So good afternoon and welcome to the House Energy Committee this afternoon. We are taking up each 67 and act relating to community resilience and biodiversity protection through land use. And before we turn it over to our legislative council. Seth and I are probably going to take just a couple words. It's a bill that we have co-sponsored and worked on in the obsession together. And I'll kick it off and just say that title of bill is building on our conservation work from last year. And I'm calling this community resilience and biodiversity protection act to And the communities are both human and natural communities as similar to the conservation work that we did, but this is like a compliment to it through the supporting of land use policies that allow us to maintain an intact functional landscape and also protect our human communities with that landscape and help promote dense development in our downtown and village centers. So with that we're we built on our past work. And for those of you who've been around the block, you know that we've been working on this since about 2017. We have the Act 250 commission. And Seth and I actually had a bill on the wall last year around governance that we worked on in this committee. We will be familiar with that we took that as our starting point for the bill this year. In addition, we stayed in touch with processes happening throughout the off session, including the ones we heard about last week, the Natural Resources Board study, the future land use map work that our planning commission brought to us last week, the delegation study as well and the designation study which we will hear about later on this week. So that's kind of you'll see it's not lined up perfectly because a lot of that work was still in process as we were working through our bill. And we'll, as we work through the bill as a committee will look to see what pieces make sense to plug into this bill as we discuss land use this session. I'll turn it over to Representative Bongard. I actually think that is perfectly adequate. Off we go. All right, off we go. Welcome. Legislative Council Chekowski. Thank you Ellen Chekowski Office of Legislative Council. I'm here on each 67. As Representative Sheldon did mention just now, the first 36 pages of this bill should look very familiar to you because is almost the same language that was passed in S234 in 2022. And that language got vetoed by the governor. And what that language, primarily what that language does is reform the natural resources board into the environmental review board, and given the authority to hear appeals of active 50 permits as well as a number of other things that are new to this bill. So I'll start there. Most of that language probably 80 to 90% of it is the same as that prior bill, but if you small to just have been made. I'll point that out and then the rest of the bill are newer concepts, although, as you mentioned a lot of them were in the active 50 commission report from 2018. So, multiple of those pieces you have heard about before. And then there's the really new stuff that came out of some of the reports from this summer. So as I'm walking, I'm going to walk through. First on page one the purpose section because there have been some changes made to this language to reflect the new additions to this bill. But as I'm going through, you may not need an exact walkthrough of every section because you've seen this language actually multiple times but you can let me know. So on page one section one is the purpose section. So the purpose of this act is to further assist the state in achieving the conservation vision and goals for the state established in 10 vs a 2802. And that's the 30 by 30 and 50 by 50 goals that you worked on last session. This is a regulatory framework that supports the vision for Vermont of human and natural community resilience and biodiversity protection in the face of climate change, as described in 2023 action resolved number 59, which again is the 30 by 30 50 by 50 bill. It would strengthen the administration of the active 50 program by changing the structure function and name of the natural resources board onto page two. It requires that appeals of the active 50 permit decisions that it requires that appeals of active 50 permit decisions be heard by a five member board called the environmental review board. The environmental division of the Superior Court would continue here the other types of cases within its jurisdiction. The environmental review board would retain the current duties of the natural resources board, in addition to hearing appeals, reviewing applications for the planned growth area designation. Review the future land use maps of regional plans and review the maps that established the rural and working lands areas. The board would provide oversight management and training to the active 50 program staff and district commissions and develop active 50 program policy through current decisions and rulemaking. This change would allow the active 50 program to be more citizen friendly process. The structure established under this act would be used to guide state financial investments in infrastructure. Section two then adds a purpose statement that will actually be added to the statue, the active 50 statute itself. That prior one I just read would be a session law provision. So, act 10 vs a 6000 is added to read purpose construction. The purposes of this chapter are to protect and conserve the environment of the state to support the achievement of the goals of the capability and develop development plan. Of 24 vs a section 2304 302 C. And of the conservation vision and goals for the state established in 2802 of this. Section two C are the goals established for the municipal zoning, the planning and zoning chapter which includes regional planning and municipal planning. And then again 2802 is the 20 the 30 by 30 50 by 50 goals. Onto page three. This starts the statutory changes to the natural resources. Section three is amending 6000 and 21 board established the environmental review board is created to administer the active 50 program your appeals. The board shall consist of five members appointed by the governor after review and approval by the environmental review board nominating committee in accordance with subdivision two of the subsection and confirmed with the consent of the Senate. So that one may appoint this so that one appointment expires in each year. And so you will recall from the prior bill that the nominating committee is established in the next section so I'll talk about that more detail, the next couple of pages. Back to line nine. There shall be a full time position and the other four members shall be halftime positions in making these appointments the governor and the Senate shall give consideration to candidates who have experience expertise or skills relating to one or more of the following areas, environmental science, natural resources law and policy, land use planning, community planning, or environmental justice. The governor shall appoint a chair of the board, a position that shall be a full time position. The governor shall ensure board membership reflects to the extent possible. The racial ethnic gender and geographic diversity of the state. The board shall not contain two members who reside in the same county. Following initial appointments the members shall be appointed for terms of five years. The committee shall begin on July one until page four and expire on June 30. A member may continue serving until a successor is appointed. The initial appointment shall be for staggered terms of one year, two year, three years, four years, and five years. The environmental review board nominating committee shall advertise the position when a vacancy will occur on the environmental review board. The committee shall review the applicants to determine which are well qualified for appointment to the board and shall recommend those candidates to the governor. The names shall be confidential. The governor shall appoint with the advice and consent of the Senate a chair and four members of the board from the list of well qualified candidates sent to the governor by the committee. On to page five terms vacancy succession. The term of each appointment subsequent to the initial appointments described in subsection a of the section shall be five years. Any appointment to fill a vacancy shall be for the unexpired portion of the term vacant vacated. A member may seek reappointment by informing the governor. If the governor decides not to reappoint the member, the nominating committee shall advertise the vacancy. Notwithstanding the provisions of three vsa section 2004 members shall only be removable for cause by the remaining members of the board in accordance with the Vermont administrative procedures act. The board shall adopt the rules pursuant to three vsa chapter 25, the administrative procedures act to define the basis and process for removal disqualified members. The chair of the board upon request of the chair of a district commission may appoint an assigned former permission members to specific commission cases when some are all the regular members or alternates of the district commission are disqualified or unable to serve. Retirement from office. When a board member who hears all or substantial part of a case retires from office before the case is completed. The board may retain may remain a member of the board onto page six at the members discretion for the purpose of concluding and deciding that case and signing the findings and judgments involved. A retiring chair may also remain a member for the purpose of certifying questions of law. So I believe all of the language in that section is the same as the prior version that you passed. Section four on page six is establishing the environmental review board nominating committee. It's similar to the language you previously passed but it has, I think one primary change, which is that instead of seven members the committee will have six. So, online 11 creation. The review board nominating committee is created for the purpose of assessing the qualifications of applicants for appointment to the environmental review board in accordance with section 2621 6021 of this title, just the prior section I just read you members. The committee shall consist of six members who shall be appointed as follows. The two members from the executive branch, which with at least one being employee of the Department of Human Resources to the speaker of the House of Representatives shall appoint two members from the House of Representatives