Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: We are live.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Live Senate Appropriations, February 6, and we have some testimony on the VA before we finish it on the last that's the money we'll take on the VA from the agency that are in I'll let you introduce.

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: Alright. Good record, Jill Briggs Campbell, deputy secretary of education and chief of operations. Thank you for squeezing us in today. I hope this is gonna be a pretty simple one. So what we're talking about today, I sent over some slides, but there's like two, so I wasn't even gonna share today, is a request for a reversion and reappropriation to support our, the agency's statewide efforts to improve literacy outcomes as part of the requirements of ACCOM 39. I will say, understanding the tight timeline on the BAA, we also have this in the FY27 budget request. The advantage of having it in BAA is that it gives us more time to plan. And I'll talk a little bit about some of the impacts of the start and stop that we've had to navigate our way through with our literacy efforts because we haven't had stable funding. So, if it's possible to have us in the DAA, that gives us several months of additional planning time, which would be much appreciated, but you will see it in FY '27 request. So, as I said, this is for state level work that we've been doing around literacy outcomes. So, Act 139 was really landmark legislation, statewide legislation really to drive and improve literacy outcomes in the state, which have been following for over a decade, really based around the science of reading as sort of a statewide standard. One of the ways that the agency has been supporting this is we know from National Best Practice that one of the strongest ways to improve this is it's all about classroom instructions. So it's really ensuring that our frontline teachers understand the science of reading, that they know how to work with their students and differentiate their instructions for all learners, and really be able to use all of the different forms of assessment that they do, all the data that they get to then help to support those students even further. So what we have here, as I said, it's a reversion and a reappropriation. And these funds have had a little bit of a long and twisted path, so bear with me for one moment. Originally, so it's a $700,000 general fund. Originally, these were actually federal ARPA SFRF funds, the legislature appropriated $4,000,000 to the agency of education for IT modernization projects. We actually reevaluated, it was an estimate at the time, we actually reduced that to $3,000,000 And then in December 2024, the agency administration did an administrative action that they were permitted to do, which basically transformed these federal dollars into general fund dollars. So as of right now, the AOE has 1,400,000.0 of these general fund dollars remaining. About 700,000 of that we are using to complete these projects, these IT projects. We have three major ones, and they should be done in this next year. The remaining $700,000 is actually what we're requesting to revert and then reappropriate so that we can use it for this literacy purpose. In addition, so not only is this not new money, but it's money that we're actually using to replace some lost federal dollars. So originally, we were using some of our ESSER and GEAR funds, which were those COVID era education funds that came from the feds, and the Trump administration reversed course and basically no longer allowed us to use those funds. In February, March, the Trump administration did an about face and said those funds are no longer available to you, and all of our literacy work had to come to a screeching halt. So since then, we've been, I would say, scrappy and resourceful, and continuing to try to pull together all the different funding streams that we have, that this would be a really important state for us. So not only is it not new money, but we're actually replacing loans that's also sourced with a different federal source. So I have that on kind of the slide number two there, just an outline of kind of the origin story of these findings. And then I did want to speak briefly to sort of what we're doing with these funds. So the Read Vermont Literacy Institute, we've been doing this coaching work for the past twelve, eighteen months or so. In November 2025, we launched the Read Vermont Literacy Institute. We have 11 pilot schools, which represent 70 educators and leaders, six week coaching cycles. So this kind of work is actually pretty personal, pretty small scale in order to be effective. So it's coaching cycles, professional learning, and then classroom implementation. And then we're already seeing that educators are applying this to their instructional practice, we know that this is an approach that actually gets good outcomes. What's next? So the work that we're looking at for the next twelve months that this $700,000 with some additional funds that we're pulling together to help to support is doing a summer convening for 200 educators statewide, and then taking this kind of coaching and professional development approach and actually scaling them statewide. So that would be the work over the next school year. So those are the major initiatives that we have underway, and we'll be adding more initiatives as we go through these family literacy engagement, which, again, we can speak to as critical. I as a parent can speak to as critical. And the last slide, I just wanted to give you a sense of how we're braiding this funding. Act 139 did not come with any money appropriated for literacy.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: What's Act

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: one thirty nine?

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: Act one thirty nine was our major literacy initiative.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Two years ago? Last year?

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: Yeah. Two years ago. And it didn't actually come with any funding. It came with a limited service position that was now made permanent. But since then, the agency has been pulling together money. So this just gives you a sense of how we're planning to resource this work over the next twelve months. So we have some title two funds, which are federal dollars for professional development. We have some Title IV funds we can also use for professional development. We have some FY25 carry forward funds that we've done a DAB, and I never know exactly what that stands for, for 100,000. We have some FY26 carried forward that we've done the same thing for, and then we have the 700,000. For scale and reference, when Mississippi engaged in this work, they had a $100,000,000 to do statewide literacy. So we are inching our way along, but this funding would get us through the next twelve months on really intensive literacy. So that is my brief sales pitch on this fungus.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Alright. Sarah, what's the

