Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Good afternoon. This is the House Appropriations Committee. It's Wednesday, 03/11/2026, just before 01:30. We are sorry running a little bit late, but here we are. We're going to vote on three bills, and then we are going to get a quick walkthrough of the sister state program with the amendment that we have and vote on that too, and then we're going to hear another bill that we may not be voting by today. It's a bill after noon, and we'll vote on four bill studies today. So, let's start with H762, which we heard this morning. It was the relating to county and regional governance, the study committee, and extending that. As we all know, there's no additional money. It's all been appropriated. Does anybody have any other questions about that before we vote? Seeing none, is there a motion to Is this as amended?

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: This one is. Okay.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: To approve page seven sixty two as amended by House Bill Vaughts? So moved. Wayne and Dave, thank you. I'll second it. And seeing no further discussion, when the clerk is ready, he can call the roll.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Representative Bluemle? Yes. Representative Dickinson? Yes. Representative Feltus? Yes. Representative Kascenska? Yes. Representative Laroche? Yes. Representative Robicki? Yes. Representative Nigro? Yes. Raul, yes. Representative Stevenson? Yes. Representative Yacovone? Yes. And Representative Chittenden?

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yes.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Item zero zero.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Okay, and Mike Moricki is going to be the reporter of the bill. One down, thank Next is H542, which is the House Education bill, which was to terminate the PCB testing because we don't have any money to do it all. Everybody remember that? Are there any questions or concerns? Hearing none, I'll take a motion to, this is not one, it's not amended, to approve age five forty two. So moved. Okay, I got lots. John Lin. And if there's no further discussion, follow the rule when you're ready.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Representative Bloomley?

[Representative Tiffany Bluemle]: Yes.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Representative Dickinson?

[Representative Eileen Dickinson]: Yes.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Representative Feltus? Yes. Representative Kascenska? Yes. Representative Laroche? Yes. Representative Raulicki? Yes. Representative Nigro? Yes. Does Squirrell, yes. Representative Stevens? Yes. Representative Yacovone? No. Is that no? No. AIN? AIN, Representative Chittenden? Yes. Ten ten.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Ten ten. And John is the reporter of that bill. Thank you. And then H5-eighty eight, which we also heard this morning, this was OPR. And the only fiscal stuff is revenue, and there's no expense from our end. Are you all good with that? So, is this one amended?

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: By ways of means, right?

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yes. So we want to take a motion to approve H588

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: as As amended by

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: As amended by ways of means,

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: or as Go by opposite, further amended by

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: By ways of patients. Is there a motion to do that? Wayne, is there a second? Okay, so I'll get to it this time. We'll share it. Okay, and if there's no further discussion, we'll call the roll when the clerk is moving.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Representative Bluemle? Yes. Representative Dickinson? Yes. Rachel Meltus? Yes. Representative Kascenska? Yes. Representative Baroche? Yes. Representative Mrowicki? Yes. Representative Nigro? Yes. Representative Sparrow, yes. Representative Stevens? Yes. Representative Yacovone?

[Representative David Yacovone]: Yes.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: And Representative Scheu?

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yes. 1105. Okay, and that's Mike Mrowicki also. Great job, everybody. Doing pretty well here. And then the next step, I'm going to see that our lunch councillors come in to talk to us about So take a seat, Rick. This is the Sisters Day program, age six seventy four. I sent you all the amendment. And you have an amendment posted on our Yes. Okay. And Rick, maybe if you want to share the screen with us, that's easy for you to do. We on We have it all together.

[Rick Seigel, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Autumn, I may need a Zoom invite.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Let's see, I bet you're right. Yes, I will. Thank you.

[Rick Seigel, Office of Legislative Counsel]: So Rick Siegel with the Office of Legislative Counsel, and I'm gonna share my screen here momentarily, but you should have draft 1.1 of the House Appropriations Committee amendment to h six seven four. I walked through the House Commerce report a week before town meeting break, and the committee had a few requests for changes, and I hope I have implemented those to your liking. I'm gonna keep delaying. Here we go. I gotta get the bill open. So the changes are highlighted in yellow for standard.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Well, Chris is available to come back to you just a couple minutes.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: That's eight page

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: amendment. Almost a new bill.

[Rick Seigel, Office of Legislative Counsel]: It's not even a strike

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: all.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Know. I'm wondering if you wish you

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: had done that, but I think it's fine. I'm not sure that we want to do a strike all.

