems. And so in the environmental context, it's very difficult to to identify someone's intent. But what we're trying to address here is the structural procedural inequities that are built into our system and yes I think that they were built into the system on purpose to exclude people, and we're trying to address that. I would say even if they weren't put in on purpose. They're there. Address and the fact that maybe no one had any ill will about it does not exempt our society from responsibility. Okay, thanks. Thank you very much. Now I'd like to turn to Professor honey car, and please correct me. So, and how to pronounce your last name if I didn't get it correct. Mr chair. May I may I'd like to make a short comment on the last witnesses testimony. Sure. We'll just pause for a moment. I'm sorry, make some account I didn't see your hand. That's right. The several of the witnesses have mentioned the systematic procedures that discriminate against people's color and working people and for in the world. And I have to report to the committee that the bill that I introduced designed to reduce carbon use in motor vehicles. And to see that more motor vehicles sold new, which would eventually show up on the use car lots where poor disadvantaged and rural people by their automobiles and was sent to the transportation committee. And it was mentioned by the last witness that the transportation agencies and committees tend to do practices that discriminate against and and do not help rural and poor folks. The transportation committee now has the bill. They listen to new car dealers. They do not. That's where the lobbying doesn't take place for use cars and for rural cars and currently year after year, new cars that are sold for more and more gas and our larger and larger. And this is the inventory that poor disadvantaged and people of color and lower incomes. This is the only source of use vehicles that they have available to them. And once again, we're not able to deal with use vehicles as a, it's an issue for disadvantaged people. And it's been sent to a committee where it's represented by new car dealers and those of us that are rural and poor don't buy that many new cars. So maybe that was longer than I intended, but I disappointed to report that to the committee. And this is an example of we're talking about the disadvantages and they're taking place for us as we listen to the witnesses. Thank you. Senator McDonnell. Okay, so back to this putting car. Good morning. And so I'm always asking when I encounter a new name for corrections so that I can get it right so good morning everyone and especially, I think Senator Bray you pronounce my name correctly. My name is been panicker. I'm an assistant professor at the Rubenstein School of the environment and natural resources. Also a fellow at the gun Institute of the environment and also a member of the rejoice and the renews by Park Council. Today, I'm pleased to be here and pleased to be invited to speak at this panel to testify in support of the S 148 the environmental justice bill. Some key points to state are that environmental justice is important to define because not everyone experience environment equally in this state. In our work. When we define environmental justice. We looked at the intersection of those with fewer privileges. Which included by Park people. People living under poverty. Mobile home residents, people who have limited English proficiency. Elderly and so on. Also people who are renters in this state, but particularly we also examined the environmental and health risks, this population faced. We drew upon about 28 different variables to create a spatial tool called the environmental health disparities index. In fact, in Vermont was given a score based on these 28 variables, and that is how we have identified those most at risk to environmental and health disparities in the state. That is by looking at the demographics, the environmental risks and the health risks in the most marginalized in the state to define what environmental justice looks like in Vermont. But by Park population people with limited English proficiency and those with lower median income are a good proxy to understand environmental justice as defined in the EJ bill. It is clear from our study that black, indigenous and people of color in the state are especially more exposed to historic environmental risks than the rest in the state. This association was not seen among the poor in the state. Interestingly, what we found in our studies is that the tracks with by Park and people with limited English proficiency. were significantly more at risk from historic environmental risks, historic sites of pollution, heat vulnerability and air pollution than the rest of the population. We also conducted statewide surveys. And these survey results on the other hand showed that both by Park people and those living under poverty in the state had less lesser access to environmental benefits. By Park people were twice as likely to report exposures to mold lack of access to public transportation to not own a vehicle, have trouble paying for food, not have primary care doctor and to report immune auto immune disorders. And there were three times more likely to rely on public transportation, have trouble paying for electricity, go hungry in a month and report higher rates of Lyme disease compared to the white population. Those below poverty were also twice as likely to have lower access to fresh food report asthma cardiovascular diseases and cancer, and three times more likely to use public transportation on a vehicle. Go hungry in a month have trouble paying for electricity, compared to those about poverty, but about 46% of the poor in the study were also people of color. So, in short, to have justice, it becomes imperative to first identify injustices that exist to then address underlying causes of them. This process of inquiry conducting a spatial analysis community engaged research, both quantitative and qualitative should be part of any State Department to help explain the root causes of inequities, oppressions and power structures that create to vulnerabilities and risks to particular communities. We have a unique opportunity to elevate environmental justice in Vermont, and my mental protection is not just about protecting wilderness and keeping it beautiful for Vermonters. This is about making our urban and suburban neighborhoods safe, clean places to live, work and raise a family. It is about ensuring that the water and air are clean, no matter where you live. It is about showing communities that have been left out and left behind are important that their concerns are heard that they are meaningfully engaged in environmental decision making in finding solutions in order to heal the injustice disproportionately imposed on them. In our in-depth interviews with people, we also asked about what environmental justice mean for people. What we learned is that environmental justice is an intersection of political power, poverty and pollution. It is about expansion, connection and change. It is about components of power and powerlessness. So EJ is a terminology that's always changing to some extent. So it is important to consider the process and politics of meaning making within environmental justice and since EJ is continually relevant. We know that environmental