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Yeah. Have a couple of questions. So just on that last point, it gets you through the next twelve months, but does that mean that you would not see any it sounds like you would need additional support in future years. Yeah. So, just something about the timing, this is the BAA. Yeah. We really need to go through the June. Are we, I actually haven't talked about this yet in terms of the FY twenty seven budget yet. Is it we're gonna see this in the

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: FY twenty seven budget? If it's not in the BAA, what we would do with if this was in the FY twenty six BAA, then we would do some carry forward into FY twenty seven, so we wouldn't use it all up within the next several months. If we wait till the FY '27 budget, I have these other sources of funds that basically keep us going through the spring so we're not in that start and stop. And then we would bring the 700,000 as soon as the new fiscal year started. We are also exploring philanthropic partnerships that we might be able to leverage, which is actually a model that Mississippi did use as well. So we are, as I said, we're trying to be very, very resource ful in how we're doing this. Then we're also looking out, the districts also receive title funds. And so how are they leveraging those dollars around very specific strategies that we know are evidence based? The agency is doing more technical support to really work with districts, especially our districts that have some of our lowest proficiency rates, to really look at how are you using your federal dollars to drive literacy outcomes, and maybe being a little bit more hands on with our technical support around that, maybe has in the past. Yeah. So we're really trying to align all resources around this really critical priority in ways that I think that we haven't necessarily in the past trying to get all of the boards rolling in

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: the same direction. I guess my question was about, like, just your comment about the twelve months, because in my mind that ends, like, you know, February year, and then does that mean that you end up in the BAA again? I would say the next school year.

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: Oh, okay. Yeah. Okay. I think that I anticipate that this will carry us through the twenty twenty six, twenty seven school year. Okay. Because we're also, we'll be background layering on additional federal funds as they get appropriated. Okay. So, we're going to add on more as we go.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: And then my other question is about the scaling up. And so, these pilot schools have, there, you know, there was some agreement that they would participate in this. And so, does the scaling up look like everybody is mandate, you know, for all districts that they're mandated to participate in some professional development? Or does it look like coaching cycles, or is it still opt in, or

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: Bit of everything. So, again, some of our lowest performing districts, it's gonna be more of a You have to. Yeah. Shout. Yes. And they our lowest performing districts also have additional federal dollars that come with that. If you're an identified student, it's additional school improvement dollars. So we're looking at needs directed in that way. We also, oh shoot, Just lost my train of thought. Had, like, three questions in that.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Oh, it's just what what is scaling what is scaling up look like? Yeah. What is scaling up? Yeah. And

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: So as I sort of signal and and as you know, those coaching cycles are pretty intensive. Right? So we're also looking at how do we scaling up is a challenge in Vermont, especially because of our complexity of our systems. So how do we actually have in our highest needs districts those intensive coaching cycles, and then in our districts that are performing better, like what are those best practices that everybody can utilize. We also have universal screeners, so that's gonna be like a statewide, you will use a screener that is at least as comprehensive as this one, and that's in Act 139 actually, that the states are required to develop that, and then districts are required to use it. So multiple strategies is what I would say. And Erin Davis, who's our chief of academics, could absolutely come in and talk on this all day. We just wanted to give you a sense of the direction that we're going in. Mhmm. I I'm not going to say that we have all the resources we're going to need to sustain this for the next several years. I mean, this is a really big project.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: And sorry. So but the the data from the screeners is that the kind of screener where the teacher gets that data immediately, or do we need to update to get that data back to We're aiming for those immediately. Amazing. Yeah.

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: Because Yeah. And we're working with some that might actually help us with this event. Making that available. Good. Thank you. The word of the

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: day is scrap. Yeah. Yeah.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Is it a certain number of years that you consider the program to be running, or is it just be part of pedagogy from here on out?

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: It's part of the pedagogy. Mean, certainly, we want to start to see improvements in literacy, you know, and we already are in the places where we're doing this intensive supports, but this is a long term project. Science of reading is best practice, right? So, how do you actually, how does that improve the standard?

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Have those debates about how to teach reading, which way have those, it has settled on this evidence based reading

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: have at this settled on the science of reading, as that is our statewide evidence based practice. So, I

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: would say that the, what do we call

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: them, the literacy wars for Reading about 10

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: war?

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: Yeah, the reading wars. I mean, with Act 139, you all actually settled that It's pretty clear.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: And this follows that. We're not questioning that.

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: It's not a which one are

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: you going to do it. This is the one.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Any other heads? Just a quote out of curiosity, is this just something I realize the education does, just in the schools or the operative communities or librarians or any of this?