[Rick Seigel, Office of Legislative Counsel]: I prefer not when it's not necessary. Okay. Here we go. Sorry about that. I got it open. I'm gonna share it. I just came to Commerce, so I'm not totally all set up

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: for And they haven't Okay.

[Rick Seigel, Office of Legislative Counsel]: There we go. So the first change on page one, this says the word has been words have been removed. If you recall, there was language here about diplomatic collaboration. I think rep Stevens brought up that was a concern. I talked to some colleagues in my office, and they agreed that that's more of a federal government. The whole diplomatic type of work is more the purview of the president, federal government. So I've removed that phrase from the purpose of the sister state committee and the program. Okay? The second amendment is starts on page one, and it completes on page two of the amendment, which is there was a request that the agency, when developing the program, that they determine how long these agreements should be in effect. So that's now gonna be one of the tasks of the agency of commerce and community development is to determine what else is necessary in addition to the length of time for these partner agreements to be in effect.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Concern, you wanted to have sort of an end date. Yes, that was the answer.

[Rick Seigel, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Okay, the next change on the same page is there was this during the timeline of a application, you may remember the agency receives it. They do the initial verification, then it goes to the sister state committee who then gives it the thumbs up or thumbs down. The language in the bill as it came out of commerce, told the governor that the governor can only approve an application that had been approved by the committee, but it was in a different part of the bill that he thought didn't belong there, so that sentence has been moved to the bottom of Subdivision B, which is where the Sister State Committee work is, and you can see it's not new language, it was just moved. The committee shall not send to the governor an application that the committee does not recommend be approved. So, if they yeah.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Is everybody good with that? Okay.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: And you

[Rick Seigel, Office of Legislative Counsel]: see the fourth removal is that same sentence being removed from the governor's paragraph. Okay. Okay. Yeah. Didn't highlight it because it's not new language. It's

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Removing all this. Old new language. Right.

[Rick Seigel, Office of Legislative Counsel]: The fifth amendment is the request to have the committee's authority to terminate a partnership. For some reason, if things go sour, the committee can vote to have a partnership be terminated. The sixth change is kind of aligning the the reimbursement and per deemed compensation so that members of the committee who are legislators are, reimbursed through monies appropriated to the general assembly. That's the line on page three, the bottom of the first subdivision. Number two, other members of the committee shall be reimbursed for monies appropriated to ACCD.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: I'll just pause this here for a second. Chris Roof is coming over. We asked him to do a little research about do we actually need to make an appropriation or can it be absorbed? He has basically can be absorbed, but I want him to just come and tell us. So he's on his way over. He'll be over here.

[Rick Seigel, Office of Legislative Counsel]: And then seven and eight, Madam Chair, these are copied and pasted from the Reps Marcotte and granting amendment for the Vermont Island Trade Commission. I walked through that on last time I was here. I didn't hear any requested changes from the committee, but I'm happy to entertain any or remove. If you don't want this to be part of your amendment, I can remove that as well.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: People remember this part?

[Rick Seigel, Office of Legislative Counsel]: I can walk through it.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Do we need a refresher on this? What's happening here? Are you uncomfortable with it? We're okay? People seem like they're okay. And was there anything else at the end of that? No. That was the copy and paste.

[Rick Seigel, Office of Legislative Counsel]: That was the copy and paste. Yep. So no other Okay.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Changes to the bill.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: And I you said you just came from congress, but they haven't looked at this. They're gonna wait till we've approved this, and then they're gonna vote? That's my understanding. Okay. And you're welcome to sit there. And if, Chris, you wanna come to the table for your seconds of fame, that would be great. Update us up. You sent me a nice email, but I can't look and make you shoot me. Oh, talking again. This is

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Dave. 08670.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yeah, that one. Hello there.

[Chris Rupe, Joint Fiscal Office]: Good afternoon. Chris Froop, joint fiscal. I will have a fresh fiscal note posted for you all later today once you vote on an amendment,

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: but I can tell you what the verbally what it

[Chris Rupe, Joint Fiscal Office]: will say. When I was here before town meeting, in the pre amended version, the cost of this, bill was really limited to the per diems and expense reimbursements for the sister state program, committee. And, the the original language had the cost coming, even for the legislative members having it all coming out of ACCD's budget. So the amendment, after your discussion, separated the legislative members so their cost to come out of the legislative budget and the line of legislators would be ACCD's budget. That changes the cost estimate from, you know, roughly $9,600 to ACCD to being roughly $5,300 to ACCD and roughly $4,300 to the legislature. This assumes all eight meetings would happen every year. In reality, you know, there may be fewer than that happening, which would obviously bring the cost down. Over the break, I did correspond with a colleague over at ACCD, and the information they relayed to me was if the high end, the full 5,300 or more was being consumed every year to support this, they would likely want to see that added to their budget because they don't have a dedicated budget for committees and boards like this. But if this group is meeting fewer than eight times a year and that cost is, you know, a couple thousand dollars, that's something they'll likely to be able to figure out within their budget.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: So no no new appropriation needed for this at this point.

