So the recording's on, we have several areas of the budget adjustment that we've been digging into a little bit, so we'd love to open it up to you in any discussion. Jim, do you have some thoughts? I didn't say I wanted to talk. But you always go first. Interesting enough, I just saw the FNM commissioner in the hallway and he said, I'm headed to Appropriations to talk about the judicial transfer for, I said, well, you go ahead and tell him. You're waiting for Hauskopf to come up with a recommendation. Finance and management. So I don't know that he's going to say those words, but that was my advice to him. No, I think you went through that laundry list, most of it's pretty much that we would agree with except for that area, whether we make a recommendation. And the other area is whether or not we want to entertain with Mike Smith, Secretary Smith said he asked for yesterday. Is there anything else that we're loose? Well, there's four issues. Five issues that are flagged that we need to make sure this is done. And are you supposed to introduce the building because somebody just came in looking for it? Oh, yes, I am. Sorry, I said my piece. All right, sure. Ron was. Okay, good. Thank you. Is that your blend, though? I did that last week. Anyone else have burningly thoughts or concerns or statements they want to make about the budget adjustment conversation? Looking at. Yes. I remember a few years ago, and I had to check and see how many. I believe the workman's content section for state employees was primetime. So an outside company takes care of this. And I guess I would like to know how much involvement they have, what the oversight is into their accounting principles, or at least to issue some kind of statement from the committee saying that even if companies or sections of state government are outsourced, there is still a responsibility for overseeing their accounting principles. I would say it's really concerning to me that there was such a wide swing from surplus to deficit. And I don't feel like we've seen a full accounting of exactly where that came from. Somewhat ambiguous references to administrative costs not being accounted for doesn't really explain it. Well, that's the whole permitting part of the administration process over the course of three years. In addition to the reduction, kind of your response to the rate of the whole thing is unbelievable. So let's pause on this issue because Representative Gina miraculously appeared moments after we asked him to come and enjoy it. So we were just launching into a different discussion and we thought it might take a few minutes for you to get here, but we are glad that you're here and we're doing just a 15 minute on each of the bills that is on our wall. And I understand that you're the prime sponsor of H-464. Yeah, so I prepared a little presentation. It should be about seven minutes. So I don't know if anyone wants to tie me, but it's 150 for the record, so I will begin. So this is Brian Sheena. Oh, it's 151. Sorry, 151 for the record. This is Brian Sheena, State Representative from Burlington. I'm here today to talk about H-464, an act relating to law enforcement training on appropriate use of force, de-escalation tactics, and cross-cultural awareness. So the purpose of H-464, and this language is in the bill, it's to require the collection and distribution of data regarding the use of force used in a traffic stop. It requires the Criminal Justice Training Council to develop a model policy regarding the use of force, de-escalation, and cross-cultural awareness. And for law enforcement agencies to adopt a policy containing each component of the model policy. And it requires the Criminal Justice Training Council to report to the Executive Director of Racial Equity regarding trainings on the model policy and race-based data collection. So the rationale for this bill, that use of force along with race data collection, existing fair and impartial policing policy, and training implicit by us and otherwise, is another aspect of a broader discussion, the appropriate civilian oversight of law enforcement. This bill will ensure more robust oversight, enable us the ability to manage our progress, and provide a consistent approach to use of force statewide. Oversight and consistency are critical, particularly in police practices of use of force, and accurate, complete, consistent data are required to ensure fair government for all. So the context of this is that right now, use of force data is not currently collected across all state law enforcement agencies. During traffic stops, a host of other data is collected, but we're not documenting use of force consistently across all law enforcement agencies. Burlington, which I'll use an example of being a representative from Burlington, knowing that there's wide disparity around the state in these practices, Burlington has reported on use of force data twice in the last three years. The city council of Burlington passed a resolution that the police department has to collect use of force data annually. Collection of this data will provide insight into the magnitude of the problem and will allow us to measure our progress on the statewide level as well as on... So in other words, it's not enough that one municipality does it, because we need to be measuring the fairness across the whole state. And a model policy and training will provide consistent expectations for use of force practices across all state law enforcement agencies. So quickly, we're at two minutes, we're dealing with definition of use of force. I'm not going to read this whole thing, but this is a screenshot of Burlington police department. You can see that they have a sentence at the top, the amount of effort required by police to compel compliance by an unwilling subject, and they get that from the International Association of Chiefs of Police. There's a citation at the bottom of the screen there. It's just to give you an idea of what we're talking about when we say use of force. And when we talk about training around escalation versus de-escalation, I wonder if this will work.  Thank you. So you can see here that escalation is when tensions rise and you go from no force using commands to maybe touching, having hands on.  Whether it's intentional, but that happens. Physical conflict leads to death, and I'll give you some examples. But the point of this is that what we're proposing is to train officers more in this piece. The more skills you have in de-escalation, the less likely you are to go up that pyramid in a situation. And then we have cross-cultural awareness. So cross-cultural awareness builds a greater understanding of cultural differences, including but not limited to race, color, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, sexual preferences, gender identity, disabilities, age, socioeconomic class, socioeconomic class, and veteran status. These are a lot of protected classes. But the point is that people who have different experiences, they're subcultures in our culture. And if we don't understand those differences, sometimes we misunderstand people or we can't communicate well with people, and that escalates conflict. And to give our law enforcement officers more skills in this area, especially as they're dealing with more of a diverse population, that this training would improve decision-making through increased awareness of bias and prejudice that strengthens communication skills and emotional intelligence. And it increases the ability of an officer to build trust with others and have empathy. And so these three pieces of training would be giving law enforcement officers more skills to prevent some of the problems we've been seeing. So two minutes to do this. So this is just some numbers. We're not going to dig into this here, but perhaps you would take some testimony to dig into this. This is from the Burlington's 2016 report out. That's how the data looked. That's how it looked in 2019. So you can see there's an inconsistency in reporting from one agency. This we pulled from the census website, and there's links if people want to explore either of those sources. But what you see just as an example, let's look at this. This is raised from 2012 to 2018, where this is just one year, so there's a disparity in how they're reporting it. But if you look, black, all use of force incidents, 20.9%, but the general population estimated 2019, 5.3%. Almost four times higher rate of use of force of police against black people. Just one example of a disparity based on general population. White alone, 85%. And white with 72%. So you see it's not equal to the percentage in population in terms of use of force. We could dig into that another time with other witnesses who are experts in this area, but I just wanted to give you some numbers. Here's some qualitative examples. We had 15 minutes, right? So I guess I don't have to do it at 7. Okay, all right. Because I can take an extra minute, but here's some qualitative data. So we had three high profile use of force deaths in Vermont. These are Burlington examples from Burlington. We had Wayne Brunette, a person struggling with mental illness, shot by the police while holding a long handled shovel on his parents' lawn in 2013. And the city of Burlington ended up paying a $230,000 settlement to his estate in 2019 after to make amends for what happened. Phil Grennan, a person in mental health crisis, was shot by the police while wielding a knife in his apartment in 2016. His death led to the formation of the Mental Health Crisis Response Commission here in Vermont. Douglas Kilburn, a person living with disabilities, was punched in the head by a police officer in the emergency room parking lot of University of Vermont Medical Center. And he died two days later. His death was ruled by homicide. And so these are just some examples of how there were incidents with law enforcement involving use of force that led to death. In some of these cases, the law enforcement officers resigned. This is not, not only is this bad for the general public that people die because of our use of force policy, but it's not good for the workers either. And I, you know, we could dig into this more if you wish, but I bet we could find some examples of people, workers who have trauma, because of the interactions as well. Use of force injuries. So there are three lawsuits pending against the Burlington Police Department right now, all from in the last year or so, with allegations of excessive use of force. All of the plaintiffs are African-American. And there's body cam footage out there if you want to see what these incidents look like, you can find them on YouTube. The lawsuit alleges that the city failed to adequately discipline train or otherwise direct or supervise police officers concerning the rights of citizens and victims, thereby causing police, including defendants. This is all from an article, so this is public record. I was quoting it, so the article is down here, so I'm not trying to make this about the individuals. I'm just giving you a quote, so I'm not going to read their names. It includes defendants who are police officers to engage in the unlawful conduct described above. The lawsuit also alleges that despite the department's written policies, the police administration allowed a pattern of behavior to form within the ranks of the police department, which encourages the unlawful use of force against minorities. And a response to the newspaper article by the assistant deputy chief of police, a person who had committed a crime, who was known to be a person who has been involved in many crimes in our city, fled from police, was pursued, tried to evade, and was unsuccessful in doing so and ended up being apprehended. That's good police work. So I think what this shows you is that our policy has shaped the culture that's leading to a problem. And so if we want to change this, it's not about holding individuals accountable, we need to change the system that's generating the problem. And so just some closing thoughts, police have a challenging job, and it's getting worse for them. And they're going to have to deal with increasingly complex and stressful scenarios. They're currently being trained to use force. They're currently being trained to use it in a certain way. In a neighborhood planning assembly meeting last week, one of my constituents asked a police lieutenant, why do you shoot to kill? And the police officer said, we don't shoot to kill, we shoot to control the situation. And the room gasped. Like what? Like how's that? So just putting it out there, that's not an individual saying that. That's training, that's policy, that's shaping these responses we get. And so it's not good for anyone. And so by changing policy, we can change training, that will change the skills our workers have, and that will ultimately change our practices, and then that changes culture. And then ultimately that culture change hopefully will make things better for everyone. In addition to that data must be collected, reviewed and shared in a meaningful, transparent way to increase accountability of the government to the people who we