Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Speaker 0]: Good morning. It is Thursday, April 23. We are getting closer and closer every day to being done our work and sending it to our appropriate agriculture. I could have gotten I saw it with my grandmother. Hey, Russell, Jess, Keith, Kevin. Anyways, we're getting pretty close to getting done our work in agriculture, and, we're finishing up some of our bills. I think that probably, next week about this time, we could be done. If not, maybe a day earlier than that. We are, again, cleaning up some loose ends. We have been spending a lot of time on H739, an act relating to prohibiting the use and sale of the herbicide Paraquat. We are down just to applications as far as how we feel that Paraquat should be applied as it moves forward. We had asked Steve Doinell, Director of Plant Industry and Division, Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets, to come in, and we'd like to hear what he would have to say on some of the thoughts that we had. So welcome, sir. The floor is yours. Thank you.

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: Good morning. For the record, Steve Buenell, Director of the Vision Plan Industry of Agricultural Business Markets.

[Speaker 0]: So can I tee it up here?

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: Yeah. Please. And then let you go.

[Speaker 0]: So we are headed towards where the House got with their version of this bill. Our findings, if findings at all, are going to be vastly different than what they say. Although I don't think that any of the language, the overall of what the bill that came over to us did, I don't think that we're going to be very far away from that. What we are not struggling with at all, but our last piece of word is, is that we've got down to hand application and then talking to a couple of the people that are the orchards or berry growers that are still using the product. They had a application method that wasn't by hand, but it was a 32 to 38 inches arm that went out through that laid a strip of paraquat of not being any higher than 14 inches of going through there, and so we wanted your thoughts as far as on that, and we'll work with Bradley Schulman as well, too, Attorney Schulman, to get some language out. Then anything else that you want to tell us? You've been very helpful with us throughout this process. And so when you need the expert of taking in your brain, the expert. And then, committee, anything that I've missed on that?

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: Nope, I

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: think that's probably it.

[Speaker 0]: Okay.

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: Yeah, well thank you, Senator. So when it comes to application directions, the labels got some very specific language. It's air plugs, they like a crop, yeah. Are a lot of toxicity issues with it, the EPA has been adding a lot of language to labels regarding methadone application. When it comes to hand application, there's actually specific language on the label relative to hand application. It has to be a hand pressurized application. It can't be backpacked

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: There's

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: also directions on the label regarding minimizing drift by using medium to coarse droplet sizes using flat stand nozzles. So when it comes to pesticide applications, you want to manage drift, the factors are the pressure of the application equipment, the type of nozzle, the plume height, and volume. So you factor in all those things. There is a pretty standardized set of definitions about all that. There's an organization called the Society of Agricultural Biological Engineers, and they publish standards for droplet sizes and pressure virgin nodules and just try to standardize it. And that language then is adopted on the pesticide label. There very specific language about how to make an application of this material, other materials too. It's, yeah, so I mean there are ways to do it. Mean is the concern drift or is the concern exposure to that? Mean, what is it you're looking at?

[Speaker 0]: Drift as much as anything, I think, is what we're looking for.

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: Yeah.

[Speaker 0]: Yeah. Attach that minimizing new sleep. Way I understood it is we use paraquatine in a couple of different ways. One is how we've heard

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: it be used, but the other is just take it and burn down the whole field so that it can then be replanted.

[Speaker 0]: Right. Part of my thought was we wanna make sure that the entire field

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: usage would not be allowed, so

[Speaker 0]: you don't have some other means

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: of doing that, but the way that it's used now would be and I'm not a farmer, I'm just sort

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: of, like, talking kind of in general,

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: and that's why we don't know any of the language on this, or even if that makes sense.

