Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Good afternoon, and welcome in to the Senate Government Operations Committee meeting of the last Friday of the month, 01/30/2026. We are going to hear today from the BSEA and a request that we allow folks that are in group c now to remain there after they become police recruits at the Police Academy. Tom Abelnour is with us today in place of Steve Howard. And, Tom, do you know everybody at the table?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: I've I've met everyone, although I don't the center we met very briefly, I think, but I am a fellow son of Orleans County, Tom Abelnour. I'm originally from Holland up on, the building hell. Built up There up sure are. There sure are. So it's a pleasure to get Jensen to meet you formally. Senator John, the senator Volk Again, seen not already. But, yes, happy to be here. Vince Aluzzi, also a son of Orleans County is here. I will say, mister chairman, I apologize before appearing for appearing for my favorite committee without an eye. Vince assured me that it was gonna be casual Friday, which is why he is in blue jeans. I, of course, took the step of reporting him to the sergeant at arms, and hopefully, he's been escorted from the bulk of this week. But it's a pleasure to be back with you today. And, as I mentioned, mister chairman, before we began, I I intend to keep my testimony very short and sweet. Just to clarify, this is to allow folks who are group c members retirement group c is the group that is associated with, law enforcement officers. Allow group c members who, join the Vermont Police Academy as staff, so that would be, you know, working to help train, police recruits there to retain their group c retirement status. As it stands, folks who are in group c who took one of those positions would potentially have to leave their group c membership behind, and this really, I think, creates two problems or two issues that we want to address. We are hopeful that when we are sending folks to the Vermont Police Academy, they're getting the best training they can receive from the most experienced trainers with deep ties to the law enforcement community, knowledgeable who spent their careers doing that work. And at the moment, if folks are required to give up their group C membership with the staffing issues that are occurring throughout, law enforcement, both here and around the country, it creates significant disincentive for those folks with the most experience to take a position working with the police.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Senator White. So they go to group F now?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: As it stands, they would go to, that's That's the status quo. And I will say that when we speak to our members at the BPA, they tell us that they do experience trouble recruiting top level talent with significant experience in law enforcement because of this specific retirement issue. So in an attempt to make sure that those final positions are being filled and to make sure that folks who are have their career in the law enforcement community are able to take this important role to safeguard the operations of the law enforcement community, we think that those folks should be able to retain their group c membership if they elect to join in a stack. We'll just pause while we wait.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Maybe we could help senator Hello? How

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: are you?

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Oh, I can take it. Welcome,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Senator Clucks. I apologize. It's okay. I just Yeah. Our life is too full here.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: So I had a question, Sala, but is that the extent of your testimony? Essentially, Mr. Chairman, yeah, it's a straightforward rationale that our members have brought forward to us. We just think this is a way to make sure that we're getting the best books for these positions.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: If it's two ninety five, conductive bill? Well,

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: yeah, this would be a section outside of the current desk two ninety five, but we think it should be included in terms of the sample of retirement changes that would be in Senator Hovsky.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Okay. So how many people would be involved in this group?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: My understanding is that the current cohort of folks at the academy is roughly, I believe, 16. Okay. That includes positions that are filled and a handful of vacant positions, so it's a smaller of folks.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: And the cost? It would

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: be difficult to know because we can't, of course, predict how many of the folks who would be coming in would have this status and would elect to retain their membership in group C. So, mean, I'm sure JFO could help with the analysis of that, but I will just say that it's one of those things that because it would be dependent upon whether someone's already in group c when joining would be a little bit tricky to predict.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Because I assume it will put certain pressure on the pension, but maybe not.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: I mean, I I think ultimately, given the number of folks we're talking about, it would probably be a Not a

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: good thing.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: A de minimis amount over the whole scope of those systems. But yes, there would be an additional cost, a cost that we would say is appropriate in order to make sure that we're having the category function as best it can. Senator Vyhovsky?

