Good morning and welcome to the Vermont House Human Services Committee. Today is Wednesday, March 30. And the first part of this morning, we are going to be sort of discussing or get being educated on the rule three of the three and four whatever of the Medical Cannabis Board. And this is rulemaking. This is not joint rules. This is not House rules. This is not Senate rules. This is Elkar rules, legislative committee on administrative rules. And you know how we pass all these laws, and in the laws they go and the agency shall write rules. They go through a whole process where they write rules. And the end of that process is to present it to Elkar. Elkar and Elkar can approve or sort of not approve or object. And part of their process of the process is that they send before they meet. The proposed rules to the committee chair of the committee of jurisdiction. Well, after many, many years, I've learned that I don't have to do this alone. So this year I've started sending the rules to the various members of the committee who have that's been their area of jurisdiction and art and the legislative council person actually is the one who does that I agree. I'm supposed to, I get a little sheet of paper and check meets legislative intent, or doesn't I forget what the third question is. Do you want me to answer. Yes, please. So this is for the result child's office of legislative council and so there are very specific basis for Elkar to be able to object to the rule. And they are a statute and the ones that are your to focus on and then advise Elkar on our rule is beyond the authority of the agency that you've granted them and the legislation, whether the proposed rule is contrary to the intent of the legislature, whether the proposed rule is arbitrary or whether the proposed rule did not adhere to the strategy for maximizing public input prescribed by the administrative rules. So it's a very, very narrow kind of basis for an objection and there's a lot of discretion on behalf of the agency to be adopting the rules. Even if Elkar objects to it. The agency can still can still have the rule go into effect. I mean rules in a sense are similar to laws laws Trump rules so if we if we as a body. Don't like a rule, and it doesn't and we can't object because it our objection doesn't fit one of those criteria, or whatever it doesn't matter. The agency can and you know, implement the rule. So, but subsequent legislative sessions or in the legislature they could then pass a rule, pass a law to clarify or to change something. So that's I wanted I mean so it's not like if we like or don't like a rule. It's a more job. It is the, you know, it is only in those criteria. But I, this was, so that's sort of why you know that the context by which I wanted folks, I want us to hear this and this is at one point in time medical marijuana was the jurisdiction of this committee, and cannabis excuse me medical cannabis was the cannabis committee, and that predated legalization. And with legalization. There needed to be some changes and within the law that we passed the exit we I believe we transferred. We gave a lot of authority to the cannabis control board to buy rule. And that new things. So that's sort of where we are. And I thought we could spend about an hour max for being an introduction, what they are. And so that we can understand this. And I don't know, Michelle, whether you want to start or whether David, you want to start. We didn't chat. We had a little bit I thought it was good. I started kind of laid the foundation just to remind folks about what this body has done over the last several years with regard to it and then David can really get into the details. So good morning for the record Michelle child's office of legislative council and so the chair explained a little bit about the history of it. And we have some new members and folks who might not have worked on this issue just in on this committee. So Vermont enacted medical cannabis law in 2004 I think we were the ninth state to do it that had been percolating for a few years or study committee is recommending it and so we adopted that in 2004. And so we've had it for quite a while, it was housed in the Department of Public Safety. So Vermont was the only state that had a medical cannabis program that was run by the law by law enforcement. And it was in Department of Public Safety until this year when it transferred over to the cannabis control board. So we did legalize possession of smaller amounts of cannabis for everyone, and I believe 28 person was I think Decrim and 2013 2014 and then legalization in 2018, and then you passed a kind of like an omnibus cannabis bill, setting up the commercial market in 2020, I don't know everything with COVID is like blending together the timelines but so I think that was in 2020 and that was like the really big bill that kind of set everything up and the idea was to create the new entity the control board that was going to regulate everything with regard to sale and dispensing of cannabis in a legal manner and so setting up the commercial piece, but then also shifting over the medical program to the cannabis control board to the medical program you have a registry, and folks go through and they work with their health care provider the health care provider can fill out a medical verification form saying that the person has a qualified medical condition that's provided that condition, a medical condition is provided by statute and who qualifies. And so it's not a prescription for cannabis, it is simply the health care provider who you have a relationship is stating that you that you have one of the conditions as listed by statute and then that would qualify you for the registry. And then once you're on the registry you're allowed to have a little bit more cannabis on hand than someone who's not on the registry so you can have a couple more immature plants than if you weren't on the registry can also have up to two ounces in possession separate and apart from what you cultivate off of your plants that you keep with your plants. So there's some little advantages there in terms of amounts. But the big one is that you could go to a dispensary so Vermont I think adopted the dispensary law in 2011. And so we've had dispensaries there's five licenses their limit it's a limited number of licenses and they're allowed to have up to two locations where they serve patients. And so that was the way that if you weren't going to grow your own cannabis that you could go to a dispensary and obtain flower and cannabis products and do that legally and so there's the legislature decide to continue the medical program. And you have if you, and I essentially the links to the statute story so if you want to just take a look at those at some point. But I wanted to just kind of go through and just talk a little bit about what are the differences like what does being on the registry get you that you know just any one of us just not being a citizen wouldn't be able to do. So, and these are some of the differences between a dispensary and what will be a commercial retail store dispensary is allowed to be vertically integrated under one license so they do everything from cultivation to sale to patients. That is different from the commercial system and that you have to get an individual license for cultivation or for product manufacturing or for retail. So the distribution of the existing dispensaries are allowed to apply for for something called an integrated license under the commercial and it's just those existing five licensees under the dispensary law now that can get an integrated and that would allow them to be continue to be integrated under the commercial system. So they are a little bit different from everybody else but they can be, but dispensaries can continue to be vertically integrated. So the cannabis and cannabis products that they sell are not taxed. So different from the commercial, they can deliver to patients and caregivers that's not permitted under the commercial system. They can allow patients and caregivers to purchase cannabis and cannabis products, kind of like with a drive through or things like that because a lot of patients have mobility issues so they're allowed to kind of bring it up in addition to delivery they can deliver to patients once car or things like that. But they can produce and sell cannabis and cannabis products that have a higher THC content than what is allowed under the commercial program. And they can produce and sell certain products that might not otherwise be permitted under the under the commercial system and then they can sell larger amounts so they can do like per transaction up to two ounces which is in the regular domain. So those are just kind of some of the basic differences if you're going to be under the in the registry instead of just going and purchasing as any person. So when you passed the legislation in 2020, you directed the CCB to be doing a lot of rulemaking it's like pages and pages of the long list and it's and you have the link there if you want to take a look at it. But a couple things I wanted to note is that look at the language here is that is some of the lead in language. So if we're looking at and I'll just give you the citation in case somebody wants to take a look at it later at 7 vs a section 974 for rulemaking for dispensaries. So the board shall adopt rules to implement and administer the chapter and adoption of the rules the board shall strive for consistency with rules adopted for cannabis establishments, where appropriate so the goal is that you don't have completely to use the systems for regulating medical dispensary versus a licensee under the commercial system because a lot of the things are makes sense to be the same and that they are to be focused on where there's there needs to be a difference because of what is there and statute or because of policy of the CCB that there will be a distinction but for the most part they're going to be regulated very similarly. There's also something in the law that says that no rules shall be more restrictive than any rule adopted by the Department of Public Safety under the old system. So the idea being that so under the, the previous medical system there were, there were quite a few restrictions and then the rules reflected that, and then in light of there being an open mark commercial market then it, the legislature didn't really make sense to have a more restrictive medical market than you would have for a commercial market so because why would anybody go through and jump through the hoops to access this way if you could just walk into any store. So those are two things that you just want to keep in mind is that you directed the CCB to be having the same