[Speaker 0]: Well, I think that Senator Plunkett is right on right on board with it. What we're trying to get to as well is that most of the testimony that we've heard for what resonated with us, which should be allowable because of the inability for them to find another product that worked as well, has been in strips or hand applied or in a strip of 32 to 36 inches, maybe 38 inches. So it's been in that way, in between rows of trees or in a row of strawberry, so it hasn't been exactly how Senator Plunkett said it. Don't want big boom trucks, we don't want large scale fields being applied with that. We want to be able to support our farmers in the way that they're using the product now in a very limited use, less than 125 gallons a year, but we want to be concerned about how it gets applied and to minimize drip and to minimize harm to anyone that might be using the product. We're pretty comfortable with the stringency of the people that have an applicator's license. We hear about the failure rate. We're okay with that because we think it's important. I think that's one of the reasons why that in The United States it hasn't been banned like it has been used in other parts of the country because there are such strict usage of it, but we also know that in other states it is being used in way that Senator Plunkett has said, where it has been used as a whole scale thing of let's burn this field down. We don't want that. We want to use it the way that we've heard our farmers use it now and be helpful for them, but also give them the off ramp to understand that you better work really hard to find another method because in 2030 it would not be allowed in Vermont anymore. The

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: language I've seen, restriction to tree fruit producing tree orchards and strawberry production. Berry.

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: Yeah, it

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: would be berries. In general, berry. Okay. So the type of what you're talking about is field desiccation or burn down prior to planting, And that's done in places where they do that with, you know, blue type ground application, the ground application equipment of the boom that may cover any distance. That's not what's happening here in Provence, from my understanding, how I understand that it's being used. So, and the way with the restrictions that you put on it for berries and for fruit producing tree orchards, they're not going to do that. There's no point in doing that. The other thing is, the way the lane is written is it has to be done by carpet.

[Speaker 0]: Right.

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: Okay, so that gives us a lot of opportunity to how it's being used and specify conditions. Right. One suggestion, rather than try to specify a certain boom length or height or anything, is to add a section that says the permit shall have conditions which minimize drift and minimize corporate search. Yeah. And and we could do that. I mean, we do that all the time with other equipment. We issue permits for right away applications for mosquito control, for terrestrial invasive plant control. We put conditions on those permits on how they have to be used. Plus, because we issue the permit, we know exactly who's making the application, and in general, we inspect every firm that's the process of the season.

[Speaker 0]: So I think you just maybe solved the problem of us really struggling with it, because we don't struggle on a whole bunch, but we've really struggled on this on far out to get the language right. There's two things that we didn't want to happen. One is that we didn't want you folks, or anyone, to look at it and say, What the heck were they thinking? They're such amateurs. And so I think the best thing, my suggestion would be for you to totally understand where we want to be and then talk with attorney Shulman and get us some language moved forward so that we can What we've been really careful about through all of this, and I've charged the committee with this, is all of this, especially this one right here, it's one of the first bills that we've ever had any disagreements in, and where we have worked through all of that stuff. And I've said we're gonna keep on taking testimony and we're gonna keep on doing this until we can all look at this and defend it to whoever has come up to us. And we're getting there. And I think now we got stuck on this because we don't wanna be going against the professional's advice where it is. It'd be helpful for us if you and Bradley could sit down and get to that, so that it would make sense. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Is there any benefit to referencing that group that you mentioned? Yes. And just saying current

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: instructions, or however we want to word it, have to

[Speaker 0]: be followed kind of thing?

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: Yeah, that's one way to do it, is to reference the standard that already has been established by the Society of Agricultural Biological Engineers. So I'll drop the sizes and recommendations. The other potential is EPA right now has established in order for them to come into compliance with the Nature Species Act, they've established some requirements on pesticide use that include drift reduction measures that have to be used and they've actually published a drift reductions calculator that includes all the different factors that an applicator can use, and we could even reference that if we had to. And those are already in effect? Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah.

[Speaker 0]: Yeah. Maybe we don't need to

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: But I mean, they're not in effect on the paraquat label yet. They have to be, this is a strategy that EPA has adopted, they're going through the process now of as they register new products or re register old products, they're putting the language on the label. The language on the drift reduction, what's called an ecological drift, mandatory ecological drift buffer, isn't on the Paraquat Lake. What I was suggesting, and go back and forth on this, rather than cite one particular standard, but use the existing EPA drift mitigation process and say, You have to do X, Y, and Z to fit in, and just reference that in the permit. Would be in the first, when you have to be in the statute, it would be in the permanent, and then the permit, you know, you can put Yeah. Those in

[Speaker 0]: It sounds like this might all be covered under the permanent process, as is

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: the reason right now, but you can confirm that. Well, we need the authority to put that in the permit. That would have to be the standard. We'd have to have the authority to put that in the permit. We would,

[Speaker 0]: yeah, we will give you that authority. I think what you want to do or what you've suggested doing exactly where we want to go. Okay. That's going to give us, yeah, it's gonna help us out tremendously.