[Chris Rupe, Joint Fiscal Office]: Right. And the amendments to the Vermont Ireland Trade Commission are not gonna have a fiscal impact of

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: the state. They they have their own.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Actually, we made it clear in the original sister whatever trade commission that we were not paying anything into that. So great. Any questions on this bill? Well, so we have an amendment, and then we have the bill as amended by us for the two parts. So if you guys don't mind just hanging out until we vote, we'll be quick. So, I would entertain a motion to approve our amendment. John? Here's the amendment. Okay, you move that. Is there a second? Yes. Okay, good. Thank you. Any other comments about this before we vote the amendment out? I am not seeing any. If the court gets ready, let's vote on the amendment.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Representative Lemonley? Yes. Representative Dickinson? Yes. Representative Feltus? Yes. Representative Kascenska? Yes. Representative Laroche? Yes. McMulligans? Yes. Representative Michael? Yes. Representative Sperle, yes. Representative Stevens? Yes. Representative Yacovone? Yes. Representative Shaul? Yes.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: And is there a motion to approve age six seventy four as amended? So moved. And second, Marty?

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: Sorry, who's

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: the Tom and then Marty. Okay, not seeing any further discussion. Let's take a vote when you're ready. Thanks.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Representative Buntley? Yes. Representative Dickinson? Yes. Representative Feltus? Yes. Representative Kascenska? Yes. Representative Laroche? Yes. Representative Mrowicki? Yes. Representative Nigro? Yes. Representative Squirrell, yes. Representative Stevens? Yes. Senator Yacovone? Yes. Represent Shah?

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yes. Eleven zero. Okay, we're doing pretty well today. And this one's Tom's. So, Chris, thanks for coming at the last second. All of you. You for your support. So good we can now pass four bills out thank you progress here yeah I

[Representative Thomas Stevens]: was just going to print out the graphic or yellow

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yes,

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: okay. I just copied Brooke's statements on. Yep. Okay.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: And then next up, And we're still on time. We have age eight fourteen, an act relating to neurological rights and the use of artificial intelligence technology in health and human services. And did I see Jen Carter? Okay. So we have Legislative Counsel, and Nolan is coming at some point. I know he's going be in for a few seconds. And We have Representative Chittenden who is the reporter of the bill from health care. Thanks for being here. Whenever you're ready, Jen, just come on up. Okay, thank you for your patience. Let me know when you're ready. You ready for me?

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Ready for me. Afternoon, Harvey from the Office of Legislative Council. We are looking at H814, which just yesterday was voted out of the House Health Care Committee. This is an act relating to neurological rights and the use of artificial intelligence technology in health and human services. Starts out with some intent language. It is a strike all amendment. Starts out with some intent language expressing the intent of the general assembly. I don't know how much you want to see what's in the bill versus just what might have a fiscal impact. Can we some

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Go ahead and take it sort of high level. Okay. So we have some that would be great.