onto page seven. The Senate committee on committee shall appoint two members from the Senate terms, the members of the committee shall serve for terms of two years members shall serve until their successors are appointed. They shall serve more than three consecutive terms, a legislative a legislative member who is appointed as a member of the committee shall retain the position for the, for the term appointed to the committee, even if the member is subsequently not reelected to the General Assembly, during the members term on the committee. Chair, the members shall elect their own chair, quorum, the quorum of the committee shall consist of four members. Staff and services. The committee is authorized to use the staff and services of appropriate state agencies and departments as necessary to conduct investigations of applicants. Confidentiality, except as provided in subsection H of the section proceedings of the committee, including the names of candidates considered by the committee and information about any candidate submitted to the governor shall be confidential. Provision of one vsa section 317 e expiration of public records act exemption shall not apply to the exemption or confidentiality provisions of the subsection. Public information. The following shall be public. Proceeding procedures of the committee standard application forms and any other forms used by the committee provided they not do not contain personal information about a candidate for confidential proceedings. All proceedings of the committee prior to receipt of the first candidate's complete application and at the time of the committee sends the name of the candidates to the governor, the total number of applicants for the vacancies and the total number of candidates sent to the governor. Legislative reimbursement legislative members of the committee shall be entitled to per diem compensation and reimbursement for expenses and accordance with three to vsa section 23. Compensation reimbursement shall be paid from the legislative appropriation. Duties when a vacancy occurs the committee shall review applicants to determine which are qualified for the board and submit those names to the governor. The committee shall review. The committee shall submit to the governor, a summary of the qualifications and expertise and experience of each candidate whose name is submitted to the governor, together with any information relevant to the matter. An applicant for the position of member of the environmental review board. An applicant for the position of member for the environmental review board shall not be required to be an attorney. If the candidate is admitted. Page nine to practice law in Vermont, or practices of profession requiring licensure, certification or other professional regulation by the state. The committee shall submit the candidates name to the court administrator or applicable state professional regulatory entity. And that entity shall disclose to the committee, any professional disciplinary action taken or pending concerning the candidate. Candidate shall be sought who have experience expertise or skill relating to one or more of the following areas. Environmental science, natural resources law and policy, land use planning, community planning or environmental justice. The community, the committee shall ensure a candidate possesses the following attributes. A candidate shall possess a record and reputation for excellent character and integrity impartiality. A candidate shall exhibit an ability to make judicial determinations in a manner free of bias. Work ethic. The candidate shall demonstrate diligence availability. The candidate shall have adequate time to dedicate to the position page 10. And that is the end of section four. And so I'll just also say that section four is based on a couple of other existing statutes. It is modeled after the cannabis control board nominating committee. And so the language is very similar to that statute. And then that last part I read you is actually based on the language that's currently in the be judicial and related to what they're supposed to look for for a judge. So on page 10 starts is section five, which amends the rule section of Act 250. So the board may adopt rules of procedure for itself and the district commissions. The board shall adopt rules of procedure that govern appeals and other contested cases before that are consistent with this chapter. So the procedure for approving regional plans and regional plan maps shall ensure that the maps are consistent with legislative intent. And so that's one of the first indications that the board will be reviewing regional plan and regional plan maps which is. I think probably the last section of this bill so we'll get to more information about that later. Next in section six powers. The board and district commissions shall have supervisory authority in environmental matters respecting projects within their jurisdiction and shall apply their independent judgment and determining facts and interpreting law. Each shall have the power with respect to any matter within its jurisdiction to. And then it lists the existing powers of the board and district commission so. Taking posts and depositions, allowing parties to enter land for purposes of inspecting entering land for purpose of inspections, applying for and receiving grants. And so then onto page 11. The next changes in these sections are grammatical. So not changing any of the other existing powers of board, and then jumping down to line 20. Subsection F the board shall publish its decisions online. The board may publish online or contract to publish annotations and indices of its decisions. On to page 12. The decisions of the environmental division of the superior court and the Supreme Court and the texts of those decisions. So just so you know, so currently, the board doesn't make decisions so you are including the requirement that they publish their decisions online. And then updating the existing requirement or there's a permissive ability right now for the board to publish indices of decisions on active 50 cases, and they do do that already they're called the notes. So they are online currently but this is updating that language to specifically include the board's decisions as well as the superior court and the Supreme Court decisions. So on page 12. Next in subsection G. The board shall manage the process by which land use permits are issued under section section 6086 of this title may initiate enforcement on related matters under the provisions of chapter 201 and 211 of this title, and may initiate and hear petitions for revocation to use permits issued under this chapter, and the grounds for revocation are as follows. Excuse me so that's one other change that the new board will have currently. The natural resources board would like to revoke a permit they actually have to petition the environmental court to do that and so now this would be giving the environmental review board the ability to initiate and hear petitions to revoke active 50 permits. On to page 13 line for the board may hear appeals a fee refund requests under section 6083 a of this title. The board shall hear appeals of decisions made by the district mission and district coordinators. Subsection J. The board shall review applications for a planned growth area and approve or disapprove based on whether a municipal application demonstrates compliance with the requirements of section 6032 of this title. The board shall produce guidelines for municipality seeking to obtain the planned growth area designations. And so I'll stop there and say quickly that is an element that is also going to be discussed later that's part of the overall location based jurisdiction. And is a is somewhat related to the nrbs report that they came up with, as there are planned growth areas will have the ability to have the active 50 exemptions. And then additionally, online 17 the board shall review for compliance the future land use maps developed by the regional planning commissions pursuant to 24 vs a 43 48 a to. So again we'll hear more about that at the end. On to page 14 section seven personnel. Regular personnel. I think you have passed this language a couple of times but the board may appoint legal counsel scientists, engineers, experts, investigators, temporary employees and administrative personnel as it finds necessary and carrying out its duties. And then providing personnel to assist the district commissions and in investigating matters within its jurisdiction. And so now that you're giving them the ability to hear appeals and various other things this is giving the board more authority to hire different types of personnel to assist them and the district. The board shall appoint executive director. The director shall be a full time state employee shall be exempt from the state classified system, and shall serve at the pleasure of the board. The director shall be responsible for supervising and administering the operation and implementation of this chapter, and the rules adopted by the board as directed by the. The board shall be serving the board in its duties and administering the requirements of this chapter, employing such staff as maybe required to carry out the functions of the board and preparing the annual budget for submission to the board. So I will just say that I think you initially drafted this language before the current executive director was hired. So the executive director at the natural resources board I believe is funded temporarily. And so this is adding the statutory requirement that there be an executive director. So you may want to hear what the current duties of the current executive director are. And if they line up with the language you've had here if you want to make any adjustments to that. So section 15 section eight section 6084 notice of application hearings commenced in overview. So this is language you have seen before upon the filing of an application with the district commission, the district commission shall send by electronic means. The application to the owner of the land, if the applicant is not the owner, the municipality in which the land is located. The municipal and regional planning commissions for the municipality in which the land is located. The agency of natural resources and any adjacent Vermont municipality and municipal and regional planning commission, if the land is located on a municipal or regional boundary. The application shall send by electronic means a copy of the notice to the town clerk's office of the town or towns in which the project lies. The