rules as much as possible between the medical and the commercial market, and also that they were not to have more restrictive rules than were under the Department of Public Safety. So what is the rationale for that conclusion or that situation that they will not that want the rules to be almost the same right. Right, so like something might be let's say you know I know that. One thing that has been I think everybody would universally agree that's been somewhat lacking in the medical program is that there wasn't really much around testing requirements in the in the previous statutes that regulated the medical market, or obviously in the other rules. But then the CCB is developing rules, extensive rules that you're directive through the last legislation about coming up with, you know, how often you have to test who has to test when you have to test what you have to test for all of those types of things and what you're talking about it from a consumer safety standpoint, is there any reason why you should have different testing standards, you know if you're taking a product to the public whether it's a medical patient or not. Is there any reason why you should have different testing standards for the different dispensary versus an integrated licensee, probably not. And so, I think that what they wanted to do is try to keep some some things consistent. I recall that was in the law that the body passed. Correct. So on some level. Also, if you have further questions about what was in the law we passed and what that was passed. And that is to ask a representative Gannon, who reported it on the floor. I did see a question from Jessica. Yeah, and I'm not sure so you can just tell me if this is more of the law, the new law, just worry about the testing only because some people who need medical marijuana need medical marijuana and a certain level of THC specific to that because that's what's going to help them deal with whatever disease they're dealing with. And so it would it would seem like in the medical side need more testing to be sure that they're actually delivering a product that actually helps the patient versus if it's just me, who wants to get Hi. I know what you're saying and I think David can probably address some of that but I would say, you know, some things that are very standard in here that will require under both systems are things around so if you're talking about potency potency is required and that was actually that was the one thing that was required under the previous statutes in the medical program was a clear labeling of of THC content. What was lacking was more kind of the, you know, more extensive testing around contaminants and you know things like that. And so, so I think, you know, David can probably go in with into a little more in depth about what's required with regard to the labeling and the testing that's with this air ball, and not the rule that they are not debating the law. Okay, right now. Yeah. Okay, sorry. I think that's, I mean, unless you have any other questions just about kind of the foundation of, you know, why we're doing this and David can probably talk a little bit about the timing of why they're coming in as emergency rules and there's just been a lot of, you know, trying to get this program off the ground and do it in a way that's kind of in keeping with the legislation but they've had a, they've had a heavy lift over the last year or so trying to get everything done and they have and David if you or whatever I mean, the rules for medical marijuana went away March 1. And we passed the law. And, well, and anyway, so that didn't anyway, it didn't happen so we needed they needed to pass emergency rules so that this wasn't going to be a program that was operating. The idea was it could be put in the budget adjustment but budget adjustment didn't quite move as quickly as possible as they, we thought, people thought. Is it David or is it you who will talk about what were the existing prior to legalization, what were the existing requirements related to medical marijuana and how those are the same or different. I'm thinking of you had to choose whether or not you grew or whether you first or whether you used a dispensary and there were points in terms of you could number of care whether or not you could have a care. I think that was at what was called a surrogate surrogate to pick it up and how many ounces you could have and so I think that is what is of interest to this committee is those differences. Sure, and, and I'll leave that to David but I will just note that those differences came about through the adopted legislation in 2020 not through what what they're doing through rulemaking so things that have changed like, in terms of the old statutes you required a person to select us one dispensary to obtain their product from that was eliminated in the 2020 legislation because you can go to any retail store then they thought well then then why should you have to pick one dispensary or things like that so there's a number of things like that but those were all that were done on this statute and and I think David has a list and he can talk to you about some of those. Are there any questions for Michelle to stay so if, if, if David doesn't do it answer all of our questions we can love got it to you. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair thanks to the committee for having me this morning for the record. I'm David chair general counsel to the cannabis control board. A few of you may have seen me in my prior role as an assistant attorney general and the Attorney General's office but have moved to the board and as folks mentioned we've been working very fast. We should take off on the thing it says assistant attorney general. That is out of date. Okay, so you are general counsel general counsel cannabis control board. That's right. This is worse than keeping up our address books when you change. I thought I'd very quickly give a little background on the larger structure the board has built and how we regulatory structure the board is building and and a little bit on the process but I don't want to belabor any of that and then jive right into medical cannabis more specifically I think some of that background help will help all of this make more sense. So the board as a design this system under the statutes that enabled the board and the adult use system decided to enact five rules. The first rule is the licensing rule. The second rule is the general regulation of cannabis establishments that's sort of like the heart of it I'd say in terms of the regulatory environment. The fourth rule is the medical cannabis rule. The fourth rule is the compliance and enforcement rule. And the fifth rule is the board removal rule which is sort of a separate little thing that's required it doesn't have that much to do with regulation but the statute does require the board to set up some rules about board members removing each other in the event of a for cause issue that might arise. So in terms of the work to get these rules done as folks mentioned, it's very tight timelines but the board was very careful to get the maximum public input they could. Before we even filed the first rules, you know, we were the board in general was very solicitous of public input at 25 board meetings at which there's public comment sessions at each one. We have 100 comments into our through the public comment portal on the board's website. The board has a statutory advisory committee that met four times in fall and had more than 70 different subcommittee meetings last fall, worked with, worked with a number of other entities had a couple of social, sorry, yeah social equity town halls had worked on those issues very carefully as well work with across government with the tax department agriculture food and markets agency of natural resources health department quite significantly. So the process, even before we filed for rules was very much a collaborative process worked a lot with members of the public with people with lived experience people who are patients and caregivers had a lot of input on this. And of course the board couldn't accept every preferred outcome that it heard naturally. And to some degree some of the concerns that a regulatory body has to have were intention with some of the desires as commercial actors as you might expect. Generally the board was very careful to work with that input once the rules were filed. Rule one, rule one and two, in combination had 260 different substantively different comments submitted during the public notice and comment session, it took the board 16 hours of public meetings to work through all those comments and did they did accept say around 50% of them and said no to that 50% of them so they're very thoughtful in the process did accept input, but you know again as regulators had to say no to some of the suggestions. Diving now into rule three specifically so rule three and I'll get to the chair's question about some of the differences in a moment here. Rule three incorporates rules one and two, quite significantly, and that meets one of those statutorily required objectives which is to have the maximum consistency between the medical regulatory system and the regular adult use system. So other goals the board was trying to meet as a constructed rule three, one of them statutory one of them sort of supports own of the board's own volition. The other statutory issue was to make the car rule, not more restrictive than the Department of Public Safety rules. So technically sometimes ran intention with the requirement that the board be as consistent as possible the adult use rules so there had to be some carve outs there to accommodate that. And then the final goal that was really the board's own volition was to do the best they could to have the least change possible for patients and caregivers in order to make sure that patients and caregivers are able to access the cannabis medication, cannabis medication with with the least interaction possible. So those are the three areas where the board was really trying to or three goals I should say the board was really trying to meet. As I mentioned the rule three heavily incorporates rules one and two. There are carve outs in rule three, especially with respect to the dispensaries. So those carve outs are our accomplish one of two things either they are carve outs to accommodate statutory differences where Michelle went over the areas where dispensaries and patients and caregivers have access and can do certain things that adult use consumers cannot. There's another set of carve outs that had to do with the Department of Public Safety rules where a review of our rules rules one and two showed that they were in fact more restrictive