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: So it starts with some intent language around the intent of the general assembly as it relates to the use of artificial and augmented intelligence technology in health care, human services. And later, it talks a bit about education as well. Section two creates a new chapter in Title 18 on neurological rights. Started out as a larger chapter, but as it's coming out of the committee, it gives a purpose section and states individual rights that the state is recognizing. Each individual has the right to, and I'll just go through these, mental and neural data privacy, freedom of thought, nondiscrimination in the development and application of neurotechnologies, change an individual's decision regarding neurotechnology and the right to determine by what means to change that decision, be afforded protection from neurotechnological interventions of the mind and from unauthorized access to or manipulation of an individual's brain activity, and be afforded protection from unauthorized neurotechnological alterations in mental functions critical to personality. Section three makes some modifications to the makeup of the Artificial Intelligence Advisory Council, an existing advisory council that provides advice and counsel to the director of the Division of Artificial Intelligence in the agency of Digital Services regarding the division's responsibility to review all aspects of artificial intelligence systems, views developed, employed, or procured in state government, and also to provide public education and outreach on AI. This would modify a couple of members and add a few members. So under existing law, and it doesn't show you A through F, under existing law, there are 10 members. I think this would bring it up to 14 members. This would change the member with experience in the field of ethics and human rights from being appointed by the governor to being appointed by the National Association of Social Workers. In subsection H, it would remove the Commissioner of Health or designee and instead put in the Secretary of Human Services or designee. It would add one member with experience in health care appointed by the Vermont Medical Society, one member with experience in public education appointed by the Vermont NEA, would redesignate a couple of existing members. It would add the state treasurer or designee, and it would add one member with relevant knowledge and expertise appointed by the governor. So the governor doesn't lose an appointment, it just becomes a broader potential scope. It also extends the length of the existence of the AI Advisory Council, which is currently set to sunset at the June 2027. This would carry it through June 2030. Section four directs the AI Council in coordination with the Director of the Division of Artificial Intelligence and in consultation with interested stakeholders to look at some national or some relevant professional organizations' recommendations, including in the areas of health, human services and education regarding the use of AI in the fields of health care, human services, education, public participation and public finance, research existing and potential uses of AI in public participation in public finance, and create opportunities for public education and engagement and development of AI policy. And then it would require by 01/15/2027 that the Council, in coordination with the Director of the Division of AI, submit a report to the General Assembly recommending any additional statutory changes necessary to further the purposes of this Act, including protections for neurological rights and relating to neurotechnologies, guidance on use of generative AI by regulated professions and regulating the use of artificial and augmented intelligence in health insurance utilization review processes, summarizing additional ways the government can promote ethical and responsible use of AI in health and human services and education, proposing pilot projects to improve public engagement in public finance using ethical and responsible AI technology, and identifying any reasons for further delaying or removing the new 2030 sunset of the AI Advisory Council as set forth in Section four. It would take effect on passage. So as I understand it, the reason that this bill is here is the potential for, one or more of these new additions to be entitled to a per diem.

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: Oh,

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: it's my so my understanding is the reason that the bill is here is because there's potential that one or more of these new members on the AI Advisory Council could be entitled to per diem compensation and reimbursement of expenses.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Okay. And so I do want to hear from Rep. Chittenden, but I think Nolan is on a tighter timeframe. Is that right, Owen? Is that okay? Representative Chino, would you like to probably just explain about how this came about? And I have to say, I remember we were both elected at the same time, and you you were the author of the bill that created the Artificial Intelligence Advisory Council. The task force. Task force.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: Then I served on the task force, and then we then we created we filed the recommendations of the task force, and we created a council. Yeah. So where we're at now is the Please introduce yourself. I'm representative Brian Scheu from Burlington. I'm here on behalf of the House Health Care Committee. I'm gonna be reporting the bill. But I am also the lead sponsor of the bill. So where we are at in history is we are on the verge of some breakthroughs in medical innovations that are gonna make are really gonna force us to question our rights as humans, and maybe even, like, the meaning of our humanity. We're on there are technological innovate innovations that are gonna cross boundaries of our mind. Our mind and and so we heard from the NeuroRites Foundation some details about these technologies, and we decided to the original bill had a lot in it. They took what every state in the country has done with AI health care and put it in one

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: bill. And

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: then and

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: then it added in this this this piece that no one has yet done, which is formally establishing neurological rights. We didn't have the time to adequately review all that work, but what we determined was we at the very least, we should establish neurological rights in statute. Doesn't cost anything to do that. And then ask the existing council to come back in a year with further recommendations on all these other pieces that we need to know about soon. And what we heard was that the council has some ex a a good group of experts, but that they were lacking community based voices in the health, human services education sectors. And so we are adding those three members to the council. And then I think it's three, we're only adding three people technically, right?

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: I think it's just the treasurer.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: Oh, yeah, I'm adding the treasurer. I'm sorry, that's right, four. So it's three community based people and the treasurer. And the reason for adding the treasurer is that AI has great potential in budgeting. It has great potential in public finance. The government of Slovakia is using AI to help them write their country's budget now. So we're clearly not ready for that, but the

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: treasurer Don't don't go that way.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: But the but the treasurer's staff is interested in participating in that exploration. And so maybe we'll get back in the report next year some ideas about how it could be used to improve state budgets because health care and education finance are a big part of the puzzle. And so I think that kind of summarizes the gist of things. So it's like we're gonna establish some rights. We're gonna add some members to the council and and and extend the time they have to work and then get a report back in a year in hopes that over the next few years, Vermont can take steps forward to maximize the benefits and minimize the risks of AI technology in the public sector in a way that we haven't had to do yet.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Well, protecting people, which is the other part of

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: the Exactly. Yeah. Tom. Quickly, I think quickly. I'll try.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: I'll keep it de minimis.