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: Yeah, so there actually is a role for libraries in 01/1939, and I cannot, I apologize, I don't remember if the Department of Libraries received funding around that. So, they do have a role in ensuring that there's high quality materials. We're partnering with them, and I think that's like the next phase for us, is actually the family engagement around literacy. It's all hands on deck. So we are already trying to, we've been talking about this for quite some time, but what is that next phase of work where we're getting out those you know, really high quality materials that, you know, all families can participate in? We've actually identified as a broader theme in our education system that, you know, sort of during COVID, for obvious reasons, families couldn't be in the building anymore. We're identifying that we haven't really come back from that, and that there seems to be a real disconnect between families and schools. And so this is one of our strategies, is actually to use libraries and other community spaces, and how do we get those materials into those spaces, because our community partners are excellent for those. We're also thinking about our after school programs and how we can embed literacy strategies there as well. We're doing work. We are thinking of every possible lever that we can pull.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Lots of fun. And then, just as a follow-up, you know, professional development out there, coaching, classroom practices change, and then there's standardized testing that happens. And how are we at where are we at in terms of, like, the ability to get the data back to the schools and to make it public and Faster. Well, right, and I guess I just I say that to

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: yeah. I don't disagree. Yeah. Right. So, a major project and priority that is occupying a lot of our time right now in the agency is how do we ensure that we get those assessment results out faster. I fully agree. We're actually putting a lot of time on that right now. It takes, I wish it was as simple as, you know, that. It actually takes the way that we collect our data cycles, possibly the Adesto, because we collect data at this point in time that feeds into the assessment data before it can go live.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: It's it's a challenge, but it's

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: a major priority for us. I say that because Zoe and I are in these meetings almost every day

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: on this track. Yeah. Sure. Well, good. I mean, that's it's important. And I bring it up just because, you know, in terms of like, how do we know if the program is working?

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: That's right.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: You know, like we should see gains on that front.

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: We should. And of course, as you know, districts have their local comprehensive assessments as well. So, you know, those kinds of four, three times a year, you're doing your own. We are also looking for partnerships in that area as how do we align these two things so you get real time feedback as a teacher, right? Why do we assess? We assess so that we can drive instruction. Right? That's the whole point of assessment. So how do we think it more timely and more integrated? It's a major goal of ours. They're pointing to all right.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Thank you. Think it's something that we need to support. Just a question of whether we can fit it the VA or

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Yeah.

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: And as I said, will be in the FY27 budget if it's not in the VA. What we gain from having it in the VA is the ability to plan and not have the start and stop and the uncertainty that we've experienced in this work. Being able to sustain

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: it is of all ours. Alright. Okay.

[Jill Briggs Campbell, Deputy Secretary of Education and Chief of Operations]: Thank you all so much. Have a wonderful weekend. You too. That is my most efficient testimony. Trying

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: to be efficient right here.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: So if anybody's trying to find this on the worksheet, it's not on there at the house.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Oh, is it? Yeah.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Oh, but what's in there?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: But It wasn't. That's not it?

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: What is?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: The the

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: chart that they're they're taking in the. So I guess the even though the governor didn't put it in his VA, you added it to the. Because he added it.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: That's the

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: I that's up since he didn't add it in his VA, but, yeah, Okay. So I have a new one. I'm like, is this a new one, or did somebody get some? Okay. I thought I'm getting somebody at.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Anybody need that?

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: I'm not using. Okay. So we can go through the trying to close out more of these but I don't know if there's anything, Central Lyons, that you want to report on the section or do you just want to talk about that once we get to those sections?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Yeah, we can go through. I do have proposals. One, Jen Harvey is working up right now and the other one is ready. And Nolan was gonna

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: He was here.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: He was here. Yes, we have a thin copy of that one. So I will find another. Well, if we could we can go ahead and bring it up and wait. It's at the end of the bill, I mean. So there was one that was that I don't I didn't write it down. Yeah. I I think it it was the 301.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Text now, and then you just want

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: It was 301B. Let me just pull that up.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: You can go to the.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Okay. I think. So Okay. I do have a line. K.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: We'll keep going till we get to that. So they're on line 45, which is b 314. Number three, the near here, we closed out everything up to that point. We did leave it open on that. It's 28. I have to do line 31. Yeah. 20 '8 is old. '20 So I I had

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: it closed. '20 Oh, you did?

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Yeah. It closed. Okay. Because it's a net. It's just a zero. It's just a change within. The. Yeah. So this better reconciliation, I don't think we have any questions there.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: No. It's not.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: I think that probably. Thank you. You can develop the transporter. P three fourteen. Mhmm. Also, forensic evaluation. Increased. Okay. Well, the commitment there. We decreased the vacancy savings, so this is a they're increasing their vacancy. Mean they're decreasing their vacancy savings. It's the increasing the savings. That's the. So we like when people save money. What was that, Funding changes to Medicaid daily. I don't remember this. Plus a million dollars. Funding swaps. Think we're up there on that. River Valley Therapeutic Riverport.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Yeah.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: That's the that was the that's. Got my nurse's contract. I think we didn't have to do it. We're going to do it. And the funding already. Ginny. So just ask Ginny. Ginny, are you okay with?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Yeah. It's a contract, so they have to meet the payment. Okay. I know. I'm gonna be probably On line 53. Yeah. In the notes, says funding swap with FF. Federal signs. In my role, that means fossil fuels. Well,

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: I feel a similar

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: These days. The income verification system that takes care of. Dollars. It's load utilization, payment services, savings, money, and. Okay. And this is based on a normalization. I can't remember what this transportation cost of the service.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: That because of

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: $1,000,000. Do remember what training support?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: I have a little in my notes, it's not rising costs for transporting children. It costs to be to school, medical, and secure transports.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: It's kind of the contracting Backseat's even such services. $40,000 savings. Base load adjustments. I'll submit his one. And reach out. Save some money there. And reduction of the positions. So you're okay with that? They're just moving these positions.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: So

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: the shelter investments, you might wanna keep this up there for a second. Or we can talk about it. Do you rather shut COVID down the ones that we need to agree on and come back to one or do you wanna talk about this as we get to it?