town clerk shall post the notice in the town office. The applicant shall also provide a list of adjoining landowners to the district commission upon good request and for good cause the district commission may authorize the applicant to provide a partial list of adjoining landowners and according to the board rules. You said that we had seen this language before, and I noted that you said the first 36 pages were passed in S 234 and 2022. Is that where we have seen this before or is this somewhere else. I actually think this has come up in a couple other bills because there have been other times when it's been pointed out that there isn't necessarily a requirement to do this electronically. So I think that I think the nrb has previously asked for this language although I'm. And then on page 16. Any notice for a major or minor application as required by the section shall also be published by the district commission and a local newspaper, generally circulating in the area where the development or subdivision is located. And on the board's website, not more than 10 days after receipt of the complete application. On page 16 section nine. This is amending 6086 F. And all it's doing here is updating the reference to the board, and then down online 16 following the appeal of the district commission. The request may be filed with the board, as opposed to the environmental division on to page 17 section 10. This is the section on appeals. So appeals to the board and appeal of any actor decision of a district commission shall be to the board and shall be accompanied by fee prescribed in section 6083 a of this title. Participation before the board. A person shall not appeal an act or decision that was made by a district commission, unless the person was granted party status by the district commission, pursuing to subdivide division 6085 C one. E of this title, participated in the proceedings before the district commission and retained party status at the end of the district commission. In addition, the person may only appeal those issues under the criteria with respect to which the person was granted party status. However, notwithstanding these limitations a person may appeal an actor decision of the district commission. If the board determines that onto page 18. There was a procedural defect that prevented the person from obtaining party status or participating in the proceeding. In addition, being appealed as a grant or denial of party status, or some other condition exists that would result in manifest injustice. If the person's right to appeal was disallowed. And so I will stop there and just say that all of this language is the same language that is currently in statute for appeals to the, to the Superior Court environmental division. So it's just transferring this language over to the board, it's not changing the standard at all. I'm sorry, nine seven filing the appeal and appellate to the board under this section, with the notice of appeal a statement of the issues to be addressed in the appeal, a summary of the evidence that will be presented and a preliminary list of witnesses who will testify on behalf of the appellate. The board shall hold a de novo hearing on all findings requested by any party that files an appeal or cross appeal according to the rules of the board. The hearing shall be held in the municipality where the project subject to the appeal is located, if possible, or as close as possible. Notice of appeal. Notice of appeal shall be filed with the board within 30 days following the act or decision by the district commission. The board shall notify the parties who had party status before the district commission of the filing of any appeal. Prehearing discovery. A party may obtain discovery of expert witnesses who may provide testimony relevant to the appeal. Prefiled testimony onto page 19 shall be in accordance with the Vermont Rules of Evidence. The use of discovery for experts shall comply with the requirements of Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure Rules 26 to 37. Which I don't remember what they are off the top of my head that I can get you more information on those. Interrogatory served on non expert witnesses shall be limited to discovery of the identity of witnesses and a summary of each witnesses test testimony, except by order of the board for cause shown. Interrogatory served on expert witnesses shall be in accordance with the Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure. Parties may submit requests to produce and request to enter upon land pursuant to Vermont Rules of Civil Procedure 34. Parties may not take deposition of witnesses, except by order of the board for cause shown. The board may require a party to supplement as necessary any pre hearing testimony that is provided. The decisions of the former environmental board, the water resources board, the waste facilities panel and the environmental division of the Superior Court shall be given the same weight and consideration as prior decisions of the environmental review board. Appeals to the Supreme Court. An appeal from a decision of the board under subsection any of this section shall be to the Supreme Court by a party as set forth in subdivision in subsection 6085 C of this title. 20 objections. No objections that has not been raised before the board may be considered by the Supreme Court, unless the failure or neglect to urge such objection shall be excused because of extraordinary circumstances. Appeals of decision. An appeal of a decision by the board shall be allowed pursuant to three vsa section 815, including the unreasonableness or insufficient insufficiency of the conditions attached to permit. An appeal from the district commission shall be allowed for any reason, except no appeal should be allowed when the application has been granted and no hearing was requested. President from the former environmental board and the environmental review board. That interpret this chapter shall be provided the same deference by the Supreme Court, as presidents accorded to other executive branch agencies charged with administering their enabling act. On appeal to the Supreme Court from the environmental review board decisions of the environmental review board interpreting this act shall also be accorded that deference. The board shall be deemed clearly erroneous upon appeal to the Supreme Court the board's finding a fact shall be accepted unless clearly erroneous. Completion of case, a case shall be deemed completed when the board enters a final decision, even though that decision is appealed to the Supreme Court and remanded by that court. Court of record jurisdiction. The board shall have the powers of a court of record in the determination and adjudication of all matters within its jurisdiction. It may initiate proceedings on any matter within its jurisdiction. It may render judgments and enforce the same by any suitable process issuable by courts in this state. An order issued by the board on any matter within its jurisdiction shall have the effect of a judicial order. The board shall the board's jurisdiction shall include the issuance of declaratory rulings on the applicability of this chapter. And rules are ordered or orders issued under this chapter pursuant to previous a no wait. And the issuance of decisions on appeal pursuant to section 607 and 6089 of this title. So 607 is the jurisdictional opinion. And 89 is the appeals. And I know you said we've already seen this before and I remember the floor votes, but I wasn't in this committee and I think only four of us were. So just for place setting, like for me, when I pull up 6089 right now, it's like six lines. So this just for place setting for me is like a massive revamp because we haven't done that. And we now have so much that we've learned about process based off of all the past reports and all of that. Fair. All existing statute under the environmental court rate. And because we're proposing to move appeals to this board, it comes into this section of statute. Okay, it already is there. Okay. Yes, and so the first part is moving it from the environmental court's jurisdiction and then this actually this last couple of provisions are based on the language that the PUC has because the PUC is a quasi judicial body. And so you're making the environmental review board a quasi judicial body with the authority to hear appeals and issue judicial orders. More similar to the PUC. Yeah. Thank you. So on page 21 section 11 is 10 BSA. Six thousand and seven, then this is where the jurisdictional opinions come up. And so actually the new language is on page 22. Subsection D. The person who seeks review of a jurisdictional opinion issued by a district coordinator shall bring to the board an appeal of issues addressed in that opinion. And so this language is new because currently, as we just sort of just touched on appeals of jurisdictional opinions go to the environmental court. So yes this language is being applied to what was in the environmental court. The appellant shall provide notice of the filing of an appeal to each person entitled to no subdivision. 