injustice have been built on centuries of unequal social relations through processes of colonization, industrialization and capitalism. Because of those communities of color and low income communities have been trapped into systemic inequities that subject them to higher historic environmental risks, lower environmental benefits and premature deaths. These social and civil rights inequities and environmental and health crises we face in the world are totally connected. Harm suffered by ecosystem today mirror the harms experienced by the marginalized. The environmental and health crisis we face in our nation and the world today cannot be addressed without addressing injustices. Our economic future and environmental future are also inextricably linked. Environmental justice is an affirmation of an unequal present and a yearning for a better future. In short, in Vermont, social and environmental concerns are deeply entangled. Environmental and health disparities are prominent in BIPOC and low income population in this state. Some of these disparities are historical. Many are related to lack of access to environmental benefits. These inequities are preventable. The EJ definition proposed in the bill was collectively workshopped in multiple BIPOC committees where each word were carefully deliberated upon, thought upon before including in the bill. We have a responsibility to adopt more traditional ecological approaches within environmental decision making in collaboration with indigenous communities with expertise. We have a responsibility to design solutions in meaningful engagement and partnership with the most impacted communities. Targeted responses, policies and action are required to address these systemic inequities. Why we need to support the state based EJ policy bill as soon as possible. Proper investment and community centered programs can address the systemic inequities in Vermont. We will need a community centered grounds up approach to build a just and sustainable Vermont. Vermont should not be one of the last states to incorporate environmental justice within state policies. We need the state support and resources to carry out this transformative work forward of building back a just and sustainable Vermont. This is our chance to break the cycle of systemic racism in this state. So, thank you all. And I hope this bill will be paused this year. Thanks. Well, it's on it's on our front burners, you know, like we're working on this as we're doing two bills first one is related to act 250 and the other is this so I expect timely progress in the committee. I, so the data that you were referring to the analysis with 28 variables, etc. Is that information reflected in the rejoice database that Ms Berm was showing us earlier. Jennifer didn't share the data that I have presented today. So the data that I am presenting today is based on a couple of different studies that we have done. I'm also part of the rejoice coalition. The 28 variable data that you know you just asked me about is based on the existing information spatial information that's available. And that included, you know, especially environmental risks like the number of landfill in each part of land or traffic noise air pollution. You know, the levels of PFAS and drinking water number of superfund sites and brownfield sites, but also a number of asthma incidents or cardiovascular disease, and then a range of social vulnerability variables. So we don't know if you allow me I can share. What I'm going to ask if if you could send it to Ms Newman Judith Newman, our committee assistant, then she can share that with everyone, whatever is appropriate for sharing I'm not asking you for like, I don't know your research data that you're not publishing yet or but if you have something that can be shared a few senate to miss Newman she can get it to everyone in the committee and we can post it on our website. So any members of public or following could take a look as well. So, thank you for that. I'm happy to share it. Okay. Any committee questions for miss honey car. Okay. Yes. Thanks. Yeah, let me just just ask on the bill before us. Is the bill adequate in your in your view or are the things you would add to it. So the bill has been wedded through so many different groups and communities. So this has been a collective process. And I truly behind what's proposed in the bill because we've had meetings for about the past couple of months. Just talking about the wording of the bill and what's actually included in it. So we've talked at length about how to define the environmental justice population. We've also consulted with, you know, the bills introduced in other states how other states actually define environmental justice population. You know, how I have looked into environmental justice population is a slightly different because I am kind of considering not just the demographic information but also the environmental and the health information to identify environmental justice areas of concern. What's proposed in the bill is to actually, you know, consider, you know, the BIPOC population tracks of land with at least 6% over 6% or 6% of the BIPOC population as, you know, you know, environmental justice, you know, zones to some extent, as well as, you know, over, over 1% with limited English proficiency to be considered also as a EJ population and also over 80% of Vermont's median income to stand in as EJ population within the bill. Okay, I'm just thinking, you know, going back to Kaia Morris's testimony about the need to actually pay attention to the voices of people of color. I'm haunted by the phrase well intentioned white people. There's a history of white people just cheerily doing what we think is best and then patting ourselves on the back without having actually listened to the people directly affected. So, thanks. That is the foundational principle of environmental justice that we, you know, especially pay attention to procedural justice and recognition justice. And this is an important component of environmental justice bill, and that is included in almost, you know, any environmental justice bill introduced in other states as well. And this is funny. I just want to double check. So the, when you're talking about this, how satisfactory or not, you know, a definition is you're referring to the new language that Ms. Mahali is going to be presenting a little later this morning, correct? The most recent draft from the working group as opposed to S148 as introduced. Is that right? By spring. Okay, great. I just want to keep the two, the two versions clear because it is confusing to have more than one version around and although it's part of the legislative process that we start with something and we keep on working with a goal towards improving it. Okay, not seeing any more questions. I'd like to turn to Ms. Kabui. Thank you for joining us. I understand you can only be here till 10 when we take a break. So we want to make sure that we get to now and give you plenty of time. Yes. Do you going to hear a lot of repetition? I mean, my predecessor talked in depth about why this bill is all about and why it is so important for it to be passed. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Sandrine Kabui. I am the Director of Housing Advocacy Program at the Shumpton Valley Office of Economic Opportunity, CVOA, one of the five community action agency that addresses fundamental issues of economic, social, environmental, and racial justice. We also work with people to achieve economic independence. Our Statewide Housing Advocacy programs provide education, support, advocacy, technical assistance, and effort for people and organizations. And our team serves thousands of renters, mobile home residents, people experiencing discrimination each year. We also partners with housing and service providers, municipal officials in an organization to promote inclusive affordable housing for all. I am also the President of the Vermont New American Advisory Council, FINAC, a new 501c3 organization that is made up of ethically, culturally, and linguistically diverse group of New American leaders working to address and dismantle barriers which prevent New Americans communities from civically engaging and participating and feeling a sense of belonging. FINAC also works to expand opportunities for New Americans to strive socially, culturally, and economically in Vermont. We are here to support the passing of S148. Why? We do support the passing of S148 because this proposition established the first and most needed environmental justice policy for state of Vermont. The policy that certifies that the state of Vermont is to provide the opportunity for the meaningful participation of all individuals with particular attention to AJ population and overburdened or underserved communities in the development, implementation, or enforcement of any law regulations or policies. We support S148 because we believe that this policy and its implementation will support the alleviation of environmental burdens caused by racial, health, social, economical, and justices. It is common knowledge that some Vermonters have more opportunities than others to enjoy good health, good food, good housing, good employment, good education, and higher quality of life. It is common knowledge that the impacts of the pandemic have been particularly prevalent among the most marginalized to say black, brown, and the genius, immigrant, and people of color, community in particular, and low income communities in general, such as mobile home residents with their unique vulnerabilities to environmental justice. Home parks are unique, affordable, and a sexable path to home ownership for household with low income. They make up 7.2% of whole housing units in Vermont, and yet approximately 40% of the sites were affected by hurricane hiring. And still mobile home residents continue to face a number of environmental and habitability challenges related to constants and clean water, proper sewerage and drainage, energy efficiency of the homes, and more. All this reflects the enduring inequities generated by systematic racism, discrimination, and fundamental gaps in public and private systems of governance, justice, and support. Therefore, there will be no progress made without the systematic elimination of all prohibitive and discriminatory policies and practices. Personally, as a new American, and as an environmentalist, I do believe, if put successfully into effect, that this environmental justice policy will have a positive impact on my life, the life of my children, and generations to come. But I do also believe that in order to succeed in this endeavor, community facing social isolation, systematic discrimination should learn about all it encompasses. They need to understand what is at stake. They need to understand why the system change is so important, and for most understanding why we all have to be responsible and active participants to this transformative system process. Education outreach engagement on environmental justice and climate change is crucial and require time, capacity, commitment, and funding. That's not undervalue the need for the active engagement and leadership of the most marginalized. We should energize, motivate, and empower our marginalized communities by supporting a positive, inclusive, and culturally responsive development approach through community empowerment and organizing. But in partnership with community-based organizations to encourage active communication, skill-building, and promote social cohesion, civic engagement, and a sense of belonging. We respectfully ask for the passing of S148. It is imperative for the future of Vermonters as a state, a community, a people. Thank you for your attention. Thank you. Are there any community questions for Ms. Kabui? So I have one, and that's around the relationship between S148 implemented as a state-level program and what you see going on more locally at the municipal level. Are there initiatives like what you would like to see implemented through S148 already happening where you are? For instance, you're with CVOEO. Are municipalities leading on this because they are, by nature, closer to the people they serve than a centralized government? Or any insights? I think we're always looking for models. Where are things working well? And what might we learn from places where things are working well? Do you have any thoughts on that? So I do think that isolated actions have been made on edge principle implementation within organizations right now. But I do also believe that unless our leaders lead, by example, which states supposed to be, providing the guidance and participating into that type of statewide of bringing and really considering principles of not only racial equity, environmental justice, but this is why this bill is here. An isolated organization effort for really implementing some of the environmental justice work is known. It is not. What this bill does is to implement it at a level where the impact is general at the state level. Okay. Well, thank you very much. You're welcome. Okay. And with that, I'd like to move. Haley Jones, Ms. Jones. Well, sorry. I'm going to have to work on my pronouns. So, you can just call me. Good morning. And thank you for coming in. Good to see you again. If you could introduce yourself to the committee, and then the floor is yours. Well, thank you so much, Senator Bray. And don't worry about that. I haven't figured out a good honorific yet. Hello, everybody. Good morning. And thank you for having me. My name is Haley Jones, and I'm the Vermont and in Hampshire State Director with Community Action Works. And I'm here today to share my support for SB 148, an act relating to environmental justice in Vermont. So just to give you some context, I work at Community Action Works, where we believe that environmental threats are big, but that the power of well organized community groups is bigger. That's why we work side by side with everyday people to confront those who are polluting and harming the health of our communities. People who are most impacted by environmental problems. So often black, indigenous, POC and working class communities, training folks with the know how that anyone would need to make change in their own backyard. Because when you and your neighbors know how to make change, you can build the power to transform our world. And as a disclaimer here, I am speaking from my experiences with Community Action Works with migrant justice and with the rejoice project. So don't take this testimony as a replacement for speaking with community leaders and really reading through their recommendations for meaningful change in the state. So what's