[Representative Thomas Stevens]: Explain what it means to lose my neurological rights.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: So there is technology currently available as wellness products where you put a headband on, and there's sensors in it, or there's AirPods you put in with sensors in them. And these sensors can measure your neural data, so they can measure your brain waves. And it's and they are testing products now that can record that data, and AI learns from it and evolves from that data. And that data is also shared between companies, and there's no protection over that either. So as as these headbands evolve, the next in health care, there is a threshold where HIPAA would kick in, you know, where health information would be protected. But there's nothing saying right now that your it's okay. So they can currently gather information and learn it, and it's gonna it's getting to the point where machine learning can tell 12 different moods based on that measurement. So, like, if you put it on, it can tell you what you're feeling or someone else who's watching you. Like, what their a person's feeling in their head, like their emotional state, but that's rapidly evolving to the point where we're gonna be able to record dreams, memories, thoughts, specifically from a person. And right now, there's nothing protecting a person from a head being put on them and not being collected. And so we're trying to get ahead of the game by saying the brain is a private space, that the human body mind is protected. And how we're gonna do that, this council will come back and share, like, if there's additional laws or regulations in place. But we're saying as a state, we are not gonna let the human brain be a space that isn't that is that is not fundamentally private, that we're declaring that humans have a right to mental those six things. And some of them are very technical, and these come from the United Nations, that they're actually United Nations rights that have been established at this point. So I think, I hope that kind of explains the risk, where we're at, where we're going, and this is where it gets kind of creepy, if that's the reason I'm being honest. Is there's I'm more asking you, Mike. And this goes a little beyond healthcare, and commerce is going to have to jump in at some point. Video games are coming out soon with headbands, and you're going be able to control video games with the headbands, and at that point, when you consent to use it, you're going be consenting to that company recording your child's thoughts, feelings, stuff, and selling it. So then the marketing could be done to your child based on that information, or even worse, there's nothing stopping them from telling your child what they want. And this is why we're saying we're protecting people people from that separate from commerce, that the human body has integrity, that we're not gonna let people be implanting thoughts before they can even do it. We're gonna say they can't.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: It's like the twilight zone.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Yeah. Twilight zone. Black Mirror.

[Representative Thomas Stevens]: It's like Spielberg movie.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: It's like Black Mirror y.

[Representative Thomas Stevens]: Can can I just follow-up? So So if there's a positive to this, perhaps this is the way it would be marketed would be I'm in a coma and people have determined, have started to learn that people aren't dead when they're in a coma. There's no such thing as being brain dead. And I could see them say, well, it's a great thing because now we'll be able to find out what this person who's uncommunicated, I would just

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Exactly, is that part of research wouldn't I mean

[Representative Thomas Stevens]: you've elucidated very clearly the negatives or the potential abuses in the system and I'm all for studying how one can slow that down or prevent it.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: You're on the right track of the benefits. I think more specifically, you can already use headbands as a measurement tool yourself. So could you imagine in therapy, a therapist training the client to notice like, okay, how do you feel right now? Look at this, look at this, there's a treatment called neurofeedback that already does this where when you calm yourself down, the screen comes into clarity. So like you're watching a video and you're calming yourself till the screen is clear, and then you learn what that feels like, and then you do it separate from the video, but it's gonna get more sophisticated. So we might be able to use these devices to eventually help people heal their brains. And it might even be able to be used in learning someday where you can actually download information into you and stuff in ways that we don't understand.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: You don't have to put the book under my pillow, right? Think it's a little bit of a step from them.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: What we're saying is people need to give permission. We're not saying you can't do it. We're saying, I have a right to determine if this happens and how to undo it. There's also invasive technology from if you look up Neuralink, it's Elon Musk's company. They've created these chips, and currently, humans are having chips put in their brain. You can watch videos on Neuralink's website. And they're in a wheelchair, they're able to move the cursor on the screen with their mind, but then you listen to some of the stories, and people are saying things like, I don't feel like a human anymore, or I don't feel like myself anymore. So we're not banning this. We're asking the council to look into it more and make sure before we go too far that we are ready to protect people. But also, we wanna make sure that if this can revolutionize people's existence, like heal suffering, we don't wanna get in the way of that. You know, we wanna make sure we can help, we can use it to improve the human experience too. And there's many other, like Gemma was showing me, like the Neurowrites Foundation, there is on record testimony from them giving much more detail about this. I don't wanna take up too much of your time, but you asked, and I think it is important to know, you know.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Yes, it's very interesting. So Lynn, go ahead, and then Wayne and I. Yeah.