represent. There should be some standards about how that's done. And the state government must diligently review data to make informed decisions that take better care of our law enforcement workforce and the general public who they protect and serve. So I'm hoping you'd be interested in taking up some testimony on this bill. We do have about four minutes left for questions. I just want to put this screen up. I see some of these people might be in the room right now. I don't know if you know you're on this slide, but we have some recommended witnesses from different stakeholders who might be affected. You can see law enforcement in terms of the Attorney General, public safety, the state police, the Burlington Police Department. We have the Racial Equity Director, the Human Rights Commission, ACLU, as well as activists and advocates. And I also think it would be good maybe public hearings or some way to engage the public. Family members of people killed, people hurt by the police advocates. And you know, something I didn't put here because we have administration, but actually maybe the police union and the workers. I didn't put it up there, but as I'm going through the presentation, I'm recognizing that maybe we should have put the police union, not just their management. Because workers have input into this and understand it better. I think we'll have a vet buy-in and they know best the job. So I think there's a place for them, an important place for them at the table in helping us to provide them with the skills they need to do the best possible job for Vermont. So last but not least, we have questions. And I have Abenaki here and the dog, Mao Geno. This is just a demonstration of cross-cultural awareness. I figured let's put the final slide, I'm going to make it bilingual English and the Indigenous language of Vermont. So that being said, do we have any Nadad Moe Wagonal? I'm still learning English. I have a question because I couldn't quite read your list because I'm not very good at this, but... This one? Yes. Do you have recommendations on people who could represent the community of folks who are in the mental health crisis? Since the examples that you gave were, and I think the examples that many of us can think of in our own communities are people who are in the mental health crisis. Yes. I would suggest that we ask the members of the Mental Health Crisis Commission if they can. I don't know if it's a conflict for them to be reviewing cases and talking with us, but I would ask Vermont Psychiatric Survivors, NAMI, the National Association of Mental Illness. That's for family of people with mental illness. We could also ask designated agencies if perhaps they had a way to ask clients or if they wanted to weigh in. I do think that there's disability rights organizations. We have so many government groups that sometimes I can't remember the name, but it's like a council, a disability rights council. I might be getting the names wrong, but I think those are some groups you can go to to get the perspective of people who struggle with mental illness. Another thing we don't... I didn't mention it in my presentation, but people living with homelessness, we might want to go to some of the housing organizations too and see if maybe they can get some people living with homelessness to talk about their experience. As you heard today on the floor, when the person gave the devotional, he mentioned wanting to be able to sleep without fear of violence, and that's violence not just from other people who are homeless or people drunk walking by. It's also police violence, honestly, sometimes. So that's some more examples. I don't know if you were taking notes, if anyone was taking notes, but... I appreciate that. Yeah. Questions, committee? So you want them to be trained through the criminal justice training council? We want them to have a model policy of what training looks like and then requiring every agency to adopt policy that meets those requirements. I think how the mechanics of it work, I would suggest we bring them in and share with them the concern and see what they suggest. Because it may fit into some of their existing work. It might be an extension of existing work that we're asked that they do with police. We already do offer training. Yeah. So it might be just enhancement of the training that they're doing and taking it further. I think this is where it's good to have witnesses come in and testify what the pros and cons are because then it can make the idea better. Questions, committee? I think this kind of policy change is important and critical. But how do we hold these agencies accountable to lift it out? Well, in this bill, it talks about two processes that would help keep the agencies accountable. That collecting data is a way of keeping people accountable because if we update a collection and reporting, then the public is seeing it, elected officials are seeing it and workers and people in the agency have something to measure progress by but right now that's inconsistent throughout the state in this area. Even though there's other areas where my understanding is there is greater consistency of that, the other piece of accountability built into here is the number three, which is we have a new executive director of racial equity who's looking at how systemic racism and looking at disparities in our criminal justice and schools, you know, in our systems of government. And so there would be a report to her regarding the trainings and the data collection. So we'd have someone in government also checking on that. I will say the Racial Justice Alliance, who I'm working with on this bill and a few others, has created their own data sharing page that I can, if you all haven't gotten it already from them, we can send it to the committee. It's like a data dashboard that they created to demonstrate what the state should do. Like they took state data, they made a dashboard. It's not everything we're looking for, but it's an example. That's another way that there could be accountability is perhaps with the data collection is a way to make it available to the public in an interface in a way that's meaningful and that's like people could click on things and it's like easy to access. And the reason I think that creates greater accountability is that public awareness makes a difference and then we as elected officials are accountable and the people can hold us accountable if things aren't getting better. I mean it's elected officials who appoint people often into certain positions who then hire people and so I don't know if that covers some of it of what you were saying like in addition to the trainings. Other questions committee? Well thank you for your very thorough bill walkthrough that you did more homework than many folks who introduced bills. Well and I tried to keep it to 15 I think we went a little over but... You can't control how many questions we ask. You can ask more of you. This is a lot more engaging than sitting in an auditorium. Did you give that to our committee assistant? Yes, it's posted. I'm actually accessing it through, I'll shut it, I'm accessing it through, see I clicked on it there. That's wonderful so we can go and look at those links if we want to. I don't know if the camera, I don't know if that's Orca but I mean part of that too is that the general public if people want to review, they can go read the articles, look at these data sites, see what's out there and be educated about what's going on. Thank you. Do you always have donuts? I think we should thank you. I'm going to do a short form university and access them. In case we're resisting. Never from very town is gracious to be the sponsor of this morning's donuts. Thanks for having me. I'm going to run back to my committee. Thank you. Thanks a lot. All right. Come on, it's 34. So folks, we're going to do a quick walkthrough of age 634 state ethics commission and then we need to switch again to go back to our budget adjustments. No. Before you get started, John, I'm going to need to scoot out to have a conversation with down in the speaker's office. So if I'm not here, I will let you go ahead and navigate the budget adjustment memo. Okay. I trust these guys will put all of their best efforts into that. This is your chance. Okay. For the record, I'm a representative John Gannon from Bloomington and I'm here to talk to you about age 634, which is a bill of co-sponsoring with a member from... It's a great bill. This came... I was asked to introduce this bill by the state ethics commission's executive director, Larry Novins. A lot of the bill is basically cleanup of some things. But there are two real substantive changes, which I'll go over in detail, but one is to actually have the state ethics commission propose an enforceable state code of ethics, which would then go to the general assembly for final approval. So there'd be a two-step process. State ethics commission would create. We would have to approve. That would be enforceable. So that's one of the big changes and the other change before is changing the sunset. The state ethics commission is going to sunset at the end of this fiscal year and so that's moving it up, adding another year so that it continues in place for another year. So those are two big substantive changes. So now I'll go through each change that's in the bill. The first change is with respect to financial disclosures of executive officers in the state government is changing their financial disclosures from a biannual process to an annual process. So every year, instead of every other year, they would be required to file financial disclosures. They would also, with respect to that disclosure, have to certify that the information on the pages is true to the best of their knowledge information and belief. So that would be in addition to what they have to do. You know, many of the disclosure documents we all fill out require you to sign the statement very similar to that. And so those are changes. It would also require commission members to annually file financial disclosure. So that's the ethics commission would have to do that. And then there is a minor change to who appoints members to the state ethics commission. One of the members was appointed by the Vermont Human Resources Association. That entity really doesn't exist. It should be the Society of Human Resources Management, or SHIRM. SHIRM is actually a national organization with state councils. So the Vermont State Council would appoint one of the members to the State Ethics Commission instead of the Vermont Human Resources Association. So I think that's a fairly straightforward one. It also changes that if you're an elected judicial officer, you should not serve on the State Ethics Commission. For Pete, a little bit of history with respect to that. The former chair of the State Ethics Commission became an assistant judge. Well, she was still, I believe, serving on the Ethics Commission. So I think that's why that change was made. We want to change the term from three to five years for State Ethics Commission members. Class C. Okay, it gives them authority to employ people if so, but obviously that's a budgeting issue. I mean, there's no budget, there's no preparation requests in this bill. Procedures for handling complaints, I don't think. Okay, so here is the start of the thing. The Department of Human Resources does not have a code of ethics. It has certain sections of its personnel manual that refer to ethics issues. So what this is proposing to do is just clarify that the Department of Human Resources does have some ethical things, but they're in their personnel policy and procedure manual. And it is my understanding that those procedures are not necessarily enforceable. So this changes advisory opinions. As I think we all know, there are some challenges with respect to advisory opinions, or at least the first advisory opinion that was issued by the Ethics Council. It just, this changes the language that says as a person who is subject to the provisions of this chapter may request it. So it can't be an entity that is not subject to the provisions of this chapter. So it would have to be a state employee, a state officer, or a member of the legislature, or judiciary, who is subject to the State Ethics Commission. So it can't be the program, for example, that can ask for an advisory opinion. Nor a candidate. Nor a candidate. They can ask for, you know, written requests for opinions. New change, the executive director can seek comment from person's interest in the subject of an advisory opinion under consideration. This is to sort of bring in, if they need expert with respect to an issue, that they can talk to those people. And so here is the big change. Honor before November 15, 2020, the State Ethics Commission saw some into the House and Senate committees and gave us the proposed state code of ethics for the general assembly to consider enacting into law. So this is the most significant change in the bill. So right now, there is no enforceable state code of ethics. And, you know, having recently done a training on ethics, you know, we in the House and Senate