6085 C1 a through D of this title and to each person on an approved subdivision on an approved subdivision. The list. Failure to appeal within 30 days following the issuance of the jurisdiction opinion shall render the decision of the district coordinator under subsection C of the section, the final determination, regarding the jurisdiction, unless the underlying jurisdiction opinion was not properly served on persons listed in 6085 C1 a through D of this title and on persons on a subdivision 6085 C1 E list approved under subdivision C of the section. So yeah so currently we and we haven't talked about active 50 yet this year too much and jurisdictional opinion but any person at any time can request a jurisdictional opinion about a particular project and a district coordinator reviews the project plans against what is required under the active 50 statute to determine if a permit is needed. That jurisdictional opinion whether or not something falls under active 50 jurisdiction is appealable currently to the environmental court. And this would be bringing under the board on page 23 section 12 active 50 fees. All persons filing an appeal cross appeal or petition from a district commission decision or jurisdictional determination shall pay a fee of $295 plus publication costs. Any municipality filing an application for a planned growth area designation shall pay a fee of $250. The planning commission filing a regional plan or future land use map to be reviewed by the board to pay a fee of $250. So then section 13 amends all of chapter 220, which is the environmental appeals chapter for appeals to the environmental court. So, I'm not sure if you want me to go through all this but what it does it goes through and it gets rid of all of the references to active 50 appeals in that chapter because they're all being moved to the environmental review board. So it leaves intact the other types of appeals that the environmental court does will continue to hear. Excuse me that primarily our decisions of the secretary of natural resources so any permit issued by the agency of natural resources, and then any municipal zoning and subdivision appeals will still go to the environmental court under this language. So that takes us all the way to page 34. So, again, on page 34 section 14 strikes the environmental courts authority to your to have jurisdiction over revoking active 50 permits, as I mentioned previously, that is with the board as well. So section 15 is providing for new positions at the environmental review board. It's one staff attorney, and then for half time environmental review board members, it then appropriates $384,000 to pay for these positions. I'm trying to remember the map on that, but we could review that. I think there was a fiscal note also the last time about how that with the breakdown of costs are there. And then on page 35 section 16 is the transition provision. And so the governor shall appoint the members of the new board. As of July 1 2025. Any existing terms for members of the existing natural resources board who are not appointed shall expire on that day. As of July 1 2025 all appropriations and employees and employee positions of the natural resources board are transferred to the environmental review board. The new board shall adopt rules of procedure for its hearings for appeals but for the other duties that they're being given honor before July 1 2026. And then so related to that section 17 is about the environmental divisions authority over its cases. So understanding the repeal of its jurisdictional authority to hear appeals relative to land use permits and section 12 of this act. Environmental division of the Superior Court shall continue to have jurisdiction to complete its consideration of any appeal that is pending before as of July 1 2026. So if the act or repeal has been filed, or if the act or appeal has been filed, the environmental review board shall have authority to be a party in any appeals pending under the section until July 1 2026. So this is setting up that the new environmental review board shall start hearing appeal cases as of July 1 2026 at which point the environmental court will not have its authority over those cases any longer. And then page 36. Finally, I'm related to this specific topic section 18 is a revision authority. And so this is giving the Office of Legislative Council authority to replace all references to the natural resources board with environmental review board, because it appears in title three title 10 title 24 title 29 title 30 and title 32. And if we included in this bill it would add another 30 pages probably. So this is giving me the authority to finish it after the session. So, so that is the language regarding specifically the new board. Page 36 is language related to new criteria for force blocks and connecting habitats. And this is language that you have reviewed in prior sessions. For those of you keeping track at home I believe this is the language from age 233 as past the house in 2017, but has been in this committee at multiple other points since then. So on page 36 section 19. It's adding new definitions to act 250 related to this topic so connecting habitat means land or water or both that links path patches of habitat within a landscape, allowing the movement migration and dispersal of wildlife and plants and the functioning of ecological species. A connecting habitat may include features including recreational trails and improvements constructed for farming logging or forestry purposes. Forest block means a continuous area of forest in any stage of succession and not currently developed for non forest use a force block may include features including recreational trails, wetlands or other natural features that do not themselves need to be covered or improvements constructed for farming logging or forestry purposes. Onto page 37 fragmentation fragmentation means the division or conversion of a force block or connecting habitat by the separation of a parcel into two or more parcels. The construction conversion relocation or enlargement of any building or other structure, or many mining excavation or landfill. Any change in the use of any building or other structure or land or extension of use of land. However fragmentation does not include the division or conversion of a force block or connecting habitat by a recreational trail, or by improvements constructed for farming logging or forestry purposes below the elevation of 2500 feet. Habitat means the physical and biological environments in which the particular species of plant or wildlife lives. And as used in subdivisions 4546 and 47 of this section recreational trail means a corridor that is not paved. And that is used for recreational purposes including hiking walking bicycling cross country skiing snowmobiling, all terrain vehicle writing and horseback writing. So then those definitions are going to be used in the next section section 20, which is amending criterion eight of act 250. It's adding the hunter of an ecosystem protection scenic beauty and historic sites. And then the new language is on page 38 line 13 force blocks. So this is a new criterion eight B. And it's related to force blocks. So a permit an act 250 permit will not be granted for a development or subdivision within or partially within a force block. And the second demonstrates that the development or subdivision will avoid fragmentation of the force block through the design of the project or the location of project improvements or both. It is not feasible. It is not feasible to avoid fragmentation of the force block and the design of the development or subdivision minimizes fragmentation of the force block. It is not feasible to avoid or minimize fragmentation of the force block and the applicant will mitigate the fragmentation in accordance with section 6094 of this title. And we will get to that section next but so what this is setting up is a avoid minimize mitigate standard. And so what that means is when someone wants to construct a project that is within or partially within a force block, they have to demonstrate either that they will avoid fragmenting that force block, or if they are unable to avoid fragmenting that they're minimizing fragmentation through site design, or if they're unable to do a full avoidance, or unable to minimize the fragmentation, they can then mitigate it. In accordance with section 6094, which I'll get to next, but on page 39 line for methods for avoiding or minimizing the fragmentation of a force block may include locating buildings and other improvements and operating the project in a manner that avoids or minimizes incursion into and disturbance of the force block, including clustering of buildings and associated improvements. Designing roads, driveways and utilities that serve the development or subdivision to avoid or minimize fragmentation of the force block. Such design may be accomplished by following or sharing existing features on the land, such as roads, tree lines, stone walls and fence lines. President Smith. Yeah, I have a question. Thank you. What's a forest block 1000 acres or 100 acres. The definition of a force block is actually on page 36. It doesn't set a size requirement. It's any contiguous area of forest in any stage of succession, not currently developed for non forest use. It can be any size piece of property. Yes. It doesn't give a landowner much opportunity to defend its property doesn't against situations like this if they want to mandate what can be a forest block and what cannot be a forest block. So, the net one of the next sections that's coming up is actually directing the the Agency of Natural Resources to map the force blocks. And so I think, and establish a procedure for how they will decide what is a force block. So, this is there is contemplation later here about providing providing maps of where force blocks are so that people will be on notice of what is considered a force but there's nothing written in it right now as to what a part block exactly is. Well, what it is but not necessarily it's this, whether or not there's a size threshold for them. So, also currently town maps are supposed to already map force blocks on their town maps. So some of those maps should already exist and because they've been required since at least 2016 I believe. Each parcel or each property owned by an individual be a forest block. If someone owns 50 acres is that considered a forest block, or someone owns 10 acres is that considered a forest block, or all of the above. I don't know if any of the existing rules around that set a size threshold I don't know off the top of my head. Should it be specified. I'm going to just ask that we can we just let this. Let's process what's here, and then we'll get into that kind of double it. Well, thank you. Thank you. Yeah. I also I haven't looked at that in a while so I can't remember if there is a size threshold already required for the town maps. So, in 1339 very similar languages is included in the new sub criterion eight C regarding connecting habitat. So a permit will not be granted for a development or subdivision, unless the applicant demonstrates that the development or subdivision will avoid fragmentation of a habitat connector through the design of the project, or the location of project It is not feasible to avoid fragmentation of the habitat connector and the design of the development or subdivision. Minimizes fragmentation of the connector, or it is not it is not feasible to avoid or minimize fragmentation of the habitat connector in the hub and the applicant will mitigate the fragmentation in accordance with section 6094 of this title. So for avoiding or minimizing the fragmentation of a habitat connector may include locating buildings and other improvements at the farthest feasible location from the center of the connector. Designing the location of buildings and other improvements to leave the greatest contiguous portion of the area undisturbed in order to facilitate wildlife travel through the through the connector. So when there is no feasible