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: Okay, well, I'll get together with Steve Collier, and we can to him.

[Speaker 0]: And try to show him, yep. So we were talking width restriction too,

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: so we can go take a look at that.

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: Well, it depends on what you need. Okay.

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: On the applicator not being any wider than 36 inches. But,

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: because you have the droplet size and all that. Right, so, okay, let's talk about that for

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: a second. So, you have

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: a 36 inches width restriction. Does that mean per pass?

[Speaker 0]: We don't even know if that's even where we want to be. Mean, that's what we heard as well.

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: You ought to unifies the amount Right, of pride, right.

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: And for the berry growers and the fruit growers, they were saying that they don't need, basically to whip this plant So if we put that in statute.

[Speaker 0]: Or if we put something in to say that no wider than, I don't want to leave it broad neither, but to put it no wider than what's necessary to get to where Rob's point is.

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: Right.

[Speaker 0]: Okay, no, you're not going to burn down the alleyway you're driving down through just because you don't like the weeds in there. It needs to be applied in the vicinity or the strip.

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: Right, in

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: the, yeah, and we can get the correct term.

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: And only for the purpose of, you know, for what they

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: were needing, yeah, to To control weeds in the In the grow area, or whatever. Whatever terms, I can get together a carer, ranch, or a growing tree. Find out what is that And we'll put that in the permit regulations. Yeah, yeah,

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: makes our job a little simpler, think.

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: Right, but yeah, so that accomplishes the goal of not allowing field wide treatment. Because we did have,

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: I wanna say somebody in Addison County use it to

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: There were Soybean. Yeah, there was one application, was 2022. Believe that was just that they were drying Yep, it

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: and that's what we want

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: to have. Right, well I wouldn't be allowed on the, Uber or Exactly. You know, because they wouldn't be allowed on soybeans or any aircraft. Right.

[Speaker 0]: So let me just try one

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: more time and make sure I'm clear on everything.

[Speaker 0]: I think the committee wants to allow whoever is using it now to continue to be able to use it.

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: Get the way they're using it. Yes. Up until 2020.

[Speaker 0]: So are we taking that ability away from anyone that you're aware of that's using it now?

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: No. Not my not my alright. Well,

[Speaker 0]: could if you were to go through the permit process, but I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but if you guys go through it and you don't have a feeling you're gonna comply with the permit, you can say, No, you're not gonna use it. If you agree to the permit terms, then you're not gonna use it.

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: Right, the permit would specify exactly how they have it used.

[Speaker 0]: And then as you said, you're gonna do, you would you know, periodically do some inspections and, or you could, or you have the ability to do, or you may do some inspections.

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: Right.

[Speaker 0]: If you think, and if you go there and find out that it isn't right, you can go there, you can see a burn pattern and say, well, what did you use here?

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: Well, that's, we do that all the time. Investigations of drift is a standard process, it's less hydration. You know how to do that.

[Speaker 0]: Sounds good. We're all on

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: the same page. Yeah, sounds really good. Will

[Speaker 0]: And then ask, ask for Steve? This is incredibly helpful. Yes. Informative. We should have called you weeks ago. Yeah. When when in doubt, call the person that knows.

[Steven Heffernan (Clerk)]: So okay. Good.

[Speaker 0]: Yeah. Yeah.

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: Thank you

[Speaker 0]: very much. Thank you, Steve. Appreciate it.

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: Appreciate it.

[Speaker 0]: Okay, very helpful. So yeah, when you call an expert, you find out the right answers. So, let's spend a little time on equine amendment. Maggie Lentz, lobbyists, Vermont Equine Industry Advocacy Group, but also I have Scott Moore from JFO, and we have been asked, asked to get a physical note on this. I've asked Scott who we use and I won't jump right into that now, but he basically says he doesn't really have an ag person, but I want to make sure that he's in here to totally understand what we're asking for, and which we can. Maggie, there's some things that are going on back and forth amongst some of the language and all that stuff. I'm letting them work out, but rep assured everything that we have in that language is to support what we're trying to get and in the way that the people that we're asking to do that to be comfortable with. The floor is yours.