don't have a lot of ethics rules. So I think it's important as a state that we actually have an enforceable state code of ethics. Even if somebody violates it, there's some action that can be taken. It's also a way to educate people about what is, you know, what is ethical conduct and what is not. I mean, we don't want to trap people. But right now, with other enforceable state code of ethics or even House or Senate rules that really deal with a lot of different ethics issues, people don't know what's necessarily ethical. They more have to go by their own more compass in the state right now. And so I think this is an important step to help guide people to know what is ethical and what's not. Jim, did you want to jump in with it? Yeah, no, my understanding is a number of states have this currently. But this section of the bill is just pushing the question. You know, we're going to have to come back and talk about it next year. So nothing changes until next year if we and others decide to move that forward or we like what the recommendation is or want to tweak the recommendation from the ethics director. That's my understanding. Is that correct? With respect to code conduct? Yeah. That's all the purpose of bringing it to the General Assembly. Is the General Assembly to take a look at it? A couple questions. Sure, sir. Why the change in the disclosure as far as from bi-annual technical, but what's the motivation behind that? I just think to have more current disclosure with respect to a person's financial circumstances and things do change on a basis. I think many other states in the federal government require annual disclosure so it would be more consistent with what other states in the federal government does. And then how about the change of term from the three or five years why that? That's a good question. Let's see. So they were concerned about people leaving the commission and staggered terms and just making sure they had more institutional knowledge. So I think that's the reason for that change. Does that make sense? Yes. When it got established towards the term to set up a staggered that you did? Yeah, they are staggered. But we have five members so five year term we ensure that there's some institutional knowledge on the board. Thank you. And finally, there's one other thing is the sunset this section was to be repealed on June 30th of 2020 this year so it extends it out to July 1st of 2021. We give the efforts commission a year of life but they would have to come back here again next year to see how they're doing. Obviously, okay, so what's not in the bill? Okay, we created an enforceable state code of ethics. There still isn't a true enforcement mechanism for that except with respect to like the House and Senate, we do have ethics panels that can enforce rules against members of the legislature. There's still not really an enforcement mechanism for state employees, especially statewide officers such as the governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state and the state treasurer. Those complaints, if somebody files an ethics complaint against them they go to the Department of Human Resources and as I understand from the executive director of the ethics council go nowhere. That's an issue that's not touched on in this but I think we've just started down the road with respect to standing up in ethics commission. I think having an enforceable code of conduct is a way to start training people about what is and what is not good ethical behavior and I think that's an important step to take before we start our aggressively enforcement. In my opinion. Jim? So, representative Gannon if we were to adopt this bill, especially putting into motion adopting a code of ethics next year we want to argue that this is removing a little bit of the thickly that some have been quoted in the press lately. Yes. Thank you. Questions for John? We'll have plenty of opportunity to ask more questions. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Nice job, representative. I'm sorry I did not have a power point. We were just talking about you. Thank you. Okay. So I think we just want to go through the outstanding issues that we had in the budget adjustment act and I think that the first one we had relates to the workers compensation fund and the state liability fund. So we started talking about that and Marcia started talking about that. She has concerns about the contractor that is now doing the workers problem. And the oversight of the contractor. Definitely. Jim. I don't know how we would know that. I want to think that F&M is if they're noticing a trend of increased expenses then are there more injuries or do we have a workplace safety issue or are the admin fees too high? I mean I don't know that we're in a position to asset but I guess I just look at this there's a deficit in that fund we ought to try to put the money back in and be honest with our accounting and that's what it sounds like they're asking for. I mean if you think there should be a minor to say give us more information sometime about the trend of the fund in terms of costs or administrative charges we can do that. The weird thing to me is that in demulking with the rates they effectively back funded departments in order than the original appropriations. So there's two things that are sort of weird. One, they're not watching a cookie cabinet and two, money that we effectively didn't appropriate to go someplace and apparently they've got spent. So this is I don't remember what they said about how far in debt they were now four to five million so we're talking 20 million bucks here over the course of three years in consequential in terms of budget but in terms of public policy it seems weird. Well he was loose on that he didn't have about five years I don't think he had all the he said four to five. He did but whatever I mean it's an unhealthy trend obviously we're not budgeting enough up front. Apparently they're not managing the finances. Well it may be. You could have just a few planes they have swayed the other way. Specifically said it was because they reduced the rates and they did so they didn't give the administration the administrative fees associated with it. No that's the testimony I mean you were right Bob. There's two causes for it. So I mean all right so let's just do concisely sir are we okay with the appropriations? The person I think they're necessary and there's a deficit. So what if any guidance do we want to provide to appropriations around this issue? I mean I for one am concerned that because they were using a surplus this year if we run into a recession next year or the year after that we'll be unable to fund the deficits in workers' comp and state liability and so that's my concern because I guess I'm concerned about their plan going forward. I have no idea what they provide appropriations each year when they go through like next year's budget but would it be appropriate here to add a sentence to ask them to I don't know if it's us or if it's or if it's commerce whoever looks at the details on working comp expenses but give us some background maybe there's no increase in workers' comp each year and they're just not budgeting enough. It sort of just jumps to my mind that this is a self-funded pool similar to the health plan and sometimes regularly it used to be what they would do with the health plan was declare a premium holiday which saved the employees 20% that saved the administration 80% or whatever and it's not like this is an isolated incident and it's something that happens sort of maybe the thing to look at is that from a management standpoint we say we can't put anything in the deficit situation and there's a reasonable customary amount that you should keep in mind that provides for that type of self-funding sort of mechanism. It seems to me when this whole thing transpired underneath the show of administration that there was some language in there I thought that you had to look back and there had to be a certain level of savings for to continue right? I do find it a little odd that somebody is trying to form it out or well in the context of farming it out that there had to be a justification there had to be a significant I forget what the savings was 20% there was some number associated but somebody should be looking at this I thought every year to verify that it's doing what it was intended to do and I do agree it does seem a little odd to have that much of a hole okay firstly we're talking about administrative costs not being allocated can we have, can I add on to that we have to sign a new contract with them which I think is, is that every two years two year contracts for services like that and then at that point the performance is supposed to there are performance measures in the contract and they are supposed to be looked at I don't know what your cycle is on that yeah it's the same, I wasn't sure if I was after something yeah yeah yeah at least 10% but the point is how often it gets reviewed I mean Adam did testify that they are now reviewing on a monthly basis not the case prior yeah I really don't think it's the fund manager responsible for making the payments and so this administration doing something but then he basically said that I'm responsible for so are those are those costs just attributed to administration or it just seems, no they're also they reduce the premiums to all that's right yes they weren't counting for the administrative costs and they reduced the premiums when they had a surplus but the concern is how do they get such a large deficit because it doesn't appear they were looking at what was happening to these two funds so I guess we could encourage the administration to continue on a month to month basis monitoring these two funds does anybody have John or all agency across the state government build the same percentage of payroll or does transportation get a higher land because that's a very good question we didn't hear testimony on that and I think in talking to Marsha there's some county issues here that we may want to look into as a committee rather than dealing with this in the budget adjustment act about what really happened here and exactly are these funds distributed evenly from agency to agency or can F&M decide oh we're going to help AHS out more because their budgets really tight this year I don't at least on the testimony we heard from the judiciary was it no and even from Adam yesterday he said that they can decide who they're going to help and I'm not sure that's I agree I mean we manage the budget so I sort of understand it so I think we can talk to Sarah about what we want to take more testimony outside of the budget adjustment act with respect to this issue Tom was just here maybe wouldn't that be human there's no office that might oversee some of that yeah I mean what kinds are we going to provide to appropriations maybe it's too complicated and if we want to we need to get this on to that again but I'd be happy to look into this more I mean outside of the budget adjustment so do you have enough yeah it's not re-applying our report back but you're just encouraging the administration to continue to monitor mostly as they have been doing now that they have realized that there's an issue got it so the next issue that I have flagged is the 27 slash 53 reserve and as admin progressions testify this morning what they're trying to do this year is prepay this is your next fiscal year does anybody have concerns with that what reserve is this when you have an extra pay period so when you have 53 weeks instead of 52 weeks got it is everybody fine with that one now okay I am fine with it it's necessary but rather than having it come in at budget adjustment is it better to bring plan for it yeah I think what happened is that when they did their mid-year review they found out they had more money and so they decided to take care of it this year as a prepayment next year budget next year I like that which is going to our next issue with respect to the Secretary of State's office the $450,000 in the testimony we heard from Adam Greshin was that that was the same reason the only thing that's a little puzzling there is that Secretary of State's office did not request it but I think it's a budget issue of just prepaying does anybody have any concerns about that not just one of the elections it's for pre-battle other elections costs as I understand because it's a one-time expense it's not every year although it's every other I mean the danger when you prepay stuff is you've made next year's budget a little easier to make but the base of the budget is really higher than what you're showing on paper that's the danger and I'm all for prepaying and staying out of debt it's a danger because you're fooling yourself you go back to following here if these weren't one-time expenses and you say so we're already a couple million dollars in a hole it's the argument that was used on education of using one-time money to keep education rates whole that next year you don't have that one-time money it's the same argument I'm not disagreeing with it it should be sensitive to it though I do want to