the problem here, why are we, why are we here today. Vermont is one of the few states that still doesn't have an EJ policy, which is embarrassing to say the very least. And although the demographics and the rurality of Vermont can hide environmental injustice disease, we're still seeing issues of water quality in your air quality, energy affordability, transportation access food insecurity, and all the health impacts that come along with this that disproportionately affect working class folks, folks living in rural areas and communities of color. And so as you all know in 2016, the US EPA added a requirement for incorporating environmental justice into all DC programs as part of their performance partnership agreement. And when they received this news, the DC was ready to go and they were going to copy paste policies from places like Minnesota and California have totally different populations and totally different challenges. So at Community Action Works and at rejoice, we know that environmental justice is not just about the product that you come out with it's about doing due process. It's about how you're centering folks who are most impacted by environmental health problems. It's about the way that you're building policy that's rooted in the lived experiences of your neighbors. So we have this challenge right we don't have an agent policy and we need to get one. So the solution that we really see it rejoice is building agent policy from the ground up. That is exactly the reason that the rejoice project exists. And I'm sure folks have mentioned this already but just briefly we are a collective of organizers and researchers, policy experts and community leaders and we're dedicated to figuring out what environmental justice looks like in the future. We have spent the last five years working side by side with community members to build a list of policy recommendations that address the needs of real remonters, things like financing small by backbone businesses, things like building more accessible multilingual informational platforms. In the community core of rejoice of which I'm a member. We had originally planned this series of in person community conversations with our partners, among them the ALV migrant justice, the Rutland area and WCP and the Center for independent And of course, we changed our plans entirely in response to the global pandemic and during the fall of 2020. We held 17 virtual conversations with 77 people from digitally underserved communities across Vermont. We're not coming in out of nowhere. We were drawing on established relationships to hold these conversations with members of the bootleys Nepali, the Somali Bantu migrant farm worker senior rural deaf and hard of hearing disabled and mobile home communities. Throughout this process we were working closely with community leaders with cultural liaisons and with our interpreters to co design and co facilitate these conversations. And it was really important to us to fairly compensate our liaisons and our participants for their time, you know, it's not it's not just an extractive process here. In these meetings, the facilitators would ask open edited questions about people's quality of life, and not just that but asking folks how they wanted the state to respond to future crises. So as a bilingual organizer and a long time comrade with migrant justice I was in charge of coordinating the Spanish between conversations with migrant farm workers in Addison County and Franklin County and in the N. And it took an immense amount of work to get elders comfortable on zoom to schedule conversations around wildly shifting milking schedules, and then finally to drive around the state compensating folks without bank accounts and cash. But that's the amount of work that you have to put in to hear what folks actually want from the state. And in the case of migrant farm workers that is so often safe working conditions, the freedom of movement, language inclusive healthcare dignified housing and disaster resilience information from really trusted sources. That's just naming a few. It took us a year at rejoice to translate to qualitatively code and to draw important recommendations from these conversations. And now the ej legislation that we're presenting to you is based on years of deep community engagement. We need not only to establish this ej policy in Vermont, we have to set up systems of accountability right it's not just about checking a box and patting ourselves on the back. We need to establish as you'll see an SV 148 an ej advisory council, a coalition of leaders from historically marginalized groups who are going to hold regulators and legislators to their promises. And once again, this advisory council, this is not an expectation of free labor from BIPOC and working across the remonters. It's an opportunity to fairly compensate folks for the work that they're doing in holding the government accountable. This is a solution we're presenting before you. And the action that you're going to take is you're going to pass SB 148, you're going to set up this environmental justice policy, you're going to establish an ej advisory council, and you're going to set a date for compliance with title title. I'm not saying that the Vermont legislature is going to magically solve environmental injustices in Vermont, but you can certainly lend your support to SB 148. As a community organizer, as an interpreter, and as a longtime rejoice project member, I'm asking you to listen to the voices of your constituents, pass this crucial bill out of committee to better address the structural inequities that continue to uphold environmental injustice in our state. Thank you so much for your time. And I'm happy for any questions. Well, thank you for joining us. Any committee questions. So to your, your last point, you know, I often think of legislation as just a blueprint. Sometimes we in the building or the news media can represent the passage of a bill as having accomplished what we're aiming for. But it's, it's only a plan of action. It's not the action itself so even if we have great success on passing SB 148, which I'm actually expecting, expecting that we'll have years of work ahead to make that a reality on lots of levels so I hope that we will see you, not only later this session, but in future years as well. So with that committee, we have come to the stroke of 10 o'clock, so you've paced us perfectly. And so we'll take a break till 1030 and we'll resume with same topic we're spending the entire morning on this.


As a result of the rocket attack by the Ukrainian armed forces on the occupied Lantratovka settlement of Lugansk region with the Himmars rocket launcher system, more than 70 servicemen of Russian army by mobilization were killed. Russian-leaning Ukrainian journalist and video blogger Anatoly Shari reported on Shari said that the Russian side hid the information about the number of dead. According to him, the injured servicemen claim that the number of dead is even more than 100. The Russian side kept the information about the incident secret. Soldiers and military journalists were ordered not to spread information about it. It should be noted that the incident took place on December 16. The Russian media reported that the Ukrainian army shelled the settlement including the school building and that 11 civilians were killed.