[Unidentified Committee Member (female)]: Mood rings. Yes. This is beyond that.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Is like, this is like, this is

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: the twenty first century mood ring. Exactly. It's like very sophisticated.

[Unidentified Committee Member (female)]: And move.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: This is not like

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: No, it's just the next level. Yeah.

[Unidentified Committee Member (female)]: I think that you have a full action that we need to have protections. I have a couple of people here that I'm

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: sort of curious about why,

[Unidentified Committee Member (female)]: in your experience of education, you will use the Vermont NEA as the person to be appointed by when there's principals, superintendents, guidance counselors, others, school nurses, school psychologists, all kinds of people who actually may want the NEA at some point in their lives, but who are more tuned into what it is, more professionally tuned in. It's number one. The number two is a state treasurer, really. The state treasurer doesn't determine the budget. The state treasurer makes a recommendation to us. So the governor makes a recommendation, and they add to it, which is what we're doing now. So why those two?

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: Well, the state treasurer manages public funds. So the idea that treasurers around the world are currently looking at how to manage public money using artificial intelligence, that would bring a perspective into the equation. That if you look at the other positions on the AI Council, you have people from different state agencies beyond health and human services, like commerce, public safety. So you're getting all these different pieces of the executive branch and state government. You know, what I would say is maybe we should add the auditor. Maybe because we have the attorney general, like, why are we leaving the auditor out? But I don't want to add more people. Know, I'm just saying, like, this should be a more inclusive versus exclusive group. If they're looking at use of AI in government, you know, we have the executive branch. We don't have the legislative branch represented, but we're delegating our spaces to the people who are appointed by the NASW, the NEA, and the VMS. And I think the reason we're choosing them is those are professional organizations representing direct practitioners. So the idea that like NEA, it's teachers, they could appoint a principal, they could appoint a superintendent.

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: Or a psychologist.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: Yeah, exactly. But like giving the voice to the teachers, giving a voice to the doctors, giving a voice to the social workers. We heard from probably 10 other groups wanting to be on the council, nurses, psychologists, etcetera, and we just felt we couldn't add too many more people.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Just come and present

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: at committee They're allowed, that's why we put the interested stakeholders. They're welcome at the table. We just didn't wanna stack the council over. We wanted to add a few voices because the council was asking for that, but we didn't wanna overdo it. So that's we those are the three we landed on. I think the reason we chose doctor, teacher, social worker is that each of those organizations has guidelines openly available on how you should be using AI in the professional settings. Doctors represent healthcare, teachers' education, and social workers both. One could argue nurses work in both, and one could argue etcetera, but in the end, we just chose those three, And we talked extensively about this, like, two and a half hours yesterday, and about all the possible changes, and we basically landed here.

[Unidentified Committee Member (female)]: I would feel more comfortable with what the school's like, psychologist or somebody that

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: you have. Well, to be clear, it's somebody with experience in public education. The appointing authority Exactly. Yes. That's what it says. It doesn't say a teacher. It says somebody with experience in public education. The appointing authority is the Vermont NEA as an appointing authority, so it doesn't limit what that person's focus or profession is.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: And I think the attempt was, we're letting professional organization of educators that's national, it's a local chapter, but a national organization of educators, a national organization of social workers, a national organization of doctors. There are local chapters choosing it. Whereas I think the school board association or the principals association are local. Yeah, so I think that was our idea, is they're connected to these national organizations that have national guide, actually even international guidelines that they were bringing into the discussion.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Well, it sounds like you've had a lot of

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: Oh my God.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: You know, and if you had 10 other people, they might come up with other committee members, but we've got to trust that you have taken a sense of testimony on that.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: The de maximus discussion on a bill that has a de minimis fiscal impact.

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: Representative

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: He needs

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: one more time. I need that implant now. There's nobody on the list that I see that is an expert in AI.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Well, there are gonna changes. It's not

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: They're all supposed to be

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Right. But right. So so if the They'll tell

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: you. They'll tell you.