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: That's

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Okay. Go back to that one. This is So it's being open. 64? Yeah. As far as open, this is the difference about how to spend that $2,000,000. And so you also wanna keep 65 open because that's they're spending that money on. You sure? This implementation program. Proving. Collective bargaining. You're not meals on meals. So this is this is money that that the house had, but it's not part of another construct. Is it this $30,000 additional funding for the other days? Or is it part of there's a section where they gave money that they sent out of program. Like, where did

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: this That's not this one. It's not this one.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Is it just one one line? Here's $30,000. House oh, so the household provided 30,000. They have language to they have a suggestion on how it changes. But there's the governor is not jacking. So reducing the EFR funding is how the House funded other things. So I don't know if we want to leave this open and come back to it, just so we can understand it better.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Out

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: of. Yeah. Seventy third.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: And 71. Yeah.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: What was this? Sorry. Where did see one? Yeah. She's talking about He's talking about, say, base or one time funding? Or It's basically an increase to the base ongoing. Correct? Well, that's the concern from the governor's office. Yes. Okay. I'm gonna suggest we close all the correction one out unless somebody has any issue with any of those. I don't think so. That's 72 through 70 p. I guess, also, you know, 79 out of state beds. I wish we weren't doing that, but we're all up. Her mom, you know, her we're not even on this. Again, margin. We did this last year, but it's just like it's just coming. Have two. I think we are.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: That one, I think, ended up being, two. They went up more than one. I think they budgeted for one to be greater than that. Oh. So they didn't have enough Oh, okay. In the base.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: The RFRA came out, they thought there was gonna be one, but then let's see. Wildfire cost is not a good sign. We have a I need to view board. Do mean save us that, Watson?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Oh.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Okay. We'll down. Okay. These are one time appropriations, which means accountability cards. Seem like we're Mhmm. With that. Office.

[Senator Anne Watson, Member]: I do have questions about that. Which one? Office fit up? I know. I wasn't here, but I'm wondering exactly what what exactly is office fit up because it's it's a pretty substantial

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Yeah. And it's for HHS. It's it's from the secretary's office, but I think it's because of the department health return to work, but I could be wrong. Oh, oh, office bidder for all the people returned. Yeah. It's not it's within the secretary's office budget. Yeah. Yeah. It's down 390,000 for the secretary's office. That's what I I mean, it's the glass elevator next to. Okay.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Part of this

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: That makes sense. I I don't know if it's

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: this side, but somewhere here is, like, the the lease Right. That they From the health department. The new space.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: So desks. Mhmm. Yeah. And, also, just a lease for the building. Yep. Is that right? Yeah. And you I'll close out that. On emergency transport. Before we

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: move on, just wanna note my objection to be returned to work. Right. That is all. Noted. So noted.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: Right.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: It's a moving up. Okay. Thank you. There

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: is a cause to that. Were real costs to that. Spending money. These I wonder if we wanna leave this one up because doesn't it relate to the other ones? This is another one that the governor in his letter had concerned about whether this was based or is one time. So I'm moving the note that come in Which one? Medical non emergency transport. Oh, very good. 89. 89. Yeah. Health Disparities Equity work. That's permanent. Richardson Health, UK. The recovery centers. I believe open. Is it part of the larger?

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: Is that 92 with that now I can just churning up to make sure they all got the same?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Yeah, remember that was the list of different, appropriations to each different one based on

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: their Yeah. I've had but I didn't think there was any policy shift. It was just making sure

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: it was all fairly Just outlining how much to be told you

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: would get. Yep. That's what I thought.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Yeah. Right. But this is What is that? That's different than, you know, the House added in this funding.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: So the administration By the '97.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Well, no. They they were not they were questioning whether isn't this part of their base or one time or was it not? I

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: think it was just truing up, so they all got Right. Right. Yes. That's what I was.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Well, let's leave it up for now just so I make sure that it's not. So the Vermont Reed program. And I talked to our chair of education, was like, you know, we didn't have time to look at it, so we could just kick it to the FY '27 budget. In my mind, seems like it's, it's not a change of policy. It's not like we're having to do something that the Attribution Committee would likely have a question for, but anybody in the committee feels wrong doing. I I probably probably better to tell. I put my son in the think it was a consideration. You have anything else we have got going on? Basically. Yeah. So we're gonna basically that would be you agreeing with the House. So if we close out, we're agreeing with the House. Seemed like the for Jill's testimony, they could still do it forward. They would like the assurity, we agreed to she'll get the funding if anyone makes sure sorry. How we're prioritizing any funds that we've reverted, which

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: were our. So are you saying that if we agree with the House of Meeting, we would consider that for that by '27?