better the prepay than spend it on something frivolous so we're okay with that as your memo do you want to make reference that you're okay with it do you want to provide commentary on your understanding that these are pre-payments listen to our tape if you want to commentary that's what you tell them no I think that might be a good idea for both the 27 slash the reserve so we understand that they're prepayments okay so you make note of that okay so that brings us to okay the transportation foundation which I explained is just a is to is the amount that they put here is actually a reduction of about 300,000 dollars and that is according to it's what they need for the pay act that the original amount was higher than they needed does anybody have any concerns about that so that brings us to our last issue well two we have two more issues one is the most difficult part of those where is the return issue with the judiciary do we have a final number on that is it zero or no according to Adam Greshan's calculations the FY20 that will actually run a surplus about 53,000 is that I actually forget what the court administrator said is that based upon them leaving a charged position and the associated staffing that goes with it not what Adam Greshan presented us it was purely doing a calculation for the judiciary the way they do it for the rest of the state government and doing what they did they have a vacancy now so he did it based on the payroll there is a vacancy rate that they take into account fine I think it's zero anything is going to be a surplus in the color the entire that vacancy in the court just happened so if he was looking at actual payrolls it's just recently that that judge was elevated to the Supreme Court like within the last month so it probably hasn't even shown up in the payroll this first day was last week in the Supreme Court the state of the state last week was this first week Marsha? so we're okay with leaving that issue up let the record show that the member of chitin passionately tried to get more money for the judiciary and failed do we want to explain why we're leaving that alone? I think we can do that I think we can do that now with russians memo that he provided is that okay? yes that's a good question I don't know when she did so does she stay down to the end of the year? so our final issue is the agency of human services and their request to change the language to allow for multiple deputy secretaries in AHS right now they can only have one deputy secretary currently they actually have none but they're only allowed that one the proposal from Mike Smith was to allow two which is similar to the agency of education and the ethics Mike does anyone know how many divisions there are within the agency of education or AHS has I believe six each one of those has a commissioner that has that division and that it is under those commissioners so I'm wondering in ag how many commissioners are there in ag and how many commissioners are there in education but I don't have a problem what he's proposing but I have a problem with the depth of some of the social services they've got a couple now that together they've got three deputy commissioners people complain in that agency that here's what people are saying the core organizational structure bothers me two commissioners doesn't two deputy deputy deputy my only point Mike my only point would be that as you change titles such as in this instance you also change the payment and I realize how large the agency of human services is but you've got a lot of people at the top a lot of commissioners a lot of deputies I think I want to hear a little bit more about what the organizational structure would look like after having appointed deputy secretary we did a diagram of how the various subunits of the agency of human services on one side was going to be health, mental health and what was the third there was all the health care related ones oh health connect yeah health connect, health and mental health under one deputy secretary and then everything else would be under another deputy secretary yes two questions first the moral comment I think I would prefer to go this way with two deputy secretaries and what others in the building have suggested from time to time and that is break it up into several agencies and then you'll have even more cost because you'll have multiple secretaries and secretary offices so that would be one concern but the other thing is maybe this is more of a question I wasn't asking for any money does that mean no money the rest of this fiscal year or is this going to cause them to a marchers point an additional appropriation when they do the budget next year and that would be the question I would have it's easy to sign off on another deputy secretary you just people around in your shop and you don't come back to us and ask for any money this year but they build the budget for next year well we've got another office I think that's just the question what is the concern assuming I don't know does this cause an increase in appropriation everything was flat next year because of the addition of a new title just to confirm a language that was proposed it's not a specifically two deputies that's the proposal but the language that's proposed is may appoint such a number of deputy secretaries as the secretary deems necessary that is the same language that AOE has but just to confirm it's not only two deputy secretaries I would put in regards to that two is clearly what he described to us and I don't think I would want to add language such that 0.6 I agree with that yeah should be clear cause you're right and it may not be him it may be somewhere down the road and all of a sudden need a new office building all your commissioners and then they have a to them you're right another disreview just very carefully Secretary Smith has recommended no changes whatsoever to his current staffing chart and some of them do include commissioner and three deputy commissioners and there's quite a few deputies so they're might be able to top it but anyway he has made no changes with his proposal except to add the one deputy secretary but I'm thinking that the language that he can add as many as he wants might not be real good can I personal opinion I'm not real problem with Matt and other cause he's got some major issues in that agency that I think needs to work on harder and I I know and he's probably at the mandate of that so does everybody agree we should suggest a word change to limit it to two deputy commissioners and then can we put it into one with the testimony we heard from Mike Smith the secretary of H.S. that that was his plan very good should we ask a question or make the assumption that this does not have any budgetary implications now yes we should definitely say this does not have any budgetary impact this year we don't know about next year can we ask that question man I think our folks should know what they're committing to well I think we can raise the concern we don't know what the budgetary impact will be next year right I'm not sure if they can get someone hired for this budget year yeah I think excuse me I do try to get this moving because it takes a while to hire a qualified person for it and again probably a good man to try to tackle some issues but he needs to help we want sooner and later which I know he's saying this would allow him to do it with the budget adjustment this is the other issue I'm just going to put it wrong briefly is overtime pay for state police you said it on appropriations testimony and I believe you're fine with their explanation of their overtime I was two fold once for officers and then also the dispatch centers and as we know they had a hard time filling the slots they're on drugs for 325 I don't know I think they're 288 and they've got some members who can pull up for the term so it's portion very legitimate I just lost four did you I wanted to ask Jesus oh really come on come more pay more alright so the last issue that's not in this memo at all which we took testimony from the state auditor yesterday on and I think we resolved that we were fine with the physician but we may just want to put it in the memo give it a we're in the memo that we were totally looking to that it's just say that we're fine with the state auditor hiring an additional auditor for funded through the tip payments and a reduction in software costs by bringing some software in house is that okay with everybody yeah okay, good are there any issues that I failed to raise I think everything else that we were highlighted for us we've dealt with earlier that's the end of that it's everything that I had marked that you needed to address or you wanted to address can we even see that or something no we get a single soul copy for the entire committee paper yeah, they do and they do not send them electronically yes it's a matter of it looks like the education has one deputy secretary but several division directors division directors which are a couple of pay grades down from a commissioner or a deputy commissioner or another now I'm sure it's an affirmation companies that are companies that we have outsourced to are supposed to save the government at least 10% I thought it was one of them did you find them? I've been looking for that legislation I can't have someone in the know look how eager the blood's at so Betsy, do you have a reason yes and I can put this together is the committee going to stay to take a vote or so that it should be from the whole committee or should I just have it be from the chair and vice chair to the chair and vice chair of that committee or what is your plan? okay so the memo received from the from the chair to our chair okay do you want to draft it as a memo back from the chair to that chair maybe and me just doing that you're going to sound good I will do that I will go down and do that now and sound good and just to confirm there were a few other more minor things like reversions back to the general fund when there's a surplus do you want the memo to at least acknowledge that you looked at those or is it just really not necessary to address those in the memo? did we look at everything that was highlighted in the memo and hear our concerns okay that sounds good perfect I'll be back thank you


Hi, this is Dr. Ruscio and let's discuss the SIBO thyroid connection. This story really begins in 2017 when a group of researchers were trying to better understand what conditions are most tightly associated to SIBO or small intestinal bacterial overgrowth. So they examined about 1,800 patients and they were surprised to see that hypothyroidism was actually the condition most highly associated with small intestinal bacterial overgrowth. They were expecting that some type of intestinal surgery or perhaps use of acid lowering medications would be what underlined or what most closely associated to SIBO, but in fact it was hypothyroidism. It's a very unexpected finding and this kind of sets the stage for a finding from a year later, 2018. A group of pollutist researchers were looking at SIBO patients and they found that SIBO patients had a higher likelihood of thyroid autoimmunity than did healthy controls and remember that thyroid autoimmunity is the most common cause of hypothyroidism. And then one year later, really the most seminal finding here, a group of researchers wanted to better understand why do some patients who are on thyroid medication still have fatigue and have an inability to stabilize their TSH levels? So they took a group of 16 individuals who are being treated with thyroid hormone as levothyroxin and still had fatigue and were still struggling with dialing in their dose and they gave 30 of them probiotics and the other 30 they gave up the SIBO so as to ensure any findings from this study would not be from the SIBO effect. And the results here were fairly shocking again. TSH levels in the probiotic group decreased, levothyroxin dose required also decreased in the probiotic group and fatigue scores improved in the probiotic group all significantly whereas none of these changes were observed in the SIBO group. So again, really interesting and actually hopeful findings here and likely what was happening, you know, why these patients saw their TSH come down, their dose required reduced and their fatigue improved was for a few underlying mechanisms. One, the anti SIBO effects of probiotics has been demonstrated now in over 18 clinical trials that probiotics can combat SIBO. Well, at the same time, probiotics have an anti inflammatory impact that they ensue in the gut and then also very important to clarify that likely the improved gut health led to improved absorption of that capsule of levothyroxin these patients were taking every day, thus leading to an improvement in their symptoms and a reduction in the dose required in that 30 individual group who were taking the probiotics. So some very interesting findings regarding SIBO and thyroid and their connectivity that have been published over the past few years and articulating the principle that probiotics are a simple and safe support that may also improve thyroid function.