What is the NET scheme for teaching English in Hong Kong? The Native-speaking English teachers' NET scheme places certified foreign teachers into state schools in Hong Kong to work as English language teachers. Since 1998, the scheme has employed thousands of teachers and it is now seen as an integral part of the country's education system. The NET, Native-speaking English teachers' scheme is a recruitment program initiated by the Hong Kong Education Bureau that places qualified teachers from overseas countries into state-run schools. The scheme recruits hundreds of teachers every year to work in either primary or secondary level schools across the territory. The stated goal of the scheme is to share and promote innovation in teaching practice and to provide an authentic classroom environment for local students. Participants on the scheme will receive a generous salary and extra benefits, as well as a unique opportunity to live and work in one of the most vibrant and cosmopolitan parts of Asia. The basics. To be eligible, you must be a native English speaker or possess an exceptionally high standard of English language competence. Successful applicants are required to sign a two-year contract with one specific school that begins at the start of the school year in August. Although the scheme is open to teachers of all ages, Hong Kong has a mandatory retirement age of 60, so applicants must be less than 58 years of age at the contract start date. The scheme is split into two separate areas for primary-level teachers and secondary-level teachers, known as PNED and SNED. Applicants for the PNED scheme work with primary students aged from 6 to 12 with a typical class size of 30 to 37. The qualifications required for these positions are a degree in English, a teacher training qualification in primary education, and a TEFL test certificate. In the event that not enough teachers meet these requirements, those with a lower level of qualifications are considered. If accepted on the SNED scheme, you will work with secondary students in an average class size of 40 to 45. The stated criteria for these positions are a degree in English or Education, a postgraduate diploma in Education, a TEFL test-all diploma, and at least one year of teaching experience at secondary level. Once again, if recruitment numbers are not met, then applicants with fewer qualifications are considered. For further information, please visit the official SNED scheme website www.edb.gov.hk.net The benefits Teachers who are recruited through the SNED scheme will receive a monthly salary of between 25 and 60,000 Hong Kong dollars. Currently, 3,200 to 7,700 US dollars, dependent upon their relevant experience. In addition to the monthly salary, the scheme also includes several other benefits such as Assistance finding suitable accommodation plus a housing allowance of around 20,000 Hong Kong dollars per month Paid round-trip airfare from your home country, including up to four family members A relocation allowance to assist with the transport costs of personal belongings A stipend for medical insurance coverage


You can't allow another person to shake you. You have to make that decision. No, that is a spiritual warrior. Someone who decides not to get shaken. You get shaken, you're going to get sick. Simple. When there is anger in the body, it leads to illness. It doesn't lead to joy and fun. People who allow anger to take over their systems too much, they become ill in the later part of their lives. They become sick. They get diseases and things like that. You want that. No, right? Exactly. Then take it, take it up now, today. This moment. Bending.


Dzień dobry wszystkim wszystkim. Dziękujemy za załatwienie Webinaru Microelectronics. Nazywam się Szymon Panecki. Jestem tutaj z mojego kolegą Martin Hubek. Dzisiaj razem będziemy cieszyli się, aby przedstawić ci kontent w tym Webinarie. W tym online eventu zauważymy wasze funkcje i architektury SDM32 microcontrollers, które can significantly help to achieve low-power consumption of application and to extend battery lifetime. As an example, we will use latest SDM32 series from ultra low-power category, which is SDM32L5 based on ARM Cortex M33 core. Here is an agenda that we prepared for today. We will start with overview of SDM32L5 series, which will focus on its key elements related to low-power. Then we will discuss about architecture of SDM32L5, which is optimized in terms of performance and efficiency of computation. After theoretical part, we will show you two demonstrations. First demonstration will be about performance, and it will be based on CoreMark benchmark. Second demonstration will also use CoreMark, but this time it will show you correlation between performance and low-power. Later on, we will introduce you low-power modes, which are available in SDM32L5. We focus on consumption and wake-up time. Here, again, theory will be followed by practice, and you will see a demonstration. At the end of the session, we will summarize the most important things that we discussed today, and we will be available to answer your questions. So let's get started now with first section titled SDM32L5 overview and ultra-low-power features. SDM32L5 belongs to ultra-low-power category. First product of this kind was SDM32L1, which was introduced in 2009. Later on, ultra-low-power category was extended with SDM32L0, which happened in 2013. Another milestone was introduction of SDM32L4 and SDM32L4+, they were created in 2015 and 2016 respectively. Finally, SDM32L5 was introduced to the market in 2019. So what is important to identify on this picture is that SDM32L5 is a continuity of successful families like L0, L1, L4 and L4+, and it takes a huge benefit from experience of SD microelectronics in the ultra-low-power field. Ok, so we know already that ultra-low-power portfolio of SDM32 consists of five different series, and SDM32L5 is the latest one. So now you might be wondering what is different or new in SDM32L5 comparing to SDM32L0, L1, L4 and L4+. So here on this picture you can see a detailed comparison, but in fact the answer could be short and simple. So SDM32L5 offers you higher performance, advanced security and lower current consumption. All these features together with a new core, Cortex M33, defines SDM32L5 and makes it unique on the market. During this webinar we want to speak about ultra-low-power, so as a starting point let's try to define profile of typical low-power application. At the very beginning microcontroller has no power supply, which is typically a battery. So first phase we can simply call as off phase. Then power supply is applied and microcontroller starts to execute application. First part of the application is always related to configuration of resources like clocks, GPIOs and peripherals. We can call this phase as startup initialization. This phase typically takes place only once. Then we have part of application, which is repetitive. It starts from inactive phase. Microcontroller doesn't need to perform here