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Yeah. So we're we're agreeing with the house. No. For all. Need to be annoyed that. So it's like, didn't ignore it for the housing. We'll bring it. Let me just keep closing that. Data hub. Data Data reconciliation payment. This is this and this represents the decrease to where it was. So update them. So the Vermonters speaking Vermonters, This is another 400,000. I would I'm if I'm not

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: gonna fight this or anything, but I would say I'd rather give it to meals on wheels or from.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Let's leave that open. Okay. I'm gonna leave that up. May I

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: like supporting a farmer? I don't I don't mind supporting farmers. You don't like farmers. But you're you're it's an additional 400,000 into a program. And if I was in in the place where they hadn't, they've been cutting the cards and everything else. So I'm I'm just I would on the side of getting money directly food directly into people's

[Senator Anne Watson, Member]: And we could think about setting up a difference with the house to keep the discussion.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: Yeah. Yeah. I don't and I I'm not opposed to any of this, but this is in addition. And if I was gonna do it, would I put money directly to people? Well, the schools will go directly to Well, but it's through the foreign around them.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: The food direction. Yeah.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: That's

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: it. From the farmer to

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: the food bank. Yeah. To the food bank to that, you know, eating shelves, it's direct. Meals on Wheels, it's direct. And we've got, again, we've lost a number of, Gilman and the Northeast Kingdom, they shut down their Meals on Meals program.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Just Yeah. We'll keep that one up. To the county pilot court, Is that that is the accountability course? Right? Yeah. Would be Not a different one. It's doing well by all accounts. Yeah. Yeah. Although I did hear that the House of judiciary said something about not needing all the money. I'm sure they need at least that much. It was something else. The House already agreed with that, right? Yeah, it was after they had done it. We'll close it out and we can move it around later. And then this is also accountability court for the state's attorneys. Section eight housing. So this is the construct of how did they get $5,000,000 for Section eight? The governor's office, I thought, had in their technical letter a better way of doing it, but still gets $5,000,000 that would show up as an appropriation that would lower the 50,000,000, 45,000,000. That would just be language changes on it. Maybe we'll leave it open. Does anybody have any concerns about that by now?

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: I'm going to section eight. Should they just say, you know, why do you think the administration's risk?

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Because they just instead of saying, we're gonna take it out and look at 50,000,000. If you read their explanation in the text of the letter, they're just saying, we'll reduce the 50,000,000 we set aside to 45,000,000, and then we'll make an appropriation of $5,000,000 to the section eight. The way And it gets to the same thing. It gets to the same.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: Well, only creates a difference between the two or they have to explain themselves better when you go to Yeah. I don't feel strongly, but I think it's better and it's and it accomplishes the same thing.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: I'm not really clear on either logic or what I wanna do that. Why that's.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: The way the way they're together? Yeah.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: Like, the governor's office? Well, the oh,

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: We governor's just reduced the $45,000,000 They

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: reduced the $50,000,000 that we set aside, but that's what the house said, we'll just take about $5,000,000 out of that. They're saying instead of reducing we're changing that budget, we're changing that 50,000,000 to 45, freeze up $5,000,000 now we can just procreate the events. And I don't know, Emily, do you have any, or Amy, you have anything to say about this construct the governor proposed? I'm just buying an accounting procedural. Do you have any comments on it?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: I think mechanically, makes sense. It makes it easier for them to track. I don't know. Six zero one half of that's with the other. I could I suppose with with the last proposed construct that it would have less strings around it.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: If it got directly located. Right. Yeah.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: And that maybe especially if they have other hoops they have to jump through.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: I think it's more like hoops to keep track of it more than the funding source would be the same. I

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: wouldn't do that in administration once if it's the same and it's easier to track.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Yeah. So I'll say that we're we're agreeing to 5,000,000. We just need to

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: Figure out the best way to

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: do it. To the gov's language. But there was no late in charge. Yeah. I got we got. I got. Somebody else made noise on.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: I think we are.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Yeah. You did that. That's what she said. They're now. Okay. Transcripts. This is the criminal history records check. Which file? This one point Yeah. For $1,060,000 for the deficit in that account. Say we're going to close it up, then we're also agreeing to the house language, which requires them to give us the sustainability report on that fund. They probably need to raise the fees. Well, we we discussed that today, my note. Yes. So you didn't And the way we'll be obviously and they're gonna look at it because they don't know what it looks like as far as the actual cost or anything. The numbers were going forward, the PV going up as to, you know, $5 per the $10 per variable. And were they okay with the house? And special funds, they I remember what this $70,000 was compared to the 3 point whatever.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: You explain this for me, Amy? The Chris Do you want me Yeah.

[Chris, Joint Fiscal Office staff]: Chris here, joint fiscal. This is part of the agency of transportation item involving Town Highway 8. So Yeah. The house declined to make V Trans pay back the pilot fund, 360,000 and change, and some of that inter general fund doesn't. So 192,000 and change in both the two funds. So those revenues, rather than going back to the pilot fund, we just stay in those respective funds. So we'll agree to that.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: Find a degree that I think Richard went and grabbed me with this private fund.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Well, hopefully, we get a second. I get it. Okay. So it seems like some of these were Some of these are all sloped together. I'm not sure the best way to address them. So do you have a proposal of more than one that are live? I

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: have a proposal. This is it's at the end of the bill, the language on the DAs. Okay.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Almost on the last page. Yeah. Let's say he's 57. And there's no money. This is just

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: There will be money. Yes. Was sent in almost. There's money. That was the hard part.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: So this this be a dry bulb section 83? Or

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Well, let's go through it, and then no one should be. Be less assuming that. Okay. So, what 8% off?