Fy oeddiwch, wrth gwrs. Mae'n gorfod o'r eich cyffredin iawn i'ch gael i fynd i rôl ymgyrchu'r llef, ac mae'n grŵi'r hollig o bwysigau cyfnodol, gyllid ymgyrchu'r llef, ydw'r amlou gan yma gwrsach o'r troi ar hyn o'r stafoddiad. A oeddiwch i'r cael ei gweithio'r gweithio, rydyn ni'n gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio. ddylau gwirioneddol. Wrth hynny, mae'n gweithio'n golygu i'w gwirioneddol yn gwizio'n gwirioneddol. Ac mae'n gwirioneddol o'r maen nhw ymddi. Rwy'n dechrau o'r gwirioneddol yn cael y cyfrifol o'r wrthig. Rydym wedi'u meddwl am y syniadol yn y ddysgufyr ymddiannig yma, yn y Llychodraeth Gwyrddol, oherwydd yma'n cyfnodol yma o'n cyfrifol o'r cyfrifol o'r cyfrifol o'r cyfrifol o'r amser. These matters will be dealt with on my subsequent papers. My presentation instead considers the metal work, its quantity, its character, all the mental styles, and ultimately date, leading to our conclusion for a likely date of deposition during the second half of the 7th century. The extraordinary character of the Statichord Horde is now well-established. It has no direct parallels for its scale, quality, or make-up in its local setting, in its Anglo-Saxon setting or indeed, in wider Europe in the 7th century. Our understanding of its quantities as altered significantly from the initial figures given following discovery. After the removal of soil, revealing many further fragments ac yn ymddych chi'n gweithio'r fragnwys yma y gallai fynd yn ddiddordeb. Felly, mae'r ffyrdd yma yma yw 4 kg o gwyllwch yma yw 1.7 kg o gwyllwch yma. Mae'r llwyddoedd bwys meffel. Mae'r ffrwng o'r gweithio'r gweithio. Mae'r ffrwng o'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r gweithio'r 4,599 gwyllwch. the silver found overall to be far more fragmented, so there's an inverse relationship between the actual four인지 gold versus one point seven kilograms of silver and the far more fragmented nature of the horn ready sort of objects. The original cane numbering system based on rathol tidbits that were so expedimentally bydd i sgwnaeth RUST, boed yn rhywbeth oedd negeson o'r catalog yn gynnig, gyda 697 yng Nghymru. Rydych chi'n 600 oedlaeth sylwig werthwyneud yn golygu ar y catalog. Yn meddwl angen, bydd yn gwneud. I gynnal, mae'r angen i llwyddiant yn ymateb o'r adegach, yn oedd gwneud i'r barchau gyda'r deudio. Many sets of fittings have been identified that are critical to understanding what the collection representsdioleth yr hynny. The same character of the assemblage, indicated by the deliberate retention only of gold and silver metalwork, is further reinforced by the masculine and nemesh of character indicated by the finds. Arrhod gwrs 500 obju depressing, i.xa 80%, of the collection by og nationwide count are fittings from weaponry. Mostly from the hilt of swords with only a small number from scabbards. Just three buckles might also come from weapon harness. But as has long been pointed out, the iron blade are not present, nor are there any gold coins and nor are there any female type of jets, such as broaches. There is, however, at least one magnificent helmet and a collection of large and elaborate mounts, some of which may be from war gear. Lastly, of course, there is the small but very significant collection of church treasures, including the Great Gold Cross and the Strip with its biblical inscription. The new findings do not challenge what was apparent early on that ours is a warhawd, which must in some way relate to the cauldron of bloody conflict from which the early kingdoms of England would emerge. All of the objects can be accommodated on the battlefield. There are at least 74 pommels, 159 hilt collars and hilt rings, 170 plates from the Guards of Swords and over 120 other small mounts thought to come from the Helps of Swords and Finding Knights. Most of the pommels are of cocked hat form and closest to Mayne Dean's tight beckon false denaro, which is dated broadly from 570 to 650 AD. But a smaller number of the pommels take a round back form multiple at the 7th century. As Leslie Webster long ago argued, the Horde's Great Gold Cross and other Christian treasures, including the Pectoral Cross and Inscribed Strip, can be seen as representing small contingents of churchmen on the battlefield. All, therefore, is a lived wargear. Furthermore, the weapon fittings come from the swords and knives of leading warriors, and likewise the church gear must have belonged to religious figures in royal retinues. There is nothing from the rampant fire of an army. In this, the Horde represents a great departure from the view of the warrior that we had become accustomed to. As presented by the rusted iron fittings from shields, spears and swords from the periods thousands of weapon graves. By contrast furthermore, when swords from burials have been found with help fittings, they are typically of base metal, only very occasionally are they so grand as those that we have in our Horde.  The helmet is chief amongst them, but there are also some large mounts that are suggested as possibly fittings from saddles. There is one reconstruction illustrated here. So we may also have the possessions of the commanders of armies, as well as those of their sub-command. Almost all of the objects show damage that was done before burial. The evidence suggests crude but systematic removal, a harvest of bullion or harvest. No care was shown for the contemporary high social and artistic value of the pieces. And with only a small number of exceptions, reuse would not have been possible for the objects. Cut marks are frequent, and it has been possible to capture some fascinating details with photomicrographs. Knives were used to chop open parts and sometimes to lever, with even the point of the blade apparent in some cases. There are additionally dents from smithing tongs used to pull pobbles from the ends of swords. This may be a clue to the class that undertook the dismantling, the smith, the class that would also have had the specialist knowledge to separate out gold from gilding metalwork. But there is some damage too that appears non-incidental, being instead deliberate in targeting, perhaps even iconoclastic. On our pectoral cross, one arm is bent and the other is broken. The arms of strong construction and considerable effort would have been needed to have broken it. The predominant style of the weapon fittings, represented by multiple sets of pommels and hilt collars, comprises all over coverings of gold filigree, typically with the filigree forming interlator style to animal ornament. A smaller number of pommels and hilt collars are in a different style, comprising all over clozzone ornament. Again, the pommels and collars form sets. Together the many sets identified, indicated without question, swords and fighting knives were being manufactured with matching hilt fittings. It is my contention, furthermore, that such distinctive ornament could represent the outputs of different regional royal workshops and could have functioned thus to convey regional identity and obligation as forms of kingdom styles. A further possible regional style is suggested from the over 100 small mounts in the collection, from the grips and guards of swords. Recognised as similar to examples on a preserved horn hilt in the British Museum, shown here, I have turned mintly cumberland hilt style. Next, therefore, is to consider where such regional styles might have originated, and this is currently very difficult, due to the lack of parallels for the hord's objects generally. And because most of those that we do have are single finds with poor understanding of their depositional context. A very close parallel for the filigree style, as well as for the techniques of manufacturing in the horde, is the method of detective find from market raisin in Lincolnshire. The small yellow triangles on this map, you can just about make out, indicate further examples of related pommons with filigree, all over filigree ornament. They plot a distribution across the Anglian kingdoms north of the Thames. Perhaps an origin for the style in the kingdoms of Lindsay or Northumbria might be possible, but also the absence from the kingdom of Kent is interesting, as is the approximate alignment of some of the finds along the Roman road system. There are even fewer parallels for the hord's clovone style fittings, which are the red dots on the map, just three of them. With the far apart examples from Suttonhu and Dinham, chief amongst them. The principal clue to a possible region lorogen for the style is the quality of the clovone. Both the geometric and zoomorphic styles of clovone seen on the weapon fittings, and on other objects in the collection, have their best parallels in the metalwork of Suttonhu and the wider East Anglian kingdom. I shall return to this on shortly. The Cumberland Hill was found during the 19th century, somewhere in the modern county of Cumbria, and it alone is sparse evidence for where the related proportion of hord fittings might have originated. Though it is tempting to suggest they might possibly represent another northern style, perhaps with growth in Northumbria. There are, in addition, a number of mounts of animal form on this side of the sky. That, it is argued, comes from the grips of weapons, though they have no direct power. And their company, as drawings show how they would have been inserted, did have this mount, for example, would have been inserted, flushed with the grip. The set of a pair of birds, that also has a fish that accompanies it, also has its greatest affinities with the garnet prosone of the kingdom of East Anglian. A further key characteristic of the metalwork is animal art, with over 140 examples. The art represents a key intellectual heritage for the early 7th century. Prior to and during the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons to Christianity. Successive traditions were widely shared across Europe, with repeated motifs and forms representing the likely remains of a pictorial system of Germanic pagan belief. Pommel 57 here stands out in particular for its rich iconography, with 14 creatures of varied species in total. Most notable are the little boar heads at the apex, for