than the rules that had been imposed on the are imposed by the Department of Public Safety rules so there's a few carve outs that have to do with that as well. With respect to patients and caregivers rule three really did try to have a simple clear system that is very similar to what patients and caregivers currently have to do. There are a few differences but those are driven by statutory changes. And so all run through some of those statutory changes now and then open it up for questions and happy to have a longer conversation about anything that folks are interested in. So one of the changes that again this is statutorily driven is caregiver fingerprinting background check requirements, it did not used to be the case that caregivers needed to have a fingerprint supported background check it used under the old statute they simply they didn't need a background check but it was a name and date of birth background check, which is quicker and has a little bit less bureaucracy around it the new statute does require the fingerprint supported background check so that is a difference that the rule obviously has to embody. So one of the other differences that there are no more designated dispensaries, as Michelle noted a minute ago, no more appointments are required for patients or caregivers to pick up product. The dispensary question. I understood a memory could be faulty that under the old old thing. I did patients, patients first had to decide whether they were going to grow their own or use a dispensary they couldn't do both. And then, if they decided that they wanted to access medical cannabis through a dispensary they had to choose one. I believe that was the rule for a while of course everything changed when a general, there was the general allowance for Vermonters to grow a certain amount themselves so there's Michelle jump in. So that you're correct and it was that way for a number of years at the beginning and then the legislature repealed that requirement, several years ago. Well, there's been a lot of changes over, you know, the last 1617 years with the program so that was that did change and then so that was not so. So you are permitted now to to grow or to use a dispensary. Don't remember that ever coming here but that's all right. Just in regard to the point that you were just making about caregivers and background checks. So, is that something that was in statute that caregivers required to have background checks in under both statutes caregivers are required to background checks the difference is whether it's a so called fingerprint supported background check is a little bit more in the guy get the FBI involved and have permissions to access some of these national databases right and so that that was required in the retail cannabis. If that is required for workers at cannabis establishments and owners and principals can establishments for adult use. So it is now required for caregivers as well. That was not previously the case caregivers used to have to have background checks but not the fingerprint supported background check right I guess maybe I need to be more specific in my question. It does the statute say that caregivers required to have fingerprints supported background. Yes it does. Okay, thank you. And so that was a statutorily driven change. And is that still the case. Okay, it's on March 1 when the new statutes came into play that had not previously been the case. Let me. Oh, sorry. So a caregiver, how many. So they're, they're growing for someone receiving medical marijuana. They're growing, they could also they are also permitted to get cannabis product from a dispensary on behalf of the patient. But if they're growing how many plants. I believe it's two and seven, two and seven so sorry two mature and seven immature. Many more medical cannabis. I believe that's the that's the limit for for caregivers for it's the same. So under the medical program that attitude so it's, it's too mature and so mature and under the adult use anyone is to mature and for immature. So you have an extra and mature plants. Thank you. No problem. Anything else, I will keep going down the list here. The old statute did require a three month relationship between a health care professional who submits the health care professional verification for her rotation to get on the registry that three months relationship is no longer in statute. The, there is there used to be an appeal board that was that had sort of two functions one was a general policy recommendation body and also it served as an appeal for a page for somebody who wanted to be qualified as a patient but who's medical health care professional would not dean them to have the symptoms that one would require in order to or the I should stop the symptoms the condition that one would require to get such a card and so then the board could step in the person could appeal to that board make it step in that board is not in the current statutes either that is no longer present. Just, but when you say things are no longer in statute that is because of the law we passed focusing. Is that correct. The law we passed around legalizing recreational cannabis specifically had all the laws related to medical cannabis disappearing. That's exactly right. And it replaced them with a new set of laws. And the changes that I'm listing are primarily are all statutorily driven changes there's one coming up that is not, which I'll get to in a moment. Another factory change this is more detail oriented is with respect to principles of dispensaries used to need to get their background checks renewed every three years. That's now going to be every year. And that is in a statutory change. The final change that is that is different, and is much more of which is really a board change is the criminal history records issue. So the board created a set of rules around what criminal history records might be disqualifying for individuals who are trying to get involved in the adult use market. But without getting too much into too great detail essentially what they did was say that for many offenses that would that will not be a disqualifying factor. There's a list of some offenses where it could be a presumptively disqualifying factor, but there is no offense that is absolutely disqualifying a person who has a presumptively disqualifying offense will have an opportunity to essentially make as to why they should still be allowed to get a license. That is different than the prior Department of Public Safety rules which did which in which the disqualifying offenses were absolutely disqualifying. And the board chose to simply adopt its adult use regulations with respect to criminal history and import them into rule three cannabis regulations as well so that's a little bit of a difference. But it is, but it is something that's consistent across the board with the regulatory scheme both for adult use and for medical. Those are the changes that I have. I also can address the question about the emergency adoption if you'd like now. So, sorry, let me just make sure. I was going to say something you had mentioned was that there are no longer any medical dispensaries or, you know, apart from retail establishments is that what you said or maybe misunderstood. I didn't, I didn't mean to, if I did, there are still separate medical dispensaries, they will have the opportunity if they would like to apply to get a certain type of license that could allow them to be both a dispensary and an adult use retail store. I have to have to. And copper copper go ahead then I have a question. Thanks madam chair. I'd like to talk about the ability to go from one dispensary to another. Could an individual in one day visit all five dispensaries. I mean, I guess it's theoretically possible that with a very fast car and good weather, you could make it. Well, let's just talk about the principle. Could an individual go to several of the dispensaries in one day and be served by each one of them. Could you go to different dispensaries each day and under the new statute, you could be served at multiple dispensaries the statute did change with respect to that. Well, I didn't realize that the stat that it changed that much I thought that you couldn't go you couldn't go and get served in several dispensaries in one day or in one week. Now it appears there are no limits in the medical end of this thing. Am I wrong on that now. So there is a there is a two ounce per transaction limit that is in statute. It is true that there's no longer designated dispensary so a person could choose which one they go to. But they could choose them. I'm trying to, they could choose to go to several in one day and get their two ounces. That's right. But that's not, that's not, I did not think that that was the intent of the legislature, but I could be wrong. I thought that. Okay, thank you. You're welcome. I'm sorry. This may be what you have been saying. I, my memory, which we all decided is not so good on this. I, I thought that there would need to be two separate entrances. Yes, sir. So if I am a dispensary, I'm a recreational dispensary and I want to be able to provide both products that there needs to be two entrances. So they need to be separate entrances is what I thought there's no, no such requirement in statute is true. However, that if somebody were to dispense and a product that's only permitted for a patient to an adult use consumer, they would be in violation of our rules and would be subject to sanction under our rules. So it is the obligation of those entities, which we call integrated licensees and the statute to be sure that they're not mixing those two tasks. They also are required to provide for patient privacy to whatever extent that is important to the people who are coming in. Michelle, so I just, if it's okay, I just want to follow up on copper is absolutely with regard to that. So, it used to be under the medical program that they were limited to purchasing two ounces per month. So that was the whole system, but with the new adult use it's an ounce per transaction and so the medical was true up with that same policy to be two ounces per transaction so you wouldn't have it be more restrictive for medical patients than if they were in the adult use program so if they could only get two ounces in a month from their dispensary, but they could do one ounce per transaction under the commercial, then again it kind of creates a disparity between the medical and the commercial and so there, the legislation kind of true them up so it was the same standard. So, thank you for that clarification, Michelle. And isn't it also true that a person can only legally have a certain limit, correct. So I mean, I suppose yes you could go from dispensary to dispensary to