site for construction of buildings or other improvements outside the connector, designing the buildings and improvements to facilitate the continued viability of the connector for use by wildlife. Section 21 is criterion eight B and C rulemaking. So on or before January June 15 2025 the natural resources board shall file a final proposed rule with the Secretary of State and legislative committee on administrative rules to implement the requirements of the administration of those two new criteria that I just discussed force blocks and connecting habitats. On page 41 section 22. This is also as I was just mentioning language you've seen quite a few times it always has traveled with the force blocks and connecting habitat language so it is about resource mapping. So the Secretary of Natural Resources shall complete and maintain resource mapping based on GIS or other technology. The mapping shall identify natural resources throughout the state including force blocks and connecting habitat that may be relevant to the consideration of energy projects and projects subject to chapter 151 of this title. The Center for geographic information shall be available to provide assistance to the Secretary and carrying out the resource mapping. The Secretary shall consider the resource maps developed under subsection a of the section when providing evidence and recommendations to the PC under section 248 B five. And when commenting or providing recommendations under chapter 151 to district commissions on other projects. The Secretary shall establish and maintain written procedures that include a process and science based criteria for updating resource maps developed under subsection a of the section before establishing or advising these procedures. The Secretary shall provide opportunities for affected parties and the public to submit relevant information and recommendations. So I would just say one of the topics for consideration is going to be how this section will relate to the future land use mapping information that we've received back from the regional planning questions so you know, stay tuned. This is a place where language from the mapping. It's two o'clock. It's two o'clock. Do you want me to proceed. Let's see. I guess we should keep going for another five minutes. We'll see where we get to. Okay, so the language on page 42 starts a new section or set of sections related to location based jurisdictions. And a lot of this language that you are about to see is new. However, the concept was in the active 50 commission report. So that so six years ago that report did contain a lot of the concepts that are in here. So it's updating the jurisdictional triggers. Based on the location slash type of resource. And this does also relate to the NRB is most recent report as well. So on page 2042 section 23 is amending 6000 and one in active 50, and it's amending the definition development, which is what we think of as the jurisdictional primary jurisdictional trigger for active 50. So it's leaving intact the 10 acre jurisdictional trigger. So for commercial or industrial purposes in a town that has adopted permanent zoning and subdivision bylaws project on 10 or more acres triggers active 50. So if the town does not have zoning, it's one or more acres. Or also if the municipality has elected to have one acre jurisdiction apply. And so that brings us to page 43 so none of that is new. So page 43 on line for a new jurisdictional trigger reads the construction of improvements on a track or tract of land within a radius of five miles of any point on any involved land within five years, owned or controlled by a person involving four or more units of housing located in a rural and working lands area. So the definition of rural and working lands area will come up later but in those areas for or more units of housing will trigger active 50 jurisdiction, if constructed within five miles within five years. Next, the construction of improvements for commercial industrial or residential use at or above 2500 feet, or within 25 feet of a critical resource area. And critical resource area is defined on an, an upcoming page, but what this is saying is any construction in or within a critical resource area will trigger active 50. So this is increasing the amount of active 50 jurisdiction in critical resource areas. So page, the construction of improvements for commercial industrial or residential use on a track or tracks of land, more than 500 feet from the center line of a state or town highway, located in a rural or and working lands area. This shall not include existing residential buildings, or the construction of a garage or other buildings incidental to residential use. So this is a new concept that this committee has not considered before it is a different kind of jurisdictional triggers for any construction that is located more than 500 feet from a state or town highway, if located in a rural and working lands area. That does get us to about five minutes past. That's a lot of talking for Ellen. And we haven't made it all the way through, but I think what we will do is take our break and shift gears. And I guess I need to orient the committee. The larger plan here which is that we're going to walk through some bills that have been introduced introduced the next and requested by other committees. They've been kind of, I just want us to look at them to see if, you know, review them understand them and see if there's issues that we have with them. And we will continue the active 50 walkthrough with Ellen later this week. Yeah, that just so people understand the last bit about. That's what I was intended to use a simplified work. So that's just see that. Yeah, and all that that I was just talking about was pretty new so we'll have to go back and actually present the sort of balancing concept that's part of the location based jurisdiction. Yeah, yeah. But now we'll take a 10 minute break.


If you want to pray with greater effectiveness, try these three simple biblical keys. You can apply these immediately. Number one, faith. Believe that God hears you. When you pray knowing God hears you, you no longer see prayer as a negotiation to get God's attention. This minimizes the distraction of perceived rejection. Number two, faithfulness. When you pray, you weaken the flesh. By making and keeping the flesh weak through prayer, it won't be as strong as if you went weeks without prayer. This minimizes the distraction of the flesh. Number three, silence. While prayer can be done anywhere at any time, there's something especially helpful about carving out a time in your day dedicated to only attention on God. Yes, prayer can be spontaneous, but it must also sometimes be intentional. Silence removes the distractions of the world. Subscribe or follow for more.


The Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology has created new guidelines for children aged 0 to 4 years called the Canadian 24-hour Movement Guidelines for the early years. These guidelines integrate physical activity, sedentary behavior, and sleep into a whole day, 24-hour period, approach. The development process followed rigorous and transparent procedures, including the appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation, agree-to, instrument and the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation, grade, methodology. The guidelines provide evidence-informed recommendations on combinations of light-dash, moderate, and vigorous intensity physical activity, sedentary behaviors, and sleep for infants, toddlers, and preschoolers. Proactive dissemination, promotion, implementation, and evaluation plans were prepared to optimize uptake and activation of the new guidelines. These guidelines represent a sensible evolution of public health guidelines by framing optimal health within the balance of movement behaviors across the whole day while respecting preferences of end-users. Future research should consider the integrated relationships among movement behaviors, and similar integrated guidelines for other age groups should be developed. This article was authored by Mark S. Tremblay, John Philippe Chappoux, Christy B. Adamo, and others. We are article.tv, links in the description below.


Hi everyone, thank you very much for the introduction and for being here as it has been said this paper was a collaborative work between me Bruno Martorano who was initially supposed to present and could not attend unfortunately today and Patricia Giustino from UNU wider. So do pandemics lead to rebellion the title we choose it because it sounds cooler I would say but we actually focus a lot more on the role of inequality itself and the way inequality and pandemics interact between themselves. So the first point is actually the literature trying to understand that the causes of protests and organized collective dissent is very broad and one of the prominent theories started by Gore in 1970 with seminal paper is actually that civil unrest is motivated by inequality. However this theory is not always supported by evidence there is more recent evidence for example by Salt that says that inequality is only determining protests among top quintile earners. So there is some room here for improving the evidence and what we thought was that COVID-19 could offer the pandemic and of course the related restrictions could offer a good opportunity to study the relationship between inequality and protests. So as the virus spread as we all know in the past two years social disconsent increased. Protest increased by almost 30% between January 2020 and January 2021 and in the USA in particular with our case study angry protesters have taken to the streets since mid-April 2020 so basically the start of the introduction of the restrictions to voice their anger. Now what I why and how have these protests come about? Initially the reason behind the protest seemed to be more of political nature but later on we realized that was actually due to well at least there is a total evidence that it was due to also economic problems generated by the restriction themselves. Think about lockdowns for example. So we thought that maybe the highest risk areas which for us are represented by those with higher inequality, the highest inequality in the country have faced a perfect storm and this perfect storm has magnified long-standing social and economic grievances. Now we want to study with this paper if pre-existing as I said in the beginning pre-existing inequality is explaining the relationship between policy restrictions and the incidence of protests co-related protests in the