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: So I'm gonna do a few things here. I think I'm just gonna put up the statutory

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: You're missing this stuff that didn't get changed because this is like Right.

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: But there's also some other language even in the statute

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: that they don't put in the bill. That's the dot dot dot there on the bottom of page three there.

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: So here's the existing statute. So you can see who's on it, which is, is inherently responsive. And that is because this council is providing advice and counsel to the director of the Division of Artificial Intelligence. So we have

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: one of those.

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: We have a Division of Artificial Intelligence in the Agency of Digital Services. The two people who run that division and that topic came in and testified in house healthcare.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: Extensively, but they were part of

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: the decision.

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: So this council provides advice and counsel to the director of the Division of Artificial Intelligence regarding the division's responsibilities to review all aspects of artificial intelligence systems developed, deployed, or procured in state government. So it's not putting these people in charge of AI. These people are providing advice and counsel to the person who is in charge of AI for state government as far as that division's responsibilities to look at how the state interacts with artificial intelligence systems. The existing and then also the council engages in public outreach and education on artificial intelligence, again in consultation with the director of the division.

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: So essentially, almost like a grassroots attempt to get the concerns of the greater community. Right.

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: And it's all about the use of AI in state government. And so you have the secretary. So existing members that you can't see because the is the secretary of digital service or designee. And the person who's on the council, who's one of the co chairs of the council is I'm not going to get his title right. He's not the director he's the person above the director of the Division of AI. So there's Secretary of Digital Services or designee, Secretary of Commerce and Community Development or designee, Commissioner of Public Safety or designee, executive director of the ACLU of Vermont or designee, a member who's an expert in constitutional and legal rights appointed by the chief justice of the Supreme Court. Then we get to some of the ones we did see, some of which get modified in the bill, someone with experience in ethics and human rights appointed by the governor, an academic at a post secondary institute appointed by the Vermont Academy of Science and Engineering, commissioner of health changes in the bill to secretary of human services, director of racial equity or designee, and attorney general or designee. And then it allows them to elect a chair. Members shall be so Existing law, not changed. Qualifications. Members shall be drawn from diverse backgrounds and, to the extent possible, have experience with artificial intelligence. And then it also directs the council to consult with any relevant national bodies on artificial intelligence, including the National Artificial Intelligence Advisory Committee established by the US Department of Commerce and its applicability to Vermont.

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: So the risk that's attempting to be dealt with, is this going to be in the medical practice? Artificial intelligence? That's already there. Well, understand all about that, I mean, you're talking about protecting people's brainwaves and rights. Those things that are already covered by existing laws that protect everything that you do when you go to

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: the doctor's office? To the extent that some of these are emerging technologies, necessarily. That's why they're having this committee look at

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: Why would this be any different than any other diagnostic technique that they might use there now?

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Well, most of those are regulated. I mean, there's a bill that has gone through. It's already gone through the House and is in the Senate to allow recording of telehealth consultations with consent. And part of the issue there is that there is recording happening using or there's interest in having recording happening using artificial intelligence. So one of the issues is how does that become part of a patient's health record?

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: So why wouldn't we modify what already exists there rather than coming up to the existing goals? Is this going to be put into that same statute that the other regulations are? Or why not add to those instead of

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: So this is having Instead of trying to determine what the right solutions are to put into statute, this is asking this group with some expertise to come up with what might need to go into statute to provide the protections.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Is there gonna have more expertise than we do?

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: Essentially, we're modifying an existing structure of government slightly to give them additional expertise and give them extra time so they can come back to us in a year and tell us what we need to do to guarantee those rights that we establish.

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: So give me testimony in terms of how long before I can get my chip?

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: You can sign up actually right now if you go to Neuralink to be in their testing, but I don't know if you meet the criteria because it's really severely disabled people who are they're doing this.

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: I would think that I am.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: Not being your medical provider, I'll stay out of it.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: That's a great call. I have just a quick question, and then I want to get Nolan to talk to us. So there are other states that have advisory councils or are doing this sort of thing instead of grabbing

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: information from around the country? There's professional organizations around the country doing this thing. What I will say is the model Vermont created is now a nationally known thing called the Vermont model. So other states have created this apparatus after us. And but no one some states have passed specific bills, and Jen Carvey took them all and combined them into the original bill here. We did not have time to do the adequate work. So we're gonna ask this council to review that work and come back to us.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Right. And that makes sense. Yeah. That makes sense. Okay. Next

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: one is asked on the side. I heard your question, which is what was the vote in committee? I believe it was nine one one.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Zero.