go from a dispensary to a retail outlet to another retail outlet or whatever and because it's by transaction and there's no like registry kind of thing, but you would still be breaking the law because at that point in time you would have more product than you are legally allowed to have. Correct, you would be in violation of the law and subject to the criminal penalties and penalty. Thank you. Dan, just, you may have touched on this before but our medical prices the same as retail. That's really going to be dictated by the market the board isn't going to have any pricing isn't taking to it onto itself any pricing authority to the only difference might be tax but that is true so that's a good point yes the medical is not subject to tax but but in terms of the prices, the board isn't exercising authority on that. It would be retail, if you were whether you're a commercial someone coming in just off the street buying versus someone who's paying who has a medical there. There's no. You have to just buy at whatever the cost is or whatever they're selling it. For the most part, yes, however, there is a current provision the DPS rules that requires the current dispensaries to provide for low cost, or potentially free cannabis medical products for folks who can demonstrate need. And the board has essentially imported that into its and it wasn't actually in rule three I believe we did that in rule one that integrated current dispensaries who want to become integrated licensees have to have a plan to retain that system under our licensing. Just to follow up. A caregiver, can they charge their medical patient for the cultivation on weight or volume or however, or is it just they are a caregiver so they're they're growing, and then they give it to their patient, but that's the charge. So the idea of the system is that that isn't really supposed to be a commercial relationship and of course if you're selling outside of, at least once we become fully operational once you're selling outside of the cannabis establishment system, then you would be in violation of the rules And there is, you know, it is lawful under title 18 I believe to transfer up to an ounce so that like individuals can do that without getting in trouble but again I think if you're actually starting to turn to commercial sales but we're not a licensed retailer. You would now be in violation of the rules so I don't think that caregivers could do that under our system. Thank you. The final piece I'll just mention is the emergency adoption issue. So, Michelle did allude to this but essentially, a lot of stuff has had to happen very quickly in order to get this up and running by the statutory deadlines. The plan had been to make sure the adult the general adult use market would to the best of our ability and it looks like we're going to make it would be up and running at the statutorily imposed deadlines which means applications are going to be starting to be accepted this Friday. So it is ready to do that the, and the plan had been in to use budget adjustment to push out the transition from the old rules and the old statutes for medical out to the summer probably July 1 and give us a little more time to get this piece in place. As the chair mentioned, that did not pass by March 1 and after further discussion with legislative council and others. The decision was made to, since we already had these rules that already been submitted to L car at that point, to simply adopt these on an emergency basis, it has been a more abrupt transition for them the dispensaries expected, but we try to maintain some continuity in terms of how things operate. We're working through the pieces of it that the dispensaries have to get used to. I don't think caregivers and patients have noticed any difference that I'm aware of that I've heard about in the office. Are there other questions for either legislative council, or, or David to our general council. Yeah, game and I don't say. Thank you madam chair. I just wanted to sort of take a big step back to what legislative council was mentioning the 2004 statute that determined what sorts of medical diagnoses apply for medical cannabis has that been updated at all. It's been updated through the years. The definition that is currently in statute that the legislature adopted in 2020 didn't change from the statutory definition of medical qualifying condition that existed prior to the commercial so it is that has not changed in this new system. But it has evolved over over the year so you know one of the more recent changes was you added PTSD as long as the patient is engaged with the psychotherapy or top therapy things like that so it has evolved. Thank you. My, my recollection is that broad brush, much of the medical establishment thinks it's too wide and deep patients thinks think it's way too narrow. So as the three bears. I mentioned that is one piece that did not change from the prior scheme is the same set of conditions. Carl. Again this may not be an appropriate forum for this but I'm just trying to get my head around what why are we trying to keep these separate but at the same time, especially now that you know they could be in the same establishment. I guess. I'm not saying I agree or disagree. I'm just saying I'm trying to get my head around why are we trying to. So it's a very fair question I think that the, I think the reason is that the medical medical patients do get to have certain types of access to both the products and the ways they can access the products that adult use patients are not currently permitted to do. So one example is delivery adult regular adult use recreational users are not permitted to and I should say retail establishments are not permitted to deliver, but dispensaries serving patients are permitted to deliver to patients and we allow. And that has not changed for medical. You don't have to be an adult. That's in fact the whole start of this was actually related to young children with very severe. I think it was epilepsy. So a good point and then products are another example where adult use is allowed to be more potent in terms of THC content so for all those reasons keeping some separation even though there's similarities and there's going to be some places where they're close to each other in terms of where sales are happening some separation is necessary to ensure that we have. We're able to regulate that adequately in accordance with the law. And so again, so a quick question you said adult use can have higher potency than medical. I meant to say that medical can have that too. Sorry about that. Okay. And the difference in between the two systems is one is tax free. And the other is, you know, is not talking to you have a question. I do have just a quick question. David you were you were alluding to a little bit a little bit more abrupt change than the dispensaries were anticipating and while, you know, I hope that folks on the consumer end of things haven't felt that I'm also interested to learn because we did hear the concerns, you know, two years ago from the medical dispensaries they had at that point in time been pretty satisfied with the Department of Public Safety is handling of, you know, oversight and technical assistance and things like that and I'm just wondering the, how, how are we handling the transition process between DPS and the cannabis control board. That's a very good question. I think one key piece for folks to know is that the, the entirety of the staff that was handling it under DPS has been moved to the cannabis control board, and it is the same three staff members who are there are now operating under the cannabis control board so that's good. Those, you know, relationships that understanding of who's doing what in the different dispensaries remains that, you know that sort of expertise is has been important to the board and so that is has already been very helpful and helping us manage the transition. And I'd say for the most part, again, the changes I did list out changes. There's been some sort of like quick alright no longer need to track the chosen dispensaries some like quick messages out to the dispensaries that have, frankly, mostly made their jobs easier, rather than harder. But I think for the most part, there's a fair amount of similarity in how the things are being conducted. The points where it's going to be harder, a little bit, a sort of new set of work for the dispensary management is that things like renewing their licenses there will be a different set of criteria than what they're used to doing. But again, we're planning to work very closely with them and be very clear, we're not looking to catch anybody out or make anybody's lives unnecessarily difficult so we'll be very clear and try to be as helpful as we can and making sure that they know exactly what they need to do for renewal processes and things like that. Thank you. It's been fascinating. It's, I have to say from my point of view it's much more helpful to actually my memory, clearly in some places was not what it should have been should have been in terms of what had been in the past and whatever but before we let you go I just want to make sure, go around and be able to make sure no one has any questions of curiosity or other kinds of questions for Michelle or, or David. If it's questions for curiosity. This is not something yet we're not passing a bill or anything like that. So, I just was curious one of the things that I heard a lot from constituents and I went and visited the medical plant in Milton and did a lot of work before we legalized for everyone. And one of the things that they said was that they couldn't remain in, they might not be able to remain in business, if we had legalized and didn't find a way to roll it in and I'm curious are you still hearing men and are you concerned that we may lose our medical side of business because I think the public needs to really be assured, especially for children that they're getting a certain amount of THC. That's right and the board has been very aware of the concern, which is essentially that there'd be a sort of commercial imperative that would overwhelm the medical dispensaries because they're not allowed to sell to anybody they're only allowed to sell a patient so how do you compete with to sell to anybody and so the legislature did one thing that was essential to that which was allowing the dispensaries to get adult use licenses what we're what's called integrated licenses in the in the legislation. And so that should help that should ameliorate some concerns. I think that other ways the board is dealing with that is is trying to be so one one other big thing that the board has done is to make it as they tried to make it as easy as possible for a new dispensary