US. Brief introduction on the data. We study a total of over 3,140 US counties in 50 states and the District of Columbia and for each county we compiled time variant information on weekly aggregated figures on COVID related protest events, weekly changes in COVID related policies and a measure of income inequality from 2019. So again this is pre-existing inequality. The period of analysis is January 2020 to December 2021. We have a working paper in which we analyze only the first year, only January 2020 to December 2021 and here we present a let's say a lengthened analysis. Our initial strategy, it's very simple actually. It's simply analyzing the role of stringency. So this is a measure of how strict the restrictions are and an interaction between stringency and inequality to give the time variance to inequality and a series of controls which I'll speak about in a minute. However, in this equation we imply that there is a linear correlation that the effect of level of policy stringency on protest incidents varies linearly with the level of inequality. So what we thought was to also analyze non-linear relationship between these elements and to do this we divide the stringency inequality into quintiles and we select the different counties based on which quintile of inequality they are. As I said here just a brief mention of the controls that we use. We use log total number of COVID-19 cases in previous week. This is to account for the fact that the level in COVID cases might influence the stringency of the measures the week after. Log average rainfall and temperature for each county. These are also factors that have been shown to be associated with protests and then a series of social and economic controls for each of the county. These are all pre-pandemic controls. These are the last ones that I mentioned. I'm not going to go through the entire table. Let me just highlight a few relevant facts. So this is our initial strategy from equation one. As you can see stringency per se has a negative effect on protest. So the higher the level of restrictions, the lower the number of protests. However, the interaction between stringency and inequality actually is positive and it's more than let's say it's higher than so that the overall effect is actually a positive effect of inequality and stringency together. Showing that in counties with higher inequality and with higher stringency there is a higher participation in protests or a higher probability of having protests in our case. Here we show the analysis by quintiles and in fact we identify non-linear effects so that only the most unequal counties, those in Q4 and Q5, the fourth and the fifth quintile of inequality are actually the ones with more positive effects on the probability of protests. We then interrogated ourselves on which are the mechanisms that can cause these effects. And as I said before, anecdotal evidence points towards economic damage caused by COVID-19 and by the restrictions. So what we thought was that we could first investigate these, unemployment for example, and then also focus on what political science scholars have highlighted as a series of characteristics that influence protest participation, which are political preferences and group identity. I show you here first the impact of our economic mechanisms. We focus on two measures, consumer expenditure and unemployment level. And we show that indeed the level, the stringency interacted with the quintile of inequality is reducing consumer expenditure only in the two highest quintiles, among the two highest quintiles, although this is only significant as you can see for the last quintile. And the same is for unemployment level. So higher unemployment levels for the fourth and the fifth quintile. So our findings here are suggestive of the fact that indeed economic downturn might affect participation in protests. Additionally here I'm just presenting briefly the social and political context here. We analyze it in a different way. We don't see this as an outcome, but we simply rerun our initial models from a question to one to three about dividing our sample between areas with above median and below median trust in the president, values for trust in president, satisfaction with democracy, and the civic engagement. And then we divide our sample between counties that have voted Republican in the 2016 election and those who have voted Democratic candidate in 2016 election. And we find that actually the results of the protests are more likely to take place in most unical counties, so these results are again significant for the most unical counties, for counties in which Republican won in 2016, where trusted in president is below the median, where citizens are less satisfied with democracy, but also where there are higher levels of social trust and civic engagement. And we proxy civic engagement by number of religion organization, civic organization, political and labor organizations. Now you might wonder, one question that was we also asked ourselves is, but what do we, what we can do is actually only identify protests if they are related to COVID or not, but protests are not necessarily a bad outcome in one might wonder why is it bad that most unical counties protest more? So also what we wanted to investigate is if this relationship between the stringency of restrictions, anti-COVID restrictions and inequality was also affecting other outcomes. And in this case we focus for example in the vaccination rate, and we actually find, as you can see here, that most unical counties, in this case 3rd, 4th and even more for the 5th quintile, have a higher, well actually a lower vaccination rate than the other countries. So the impact of stringency with inequality causes a lower vaccination rate or is related to a lower vaccination rate in these counties, the most unical ones. There are, we also tested a series of other outcomes that we can talk more if there is time later on. And we, together with our initial analysis, we also run an IV strategy, an IV strategy for which I have extra slides in case we have time, because one might raise issues of endogeneity of the results. But let's for now focus on the main conclusions. So main results shows that the implementation of policy restrictions to contain the virus led to increases in intents of protests, COVID related protests, only in counties with highest level of inequalities. These results validates the theory that civil unrest might be motivated by inequality or is somehow connected to the levels of inequality. And the mechanism that we identify is that of the drastically adverse economic effects caused by the policies. Again, the example of Dock Town I guess is what comes to mind to all of us. However, the political and social consequences of such severe economic shock are yet to be completely understood and may take decades, of course, to grasp this point. Thank you very much.


Today kicked off the Minnesota State softball tournament as the best of the best squared off. Unfortunately for Bemidji, they drew the best, the top-seeded Fairbow Falcons. Lumberjack faithful, making the trip down to Caswell Park. First inning, Fairbow with a runner in scoring position. Gabby Tacken enforces the grounder to get out of the inning unharmed. But in the third inning, that would start the harm. Allison Schach puts one over the left field fence for a solo shot. All the runs the Falcons would need on the mound for Fairbow. Makayla Armbruster was dominant, striking out 18 and throwing a no-hitter. Schach adds some insurance runs, a two-run shot. Part of a six-run, six-inning to cap off a Falcons eight-to-nothing victory. Not the way you would have liked things and getting no hit in the loss. But regardless, it was definitely a season to remember. At the end of this day, when we look back on what's happened, whether we win the second game or not, it was a great season. We came down to the state tournament. I mean, all these are learning moments for the younger kids and hopefully special moments for the upperclassmen as well. And in that second game, they were able to pick up the win 10-8 after being down five-to-nothing showing some fight. They'll play in the consolation championship game tomorrow.


Aloha and welcome to Life in the Law with Hingte Kauai. I'm your host, Trisha Nakamatsu. Joining me today is my esteemed co-host, Cecilia Chang, former director of the Hoi Si Qutu Sherry Center for Alternative Dispute Resolution, and our guest, Tracy Wilkin, Executive Director for the Mediation Center of the Pacific. Good afternoon, Cecilia and Tracy. Good afternoon. Starting today, we'll be kicking off a five-part series featuring the distinguished recipients of the 2020 annual awards presented by Hawaii Women Lawyers. Hawaii Women Lawyers is a local nonprofit organization committed to serving our members and the community by improving the lives and careers of women attorneys, influencing the future of our legal profession, enhancing the status of women, and promoting equal opportunities for all. A lot of HWL's work centers on educating, mentoring, and promoting women attorneys, but we're also engaged in legislative matters, judicial appointments, and career health and welfare matters that affect the legal community, women professionals, and women and children in need. Today, we are very fortunate to begin our awards series by celebrating one of the foremost experts on mediation in Honolulu, Ms. Tracy Wilkin. Tracy was selected to receive HWL's 2020 Distinguished Service Award, which honors an individual in the community who has made significant community contributions within the past year, which advanced the mission of Hawaii women lawyers. At this point, I'll turn things over to Cecilia to introduce our esteemed awardee. Cecilia, I understand you had the pleasure of working closely with Tracy on a number of projects during your tenure at the Hawaii State Judiciary Center for ADR. Absolutely, and it's such a tremendous experience. Thank you very much for inviting me to introduce Tracy. It's a real privilege. If I may, Tracy Wilkin is the Executive Director of the Mediation Center for Pacific. It's a non-profit dispute resolution corporation that serves over 7,000 people annually through direct mediation, facilitation, and training in conflict resolution processes. Tracy consults with businesses and other agencies such as the Hawaii State Judiciary, the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, the Department of Education, and the U.S. military to design and develop in-house mediation and dispute resolution programs. One such