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: 80 or 57. Frictionality.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: This relates to conflict proof case management and funding, new funding for our designated agencies. And basically what's happened is the designated agencies would be providing services for the first year of implementation and then they would receive their payment afterwards. It would be put them in a deficit. Is this seventeen or eighteen months that

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: they said you would not receive?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: That's the seventeen months that they were talking about. So it's based on utilization. So the question is, can we, for that one time expenditure, put money into the DAs and sort of estimate the utilization rate for them. So in this one it says a utilization rate of 65% that will be a certain amount of money. No one will help me here how much it is exactly. If the DAs don't use all of the money then it will go back to the department. They use it all. It's part of the services payment delivers. This language, I will say, the reason I brought up conflict free case management in the beginning is that this has not been without conflict. To resolve this issue, it's taken time. This has been going on for a year. Joint fiscal heard about it over this summer and fall and our committee has looked at it. So I think with the negotiation that's going on with the Department of Aging and Independent Living, we've gotten to a place, hopefully to a good place where we can resolve the differences that have been out there and help the DAs remain solvent while the new repayment system is put in place.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: I'd ask someone to chime in. So for the record, there's a couple of small tweaks that just need to be added to the language. The section c, there's no date. Have quick date, no later than active date. Also under C, it requires a joint group to convene. It includes chairs, the Senate Health and Human Welfare, appropriations, etcetera. We suggest adding an N-four designee so that under Perchlik doesn't have to take the meeting. We can send lot of it. Can send, you know, Senator Westman instead. And then finally, the cost to increase the that utilization to 65% is 9,500,000 gross, which is $3,900,000 in general. What is the current proposal? What is the change in your take? To get this from one to six. It's worth zero. It's The budgets are based around 40. Okay. But it's not it it it's a little more complicated than that, but it's sort of based off of the point. So you're getting this extra 25% deals with the cash flow. Helps with the cash flow. Okay. And then this $3.09 $3,900,000,000, do you have the proposal that that comes in?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Well, I struggled with where to find it. And going through the list of what we have on this sheet, the rule wasn't in place until I got to the bottom line. So I was looking at the bottom of the satellite line, which is 122.7 and using I don't know the alternative to that, maybe taking it out of 50,000,000, but it seemed reasonable that this expenditure will help maintain our designated agencies across the state and keep them sustainable. And we've heard that they could be in real financial difficulty with that. And were who wanted the number to be much higher. This was a number that came to us, the 65 number more or less was something that the Department of Aging and Independent Living can live with the votes. And why why why does the Senate have everything about

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: you? I'm not understanding the or remembering why we would have that much more of it.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: I couldn't remember that either. I thought We haven't filled in any of the yet. So I made my choice in the set.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: So all the because so all the expenditures. Right? So there's not that much money. No. We're So

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: you hadn't spent any. Now you've spent, I think, all of it.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: So Right.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Yeah. So we can look at a new spreadsheet basically because once we have agreed with everything, it's in this I'll go through one of the 74,000,000 carry forward for property taxes or other things that for the house construct, we'll have some well, depending on a couple of these things, we'll have more like $18,000 on the policy. 18,000? Yeah.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: How much?

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: 18,000. That's what the house ends up. Mhmm. Right? So if we agreed with everything at the house

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Oh, yeah. There it is.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: It would be that 18,000. So I do have a quick question. So why we is this something because of loss of credit funding or what?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: No. It's just well, yes. A federal requirement for the new payment system. And during the implementation of the payment system there's a of a hiatus between old and new. And so the billing would be retrospective so they would provide all the services then get paid. And after that period of time it would switch around so you get prospective papers. So within that period of time where you're not getting paid, if you don't have cash reserves to last for a period of time you can't meet your financial obligations as a designated agency. They wouldn't be able to pay for Does it really mean they're gonna get paid for seventeen months? Yeah, no. This is less. No.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: They get paid assumption that they're gonna provide 40% of the services. And as a reconciliation, if they do less, they've got money for more, but if you bump it up to 60, they get more money. And then the reconciliation, if it's under 60, would be higher, but it's a bigger payment and assumption that they're going to provide more service. You would do that, that would be the rate going forward. Or do you just have to do it the first year then? After the first year they'll know what it is and they can recalibrate It's the first year of doing it. And your estimate of a $3,900,000 cost, that's if you do it through all the DAs. So the DAs in my county said that they could live with 40%. Some can and some But this but the estimate is just This assumes this assumes 60%, 65%. So Correct. If they are below 60%, then they'll have a bigger reconciliation. Except they're above it, they'll have a cascade of, like a 5% plus. It's very common. It is. What was previous percentage? Well, to it, was just a little different. They changed it. They changed the way they pay. Okay.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: So And it's in the free years. Goes into place. Ten place. 10. So we're in the okay.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Supposed to be retro. Okay. We'll leave that open. Talk about this more. Did you at all in your committee also talk about the shelter investment card at all? Which one? This is line 64. 64 and 60 5. So the governor had recommended the $2,000,000 I remember we had OEO ing the other day.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Right. There were questions about, and there was a there was support for the children's investments. Yes. And then there were questions about the funding and I think fine. I think we're okay with that. Yeah. I was going to recovery residences.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Okay. We'd love to house it. Yeah. Yeah. Yes. Where where is this in the language? I think I have a. Is there if there's language as well, it's just in my