should one want to exist to come online which is not to say they get to skip all of the requirements that we need to make sure that people are being safe and operating within the rules but to really try to streamline that process if anybody would like to do that. And one could imagine in a environment where somebody could say you know I'm going to be a delivery specialist for medical patients. I'm going to purchase products from other people are making it and my specialty is just driving all over and delivering. So we do think there is some commercial opportunity there that could help patients and could help sustain the the supply of medical cannabis, and the board was aware of that and tried to design some of those regulations to encourage that. Carl. I could just let me finish this testimony. What are we being asked to do. We're not being asked to do anything. We are not. We're just getting information. We're getting information to know so that we know when the when the when Alcar makes a decision. Yes, Michelle. So I just wanted to add is they would like there's a form there's a form that I have to fill out. So I think they would like to do that the rules are before tomorrow morning. Right, but that that is it. I just want to know, right, do you have a concern based on one of those kind of four things that I mentioned is there's something there that you feel is it's not supporting. What I'm here. I set out in the beginning part of this was to share with the committee what oftentimes goes is one of the chair responsibilities and so that's I have to fill out that little form. And, you know, if people, if you, if it is not something that I normally do or that chairs normally do, which is to put it to a committee. Both, but we can certainly do that if that is something that you would like us to do car. The real question is the emergency ruling. Is that what you're asking for this. No, it's actually for the regular rulemaking. Yeah, the emergency rules, assuming we hope everything's okay and I'll try doesn't have any objections. These emergency rules are only really going to be emergency rules for 16 more days or so well a little longer than that but 20 more days or so. So part of this was I want to say our mutual education on what is the process of rulemaking and what's the role of the chair. And because this is something that we haven't this group hasn't talked about at all. I thought it was important that we all sort of hear about it. It was easier than me sitting down with Michelle and David going up because it's my memory on wasn't it this way before and like no and it wasn't. You know, because I wasn't involved in the legalization for adult cannabis use while I was here this was not did not come to this. We did it did come we did voted out. I wasn't. It was it did get out with a 65 vote I believe from. No, it certainly was not a unanimous on that. I appreciate it madam chair actually having counsel both counsel go through the differences that changes what's happening now. You know because we this committee has a long longer history than the rest of the body with this topic so which is sort of why I wanted us, you know to do that and the kinds of. Just one to follow up on, just one to follow up on Jessica's question sort of around how many there were there eight. How many dispensers. There are five, they're five okay of the five dispensers. How many of them are still. How many of them have have. No, I mean they're still in Vermont and I still have Vermont owners but perhaps they have other owners as well. So my understanding is that they are all owned by entities that are not based in Vermont. Okay, and so I guess and so I. I guess my unstated assumption is that the worry is, you know, it's maybe not there because they're bigger places, you know, that there's no dispensary. That is just a medical that has an interest solely in medical is that. Right. And also under even, you know, within Vermont, that dispensaries will all have the opportunity to also sell into the adult use market because the integrated licenses so they can sustain that way also. I see a question from topper and then the last question will be Dan. Yeah, thank you. I guess I'm, I'm still concerned. I've been sitting here thinking about this. An individual being able to go from one dispensary to another is the card that the individual used to have. Well, I, I don't know. Do they still have that card that they have to have one. Yes, patient and caregiver cards are still part of the rules. Right then, then how, how could an individual go from one dispensary to another and be served if they have to present that card. What's the check on it so that a person couldn't go from one place to another and get served get the higher THC. Well, the check is that if the person goes above the two ounce possession limit they will be in violation of criminal law and subject to criminal sanctions. So if an individual has gone off the, the, the truck so to speak, they've fallen off the truck. If they're using again, what do they care if they, if they're going to be criminally responsible. Topper. If I might add. Yeah, because you and I, if you remember we sat here, neither one of us were supporters of legalization that passed. And, you know, despite actually passed out of this committee under that law. I could go to, maybe I could go to five different dispensaries and get me not, you know, I could purchase. I'm not a medical I could purchase. I could go to any one of the five, and I would still write. I think what you're talking about is under the commercial adult adult. Right under the commercial under the commercial retail, I could go to as many stores as I wanted to. If I ended up purchasing more than two ounces, I'm holding more than two ounces or however many ounces it is. I would be, you know, at risk of, of breaking the law. And one of the credit what Michelle clarified for us was that the medical, the rules related to medical could not be any more restrictive than the rules that then the law or whatever the rules for recreational adult recreational. So, whether or not, I'm sorry, Topper, whether or not we like this. It is consistent with recreational adult use. Yes, Madam Chair. I just didn't know. I don't know how I missed that. But I just didn't know that that was the case. And I heard that this morning. Yeah. I didn't realize that was the legislative intent to allow that to happen. Oh, okay. Dan, actually, I don't have a question. So. Thank you. So it might not be worth asking. Well, I think I know the answer. So there's no regulation on who can own the integrated licenses. The only entities that are under the statute, the only entities that are allowed to get an integrated license are the current other people who have dispensaries on April 1 of this year. And as you said, they're, they're not Vermont, they're owned by their MSO, so they're multi-state operators that run these and other states. So that's my understanding. I haven't reviewed their paperwork, but that's my understanding. And there's no nothing in our laws or statutes that says couldn't have one entity by the month. Well, all of that. No, no, there are limits. If you'd like to be my friend, you want to tackle it. Yeah, you can't do that. So integrated is there only be a maximum of five licenses. There are only however many retail stores. So it's not like people who are purchasing only have the option in the adult use to go to an integrated licensee there will be retail licenses issued to other people in the fall. Under the law that you passed, folks are only allowed to have one of each type of license. And so for an integrated. Right. And so they couldn't have, you couldn't have an existing dispensary purchase all like have all the integrated licenses. Right. So each dispensary is entitled to one integrated license. Right. And then under the new system, if you are going to be a retailer coming into the market, you can have one retail license and one location. And so the legislation that you set up was intended to prevent kind of having, you know, men men, or, you know, someplace like this where you have basically one company that has multiple stores and kind of corners the market. Okay, so you can't, you have to only have one. Okay, thank you. So both for the dispensaries and for the regular adult use. So it's a one license per license type rule so so you can have multiple retail stores you could have, you could be somebody who's both a cultivator and a retailer. So you can integrate vertically, just like the integrated licensee can, but you can license because, yeah, I thought I read somewhere, go have to check but I thought that of the five integrated licenses they were owned by three MSOs. So I have, I have heard that same information but I'm not speaking from a place of expertise when I. Pardon me. What's an MSO multi seed operator. And just to clarify, and I don't know who owns what under the centuries but under the medical older medical system, there wasn't anything that said you can only have one type. And so I think, you know, what happened over the course of years was you have, you know, one opened up and then they apply later for another license had the same owners, but you wouldn't be able to do that under the new system. Okay, thank you. That's right. Thank you. Thank you very much, David. Thank you all appreciate this and don't hesitate to reach out to me or people on the board we're happy to answer any questions. Just Michelle, before you leave the, the, the L car points are legislative intent. I can't find my memo. I'm looking for my memo. Whether it's beyond authority of the agency, whether it's contrary to the intent of the legislature, whether it's arbitrary or whether or not the agency didn't adhere to a strategy for maximizing public input. And so if you have concerns that fall into one of those categories with regard to the basis for all parts legal objection. Well, legislative intent is clear on the, on the law in terms of the law that we passed, you talked about, you mentioned David the amount of public testimony that you took that doesn't mean everyone agrees with it but that you did that. Certainly not beyond your authority since we gave you the authority and told you to do it. And it does not seem to be arbitrary it seems to be based on, well, on what the criteria were in the past.  And I want to say that Tapper and for others who don't like what some of the rules say we're getting a awfully long agenda for next year. In terms of that. But thank you, thank you both very much. Thank you committee. And we are basically on time in terms of our agenda. We're going to take a 15 minute pause or 15 minute break. And when we come back, we're going to have a bill introduction on.