initiative that Ms. Wilkin created is the Kupuna Hono Program, which assists families in reaching agreements on elder issues. In 2019, Tracy spearheaded efforts for the mediation center of the Pacific to further expand its services and increase accessibility, including providing online dispute resolution services. In addition to her extensive work contribution, Ms. Wilkin is very active in access to justice efforts across the state. She served as a past commissioner of the Access to Justice Commission, co-chair of the Hawaii Access to Justice Commission's pro bono initiative, past force, and as a member of the Commission's administrative committee since the Commission's inception. Ms. Wilkin is currently an adjunct professor at the University of Hawaii's William S. Richardson School of Law, where she teaches mediation workshop at the law school. She also teaches courses at the Montenegro Peace Institute and program on conflict resolution. And the Hawaii Pacific University and serves as a guest lecturer for Kishamina University. Ms. Wilkin serves as advisory director to the Rose Periment Foundation, with a mediator with the Transportation Security and Health Association Council, a past director for the Hawaii Association for Conflict Resolution, a past co-chair for the Hawaii State Bar Association's Alternative Dispute Resolution Section, a founding member and past chair of the Rotary Club of Honolulu's Peacemaker Committee, and a past director of the Rotary Club of Honolulu. Ms. Wilkin served as a member of the special advisory panel overseeing the implementation of Hawaii 2015. State plan on Alzheimer's disease and other related dementias, Alzheimer's and other dementias Hawaii Task Force. Ms. Wilkin has received numerous honors for her service and dedication to improve the lives of others, including the citizens of the year award from the U.S. Navy Pacific Region for her work with the Navy and other federal agencies in developing an in-house dispute resolution program, the Mahalo Award from the Hawaii Speech and Hearing Language Association, assisting families and children by providing training, facilitation and other dispute resolution processes, the Suroptimist International Making a Difference Award for her outstanding work to improve the lives of other women, and the Hawaii State Bar Association's Shreddy Award for service towards the profession. She has also been recognized with the Hawaii Women's Legal Foundation Rota Lewis Award. Ms. Wilkin received her BS Homaude from Gonzaga University, a master's of science degree from the University of Hawaii, and the JD's of the William S. Richardson School of Law. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Thank you very much for the opportunity to participate in this award. That's truly amazing accomplishment and well deserving of the Distinguished Service Award. I'd like to know for our viewers that Ms. Wilkin, Tracy Mei, if I may, Tracy, did receive the actual fiscal award from Hawaii Women Lawyers in October 2020. I believe we have a picture for there. And that was along with official commendations from the Hawaii State Legislature received in December 2020. Thank you so much for joining us today, Tracy. Thank you so much for having me, Trisha, and thank you so much to the Hawaiian employers for this recognition. Greatly appreciated. And thank you, Cecilia, for that long introduction. Way too much information. There's so much that you have accomplished. It's just it's hard to keep in nutshell. I did want to shift gears a bit now and see if we can really get to the crux of your work, Tracy. We've heard about the amazing things you've done, your contributions to the world of mediation. But first of all, if you could just briefly, for those of our viewers who might not be familiar, what is mediation in a nutshell and what makes it different from say litigation, arbitration? Where does it fit in amongst all those other legal mechanisms? Sure. Thanks, Trisha. I'm happy. I'm always happy to describe mediation. Mediation is a process in which parties in conflict work with an impartial mediator who basically helps them talk to each other in a way they haven't been able to and helps them negotiate creative solutions to their issues. What's key about mediation is the mediator, unlike a judge or an arbitrator, doesn't make a decision. And it's up to the parties whether or not they want to reach an agreement. So it's a really empowering process in that the parties have an opportunity to work privately with the mediator and joint session, bouncing ideas off of each other to see if they're able to reach an agreement which leaves both of their needs. And if they're not able to reach an agreement, they can always move on to the formal legal process. Much more informal than going to court or an arbitration. And what's key is it's not an adversarial process. Court by nature, it's about winning and losing. It's about proving the other person is wrong in mediation. It's about having a conversation and negotiating agreements that are going to enable both parties to be able to move forward. It really does have a special place in that legal realm then. Given all of that, why do you do what you do? What is it about mediation that keeps you excited, motivated to do this type of work, this great work year after year? So that's a great question. And I always tell people the reason I really like mediation is I don't like being told what to do. And I think most people feel that way because that's the crux of mediation. It's the people coming up with this solution. I was attracted to this arena many years ago. I was formerly a speech pathologist when I first my first career working within the school system. And I saw a lot of conflict between schools and parents regarding the needs of their children. And I thought there's going to be a better way to address these issues because schools and parents need to work together for the benefit of the child. And when I went to law school, I learned about mediation. And it just was a process that really lent itself to me because it helped people sit down and really talk and work through issues. And it's appropriate for any kind of situation, but in particular when there's an ongoing relationship, it's really powerful. So it's been a great honor for me to be part of the Mediation Center all these years and be able to do this work. Because Tracy, you've done so much. Can you tell us about one of the programs, perhaps the domestic mediation program? So domestic mediation is one of our largest programs at the Mediation Center of the Pacific. And it really fits into the mission of Hawaiian lawyers because we are helping couples and a lot of women who are going through a difficult time, whether they're a married couple going through a divorce or an unmarried couple who have a child who still need to work out time sharing arrangements. They're far better off working through these issues together. As we tell them, you may not be a couple, but you're still parents to these children. So you need to find a way to talk with each other to make the decisions together for the benefit of your children. And mediation helps them do that. And so over the years, we've seen our domestic mediation program, we've really focused on growing it. And the number of couples that we assist has tripled over the last 15 years, which is wonderful because we see so many people come in and they're going through tough times. And by going through the mediation process, they start talking to each other in a different way. So not only do they reach agreements, but they're figuring out ways to communicate to help them move through the future. And this is really important. And I must say over the last year with the pandemic, we saw even more couples in conflict regarding time sharing issues, because one parent would feel that their home was safer for the child than the other. And so they wouldn't want the child to go to the other parent's home. And of course, the other parent would want to see the children. So we've really seen those cases increase even more over the past year. Oh, no, you and attorney, another attorney, William or Bill Dara, have offered and have been offered having you long past your 200th recession on some of these domestic mediation possibilities for people contemplating divorce as well. Yeah, absolutely. You know, one of the interesting things about mediation, even though it's grown over the past 25 years, and it's in the forefront, most people don't think about axing accessing mediation. So it's really important to get the word out. Attorney Bill Dara, William Dara created the divorce law and Hawaii program. And he invited me to participate with him. So since 2011, every month, we've been providing the program for the public. It's a free program. It was traditionally at noon at the Supreme Court. Then we started at Cochle and it gives couples or people going through a divorce with knowledge and information about how the divorce process works, paperwork they need, how mediation work. And so actually, next month, we'll be celebrating doing 250 of those presentations, which is amazing. And we shifted to having the presentation via Zoom just this past February, because we realized it was so valuable for couples. And it was amazing because we weren't sure if anybody would show up via Zoom. And actually, we had 32 people in February and 33 people in March. And tomorrow we'll, I think we have another 34 people signed up again. So the nice thing is we're actually more accessible to people and giving more people this important information. So it's exciting. So even with the pandemic, or even more so with the pandemic, your outreach has expanded. Absolutely. Absolutely. We are doing a lot more outreach in the community and not only in the divorce arena, the domestic arena, but we've been doing a lot of outreach regarding landlord tenant issues. Since this is a huge area of concern with the moratorium in place, then we know eventually that moratorium will end. And there's a potential for a flood of eviction cases. So we've been doing a lot of outreach through Zoom presentation, working with property managers, resident managers, realtors, and many others to get the word out about encouraging landlords and tenants to access mediation now to work out agreements that will enable the landlord to receive payment and enable the tenant to remain in the residence and have them not end up in court. So it's, it's as challenging as some people have found shifting to using the Zoom platform, what we have found with our outreach and training is that