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: With the? Yeah. There is. That that was the only some journal yesterday.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Female section that he's making?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: It's on page 55. And then that that was that was a topic of discussion in our committee regarding how much each of the organization could receive. Ultimately, I think we're okay with that. Allowing for allowing for.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: It gives it gives money to the peace providers instead of just focus on shut ins.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Yes.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Anybody have any anything about the rent? Closes could go along with the house. Closes would be closed out 64 or 65. 6. Which lowers the amount the government wants for emergency shelters, but it's $680,000 se, but as it says on page 56, provides benefits directly to these on the ground organizations that are helping people with housing. I don't remember the EFR funded a decrease, but that was Right. I guess they they reduced the funding for the EFR to pay for the ERC-one rate. ERC-one, right? So in this year, our twenty sixth budget, we gave 2% increases to home and community based providers. Was based on rates, but it was not clear to legislative time that in that rate study there was assumption of some decrease in rates as well. So when they implemented the 2%, ERC-one actually saw a decrease in the rate, not an increase. So what this does is it brings them back to where they were. They don't get 2%, don't drop. So it's like two after the number is one point hundred and twenty seven. For this year, and then it's annualized, it's a million, both point 1,000,027. If you approve it in the CAA, it's also got a 27. Right, so this is one of the concerns from the administration about adding to the base. To the There's no way to do it at the month of the year. No, because it's a base increase. And so if you start looking at giving them grants, it creates other concerns and issues about when you get match on it. Right. And the AAAs are also baked into that too, they're a lot smaller, into that decrease in the FRF funding. Okay, so I think we're going close those out. On the Medicaid non emergency transport, is there a way to do that as a grant? It seemed like there would. I think that is one time. But now this is a 130. It's it's a gross stuff. So if that's normal commitment, it's not a GM. It's 800,000 gross. I don't have a sheet. That's 800,000. I did write it down. But my opinion

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: is that is one time. It's one time settlement.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Okay. Yeah.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: I think there's been some confusion for this.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Yeah. In the letter in the governor's letter, that this was a one this is the base pressure. Yeah. It is right. Boot there has it's been on speaker. We think it's one time. They think it's based. I think she's gonna that out. Okay. So if there's any other language that we can put in there, clarify that it's. Yeah. The does not. So that would close out pretty easily. And then on the '89. And then on the recovery centers, I don't know if you also looked at this center of Lyons. Well, it's just if this was specific, you know, you tied to something else the house did, or they just got found? We found one. It came out of the stuff that's been seized. Yeah. And then there was enough to cover it. And that's that's one time pending. Yeah. It's an old. Can you remind me where is there language about?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: I don't have the language. Yes.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: And

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Let me check.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: JFOs, can we if when the when the house did these these amounts, I remember hearing, can you remind us how they did this? If I recall, when the grants were done in the budget, each recovery center needed a different amount. AHS just gave everybody the same amount, regardless of their need. And this was meant to sort of correct for that.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: It's no policy change.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Yeah. The reason doesn't fit you for a bridge, but there's money in the fund covered. And we're not going to differently what the recommendation was for the use of those. Isn't there like a Oh, that's not part of the opioid side. No. That's different side.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: Yeah. It's a Okay. Different fund. This isn't the policy change. This is

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Yeah. So the appropriation. Yeah. Okay. We'll agree to that. And go to the K. I'm gonna suggest a

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: I have another So

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: I guess

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: have another I have another

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Oh, yeah. Here. Let's do that. No

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: no money involved. So There Here.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Thank you. Yes. I

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: have enough. No one. Am I not one back?

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: I have one. I'm just

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: one's 97. I need I need one more. And, Jen, I got a. Does everybody have one? Yep. Yeah. Okay. So this is right now there are family planning codes within Medicaid that we could use to get federal match at a ninetyten match, which is terrific. What this will do is, the reason that, PEVA hasn't gone through and asked for the match with the family planning codes is because it takes time to go through all those codes and identify the ones that are, could be acceptable for the state to apply for federal government. So what this does is it allows, it puts it in place. It says go ahead, identify the codes and look for the match so we can get a ninetyten match, 90 from the federal government, if they're paneled when it happens. There's a lot of money involved with this. It will be millions of dollars for the state as a result of the match that we get. So that's all this does. It expands our ability today And use it. So what