So, welcome to lecture 37, now we will go to next level of complication, we will now consider transient analysis. So, transient magnetic problems for again in 2D, the governing equation will be this. So, del square 1 upon mu del square A is equal to minus j 0 plus sigma dA by dt. So, we are taking into account the conductivity and the corresponding diffusion term. So, the global system of equation will be C A as a function of time d D d d d daba by daba t of A t is equal to dt. So, this is representing the diffusion term and this sigma is directly reflected into this capital D. This as usual Laplacian gets reflected into this C, capital C global coefficient matrix which is function of geometry and material properties into column vector A, no vector of matrix, column matrix of magnetic vector potentials which are function of time t. Now, most popular time discretization technique is this. What you do is, you basically this A t plus delta t that means magnetic vector potential at t plus delta t minus A of t divided by delta t, you express as beta times daba A by daba t at t plus delta t plus 1 minus beta daba A by daba t at time t. So, this is the most popular discretization scheme and what is beta? Beta is just a number between 0 and 1. So, if beta is 0 then if you substitute it here, this will go to 0 and then this beta is 0. So, this remains just daba A by daba t at time t is equal to A t plus delta t minus A t upon delta t. So, what we have done is, we have expressed different partial derivative with respect to time as a function of forward difference because we are taking derivative of A with respect to time at t as a function of difference of A t plus delta t minus A t. So, this is a forward difference because this is a forward in time. So, basically A at t plus delta t minus A at t is taken divided by delta t is taken as daba A by daba t at t. The backward difference will be daba A by daba t at t plus delta t is equal to A t plus delta t minus A t upon delta t. So, here this what we have done, this partial derivative at t plus delta t is a function of this backward difference because now we are at t plus delta t. So, minus A t, this becomes backward difference. Here since we were at time instant t, this was forward difference. So, this is backward difference beta is equal to 1 and then third is Krang-Nikolson in which we take sort of average of partial derivatives of A with respect to time at t plus delta t and t and then average of this is this. So, for Krang-Nikolson method beta is 1 by 2. So, if you substitute beta is equal to 1 by 2 here, you will get this equation. So, again starting with this equation which we have seen on the last slide, if we multiply both sides of this equation by beta at time instant t plus delta t, then we will get this expression. So, beta times this, so this is this term beta times this is equal to B, beta times this term taken on the right hand side that is why it becomes minus plus beta times this at t plus delta t because we are doing this at t plus delta t. And then multiplying the same equation on both sides by 1 minus beta at t, you will get this 1 minus beta times this is equal to minus of 1 minus beta into this term taken on the right hand side plus 1 minus beta into B of t. Now, multiplying equation A by matrix D, so we multiply this A by matrix D. So, then we will get here D, here also we will get D matrix, here also we will get D matrix, why we have to do that because in these two expressions now you have D here, D times this. So, we are bringing it to that form. So, we are multiplying both the sides by D and then we substitute these two equations in that then we will get this total expression where this D times this is coming here and then this beta times this and this is being replaced by because here D times all three are multiplied by D all these three terms by D and D times this and D times this are replaced by these two expressions, is it clear? See here we multiplied it by D all the terms and now what we have already got D times beta dA by dA by t this and D times this we already have these expressions now. So, D times this will be equal to this plus this. So, that is what we have got now these four terms are on this side and D times this is on the right hand side. So, we have just substituted this and this in place of these two here.  So, terms marked in blue are combined because this is in A t plus delta t then this is marked in green is B D plus delta t and this is B t. So, that we are combining together because both are in terms of B and then third is in black. So, this is A times t sorry A of t and this is also A of t right. So, these two terms we are combining together and then we are also dividing by beta here the whole equation we are dividing it by beta and then we are combining this blue, green and black term in this equation. So, for example, this just remains C A t plus delta t because this whole equation is divided by beta right. So, that then other terms also similarly are adjusted and arranged. Now, we are actually starting with this this equation is rewritten here and now you can see the three terms. Three schemes that emerge are for beta equal to 0 beta equal to 1 and beta is equal to half. So, if beta is equal to 0 then you have forward Ehlers method you substitute beta equal to 0 here this term will go this term also will go and what will remain is only D times this is equal to this beta is 0. So, this plus 1 times B of t. If beta is equal to 1 then that will give backward Ehlers method and then these two terms 1 and minus beta 1 minus beta they will become 0. So, these two terms will go. So, D times this will become simply this is beta is 1. So, C into A of t plus A at t plus delta t plus beta is 1. So, then it is just B at t plus delta t and then if beta is equal to half which leads to Kank Nikolson method. So, there is a if beta is equal to half then it leads to Kank Nikolson method. So, there is a type over here. If beta is equal to half then you get this. So, then you get the average of those two terms. So, none of these terms goes to 0 and then you get average of the corresponding terms. So, now, let us see how do we implement this for example, in Poisson's equation and then coupled to circuit equation. In time domain. So, now our Poisson's equation is this del square A is equal to minus mu times j naught. So, j you replace by n i by s as we had done earlier in previous lectures and then this leads to matrix equation C times A minus B times i equal to 0 where B at the element level for the ith node is n by s delta by 3. So, that you can see in the previous lectures on you know current driven system we had similar you know expression and voltage driven. This is voltage driven because i is variable. So, i is unknown. So, this will be voltage driven case. So, now the corresponding circuit equation is this. This also we had seen it earlier same you know circuit coupled with finite element model this is the field region and this is the circuit region. So, this is a voltage driven circuit coupled to field model. So, now the circuit equation this also we had seen u is equal to n d psi by dt r into i plus l d i by dt and this n d psi by dt is the corresponding terminal voltage here at the device.  So, now the two equations become C A minus B i equal to 0 and u is equal to this. These two equations also we had seen earlier they are identical to what we had seen earlier for voltage fed circuit coupled to field model. In sequence it over. So, combining now these two equations then you can get this matrix equation. So, you have in the first equation there is no d a by a by d a by t and d a by i by d a by t. So, that is why you have 0 0 here and in the second equation you have g dash getting multiplied by a d a by a by d a by t is to be d a by a by d a by t and similarly l external is getting multiplied to d a by i by d a by t. So, this one and then plus now the you know multiplicants to a and i. So, they are C here minus B and in this equation it is second equation it is r external into i and then on the right hand side you have u in the second equation in the first equation it is 0. Now, actually we had got the same equation earlier for time harmonic case, but it is not in time harmonic. So, this equation now is in time domain, but same equation you know if we converted to time harmonic case wherein we replace d a by d a by t at j omega then we get this and this is this equation we had in fact seen earlier. So, here what we have done d a by d a by t is replaced by j omega. So, that is why j omega gets multiplied with g dash and now this since it is there is no d a by d a by t. So, now a and i become common and d a by d a by t terms get multiplied by j omega. So, then we get a simpler equation which we had seen earlier. So, since now we are dealing with time domain and transient simulation we will be working with this equation. Now, following the method of discretization what we did you know if you remember we multiplied one equation what we had. So, here also we multiplied there were you know 2 2 see here this equation we multiplied both sides by beta at t plus delta t and then multiplied by 1 minus beta at time t. So, same thing we are doing here this equation we are going to multiply both sides by beta at t plus delta t. So, you get this and then multiply both sides by 1 minus beta at t. So, you are then getting. So, that is why here it is t plus delta t. So, here it is t plus delta t, here it is t. So, all these superscripts are at t plus delta t here they are at t. So, both the equations are identical only the variables are at t plus delta t here they are at t here and here it is beta here it is 1 minus beta. So, now we add both these equations this whole equation and this equation we add together then we get this. So, what we are doing we just can you just see here these terms are common is it not these are common multiplicants. So, they are taken out and what is common to them is in the in this bracket. So, it is here beta times this here it is beta times this 1 minus beta times this and then you get this entire equation. Now what we will do is we will use that equation A which was there on the first slide and it was beta times dA by A by dA by t at t plus delta t plus 1 minus beta into dA by A by dA by t at t is equal to this difference divided by time delta t. So, this actually whatever we have it here in this equation we replace it by so you get this. So, now same equation is written here again this is the same equation what we have got here is written here and now the final step what we have to do is because this is a transient simulation. So, we have to bring t plus delta t terms on one side and all t terms on the other side because we are marching in time. So, we already have values at time t and we want to calculate values at values of variables at t plus delta t. So, we are just rearranging this equation by taking t plus delta t terms on the left hand side and all the variables and they are multiple currents at t time t on the right hand side. So, this is our final equation for implementation in finite element method. So, what we are going to do is we when we get when we discretize all these by using finite element procedure all these terms by our usual procedure they are known C is known is it not these are global coefficient matrix V is also known G is known R external L external are known everything is known and beta depending upon what we select which scheme we select beta will either it can be 0 it can be 1 or it can be half. So, depending upon that beta value will be so the nine accordingly it will become forward backward or Krang-Nicholson scheme. So, with this we complete this theory of transient FE formulation in the next lecture we will go to non-linear formulation. Thank you.