[Maggie Lentz, Vermont Equine Industry Advocacy Group]: Thank you. Maggie Blendt, Vermont Equine Industry Advocacy Group. We initially saw the language. Thank you so much. I have a laundry list of people to thank making this happen with committee, first and foremost. I think yesterday, I just had some questions about the language in terms of farm structures because this, to us, is really about the structures more than anything else. The survey that we're working through right now that these folks, my client put out, identified, I think they sent it out to about 190 farms. This was a painstaking effort, I mean, researching on faith, but it's very hard to identify who all these people are. That 190, to be clear, is likely not the universe, it's just who they could find, no idea about eligibility. They had about 63 respondents. We're breaking that out to try to understand better what the structures are on the eligible land, how that intersects.

[Speaker 0]: Well, think that a lot of it has to be that if they went to the current use website, they're going to understand that a little bit better because they're not going to have any carve outs any different than what other farmers are, and we are battling that right now. In fact, all the committee on it, but I included Senator Major on it. We are going to bring in before the end of the season again the LERB and ANR because we have farm structure buildings that are requiring active 50 permits that we don't always agree with. So we are battling that just like some of your people are going to battle, the best advice is two things. One is let's wait for the complete language to be done before we get into what we want to do, and the other is it is going to comply with the set tone of what current use is right now. There may be some of your buildings that maybe, I don't know, but I could imagine there are going to be some buildings on there that aren't going to comply with current use, but we battle that all the time as well. So And

[Maggie Lentz, Vermont Equine Industry Advocacy Group]: we're that's what we're we want to do that. We want this to be narrow. We're not looking for to bring everybody into this universe. That's been important. One of the first things they ever stressed to me was what defines, you know, in their perspective, a professional equine farm. So what I mean, I actually think now that I've had a back and forth with legislative council that we feel comfortable with this language. I think that it does do what we're asking it to do. We And would also like to better understand the universe. I think a fiscal note makes a lot of sense. A little concerned just about timing. Yep, so

[Speaker 0]: what we're doing right now is the reason why I've asked Scott Moore to come in with us is that we're hearing from, you better have a physical note on this. I've had a hallway conversation with the chair of finance and she seems amenable to this idea and the way that I framed it. But it is gonna go through that committee without this goal. Absolutely. They're not going to agree to it unless they know what they're agreeing to. Our goal is to have this done this session.

[Maggie Lentz, Vermont Equine Industry Advocacy Group]: Yeah.

[Speaker 0]: To have a piece

[Maggie Lentz, Vermont Equine Industry Advocacy Group]: attached. It. We'll look forward to that this one as well. Think it would be always good to have the information. We're not trying to put something through without understanding the universe that we're asking for. I can say from the survey, and again, this is not the most scientific survey ever, but it's the closest thing we have to information, believe we're talking about they had something like 7,000 plus acres respondents. Half of that was already in current use. We're looking at adding then some structures that exist on those properties. I think we're talking about something like 22 or something like that.

[Speaker 0]: I think that the survey that you had, and you might want to stay in the room while we have Scott come and you might want to share your survey with Scott. They're going be looking for information, I'm sure. I can honestly say that the time that I've been here, I've never done a fiscal note because the committees I've been involved with have been able to bring their own financing in or their own people in to tell them. It's a little bit of an eye opener for us to actually get a fiscal note. I think maybe Senator Collamore has been involved with it because he's been around here for longer. If you want to hang loose-

[Maggie Lentz, Vermont Equine Industry Advocacy Group]: I'd love this.

[Speaker 0]: You. I will bring Scott up and make sure that he's fully aware of what we're asking him to do.

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: Thank you. I really appreciate Thank everybody you.

[Speaker 0]: Morning, committee. Good morning, sir. The floor is yours.

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: How are you? Are you? I'm directed to Scott Moore for the fiscal office. Senator Ingalls asked me yesterday to knock knock over all the things and stuff.

[Speaker 0]: Nice to have the breakfast.