any tasks. So goal is to reduce consumption to minimum. In consequence microcontroller stays in low-power mode. Then microcontroller receives an interrupt. It might come from external world, for example from GPIO or communication interface. It might come as well from internal resources, for example timer. Interrupt is a trigger to wake MCU up from low-power mode. That is why this phase is called wake up. After waking up microcontroller performs some tasks. For example, it could be reading data from sensor. In consequence, this phase is an active phase. Once activity is finished, microcontroller comes back to low-power mode and whole process starts again. In each of these application phases, microcontroller consumes current. So after taking into account all of phases, it is possible to calculate average current consumption of application. Once we are familiar with profile of typical low-power application, let's try to identify list of requirements for ultra low-power microcontroller. And let's speak about solutions of STM32L5, which addresses them. First requirement for microcontroller is computational performance. This feature is needed because it allows to execute faster tasks in active phase of application and to reduce the amount of time spent in it. In order to address this requirement, STM32L5 offers performant Cortex M33 Core system frequency up to 110 MHz and so called Art Accelerator, a cache memory, which reduces number of flash weight states. Second requirement for microcontroller is power efficiency. This feature is desired because it helps to reduce the current consumption in active phase of application. STM32L5 is equipped with internal SNPS, which can significantly reduce the consumption. In addition, scaling of voltage and gating of clocks that supply and feed resources of STM32L5 could further reduce the consumption in active phase. Third requirement for microcontroller is set of low power modes. They help to achieve low current consumption in inactive phase of application. Here STM32L5 offers multiple low power modes, starting from slip mode up to very deep low power modes like standby and shutdown. We will take a deeper look on these modes later on. Another microcontroller requirement is short wake up time. It helps to reduce the transition period between inactive and active phase of application. Depending on the low power mode, STM32L5 can offer wake up time even down to 6 clock cycles. Finally, last requirement for microcontroller is set of smart peripherals. Czcikali, they can help to reduce consumption by offloading CPU and by extending inactive phase of application. Here STM32L5 offers wide range of smart low power peripherals. Among them, we can find watchdog for ADC, low power reward, low power timer, DMA, or PKA. As a summary of this slide, we can say that STM32L5 offers effective solutions to address all requirements of ultra low power microcontroller and it can definitely help to optimize each phase of low power application. With this sentence, I finish this section and I let my colleague Martin to continue. Thank you, Simon. In this section, we will have a close look at performance and efficiency of computation on STM32L5. One of the key factors that affect performance but also power efficiency of a microcontroller is the system level architecture. Most applications run their code from either internal flash or an external one and they sometimes place the very critical code into S-Ren. But it's often the flash that limits at higher frequencies. However, this was largely mitigated on STM32L5 thanks to low number of flash weight states in the first place and also due to the cache that resides between the cortex core and the memories. So what you see in the picture are the four busmasters on the chip, which are the cortex core and the three DMA controllers. On the right you see the slaves, which are the internal flash and S-Rems, all the peripherals and also the external memories. The cache resides between the core above the bus matrix and it caches instructions and data to internal memories and when remapped even to external memories. When the instructions and data are inside the cache they can be accessed at zero weight states and even at the maximum frequency of 110 MHz. This not only affects the performance but also the power efficiency and that's for two reasons. Firstly, the code executes faster so the application can spend more time in one of the various low power modes. Secondly, the access to the cache is in fact more power efficient than accessing the original memory. The next step is to measure computational performance of an MCU. One way to do this is to simply state the core frequency or number of instructions that are executed each second. Drystone benchmark was one of the first that tried to tie performance with a real code. But today the industry standard is coremark from the embassy. Their source code is freely available via link algorithms and data manipulations that can be found in common real applications such as list processing, metrics manipulation or state machines that are based on if or switch statements. The outcome of the coremark is a single number that represents number of coremark iterations executed each second. You can also encounter coremark score per MHz which defines the computational efficiency. The coremark score is influenced by the core itself. In case of STM32L5 this is the codex M33. The score increases with frequency but this relationship is not necessarily linear especially when the code is executed from flash. However, on L5 this is the case the relationship is linear thanks to the low number of wait states for the flash and the cache that accelerates code execution. It's also worth mentioning that every coremark measurement should be accompanied by the exact version of compiler that was used and also the optimization flex. The coremark code is designed in a way that it prevents any elimination of code at compile time i any computation is actually performed at runtime. In the graph you see the dependency of coremark score on the frequency of the core for STM32L5 and one of our competitor that is also based on Cortex M33. In both cases the code is executed from internal flash. At low frequency the performance is almost the same but at higher frequencies flash wait states and the lack of cache start to limit our competitor. L5 reaches similar performance at 80 MHz where the other device needs to run at 150. And this has significant implications for the consumption because the same amount of computational work can be done at lower frequency and therefore at much lower consumption. Coremark can also be executed from SRAM which is always zero wait state at all frequencies so you might encounter very different results for code executed from flash in SRAM and it's something to be aware of. So how can we evaluate power efficiency of computation? What's often used for this purpose is micro-Ms per MHz in other words how much current is consumed i there are two issues with