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Nine one one.

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: Yeah. I think drop this bill into AI and.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: I actually asked AI to make a summary of it. I'm gonna ask AI to come up with a catchy phrase to use in my law report. I'll keep you posted.

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: Actually, when I can look at what other states have done and summarize, you know, what the most effective way to approach this problem is.

[Representative Thomas Stevens]: Alright. This

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: can you tell we have an AI devotee here? I would like to get to

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: know that. He's so patient. I don't think it's going take that long though.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Robin, would you like to tell us? It's not

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: my full day question.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: You want come take my plates?

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Thank you, Reptune.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: I don't know if you always get into it this much, but I'm glad you're

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: involved. Well, this is one of the more future. It is. Is. The expressions at the face are on the table. The hot and fried sides. Okay.

[Nolan Langfeld, Joint Fiscal Office]: The record, Noel Nangle, the joint fiscal office, you know, representative Chittenden had an agreement. It was gonna be the shortest testimony ever. And I just think you're incapable. I'm sorry.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: It's so bad. You're a watchful.

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: I'm just

[Nolan Langfeld, Joint Fiscal Office]: kidding. But I plan to hold up my end of the bargain. I'm not even gonna put the fiscal note up. It's very short. Jen and Representative Chen talked about how there's three new members. There's three new members on the Artificial Intelligence Advisory Councils. What's that?

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: I think there's four.

[Nolan Langfeld, Joint Fiscal Office]: Well, no, but there's only three new members for which- There might be per diems. There could be per diems. And it's usually, per diems are usually for members of the council who are not state employees and who are not otherwise compensated or reimbursed for their attendance. And they'd be entitled to the expenses pursuant to 32 VSA ten ten. The fiscal impact would really be no more than $1,800 per year. So I'm not gonna use the DWER, you know, it's in my, anyway, it is de minimis. Still does. It is de minimis.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: In this case.

[Nolan Langfeld, Joint Fiscal Office]: And honestly, it can be captured within ADSs. So this is how it's an ADS? Yes.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Okay, Marty. I had exploded there. Ryan, we gotta get together. All

[Nolan Langfeld, Joint Fiscal Office]: you have to do is say our jurisdiction was around per diems and the cost is minimus. You can practice, representative will happily practice the word with you

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: offline.

[Nolan Langfeld, Joint Fiscal Office]: And you can just say, and it's de minimis and no further appropriation was required, it could be kept within ADS's budget.

[Representative Thomas Stevens]: Okay. You

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: could have me report it.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Thank you for the offer, Wayne. Okay, was this one we wanted to wait till tomorrow to vote on? Oh, that's right. We don't technically have this yet because it's not 03:00

[Unidentified Committee Member (female)]: or 03:30.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: So we can't vote on it yet. We vote on it if we could, but we actually don't have it in our possession. But I don't think the floor is short today, but we'll vote on it tomorrow morning. And so it would be out on Tuesday, Wednesday for next week. I don't think it has to go anywhere else. We're usually the last stop. So any other questions of these folks that anybody has? Okay. Thank you. This was very interesting.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: I'd like to say thank you for getting it done ahead of schedule. You know what I mean? Even though you can't vote on it today, we've got this part.

[Unidentified Committee Member (male)]: Yeah. Despite my comments, I'm

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: pretty supportive.

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: Happy to talk more with you.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: He was the one who came up with the AI Advisory Council, Martha Feltus, and we were all like, what, 2017? Why do we need this? He was prescient on that. It was very good. That was a very

[Representative Brian Cina (Burlington), House Health Care]: good move. Well, of everyone's open mindedness, Vermont has led the

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: way and maybe we'll do it again. Yeah, that works. Okay,

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: thank you. Now I have to go back to health care. Thank you. We did have O'Grady, he disappeared. See how they're waiting. What's our are we late? Was it 02:15 or was it supposed to be? That's good.

[Jennifer Carbee, Office of Legislative Counsel]: All

[Representative Trevor Squirrell (Clerk)]: right. So,

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: welcome. We've just been through five bills. If we spoke for five minutes, would you guys be okay?

[Rick Seigel, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Oh, for me. Yes, absolutely.

[Representative Robin Scheu (Chair)]: Let's go off live