they represent a sort of Anglo-Saxon joke. The little boars wear helmets. They represent an inversion of the idiom of the boar crested helmet, such as we encounter it in Beowulf. Instead of a boar crested helmet, we have a boar wearing a helmet. Common to many pommels is the motif of a pair of creatures. You can see it on these pommels. Often shown fighting. There can be no doubt it had meaning, and it can be traced back to long before the arrival of Christianity. The most striking instance of its use, together with bird beaks, is on the side of pommel 52. So here it is and here the pair of bird beaks. Here its Germanic character was set in deliberate opposition, but not necessarily confrontation with an early Christian inspired design on the other side of the pommel. This one here. The design's unusual arrangement of arches and crosses can be compared with that of a basilica on a Byzantine weight of approximately similar date. This pommel with its pagan, Germanic and Christian imagery is just one of many objects in the hall that open a new window on this important period of intellectual transition. Most of the animal art is of the four known as Salim's style too. Just two hill collars have the preceding style one, making them two of the earliest objects in the lecture. Both styles have long been studied for their chronological development, and the style two of the horde in particular has been important for our dating. Arriving at a date for the collection is not straightforward. Radiocarbon dating of its rare organics has not been possible, and there are no coins in the collection. Furthermore its atypical object forms have few well dated parallels. In quantity the style two represents an approximate doubling of the corpus prior to the horde in England. It therefore presented a great opportunity for reconsidering the styles used in Anglo-Saxon England. My conclusion has been to propose a new understanding of style two in England in the form of an early version and the late version. The early form can be found across Europe, but the late form developed somewhere in Anglo-Saxon England. The dating for the two forms of style two was arrived at by stylistic comparison of the ornament with examples from well dated contexts from England and Europe. In early style two the key creature is the zoomorph with the little heads around, a jaw and often a serpent-like body, although sometimes with abbreviated limbs in the form of a curl or a single hind leg. Examples can be found on filibrary cast and sheet metalwork across England that's focused in the south east. The key dated instances from England are Pricklewell, Alton and Southern Hoog. The earliest examples however appear in Scandinavia in filigree on weapon fitting, like the example at the top here from Langelland in Denmark. This agrees with the currently accepted position of style two developed first in Scandinavia around the mid sixth century before spreading across Europe by the last quarter of the sixth century. In Anglo-Saxon late style two the zoomorph, the key creature, is replaced by the quadruped in profile and altogether a more recognisable creature. It is harder to find well dated examples but key are those from Mount One in Southern Hoog. It seems this form of style two most likely came into use in the seventh century in the early part. In fact this creature form has long been regarded as generally later in Anglo-Saxon studies being the same that we ultimately find in early manuscript illumination. So what I am proposing actually represents more of a formalisation of the observation of others including George Speke and Kyra Gwylem Nielsen and that an entirely new conception. Indeed especially relevant for considering the dating of one early manuscript, the Book of Daro, is the very close likeness of the animal form seen on some of the latest objects in the hall. The Great Gold Cross and one of our omels can be compared directly with one of the objects in terms of its shape, in terms of leading position to the animals in the Book of Daro. I have mentioned already the connection between some of the metalwork of the Staffordshire Horde with that from Sutton Hoog. The linkages extend beyond general observations concerning quality of manufacture to include signature details which I believe support an argument that the proportion of the objects in the collection originated from royal workshops in the Kingdom of East India. A key connection first identified by Kyra Gwylem Nielsen is that of a motif on the cross that was copied from one that is seen on the maple wood cut in the mound, one burial. Here it is on the arm and here it is on the maple wood cut. In fact on the other arm there is a modified version of the same motif. Another is the frequent use of mushroom cellwork in the gynaic clozone of mushrooms up here. Whilst not unique to the Kingdom of East Anglia, so-called mushroom clozone appears to have achieved a popularity in the region that is not observable in clozone manufacturer elsewhere, notably in the Kingdom of Kenya and across other areas of southern England. Further affinities are found in the execution of the animal art, notably in the tiny detail of the Y shaped division of the beaks of birds seen here on the great gold buckle from the Sutton Hoog mound on burial and again seen in the clozone on the bird from the purse. We have the very tiny Y shaped detail, both in cast and in size style too, and in the gynaic clozone. Then there is another further linkage in terms of the use of rare gynaic clozone cut garnet forms that we find in the hoard and that we only have power elsewhere in the Sutton Hoog. A link that was pointed out quite early on is our link between our lovely beautiful Seax fittins reconstructed here as the fighting knife and the very close in terms of quality link that they show with the Sutton Hoog shoulder class. In addition to the ornamental style so far presented, another is demonstrated by some of the latest silver metalwork which we have termed the early insular style. The group includes three magnificent silver pommels, one of which is shown here. Two of them have gold mounts on one side only of their silver cast forms and all have the novel feature of two ring knobs on their shoulder for the part of the sword ring tradition, the latest form of the sword ring tradition that we see across Europe. However no other pommel in Europe has two knobs, although unique. The pommel here shown number 76 has a pair of collars that we believe went with it and a pair of silver guards which again are unique from the Anglo-Saxon England which do have affinities with Scandinavian fittings and here we've reconstructed its original glorious form. The early insular style of the metalwork has been so called because it appears to anticipate the full insular style combining Anglo-Saxon and Celtic arts that we see manifested in the earliest manuscripts. Some of its characteristics are shown here on an extractive page from the book together with Comparanda on this side. In particular, tight interlace is a part of its expression. We also have examples of little animal heads that will mark the Celtic and Triscals and Triscaleons and Triquetres. As well as considering the typology and style of the objects, every fine was assessed for its wear, all for signs of repair, aspects that affect consideration of dated. An example of heavy wear is that shown on the silver pommel 68 where the decoration of the tops, edges and ends of the pommel has been worn smooth by decades of use. On these two photo micrographs we have contrasting light and heavy wear seen on different pommels with gold fillering in this instance. Overall it was found that objects with early style too showed more instances of heavy wear in contrast with only light wear seen on objects with late style too. Two places of repair are shown here, one is a garnet lost from our broken old cross, broken and repaired and another is this pommel here which had two red glass settings to replace perhaps lost garnets. The patterns of wear observed agree generally with Sue Brunning's findings from her study of other North European swords. The wear occurs mainly on fittings at the extremities of the hilt, shown as red on our schematic. Probably it was due to rubbing against clothing with the weapons worn habitually as a leap, that's being questioned. In addition longitudinal fine stretch marks have been identified on the plates of lower weapon guards which it is argued were caused by the routine polishing of the weapon blade. To conclude my presentation today I present the dating and from it our estimated date of deposition for the collection. The metalwork is not all of one phase it was manufactured over a period of more than a century in total. Though the bolt belongs to the late 6th to mid 7th century. Probably most was made and in use in the first half of the 7th century. The earliest phase comprises silver material with style 1 or early style 2 ornament, much demonstrating heavy wear. These fittings might have come from so called heirloom weapons that circulated for decades before they came into the hall. The middle two phases comprise the bulk of the gold material. The earlier gold phase is closely associated with early style 2 and filigree manufacture.  The final phase comprises our silver material with the early insular style. Note that this phasing has implications for considering the metal economy of the time. For it proposes a rich gold phase of manufacture that was preceded and succeeded by phases of silver manufacture. This is undoubtedly a simplification but is consistent with the trend observed by other studies that there was a sudden influx of gold to England from late in the 6th century but it was brief, with the debasement in coinage in particular suggesting that already by the 640s supplies of the precious metal were again running short. In the hall therefore we are presented with a true golden age, not only of artistic genius but also in actual terms. Finally, the proposed dating of the material has led to a revised date of deposition. We now believe the collection was most likely buried at some point in the third quarter of the 7th century. Thank you.