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I appreciate the reasoning, for this. And my understanding, and do correct me if I'm wrong because I wasn't here when Group C was created, is that Group C was created to allow for officers because of the rigor of their jobs and the danger of their job to retire early to Earth?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: That is, I believe, a part of the rationale. I think part of the rationale as well is acknowledging, and this is what our members have said to us, the sort of vital and unique role that law enforcement plays in terms of public safety. And so I will say that the folks who are coming in who would be the beneficiaries of this change are folks who have been working in that capacity throughout their careers, And given the current disparity between group F and group C, I think our members' concern is that in this new rule where they will be ensuring that the folks who will be performing those duties going forward are getting the best training that they can, that there is a significant disincentive to have them come in.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: No, and appreciate that, but the role of training no longer has those rigors or danger that would be associated with being out in the field, correct?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: I would say it's a different scope. I mean, I do think that the the training there is is a is a a essential aspect of it is quite intensive, and it involves, things like use of force training and firearms training. But I will just say, I think the broader priority that we are focused on here and our members have asked us to focus on is ensuring that we're creating a system whereby the people who are out in the public doing this important work are operating in the way that we would hope that they would be operating, because they've received the best training from people with the most experience who will be able to give them the best guidance in terms of how they should be operating on the

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: field. Okay,

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Senator White?

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White (Member)]: Oh, thank you. So maybe you said this and I just did here. So if if you're in group f, you have a longer amount of time that you have to be in working service to get to retirement.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: That's essentially correct.

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White (Member)]: Yeah. But you don't get a different amount at the end of your retirement, or do you get a different amount?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: There are a variety, and we can certainly provide the committee. I I don't have it for you at the moment. Oh, yeah. Well, I can provide the committee with a complete breakdown. You know what? Of all of the difference between the two groups.

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White (Member)]: Yeah. Know we've Confused.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: You guys are blatant. Yeah.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: It's Yeah. It's confusing. I mean, I know I know that even when we speak to the incredibly well versed folks at the retirement division, they talk about how nuanced some of the changes between the groups are. We are happy to provide you guys with a complete breakdown.

[Sen. Rebecca "Becca" White (Member)]: Yeah, that would be great.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Thank you. So I'm

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: missing a whole

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: bunch of links here. So

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: why do they come out of group C, to begin with? They come out of group C at the moment because they, as the group is defined currently, it doesn't allow for folks who are in these training roles at the academy at the moment to retain membership. It defines a specific group of people who are eligible at the moment. These these group of VPA staff who do this work, if they have been in group c, are required to join group f. So we're just adjusting that, just to be clear, only for folks who are currently in group c before they join. So if someone were not in group c and they joined, it would not get group c medical sort of treatment.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yeah, Senator Vyhovsky?

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Are there any other places where there would be group C members that would move into a training or more administrative role that stay in group c?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: I don't believe that the way the group is defined at the moment would have folks other than the folks that we're proposing who would be in a in a pure training role.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: So the pure training role for any other group c member doesn't exist, except for

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: Say it again, I'm sorry.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: So what I'm trying to understand is if there are other current group c members that would have the opportunity potentially to move into a training or administrative role and would have to be moved out that are not captured by this bill. Are we treating these 12 or 15 or however many people differently if we were to do this? I'm trying

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: to think of other analogous training roles throughout state government that have as a core component of them this law enforcement nature, and I don't believe that they're orange, you know, which is why why our request is limited to this narrow group.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Senator Clinton. Do you want me to ask my question?

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: You are choking, choking. I

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: was ready to sprint. Oh, thanks. The science question is, my understanding is that these trainers often are continuing to work. They train, but they continue to work.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: That is absolutely the case. Think it's

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: So why we carving out anything different?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: Because I don't know that that's always the case. So we want to ensure that people who are going to be focused purely on their work at the Vermont Police Academy are able to retain this membership.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: But almost nobody does that,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: from my understanding is. My understanding is that these are all generally active. I'm that are also active in law.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: I'm not I'm not sure about that, senator. I can certainly try to find out for you what percentage of the folks who would were working at the academy in these roles, are still actively working as law enforcement officers in other capacity. I don't know the answer to that question, but

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: And my simple question is that any law enforcement officer, certified law enforcement in this officer in this state, at any point can be called in, if necessary, to something that's a public safety issue. I don't understand why we have any differences in any of this. Why don't we just have one schedule for all law enforcement officers?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: Well, I think I think the point, with regard to this bill is that if someone, I think what we're trying to do is ensure parity between the folks in the law enforcement community to make sure that people who are taking on this role get to be, as you're saying, senator, a part of that same broader system. That that I think is our goal with this with this change. Yeah.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Okay. So this is beginning to get just an equitable treatment for all law enforcement officers?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: I think that I I think that I would say that this because I would I would I guess I would say that our members are focused here on trying to produce a specific result, which is ensuring that folks who have worked in law enforcement throughout your career who take on the important work that I know that this committee and the judiciary committee, other committees have gotten that, but making sure that our law enforcement officers are receiving the best possible training, don't have to face significant financial disincentive to do so. That, I guess, where our our rationale