this. First of all megahertz is a poor metric for performance because performance depends on many other factors apart from frequency such as the flash and cache design. Second of all as you'll see later STM32L5 includes an internal SNPS so unit of energy instead of current provide better and more accurate description of current at certain VDD voltage. The better way to compare two products is to measure the energy that is required to compute certain tasks for example one coremark iteration. In fact embassy provide a standardized method to measure the consumption while running the coremark. So the ULPmark-CM is the inverse of the energy required per one coremark iteration. The inverse is taken just because we intuitively expect that the higher value expresses better performance. To compare two products we should always make sure that we compare at the same level of performance and not just at the same frequency. The STM32L5 integrates an internal SNPS which is an optional feature available on specific part numbers. W material point of view it requires only few passive components one inductor and two capacitors. SNPS greatly improves the power efficiency especially at high VDD voltage. SNPS is configurable at runtime so when the MCU enters one of the deeper low power modes in fact stop one or deeper SNPS is automatically switched off and it's re-enabled once the MCU wakes up. SNPS supplies the internal LDO that in turns supplies the whole digital domain the CPU, digital peripherals and memories. So this is the end of the theory part so let's now move to the practical demonstration. In this part I'll execute coremark on STM32L5. The code will be placed in flash and I'll run the test at two various frequencies to confirm that the coremark score is in fact linear with frequency. I'm going to use STM32L5 Discovery Kit that has the version of L5 with the integrated SNPS. On the board you'll also find STLink v3 power shield to do power consumption measurement and various other components such as external memories, Bluetooth module etc. To display some runtime messages during the coremark execution we will use the virtual comport of the STLink and in the next hands on we'll also use the cube monitor power to measure the consumption during the execution of coremark. So the USB cable is now plugged into the STLink we can connect to the target and flash the two binaries. So I have pre-compiled one binary for coremark running at 110 MHz and the second one running at 24 MHz. STLink enumerates also as a master reach so the easiest way to flash a binary is simply drag and drop it to the STLink master reach. So in just a moment you see the binary was flashed and the coremark is immediately executed. If I press reset it will start from the beginning. So the coremark needs to run for at least 10 seconds to get valid result. So let's wait a bit. You see the code run for 11 seconds which is fine. It ran 5000 iterations. So the coremark score is 443 iterations per second. I used RMCLANK v6.14 as a compiler and set the flags to optimize for speed. The code is of course running from flash and at the very bottom we see the confirmation of the frequency which is 110 MHz. So let's now run the second binary. I will just flash it in. Again we need to wait at least 10 seconds to get a valid result. And here we go. The coremark score is 98.3 iterations per second. So if we divide the coremark score with the frequency we get approximately 4 for both cases which is a proof that the relationship is in fact linear. Here you see another comparison of STM32L5 with one of our competitor that is also based on Cortex M33. To make this comparison fair we are using the same compiler and the same compiler flags. This is also the reason why the result for 110 MHz is few percent less than in the demonstration that we have just did with RMCLANK. So to summarize the system level architecture of a chip is extremely important factor that affects not only the performance but also power efficiency as you will see in the next demonstration. So now we will measure the consumption while running the coremark. I will run the coremark at 24 MHz of the microcontroller where it performs best in terms of computational workload per unit of energy. And we will also try to measure the consumed energy per one coremark iterations. And we will do that thanks to the integrated power shield on the discovery board and QPoR running on a PC. You might be already aware of standalone power shield that works as a power supply that also measures the current consumption dynamically. Now the power shield was integrated on the STO32L5 Discovery so we do not need any external components. The supply voltage can range from 1.8 to 3.3 volts. The measurement has a huge dynamic range from 300 nanoamps up to 150 mA and it measures with sampling rate of 100 kHz. So now I plugged in another USB cable to the power shield. I also changed the jumper here to supply the target of the STO32L5 from the power shield. And I also put the switch into the measure mode. So now I can go to QPoR and connect. I see the configuration tab. Here I can set the sampling rate so let's put it to the maximum 100 kHz. I set the acquisition time to infinity so it will keep measuring until I press stop button. And let's supply the target with 3 volts voltage. So once I press start acquisition the target will be supplied and the microcontroller will start to execute. We still have the binary with the core mark running at 24 MHz. So let me start the acquisition. You see there was a short current peak to charge the decoupling capacitors so let me stop the acquisition and start again. So you see the core mark finished just after I started the acquisition. So now the consumption is about half a milliamp. If I press the reset button and release it will start to execute core mark and after about 11 seconds it will finish it will reconfigure the clock to 4 MHz and that's why you see this sharp drop in consumption. So now what we can do is to show all the measurements and you clearly see this portion of the graph that is the microcontroller executing core mark. So what I can do I can zoom in just approximately into this interval and I see here in the selected time frame there was 61 mJ consumed during this time. And we also know from the traces that the microcontroller executed 1100 iterations of core mark. So from that we can calculate the energy required per one core mark iteration or it's inverse which is in fact the ULP mark CM score. If we plug in the numbers we get a ULP mark CM score of about 18 which is close enough to what we publish at the embassy website. Of course the accuracy of this measurement depends on how closely we can zoom in into the actual core mark execution. So this is only an approximate result. Here is another comparison of STM32 L5 and one of our competitor that is also based on Cortex M33. So these are the same. Both microcontrollers are executing 1500 iterations of core mark. The VDD voltage is 3 volts and the code runs from flash. L5 