What's good Josh? You will rock back again with another video. So we're gonna check out how good was the yes movement from 2013-2014 Yes movement easily one of the Most organic movements that has ever happened in wrestling When you think of the yes movement, you obviously kind of think of the what chance that stone cold created back in the attitude era It's it's one of those things where it transcended just wrestling and When the yes movement really came into Like its own stride it it started it started to remind me and many others of The what movement the what the what chance and what stone cold created people were saying it outside of wrestling the same here This is what got Daniel Bryan over and we all know WWE did not plan for Daniel Bryan to get that over and when he got that over it was It was great because we wanted him the fans wanted him It was what even just a hardcore fans. It was the casual fans too. They wanted him to be the guy WWE did not want Daniel Bryan to be the guy and he ended up being the guy How many shows during this this movement were taken over by the yes chance How many promos was ruined because of the yes chance? It was it was just a Organic moment and I was glad I was able to witness it when it happened man One of the better times in WWE for sure So we're gonna check this out man appreciate all love and support wrote to 60k and let's do this Different show than what we know it as today. This was a time where NXT was an elimination game show God damn instant ads gotta love them gotta love them Paired up with a WWE pro and that pro would coach them through challenges and help determine the fate of the other competitors Amongst these hopefuls was Daniel Bryan Yeah, I was well respected on the indie scene and a fan favorite the hardcore is knew who this guy was They knew about his amazing in ring ability and they were pulling for the guy to win it all Unfortunately, he'd be eliminated and for a lot of people their hopes of seeing the American dragon in WWE were dashed When WWE ran their nexus angle Yeah, Brian was brought back, but he was legitimately fired after strangling Justin Roberts We all thought this was it for him He had squandered two chances at the WWE and he wouldn't be back or if he was it would be a long road back Yeah, thankfully for him WWE saw the air in their ways and brought him back from here He'd climb the ranks first He'd win the United States title beating his former NXT pro the Miz then he'd achieve success in different aspects of WWE Everything from money in the bank and even an 18 second loss Yeah, what was the time that defined this indie darling in 2011 Daniel Bryan won the money in the bank briefcase. This came at the legendary money in the bank 2011 pay-per-view I forgot about that. Yeah, that was that same pay-per-view the infamous 2011 money in the bank pay-per-view That makes sense. He did win it there. That was man If you haven't seen money in bank 2011 definitely go check it out It's an enjoyable card through top to bottom For the most part is very it's a very enjoyable show. Everything was set WWE had their money on Bryan and he was their guy, but as loved as he was He lacked one thing critical to every WWE superstar a character Sure, he would make out with the divas But was that enough Bryan when he won the money in the bank said he'd cash in at WrestleMania the following year But he'd instead end up cashing it in at TLC that year. Now Daniel Bryan was the WWE World Heavyweight Champion. He'd have some successful title defenses But when Royal Rumble winner Sheamus decided to choose him as his WrestleMania opponent, it was a kiss This Single-handedly, I think jump started the yes movement the way he lost in under 20 seconds at this WrestleMania it was He was technically I believe a heel at this time But the booking of this was so atrocious and People were actually doing the yes chance because I think at this time he was doing I want to say no chance And I think the crowd was you know to and you know To be like I guess you can say His opposite to kind of annoy him in character sense. They would chant yes So you oh no, I take that back No, he was chanting yes, but he was still a heel at the time So people started getting on to that wave and then when he got squashed and he pretty much got squashed here I think the movement started to really Started really going because people wanted to see him actually do well Even though technically he was a heel at this point people still wanted to see him do well I could be a little bit off on this But I believe that's kind of what started it in my opinion I think that's kind of got the wheels of motion and 18 seconds that would finish off his first title run from there He found himself in a love story with punk and AJ. Yeah, he was doing I remember the yes chance Weren't like he was still technically heel he was doing the yes chance to annoy people and then it started really becoming more of a Positive movement and later on the formation of team hell. No gain and Daniel Bryan two polar opposites Yeah, these guys just couldn't get along and it was everything Sports entertainment should be the two would attend anger management Consistently bickered but slowly they started to appreciate one another and found themselves as tag team champions The shield would put an end to that title range But man were these guys ever entertaining hell. No, they were organically loved by the WWE universe Everything they did their comedic flair. There's somehow brilliant chemistry. It was all When these two lost the titles Bryan went out of his way to prove that he wasn't the weak link of the group He delivered a more vicious side to his character It was at this time where people fell in love with Daniel Bryan even more Organic connection to the WWE fans was unrivaled his in ring skills much the same. He was universally loved It's this admiration which led John Cena to choose Daniel Bryan as his summer slam opponent The story here was the top dog in the company. Yeah, it's the underdog Yeah, it was that simple was Bryan ready to be WWE champion Well, the McMahons didn't really think so. No, they started to poke fun at his appearance and stature saying that and this is Here's what I want y'all to understand if you don't know a lot of the stuff that they come up with in these promos Especially if it's coming from Vince and upper management That's how they really feel They just cover it up as a promo, but that's how they felt They did not think Daniel Bryan was a A plus player. They always considered him as B plus the best The fans we considered him an A plus player because we knew that he was And that's what made this whole Daniel Bryan versus authority segment one of the greater Like greater like segments we've ever had like greater programs It reminds me of the Stone Cold going against events McMahon Authority figure back in the attitude era granted Daniel Bryan wasn't you know as you know rugged and and hardcore like Stone Cold character was but he had heart he had fire we had passing like Stone Cold and Basically, this is this is literally what this was the underdog going against the authority figure Stone Cold even though technically you can say he wasn't really the underdog He just wasn't the typical champion for for the for The mainstream wrestling fans of what Vince McMahon wanted, so I like the comparisons here And as you can see there had been no one as over as Stone Cold Since Daniel Bryan Name me someone that was that over universally with the the hardcore fans and the Casual fans no one had been that over outside of CM Punk Daniel Bryan Since Stone Cold this the attitude there like it was it was cool to see that he would always come up short This was because of his height and how he wasn't a prototypical wrestling star They simply said Bryan was a B plus player and a face like his would never be the face of WWE They tried to get him to cut his hair and shave his beard But it wouldn't go anywhere. This only helped get fans more behind him The whole aesthetic of Daniel Bryan just works so well He was a guy like me and you know fought for his dreams and he didn't take no for an option Now it was summer slam time. That's what worked with Stone Cold's character people could relate back to him Stone Cold He's like a guy like you and me. He works hard You know, he likes to drink his beer, but you know saying he may not look like a traditional champion But he felt like he deserved it. He put in the work. He wasn't gonna quit.  He's gonna go out there and give it his all and it works when you when you can like connect with people on that level The sky's the limit sky's the limit man in the main event of the show was the ultimate underdog Against fantastic mass to top dog Daniel Bryan and John Cena fantastic That's a referee though was Triple H after an amazing back-and-forth match so many close falls The underdog finally. Yeah, the company and now he was the face of the company Until pedigree cash in that's all she wrote the same night Daniel Bryan had become the WWE champion It was all taken away from him Triple H turned his back on him. And now the face of WWE was Randy Orton The authority had it out for Daniel Bryan. He just didn't fit the mold. He couldn't carry the company So Triple H Vince McMahon and Stephanie would do everything in their power to keep him away from the WWE Championship They attacked Daniel Bryan mercilessly and he just couldn't do anything about it The rules were if anyone disobeyed Triple H, there would be repercussions Now it was time for night of champions such a grind build up another chance at the WWE Championship And he earned himself another win But he was stripped of the title after a fast count the authority thought that Bryan was working with referee Scott Armstrong I remember that hired him for violating policy now The title was vacated and it would be another match between Orton and Bryan this time Man, this was a good.   