What they gon' do with me now?  We go red We got Rico right in the building Coming from Atlanta, right? Yes, ma'am So welcome to New York How's your time been here so far? It's been okay, it's cool, it's lit All right, so tell me, like What was it like when you grew up in Atlanta? Yeah, I came out there when I was three years old Okay, so you grew up there What are you looking at before that? Puerto Rico So that's where Puerto Rico Red came from Yeah So, okay, we gon' get into that All right, so what has it been like, though, growing up in Atlanta? Me and been great, I've been there since I was three years old So it's like the culture and everything Just, you know, it was great And when did you start getting into music? I think I really got into it when I was like 13, 14 Like doing my first little song type Then like really just going at it Okay, so would you say that you started making music because of like What you were around, like the culture, or was it something that you were genuinely interested in? At first, I feel like I was doing music because At first I felt like I started doing music because I see my homeboys doing it And then I was like, man, I'm gonna try this Then I was like, man, I can't do it Then I leave it alone, then go do something else Then go try it again, like just playing around with it So I really took it serious, serious Okay, so if it wasn't music that you were taking serious, what would it have been? Uh, boxing? I used to boxing Okay, oh that's cool Yeah, I used to boxing when I was little, too So what was it that made you feel like music was it? It made me feel like it was it when I really like just like started going harder You know, just going to the studio and like really like making a song And then I was like, man, I can do this Okay, so were you listening to anybody growing up that like influenced you or influenced your sound?  My sound? I say my sound kind of like My future wave a little bit like my dumb kind of cat It's like future writer is like and that kind of like I'm a lot of yeah, a lot of rap Yeah, so like walk me through like what your creative process looks like From the time that you like have it in your mind to write a song Uh, I got a everything started with the beat. I had a right beat Like if I don't like the beat, I might not even record that day Oh really? Yeah, I gotta find the beat and then just play with the hook Everything come from the hook for me like Like if the hook don't sound right, I don't like it So you start from the hook and you build it out?  That's how I come over, yeah Actually like I was in the car and I heard the beat And when I heard the beat when I went to the website and cried the beat I was like she got that wet um I'm like yeah yeah And that's how I came up with it Okay, well I mean you mentioned it so let's let's talk about it now So you have yeah yeah coming out with Callie And that I mean it's a bop It's a bop So you just said that you heard the beat while you were in the car And you started coming up with your lyrics Now was this pre or post Callie? Did you know she was gonna be on it? When I made the song or when I made the song Actually when I made the song and I heard it I was like I need to go put Callie on it because she was already my own girl So I was like oh okay that's dope So how was it working with her? It was great you know she came in there and killed it Of course That's a bye So and y'all have visuals? Yeah we shot a video in here How do you feel about working with like female artists? Is that something that you like? Yeah it'd be dope I'd like to work with a lot more female artists Like who? Like a lot of oldie roles Like just different artists I see like they're doing a thing right Yeah I think it'd be dope So you are like I guess right now in the stage of re-branding Because all of your Instagram content is basically based around here yeah Drop the names and then Rico right now So what is like who is Rico right? What can we like look forward to seeing? We can read what you can look forward to seeing from my music right?  So stay tuned So you signed to Wolfpack Yeah I signed out to Wolfpack I signed out to Wolfpack How did that come about? How did you what was it that made you decide to sign to them? Uh now it's family art Like it was already it was already like family So it was just easy for me to sign to Wolfpack Because it was already like family So okay They want no question about it So like remove your family aside If it wasn't your family would you still have signed Or would you stay independent? Uh now I would have signed too Because the person that owned Wolfpack big bro like He a real salad one So he gonna go off for it And then like sign on anybody else Or any other label or something Okay so I'm gonna put you on the spot right now Because you said that it's not about family Right so I'm curious because I see a lot of conversations about like independent artists who They are against being signed and then you have signed artists who feel like no It's a great thing to be signed What would you say like Is or like some pros to being a signed artist as opposed to staying independent Which means a pro or a BS? Like what do you think are benefits to being Do you feel like there any benefits to being signed? Uh in some cases I feel like it might be like Other artists like when you sign to like certain labels Like certain labels on what you do certain stuff I guess And then other people who would Like someone like like the label I'm signing to Wolfpack I know he gonna go 100 times like harder Hard than probably in other labels because like he believe in it So would you say like a pro will be like that your music gets pushed out Is it that you get connections? Is it that like you're working with people that maybe you wouldn't have worked with before? Yeah I believe in that like with the pros Yeah that's probably different Okay all right so is there anything that you wish like Looking back at the 13 year old you that was making music Is there anything that you wish you would have known back then that you know now? Hmm yeah that's how to like to like I feel like when I was younger like You know you don't know everything so you just wish you would have like Knew what to do back then which you know how to do now like go to the club like You know do some stuff but of course you can't do that when you're young so Of course You gotta learn everything when you get older too So you said go to the club so like you think that that's the big part of Establishing yourself as an artist? Uh So what do you mean when you said that? Just getting yourself out there basically Okay Okay Because more because you know more is like more internet and stuff like that now Back then and wouldn't really like that Back then you know back then you should like you had to go out to the club Right right right And like doing stuff and like be outside every day Now it was really like internet tick tock you know Do you feel like It's a little easier now I mean but you're also in Atlanta so in Atlanta it's like Every like I feel like there are a lot of artists out there I'd be outside every night so Right That's how I feel And I'm sure I get your name out there Yeah of course that's how I deal with my record yeah yeah I was outside every night Before I got something I'm like I was outside Every night in my record play Some all out people So what would you say like to artists how did you how did you make that happen If somebody trying to get this stuff played in the clubs and stuff Well with me For me it worked for me I knew how the DJs are ready So I would like show them some love So of course they didn't show me love So that's what a lot of people don't get Like the people want you to go to the club Like people that got their music out there They want to go get it played in the club They don't probably like show love to the DJs They don't meet it was different because You know I thought of some of them They were crazy and lasted everywhere I go And they liked it and if they liked their song they really gonna go crazy So that's what it was my song they liked it So they really like kept going crazy like every day Every time I go somewhere else Or they'll send me videos to my phone like boom I'm playing your song I was like I bet So just staying well connected When hand washes the other type of deal Basically yeah Okay so what song was it of yours that really like Hopped Like what was the song that got you attention I did a song Matter of fact I did a song The White Hail Cyrus May Love And that only did the main music on YouTube Is that the song you had done playing in the clubs Nah after Yeah yeah we've been Yeah yeah we've been going crazy playing Oh well yeah So this is a new thing You can get into songs played in the clubs This is a new thing Yeah Oh okay all right all right all right Okay so your song The White Hail Cyrus was When I Got Baby Yeah which is a YouTube though All right but it only did the main music Do you have any other like Cosigns or I just know a lot of people a lot of rappers That are hard you know Well it's still me I just do one of the things By doing other things Yeah like them and the shit All right Yeah we'll get a relationship like that All right so I mean you're from Atlanta And a lot of times like we have artists come here We ask them like if there's another place that you could go Like where would it be And a lot of them say Atlanta But I know Atlanta is getting very populated Like there's a lot of people out there Especially a lot of artists trying to make it Do you feel like There's enough room for everybody Who's trying to make it out there It's another room but Atlanta is packed Y'all keep coming to Atlanta it's packed I ain't no lie What you trying to say It's packed Atlanta is packed Ain't no room for no more people Atlanta is packed But we love it There's a lot of people Y'all like So okay so Atlanta is packed You're saying there's no more room for us So where do you think would be like The next best place for artists to go If they wanted to make some connections And make it work If they, they're not allowed to Not just talking but now Atlanta, Atlanta, Atlanta the place comes here This is where all the music is It's like you gotta come to Atlanta forever If you had to choose another place outside of Atlanta To be where would it be Probably Miami Why Why Miami If I had to choose another place to stay at Yeah like you choose Miami I like Miami it's a buy You like to party I would say that's what I'm like You saying it like I like to party on the party vibe I like the outside I like the sun out there Like the beach Okay Yeah but so beautiful woman He outside for real Okay So what ultimately Is like your angle When it comes to your music career Like what is it that you would like to see Come out of this I think I would like to be one of the top artists Mmm Would you like to be one of the top artists In terms of people really bumping in music Or just like one of the most well known artists People really bumping in my music Really bumping in my music So if you were making music And people liked it But you weren't really seeing anything from it Would you keep making it Yo of course Yo keep grinding Okay That's good Cause not everybody gonna like your music Everybody's not gonna like the music Some people gonna be like No no I like this kind of music I like that kind of music Everybody gonna probably like the art of music I make I'm just checking the temperature So it's gonna be