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: happened was, we put in the budget, it's $80.10, we put in 85,000, and we're gonna get $8.50 back. Or 860 gross. So 85,000 GHF is the match for federal, so it's a gross of 806,000. But in the budget, when the administration went to implement it, they determined that it's based on the intent or whatever feedback to give, and they were unable to administer it. But we were sort of, they had kind of hinted that it could be done, they just didn't do it, but then so BAA, instead of doing it, they just took the money out. And so the house went along with that. So what this is doing is saying, no, hey, hey, figure this out and do it, other states are doing it, don't see why you can't do it too. So this is kind of back and saying, please figure out how to do it. But it would require $85,000 to come back. The House went along with the governor's reduction of $85,000 This would require $85,000 in general fund to gross up $850,000 That make sense? Yeah. When do we need that money? Well, it's one of those things where it would be implemented when they do it. So it's not like the money. They need the money in the budget so that when they can do it, they do but your point is correct. If they don't do it the full year, you might not need the full 85,000. That's a good point. So you're right. Actually, the 85,000 will be

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: the product cut that down.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: We could already have much of the years here. And, actually, one could argue that thinking of doing math on the fly, should probably do one quarter. Think 85 times 25% of that is what you need for this year, and then you annualize it for the '27 budget. Total 85 is 27, so you'd be committing. This is base. '20 two five. Yeah, you do 22 whatever it is, and then you have to, because you're committing to a base of '27, it'll be 85. Let's see. Think the only well, do you anybody have any questions or comments? I do have a quick question. Yeah. So is there a guarantee to come with this with the credit funds?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Is there what?

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: The credit funds are gonna match

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: to matching things here?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Yeah. We've got we'll put in 85,000, and we'll get back to the total of 850,000.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Which well, my question is will we get it back toward everything? Yep. Yes. Yep. Thank you. Yeah. Well, the only other thing other than the two new things or not well, one is the DA language. One is the is programs. I'm going to suggest that we lower the 35 and add the 50,000 to meals on meals as a way to address your concern. So we'll take a little bit off of the Vermont, feeding Vermonters, put it on with the meal to meal so there's a so there's a difference for the conference, but we can talk about it later. We'd add it. It would be 4035 over there. What number was that again?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: 98.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: 98 and 61 down. Yeah. 69.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: I have no problem with it. Vermonters, speaking to Vermonters who just

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: So you're putting that to point 35? Point 35, and then the other one, I guess, would be up to point two six point o eight. Yeah.

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: But

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: And then I think we're gonna have to wait till Tuesday to talk about a three point nine and eighty five thousand units by once we make sure we do the math. Otherwise, we have to take a break and come back from here today. So we will have a new sheet on Tuesday and any other new information we have between them and Tuesday. And it seems like we have. Do we do we still have that? And 70 open. 70 and 71. Long term care. No. That's what we we talked about that that one is. It will be a bit if there was a way to make it one time, that was one of the government's concerns. He didn't disagree with it, but he disagreed with the phase. Don't see a way of making it a problem.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Anne? Yes, so on the governor's worksheet that they provided, there are some items that you haven't discussed that aren't general fund, because you've only really talked about general fund. So like the cannabis board has some and AHS does have some requests that aren't general fund related.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: So where are those done? Is everything under your guidance?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: No, no. So on the first sheet, like at the bottom of cannabis is what we've got, know, flows, just sort of discussing them whether or not you wanna close them or you wanna change their

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Is there a relative birth policy?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Right, so you've only really discussed everything on the left hand side. The column that says general funds.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Oh, I see.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: And then if there's a GC component

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: of Or it's got to be done. Yeah. Okay. So

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: you can talk about those next week.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Right. But like the Public Safety Administration. There's other

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: So you only talked about three items that are on the sheet of clothes. So you just need to talk about those two.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Are those the only one? Because there there's other ones.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: We're gonna do more.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Maybe we can, on Tuesday, go through those and. Ones that we Ones that we haven't already done. I don't think any of them we wouldn't close out, but so we have fresh eyes on on what those are and maybe put them in a different highlight the virtual paper. Any questions?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Another question, just the I did ask on that section eight housing about the distribution of funds to the different housing authorities. Was what we Oh, it's it's no many changes. It's just how, cause there's the $5,000,000 that it's, maybe going to the, of like, hybrid Section eight. Yeah, for Section eight. And so there's a question that I raised about how the money gets distributed. Oh, right. And is it

[Senator Richard Westman, Member]: just like everybody gets the

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: same amount, or is it proportional to the case load, etcetera.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: Right, and also The affirmative vote. Right, and I did get language about the affirmative vote, but I think also the governor's technical letter also mentioned the technical change in that section about how we talk about the reverting part, which I had asked about as well. So we will also have language to go. Okay. Section 79. So you did ask for language? I did, but I mean, I open to discussion about it. Did you ask the language just when we talked about the committee, or separate language specifically? Said, can you write me out how that would be looked?

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: I asked for a new language that would be in the best,

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: I suppose.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons, Member]: Okay. But I just asked for it today.

[Senator Andrew Perchlik, Chair]: So we can No. Go over that Tuesday. Yeah. Because, yeah, I think the way the app was worded about how it's how it pairs forward. Okay. So we also have that. Then we would we would also need to go through the language with credit, you know, some benefit. Then both the governors recommend them. And if the language should we have Okay.