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: Typically what happens is when we often the bills will pass out of the community when we look at the fiscal note. Up until then, often we kind of run some numbers, so at least she has an idea of what you're facing. I know Senator Plunkett, we've worked together with fiscal notes. So part of that will be what he's looking for so I can look at things. I might not be the best person for some of the Act two fifty things, but I know after the capital bill's done this afternoon, I'm looking at a lot of capital bills. That's real. Then my workload, I can shift so I can have the capacity to do this. Part of this will be what are you looking for, how much research and where I want to go. If I can't be that person, I'll find the right person.

[Speaker 0]: I think I'm gonna be able to help. We are, as a committee, close to getting it so that equine, modified equine businesses, are at least 50% of what they do on their horse farms, can enter into all the protections or products or whatever that farmers enjoy through the current use program. As of right now, there was two columns of requirements, one over here and one over here. Taxes said, no, we're going to allow some of these things to move over here to help them better get into the eligibility of current use. We don't know how many of those horse farmers that's going to be. Maggie's done a survey, unofficial to them, but unofficial survey. It looks like they might have 22 horse farms that might be eligible going through. Of course, current use hasn't stepped into that yet. Also, might be helpful to have a conversation with the chair of finance and say, I'm gonna ask you a fiscal note. What is it that you're gonna wanna see as it comes through this committee?

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: Typically, they're gonna wanna look at what the potential revenue might be to the state. And just back up because I had all of twenty four hours to talk about this, not even, because Senator Collamore sent me stuff last night, about 03:00 or so. So when we talk about equine, mostly equine owned properties, forest farms are great, perfect. Veterinary, leather goods, like how much worse that line when it comes to equine?

[Speaker 0]: I think I would talk to tax because I think we have the job. I talk to tax and say what is it that you agreed to? And, yep. What is it?

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: We've got people.

[Speaker 0]: We've people. No. So I think that would be without a doubt very important to say, What is it that you agreed to? Yes. And

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: so Yeah. I wanna look at the scope of everything and Lawrence Farm is very clearly, act by related. Right. But I can just sit here and thinking about it. I can picture other areas that this might affect. Might not have much of an effect if it's just the leather goods guy down the road selling the bridle. But nonetheless, you want to make

[Speaker 0]: sure that might be included. So I think what wasn't included before was riding lawsuits, and I think they've allowed that to be included. I'm just trying to think of anything else on that very brief time that we looked at that second list, the two columns, and I can't remember. Boarding, breathing. Yeah, think boarding, breathing. Summer camps? Was it Riding buses. Riding Riding Yeah, Riding but I think that to be all we're doing is giving you ideas to ask tax about. I think that would be the best thing.

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: On the phone side, I'm sorry about that, but Maggie did have to have

[Speaker 0]: a survey of some sort.

[Maggie Lentz, Vermont Equine Industry Advocacy Group]: Yeah, we'll get that to you the next day. I'm still just waiting for it to be a little more clear. And then if I, may I just say something? Oh absolutely. Ag funds, Lab Equal Industry Association. I think the threshold yeah, so I think it would be helpful for us to have clarity on if there are going to be there's rule making or definitions of the activities because I think the way that the language drafted, it's more of the threshold that ties into the Act 50 definition, like raising a four or more in equine, but then you also have to meet the test of 50% income threshold. I think that's what the universe is talking about. An impact on the general fund?

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: I don't know how many horse tropes are manufactured here in Vermont, that should be another thought about Potentially,

[Speaker 0]: I mean. At the end of the day, Scott, we want this to go forward as best we can, but we're not asking for any special carve outs. I think that the requirements of complying with current use are very well established And then it was just all the graciousness of what the tax department had said that they would be willing to do would allow that. We'll see how many people that helps. But yeah, we'd like to be able to include it in this year's stuff. Know it's at the end of the year. It's getting late, but whatever we can do to help would be appreciated.

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: Yep. We know you're not busy.

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: The one thing I do enjoy about my job is I do touch lots of different areas, including making sure you all get your expenses taken care of, the capital bill, and lots of different areas.

[Speaker 0]: It keeps me on my notes. Keeps me on Anything else for Scott? No, much appreciated. You thought of stuff we didn't think about, though. Yeah. We're just trailing. I don't Well, listen, that will be all, again, a lot of what we did in the previous testimony was, you bring in the experts and let them figure it out.