runs at 80 MHz and the other device at 150 MHz and as you remember from before they have the same performance level at those frequencies. I will note that L5 is 16.9% more efficient. I will now hand over to Simon. Thank you Martin. Let me continue with next section which is related to STM32 L5 low power modes. As already mentioned before STM32 L5 has wide range of operating modes. On this picture you can see their overview Starting from the top there is a run mode. We can notice that for maximum system frequency which is 110 MHz consumption is on the level of 11 mA. Of course it is possible to use so called clock gating and reduce system clock. For 80 MHz and 26 MHz consumption is 7 mA respectively. In case of significant system clock reduction for example to 2 MHz it is possible to use low power run mode. In such case consumption is on the level of 320 mA. In sleep mode core is stopped while rest of resources can be active including clock domain. As frequency as previously consumption is reduced to 230 mA and wake up time is very fast. Then we have 3 stop modes. In these modes both core and peripherals are stopped. These are typical low power modes where a microcontroller is waiting for an interrupt to wake up and to resume the application. Wydaje się o typu stop modes consumption is different, wake up time is also different and additionally number of wake up sources is different. Lowest current consumption can be achieved by using standby, shutdown and VBAT modes down to few nanoamps. However we need to consider limited number of wake up sources and longer wake up time. 1332L5 offers a variety of low power modes and it gives you a flexibility to select the most suitable one for your application. When deciding about low power mode there are some parameters to consider like average consumption, peak current performance and reaction time. For example standby mode fits to the profile to be very low, reaction time doesn't need to be quick and time between wake up cycles can be long. On the other hand side low power sleep could be a good idea for a profile where reaction time has to be quick and there is a short period between wake up cycles. A good trade off between low average current consumption and short reaction time is stop to mode. STM32L5 is clearly an ultra low power microcontroller family. So important to highlight is that among different microcontroller families with ARM Cortex M33 available on the market STM32L5 will give you best in class ultra low power capabilities. In terms of low power modes here you can see a comparison between STM32L5 and other device based on the same core. If we compare stop mode, standby mode and shutdown mode with their equivalents from competition we can notice a huge difference. Both in terms of consumption and wake up time STM32L5 is multiple times better than competitor. Ok, so this is the end of this section again to Martino. Thank you Simon. In this last demonstration I would like to show you a typical example of low power application. The firmware will perform ADC acquisition with 1 kHz rate. When the sample acquisition is finished the microcontroller will enter stop to which means that all high speed clocks are turned off i wytrzymające się od low power LDO. Po wake up, przed następnym samochodziem microcontroller will continue executing exactly at the point where it left before. Content of the memory and the state of the processor is retained in stop to. I will also measure the consumption again thanks to the cube monitor power to show the importance of the wake up time and the consumption in low power mode in this case stop to. In this picture you can see the transition table between various low power modes on STM32L5. For this particular example we are going to use run mode at 4 MHz to take the sample and then enter stop to once it's finished. Let's now have a look at a consumption profile for 1 ADC sample acquisition. When the STM32L5 is in stop to the consumption is just a few microamps. When it wakes up and the core starts to execute at 4 MHz, the consumption is at a level of hundreds of microamps, so it's very important that the active phase is as short as possible. To wake up from stop to it takes approximately 5 ms. To start the ADC acquisition to store the value and clear the wake up flags take less than 30 ms. So the rest of the 1 ms window which is the acquisition rate of this application can be spent in stop to. To achieve low power consumption it's necessary to have low duty cycle between the active and inactive phase. Having a short wake up time is absolutely essential to achieve this goal. So now I will flash the test binary again by drag and dropping to the STLink mass storage. I will connect to the power shield and let's set the sampling frequency again to the maximum 100 kHz and let's set the acquisition time So what we should see is a consumption profile during 100, exactly 100 sample acquisition and let's apply the target with 3 volts. Again I will start the acquisition for the second time and here what we see is the periodic pattern during the ADC acquisition. What we don't see is the sharp transition between stop to and run mode but it's only because we are measuring on a shunt resistor close to the power supply so the waveform is sort of low pass filtered. Nevertheless the average current consumption is correct. The microcontroller consumes 47 microamps in this particular application. So this is all from me and for the last time I will hand over to Simon. Thank you Martin. So this was the last section of our webinar. I hope you enjoyed watching it. Before we finish let me provide you a short summary of the things that we discussed today. STM32L5 is a continuity of successful ultra low power STM32 families like L0, L1, L4 and L4+. Thanks to this fact STM32L5 has multiple solutions which address all phases of ultra low power application. High computation performance and power efficiency reduce both time and consumption of active phase. Low power modes reduce consumption short wake up time reduces inactive to active transition phase. Finally smart low power peripherals offload CPU and extend period of inactive phase. In consequence we are very confident to say that STM32L5 is best in class ultra low power Cortex M33 based microcontroller family. Last information which we would like to share with you are references. STMicroelectronics created application nodes which are focusing on STM32 and ultra low power. If you are interested to know more about topics that we discussed today, we encourage you to check the documents mentioned on the slide. Thank you.


The coma supercluster is a nearby supercluster of galaxies that includes the famous coma cluster Able 1656. The supercluster is located 300 million light years from Earth. It is roughly spherical, about 20 million light years in diameter, and contains more than 3,000 galaxies. Being one of the first superclusters to be discovered, coma supercluster helped astronomers understand the large-scale structure of the universe.