Oh, man And to prevent from any referee shenanigans Sean Michaels would be the special guest referee This was the only one triple H could trust was his best friend He knew he would do what was best for business during the match Michaels got heated after Brian attacked Triple H and you don't mess with Michaels boy So switch in music and Randy Orton was the WWE champion once again from here Brian left the WWE title scene They were enjoying his knee versus the establishment story. They put it on the back burner though He'd feud with the Wyatt family where Bray Wyatt tried to brainwash him into joining the Wyatt family and Brian had had enough He was tired of everyone screwing him over. He was tired of fighting everyone and coming up short He knew whatever he did. He just wouldn't win So he joined the Wyatt family He was now a follower of Bray Wyatt's group, but it didn't last very long after a steel cage match Why it was about to sacrifice Brian? He was the reason they lost in Wyatt's eyes. It was all Brian's fault. So he had to pay the price It was this moment where Daniel Bryan said screw following the buzzards Yeah, you're gonna follow me He beat down the Wyatt's and led one of the greatest yes chance in the history This visual was simply stunning. Yeah, from here. It was Brian Wyatt at the upcoming Royal Rumble one of if not one of the best matches that year that year Daniel Bryan versus Bray Wyatt fantastic Fantastic, and I'm okay with at the time Bray Wyatt winning because we all thought Daniel Bryan was gonna be in the Royal Rumble So we didn't really matter. I think that would have been the most epic story But they had other plans and when I say this match was amazing Fantastic was amazing fantastic Ryan fell short once again. Mm-hmm later in the night It was time for the Royal Rumble match where we wouldn't see Brian That's all the crowd wanted was Daniel. Yeah, that's all they wanted him out in the ring The moms wanted him out in the ring dogs wanted him out in the ring He was all WWE fans wanted to see was the underdog After he wasn't in the Royal Rumble fans would continue to make their voice heard Whoo, Batista are the building when he was in Royal Rumble for the simple fact They wanted Daniel Bryan. Yep, but it was literal the authority wanted a dude like this Nowhere near the main event, but one week They said they'd entertain Brian being the face of WWE all he had to do was beat WWE world champion Randy Orton But of course it would all be for not Thankfully Brian qualified for the elimination chamber where he'd have another shot the title But he was attacked by Kane and it was another opportunity where Brian would be screwed over The same guy he won tag team gold with a few years ago was the guy screwing him out of his dream It was from here. Brian had to take matters into his own hands He had to fight for the people dare He was the voice of the voiceless WWE fans were rejecting Batista and Randy Orton as the main event Oh, yeah, no one wanted that No one No one if you said you wanted that match, bro I would have to look at you very strange like like what are you talking about? No one wanted to see this No one wanted to see Evolution boys go at it. No No If Daniel Bryan wasn't gonna be in the main event None of this mattered. Yeah, because their man was Daniel Bryan. His popularity was at a fever pitch Yeah, so Brian confronted the authority. He said clearly the authority had it in for him Now all he wanted was Triple H your WrestleMania He had screwed him over for nearly a year and he needed to take out what was causing all of this on the March 3rd 2014 episode of raw Daniel Bryan stood in the middle of the ring and told the Chicago crowd They had a voice and they would hijack raw Daniel Bryan would not leave the ring until one of two things happened either triple H accepted this challenge Or a Batista came out to fight him triple H came out and the answer was still no But when Daniel Bryan fought Batista in the main event He'd hold his own against everyone until the authority would once again get the better of him The next week as long as Daniel Bryan apologized to the authority He wouldn't be fired for his actions, but Daniel Bryan would not quit Yep Daniel Bryan and hundreds of his fans dressed in his shirts. That was pretty cool I was a cool visual hostage until they got what they wanted Triple H versus Daniel Bryan at WrestleMania. That was You can't I know this is all planned and stuff, but this is organic Overness, it's not even a real word. This is how you organically get over, bro Like I don't What else is there to say? I watched I'm telling you from this span period of The yes movement beginning I was watching raw heavily because I was interested in the Daniel Bryan storyline Really interested because at this point I think see him punk was having some issues With management and I think see him punk had left. I want to say because he didn't want to face triple H I Think that's what it was originally. It was gonna be him facing triple H But he didn't want to face him. I think that's what the reason was but basically because see him punk Didn't want to show up like he was done with the direction of how things were gonna be booked This is why we got what we got because technically This match Daniel Bryan wasn't supposed to be in the spot But because see him punk left he ended up being in the spot. So it was kind of a double-edged sword We lost seeing punk who we came this so a wild sight. That's all I can say Daniel Bryan no matter what anyone said just wouldn't leave the ring He had hijacked the show and despite their best efforts They couldn't clear the ring so they had to give in and the result was it was Daniel Bryan versus triple H at WrestleMania 30 if Brian won He would be added into the title match at WrestleMania 30 everything between triple H and Daniel Bryan was just so well Executed it was the highlight of the show. Yeah, how amazing both men were at their job This is great triple H would get Brian handcuffed and just Mercilessly beat him down It did a great job at cementing Daniel Bryan as the underdog He couldn't help but cheer for and also triple H as a horrible villain. Yeah WrestleMania were a different level. Yeah segments were great now We were a few days away from WrestleMania 30 Daniel Bryan would end the go-home Raw on top of But the question was so good would he end WrestleMania 30 on the top of the the way they set it up They had to because you have him going against triple H at the beginning of the I think they were gonna have him like or they had to settle where he was gonna face triple H Prop at the beginning of the show and then later on if he wins He was gonna be added to the match It wouldn't make sense for him to lose that match because it would kill all the momentum The show would be ruined because no one would care about anything else on the show because Daniel Bryan Ross He's not gonna be in a main event. So you kind of knew how where they were gonna set it up You kind of had a feeling it was gonna go this way But you was just enjoying the ride, bro, and it made it just made for epic moment at WrestleMania 30 WWE Mountain And it was a great match great They told us that selling cars that match that first match at WrestleMania 30. It definitely got things going bro That was the perfect match Mania Brock is fighting taker seen as fighting Wyatt the Rock stone cold and Hulk all appeared But there was one question could Daniel Bryan Unthinkable could he be one of the greatest in the industry and if you want that match Could he be two more of the greatest in the industry in the first match of the show? It was Daniel Bryan versus triple H winner advances to the main event of the show This match was back and forth with the proud roaring and biting at every move the tension was high and so were the stakes and It would be a running knee that helped Brian topple the game and advanced to the main event of the show The yes movement was at a fever pitch Everyone was going wild now It was the main event of the show an injured Daniel Bryan versus to the all-time greats Randy Orton and Batista But Daniel Bryan reached the mountaintop after months of mental anguish torture and being screwed at every turn Could he finally do it Brian fought his way valiantly? He would come so close. Yeah triple H The ref out of the ring that damn you triple I'm strong the same ref which was fired a few months back had returned and now he was working for the authority But that wouldn't work Then Randy and Batista would work together to eliminate the pest the guy that they just couldn't get rid of shout out to Randy Orton Hitted a RKO from a Batista bomb and landing Flesh, I mean not flesh flush on the TV monitor Look, he landed straight on the TV monitor all his weight Back landed straight on the TV monitor. Oh my god brutal I think that hurt him more than Daniel Bryan look like they had finally done that It was a Batista bomb into an RKO on the announce table Daniel Bryan was getting carted out of the arena and his hopes of winning the title were over Then he gets off the stretch. Hey, we're building this up Final flurry as the crowd is roaring need a Batista Yeah, yes lock and the culmination of everything had come true one of the best commentary by Michael Cole ever Batista tap out but he's the tap out bro I I'm getting goosebumps because I remember watching this live Remember watching this live and losing my shit Because they did it He won they listened to the fans He got the victory. Oh my god, Daniel Bryan was the WWE World Heavyweight Champion Oh Everything thrown in his way was overcame. Yeah, everyone who is a thorn in his side He'd be in this match. The crowd was going wild WrestleMania Simply turned into yes, so mania and the yes movement was complete This feud solidified Daniel Bryan as a top tier star facts There was an organic magic that he encapsulated and what that is It's still kind of hard to figure out Daniel bronze run to the WWE's mount top was simply magical Even though he got injured. Yes, well done It was long-term storytelling whether it was intentional or not Who knows but this is one of the best underdog stories ever told and everything blended together so well Everything from him losing in 18 seconds to the And him overcoming everyone in his path Organic about the yes movement. It's in two different lights Some people say that Daniel Bryan became a star during this time and without this It would have been harder for guys like AJ Styles to achieve success as quick as he did People say that Brian transcended the business for guys his size And it became okay to look the way he did Others will say it was a time that didn't do anyone any favors People say this is where fans started to get their way a little bit too much That topic is up for conversation about that one that up to you as far as the yes movement goes It was just fun to watch the product It was a storyline that got you hooked in and it was simply Magical one of the greatest story lines in WWE history the yes movement is synonymous with One of the best Endings overall endings to a story You couldn't have ended it more perfectly than Daniel Bryan went in now originally I think they had Daniel Bryan holding the straps holding the belts until Summer Slim And that's when he was going to Drop it to Brock Lesnar. That's Originally that was what what what was supposed to happen He was gonna drop the belts to Brock Lesnar and because obviously Brock Lesnar beat the undertaker streak So he's gonna drop the belts But that never happened because he ended up getting injured so he couldn't wrestle stuff like that But man, I we for those who don't know a lot of things happen for this movement to happen CM Punk leaving is one of the reasons why this actually took place and the fact that the fans We made a difference I would like to think that we forced their hand because if that show did not end With Daniel Bryan winning they would have shot. They would have destroyed that main event They would have destroyed Monday Night Raw. You wouldn't have hurt by people would have been upset And this is one of the few times where I can say the booking here was it was good I don't think it was all the way intentional I don't think they wanted Daniel Bryan to be this over but the booking here was perfect They slow built the booking with Daniel Bryan to the point to where he got and it worked beautifully so comment down below Let me know Do you guys feel like the yes movement? Well, I don't even know I can ask that because I'm I'm I'm being honest with you the yes movement it I Feel like this is a redundant question. It is one of the greater things that's ever happened. That's ever been produced by WWE There's no denying that man. Just comment down below Let me know man. If you guys miss Daniel Bryan WWE because I do I do miss him. I wish you know He was still in WWE, but you know Reports are saying he's in AEW. So maybe they they do something in AEW, but I'm willing to bet they see Daniel Bryan in AEW The yes movement will never die. They will be chanting. Yes as soon as they see him So comment down below. Let me know if you guys miss Daniel Bryan in WWE But I appreciate all the love and support roll 260k appreciate y'all kicking it with me and I'll see y'all in the next one