different Okay so like what are some things that Some artists rather that you would like to work with Uh Of course it's great A future Where I weigh A little baggy Lotto It's a different art I think it's interesting you have a little baby on your list See I signed to the same label Yeah but we ain't never made a song though I don't know How is it being signed to a label with somebody that you Were you bumping Lil Baby before you got signed Yeah I knew him before I got that I already knew See you Okay excuse me So you was already connected to Lil Baby Is anything in works Anything in maybe you in works Not right now but probably in the future Okay All right so If you had to give like Your top three things for an upcoming artist To have down pat to make it in this industry And keeping in mind that everybody is not as well connected to you Because we know that you are connected and protected out here in these streets If you had to choose like three things that you think are like the most important what would they be Uh that they should do That they should be where uh staying in the studio Uh make a lot of content Just be on the internet a lot Be on the internet a lot Yeah like get your music all the way out there And like keep like you know go get all the connects that you can possibly try to get Keep grinding basically Don't let nobody tell you can't do it Okay Okay so um What are your plans for 2022 as we move along and just drop the big single So what else can we expect Uh after this single drop another single I'm dropping another single And then probably take Are you dropping a single a solo or is it gonna have a feature one year? No that one got a feature then after that it's gonna be solo Who's the feature? The surprise Is it a label meet or no? No it's somebody else Atlanta?  Oh the take on me crazy For sure And what can we expect it For the summertime You got a name? Mmm not yet I'm working on it Okay I'm keep making these records Fair enough fair enough We'll be looking forward to it So is there anything else that you want to talk about touch on before we wrap this up? No I just want to say shout out to Woodpack If I'm not on all platforms you know and they be grinding keep grinding that's all you gotta do All right y'all thanks for tuning in


there is like a Apple Watch charger with no cable at all. Like it literally is just the USB port and the part that you put your watch on. So, and it weighs nothing. It feels like it's just empty. So weighs nothing, it's as tiny as could be. It actually works really well. I used to know, I took a red eye flight and I was able to plug it into the USB port under this TV screen in front of you. Yeah. And it actually, it's perfect. It plugs in the right way and then you sit, you watch on top of it. The downside is that it's really hard, I have like one of those chargers that has three ports on it or whatever. And if I plug this into it to get the watch to stay on it and all that. So it's not the kind of thing you wanna use as your everyday charger, but to put in your travel stuff and have it with you. You know, cause you only need like a couple of hours chargers. Apple Watch is great. If you forget to plug it in at night and you get up in the morning, you could charge it while you're in the shower and you're probably good for the day. So this thing saves you, it's like way better. And I think it was like 10 bucks. Oh, that's awesome. So yeah, so it's definitely like easy purchase and it's in my travel bag and that's where it lives. Yeah, just 100% of the time. Yeah, exactly. 100% of the time I have the regular cable on my nightstand and that's where I watch normally get charged. So that was a good find. And I can't believe, like I went through earlier trips this year and I didn't have this thing. I was like, okay, I've got it. Yeah, yeah, this problem is over now. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, I, you know, looking at that and for those of you watching the video, you can see it. I, my use case thought was, oh, this would be perfect to plug into a battery pack that has a USB-A port on it, right? Definitely. Oh yeah, it works, yeah. And you know, like you said, it doesn't take much power to charge up the watch. So you're not gonna deplete your battery pack but you put that on the counter or whatever, you plug that thing in, you're good to go and then you're off to the races. Yeah, I like it. I like it. It's good. Great stuff. Yeah, you understand what cool stuff found is here because that's it, man.


You had said on Truth Social a number of times you did the declassify. I did declassify, yes. Okay. Is there a process? What was your process to declassify? It doesn't have to be a process as I understand it. You know there's different people say different things, but as I understand it doesn't have to be. If you're the president of the United States you can declassify just by saying it's declassified even by thinking about it because you're sending it to Mar-a-Lago or to wherever you're sending it and There doesn't have to be a process. There can be a process, but there doesn't have to be. You're the president. You make that decision So when you send it, it's declassified. We, I declassified everything. You just watched Donald Trump possibly incriminate himself during that interview with Sean Hannity Not because he stupidly claimed that he could declassify documents with his mind I don't know how he thinks that would work But just to show you how stupid national security attorneys think that that is they called it idle fantasy But the reason why he may have incriminated himself there and why this interview may be used against him is because he made an Admission there. So Maggie Haberman of the New York Times explained this via Twitter The focus is understandably on Trump's claim of mental declassifications from his Hannity interview But he appeared to indicate he intentionally sent the documents to Mar-a-Lago Which cuts against the it was an accident claims from the transcript quote if you're the president of the United States You can declassify just by saying it's declassified even by thinking about it because you're sending it to Mar-a-Lago or to wherever You're sending it in other words He can no longer claim because of that interview that he just so happened to be in possession of classified materials by Accidents now he is admitting here that it was purposefully illegally sent to Mar-a-Lago. So Great job Donald Trump now to make matters worse on truth social He also tacitly admitted to financial fraud in an effort to presumably make himself look better That wasn't the case of course So he quoted Fox News digital which said Trump did not inflate his financial statements as prosecutors had anticipated But instead undervalued his assets so In an effort to make himself look good pointing out to his followers see look I didn't actually inflate my financial assets Okay, but in that same sentence it says that you undervalued your assets instead. That's still illegal What are you doing? I mean his attorneys have got to be so frustrated with him because he is not the type of client that you can coach Like he is constantly putting his foot in his mouth and Honestly, I love to see it.  I think you should keep talking like if I were his attorney I would say get off of social media Stop doing interviews like you're very clearly making matters worse for us. You're making our jobs harder, but he won't stop He's uncontrollable. So he's gonna continue to make matters worse And if he didn't do enough damage to himself today Let me just show you the 24 hours that he's had as CBS News reports a three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit agreed to put on hold a lower court's order that kept the subset of sensitive records off Limits for the Justice Department to use for investigative purposes pending the review of the materials by an independent arbiter known as a special Master in its 29-page opinion the panel said it agreed with the Justice Department that the federal district court in South Florida likely aired in blocking Investigators use of the classified records and then requiring them to submit the sensitive documents to the outside arbiter for review Now if you're a Trump supporter, you're probably claiming well These judges are just biased because they very clearly rebuked the order from Judge Eileen Canon and we'll talk about her in a second here But you can't actually claim that these judges are biased because two of the three judges on this panel Were appointed by Donald Trump so yeah Them saying that Judge Eileen Cannon aired is what everyone else what all legal experts were essentially saying in unison now On the subject of Judge Eileen Cannon as Kyle Cheney of Politico points out She actually had to backtrack and strike out provisions from her original ruling that stated that the 100 classified Documents were exclusively subject to the review of the special master now She did this remember after blocking the Justice Department from accessing the documents that were seized at Mar-a-Lago So now because of the 11th Circuit Court the DOJ can again review these files and continue with their investigation So this is really bad news for Donald Trump But the one silver lining at least politically for him not necessarily legally but politically for him is that his supporters? Primarily his sick offense They don't really seem to care because as a poll conducted by Sienna College and the New York Times points out here His support has remained relatively stable meaning that those who already thought that he was guilty Well, they still hold that view but more importantly those who thought that he didn't commit serious crimes Haven't changed their minds either. So the prospect of him potentially committing crimes and the FBI raid It's not really changing their views So yeah, I'm not necessarily surprising because this is largely a cult of personality, but still there's that so either way Like I can anticipate many more bombshells these investigations will continue and one other thing that I am certain of is Trump will continue to put his foot in his mouth and Possibly self-incriminate even further and I love to watch this shit show because it's great to see somebody who's a terrible person Who's never been held accountable once in his entire life finally face a little bit of heat for the potential crimes that he's committed So I don't know if anything will come of this, but there's a lot of investigations and where there's smoke There's fire so even if he's held minimally accountable for this even if he's just slapped with the fine Just the mere fact that all of these investigations are inconvenient and they're making him squirm is great But Donald Trump, please keep on talking because you are doing yourself. No favors To the kind self


A price cannot be put on the importance of training with allied and partner nations. We were working with our force reconnaissance group counterparts, but we were also working with the 37th Maroo, which is the first Filipino Marine hella-borne company, so we're trying to set conditions for successful operations for them in the future. Operating in the Philippines gives our Marines the opportunity to prove that their tactics, techniques, and procedures are working in other environments in the Pacific. We were able to learn how the Filipino Marines control the jungle, how they execute raids, and then we were able to impart our knowledge on how we execute those same operations.