enables us to access more people, which is really wonderful. Thank you. You're talking many people despite the moratorium avoid eviction. So we are encouraging landlords and tenants to access mediation. We have worked closely with the state and the Aloha United Way and Catholic Charities with the rental assistance program where they would offer mediation to tenants who were interested. We partnered with Catholic Charities in their rental assistance program this past January, the RAP program, where they provided rental assistance and educated tenants about the opportunity to mediate. So as a result of those partnerships, we opened over 600 landlord tenant cases last December and another 600 between January and February of this year. Now not every landlord and tenant are mediating. Some of them are accessing mediation and working out agreements, which is great. Others were helping them understand the rental assistance program and the need to work together. So we are really helping them have more open conversations and communications because they need to work together as a team to access the rental assistance. That is amazing. Now, you are also, you've also created the Kapuna Pono program, which helps our elderly, correct, and their family. Yes, absolutely. So we created the Kapuna Pono program with the assistance of Attorney Chuck Hurd, who he was very passionate about it because we recognize the community need more and more members of our community, particularly women, that fits in with the white women lawyer's mission, who are caregiving for elderly family members. And there's a lot of conflict around that. Oftentimes the caregiver is taking on a lot more than they're comfortable with. They're not comfortable reaching out to family members. Sometimes the elder adult siblings aren't honoring the wishes of the elder family members. So we have a mediation program and also a family conferencing process that we created to bring family members together, to have difficult conversations and basically to come up with plans that support the needs and the desires of the elder family member and working together. And that's really what you want at the end of life. You want to see your family working together, not in conflict. And this was a program near and dear to me because I was a caregiver for 16 years for both parents. And so I know how challenging it is to be a caregiver, particularly when you're balancing, working, and trying to give your loved one the best support possible to enable them to be as independent as possible while making sure that they're safe. So your own personal experience was that an inspiration for creating this program? I can definitely relate to families who are working through that process. So with all of these programs, how do you, in the mediation center for Pacific, sustain them? How does one, where do you get all of the mediators? Well, that's a great question. And we are so fortunate because our mediators are the lifeblood of the mediation center. We generally, we have about 125 mediators. We have a little bit fewer right now. We're coming back as, as people are getting vaccinated and getting comfortable with doom. And they provide for the, for most of our programs, the mediators provide the services at no cost. They're volunteering their time pro bono. So we do a lot of training to train our mediate, train our mediators in all the different areas that we provide mediation in. We provide ongoing continuing education so they can hone their tools. And over the last year, we provided a lot of training and how to mediate via zoom, how to be comfortable working with people in zoom so that we could continue our services. And as a result of our wonderful mediators and ability to provide mediation remotely, our services never stopped. So we feel really fortunate. And in fact, the number of requests for mediation have continued to grow. We're really grateful to our mediators who give so much for the community and do so much. I don't know. I was just going to say that's so impressive that you were able to, that you have so quickly and really pivot to, to meet the needs of your clients and, and everyone that you serve in such a short amount of time during such a difficult period for the entire world. Yeah, it was a, it was a little scary initially. And once we set up the processes and protocol, and I say we, because I work with an amazing team here at the Mediation Center of the Pacific, there are eight of us. And I'm very fortunate we work well together. They were able to adapt to the technology. And together we came up with good protocols and processes to support our clients as well as our mediators. We also were able to continue providing limited in-person services. We want to make sure that we're accessible to all. We work closely with the Access to Justice Commission and other legal service providers, because we know that there are a lot of mediators out there. The mediation center, the Pacific serves everyone, but we are the only option for people in the lower income population. So it's important that our services are accessible. So we make sure people can come in and social distance and be safe. We have the ability for them to participate remotely. And if they want to participate remotely and they don't have the equipment, they can come to our building and use our equipment in a room by themselves. So we have really worked hard to be versatile and as a result, as you said, we were able to transition quickly. And it's to the credit of the staff and team that I work with and the mediators who really believe in their work and are really dedicated. So wonderful to hear that you have such a dedication to Access to Justice, especially for some of those who are less fortunate. Thinking about and it ties in a little bit to how you adjusted to the COVID situation, thinking about the future of how things may be evolving for mediation for mediation in Honolulu, in particular for MCP and your client. Where do you see things going? Have things involved in the time that you've been there? Are there opportunities perhaps for young lawyers or other professionals, students perhaps even who are thinking this might be something I'd like to get involved in someday? Yeah, absolutely. And I'm delighted that you asked that question. I think there's more and more opportunities for young lawyers. Generally, before it would long time attorneys and retired judges who were predominantly the private mediators and we still have many wonderful private mediators providing services, but we are creating opportunities. We have about eight law students from the William S. Richardson School of Law right now who are volunteering their services for the Mediation Center of the Pacific and we're delighted to have them. We've also been fortunate to recruit a couple of young mediators who, one in particular, he completed his master's in conflict resolution at Pepperdine. He's from Hawaii. He wanted to be able to have the opportunity to get more experience and he's really well versed in Zoom and technology. And as much as we reopen and we'll have more in-person mediations, technology is here to stay. We will still offer mediations through Zoom. So having young mediators gain their experience and incorporate what they learn into their law practice, into the work that they do is invaluable. So I see, Tricia, that there's more and more opportunities and we're delighted to have them be involved with us. That's wonderful to hear and it sounds like you're going to be with them every step of the way to help develop that incoming generation as things continue to evolve over time.  It looks like we're starting to run short on time. I've had such a great time speaking with you and Tracy, thank you for being here to put up this area of law with us and all the amazing forward movement you've really brought to the field, especially here in Honolulu. Maybe Cecilia, did you want to take a minute or so and what are some of the highlights you had today? Thank you so much. Just from what we've seen here, Tracy, you've done a tremendous job bridging the legal field and the practice of mediation. So if you have really moved Hawaii forward on Honolulu, we see attorneys and mediator pools that you've developed are not just attorneys, correct? So we've really seen this incorporated or emerging of the practices together, haven't we? Yeah, absolutely. I think it's wonderful. And as you said, we have many attorneys who are mediators, but we also have many non-attorneys who are wonderful mediators, and actually they do great when they're paired together. They bring different strengths to the table to help people with different types of issues. So I really appreciate the opportunity to be able to talk about mediation because I really believe in it and share about the Mediation Center in the Pacific and I am so grateful to both of you and Hawaii women lawyers for this recognition because there are so many amazing women lawyers out there who are fully deserving of the recognition. So thank you for giving me that opportunity. And thank you Tracy and Cecilia for joining us here today. We did have a chance to show that contact information for mediation center of the Pacific for any of our viewers who would like more information to contact them about any of the opportunities you've heard about here today or services you've heard about here today. Thank you so much to our guest, Tracy Wilkin, Executive Director for the MCP and HWL 2020 Distinguished Service Award recipient. Thank you especially to my esteemed co-host Cecilia Chang. I am your host, Krisha Nakamatsu, extending a big mahalo to you, our viewers, for taking the time to join us today. Please tune in again next week for another edition of Life in the Law and if you'd like to follow the rest of our five-part award series for Hawaii women lawyers, each segment in this series will feature a new HWL board member or officer sitting down with remotely, of course, with a new award recipient. This is such an amazing opportunity to hear from some truly amazing, remarkable women who have been having positive impacts on the lives and well-being of the women, children and legal profession and really everyone in our community as a whole. Mahalo, thank Kauai and Whitman Lawyers for your collaborative work on these awards segments. Our next award, our next awardee will be Judge Barbara Richardson for the Lifetime Achievement Award that will be on May 3rd, Monday at 3 p.m. Until then, thank you so much again ladies for joining me. Always a pleasure and to all of our viewers, a hui hou and aloha.