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: So I'll probably do a deeper dive after today, which was kind of for

[Speaker 0]: an expo response with Maggie needs to give me things by the end the week. I might not have anything for you tomorrow. Next week. Next week. Got next week. We got till May 8. May 8. So we have May 7, I can roll out. That's when I did my pool. I don't think that's gonna happen. I hope you're right. Well, would love for you to be right. But I'm betting that you're not. That's true.

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: Otherwise, senators, whatever I can do now, I'm happy to help.

[Speaker 0]: Thank you. Always do. Glad to have you on this committee. Yeah. We'll broaden your horizons.

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: Yes, sir.

[Maggie Lentz, Vermont Equine Industry Advocacy Group]: Sorry. Good luck.

[Speaker 0]: And anybody got any more concerned about anything? Are we getting close? We all know where we are where our bills are. It's that there'll be a big moving day where we just start popping things out of here. Anybody need to hear anything else? Anybody here weed? I saw your email traffic on, is that the farmer up in Orleans that is gonna come down and testify? What was your email?

[Steven Heffernan (Clerk)]: Jason Struthers.

[Speaker 0]: Oh, yeah. Who's that?

[Maggie Lentz, Vermont Equine Industry Advocacy Group]: He says he is the farm

[Steven Heffernan (Clerk)]: that was the reason for part of the S-three twenty three. He would like to come in since his I I don't know if his pharmacy mentioned it, but he felt like it was significant to that.

[Speaker 0]: And I do you communicated with him. I communicate with him. I asked him what is, that we were getting late in the season and what it was. Haven't seen the email. Okay. I haven't seen the email back, so he's answered back. Yeah.

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: Yeah. He was the farmer in Essex that was growing pot and raising bugs. Okay. He said, alright. Creator who didn't create was the subject of the Supreme Catalyst.

[Speaker 0]: Okay. Okay. Okay so I here's where I'm at, I think you guys know this. I'm all about not creating noise and not revisiting past tense moving forward. If you guys believe that Mr. Struthers can add anything to what we've already done and passed already, then so be it, but at this point in time I think we're I've moved on from that. I don't mean to be not at all

[Steven Dwinell, Director, Public Health & Agricultural Resource Management Division, Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets]: I don't think it would change.

[Speaker 0]: Thought he had a specific Steven. I don't know if any testimony on that is going to change anything that we've done. I'm gonna just try to think through it. I think that a lot of what the Supreme Court decision was is how we have changed our language around, especially to the one acre, the one to four acres, the four acres bought swine. I don't know that I don't know that that's gonna help us get anywhere.

[Scott Moore, Joint Fiscal Office (JFO)]: I don't know

[Sen. Robert Plunkett (Member)]: how 03/23 the passage of that would affect his situation. I think that's what he's not maybe saying as directly here, and and I don't know the answer to that.

[Speaker 0]: I think 03/23 passed because of what the all those decisions were and what the supreme court said and and all of that. And I think we have enough to finish up. That's where I'm at, but I always listen. I don't know if he's still operating. I don't know, but again, I think we have some things to finish up before we get back into all of that. It's okay. So what else do we have to finish up? Are we on track? Is everybody comfortable? Is everybody good? You know- Deeply there. I'm sorry to keep on asking that. No, I'm not We'll learn to Bradley tomorrow about some of the languages. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. I think that tomorrow that we might be able to Oh, do know one thing. I don't know what they're I don't really understand what they're asking We to do have So yes, we have Riley coming in tomorrow for language, which will be language on a lot of this stuff. A lot of what we're doing. We'll have a little time with them. VHCV has to come in. They've asked for something. I don't know what it is. I haven't spent the time, too, but they've been a very big player in this building. VHGB, Gustafelig, and all those, they've asked. Proposed expanding eligibility for the Rural Economic Development Initiative program. They've got something that they bumped up against or something. I don't know. I I didn't I haven't I haven't dove into any of the they haven't sent me a lot of communication, but out of respect for them is what they what they do and what they were willing to do. Think that we should just hear them out. So they'll be in tomorrow as well. K. Unless there's anything else that's that's remorisced?