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: That I appreciate. But but there's any change at all for a law enforcement officer when they can all be put into harm's way at any point. I just don't get why we're even why this is this seems to be a difference without a difference. Well, I mean, all of them can be immediately called up on to be in active duty for a law enforcement incident. It's just just just I don't know why I think I think senator the same.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: Yeah. I I think, senator, that is our I think we would share that goal. And our goal is to make sure that these people who are working in the law enforcement community get to have the same retirement status as other folks who are working as law enforcement officers in that same community. That that protocol. Okay.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Sandra Vyhovsky.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: If someone were, as some of her clerks is bringing up, working in a training capacity while also continuing to work in active law enforcement, would they also be forced to move out of group c, or would they be able to stay in group c because they're still working actively in law enforcement?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: As a requirement of group c, some of the people are are required to maintain that certified status. So this would apply to folks working at the academy who would be required as a part of that to maintain their certification.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Was not my question.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Okay.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Senator Clarkson brought up that some people who go on to do training also continue to actively work out in the field as law enforcement. Yes. Would those people who are still actively working in law enforcement while also training be able to, under current law, be maintained in group C?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: I believe they would, yes. Okay. Yep, I believe

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: they So the people that we are talking about are not the people Senator Larsson is talking about who are doing both. It is only the people who are now no longer actively doing on the street law enforcement are only doing this training. Oh. Correct.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I assume that from the word retirement when we got the first request. It says a request to allow retirement group c law enforcement officers to remain in group c after becoming police recruits recruit trainers. So I interpreted that to mean that they are not actively still working

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Oh, that they're retired? That they're retired.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: The goal is to ensure that nobody is falling through the cracks by taking and focusing on a position at the Veloplates Academy. So regardless of your other duties elsewhere, if you are a group c member under the change we're asking for, if you're a group c member who's working at the Vermont Police Academy, we want to ensure that regardless of their other participation and other law for that, I mean, that they would be able to be eligible to be in group's sake.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: That seems to the client still be active.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: Well, they would they would be required to retain their certification, yes. But you could retain your certification and be a BPA focusing on your training role, and those are the folks we're trying to make sure are part

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: of it. I have to admit, I'm a little confused.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: Okay.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Well, we talking about active I mean, are we talking about changing retirement plans for active people, or we're talking about retired people who are coming back in and we don't want to affect their retirement?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: I think there's I think there's a con a confusion around the phrase, the the fact that we're talking about retirement group c. We're talking about folks who as let's say today, someone were working as a a game ward.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Mhmm.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: And there are, because of that current position, a member of group c. They want to apply for a position in the Vermont Police Academy as a as a

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: trainer. Good.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: They accept that position, and they focus on that. That is their new job. That is what they are doing for employment now is working as a trainer at the Vermont Police Academy.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: After they've retired from active duty.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: After they have left their position as a game warden and are taking this new job, they would be able to retain their group c status. That's the chance we're requesting. Okay. It's not so much about retiring from that other position. No. Being able to move from another law enforcement position where you have group c status to one of these training positions at VPA, and as a result, retain your status as a group c member.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: And one of the to get to senator White's earlier question, I think, one of the differences between the two group requirements is, besides probably benefits, I assume that's why there's a disincentive as the length of service, I think group F is thirty years and group c is twenty.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: And group c includes a mandatory require mandatory retirement component at a certain age. Mhmm. So that is, I guess, the other primary difference, mister chairman, which is one of the reasons why certification would still be. Yeah.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: I thought they both had retirement agents requiring

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: Group f. No. Group f does not have This

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: is a retirement agent. I thought all law enforcement officers had to retire it or stay troopers at 55. Well, to be clear,

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: though, law enforcement folks are members of group c. So there are currently, at the moment, no as far as I'm aware, no certified law enforcement officers, to your point, senator, who are not members of group c.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Yeah.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: So that's why they all have to retire at that mandatory retirement commission. Not because they're in group f, because they're not.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yeah. I I just think the confusion came from possibly That's right. Right. I mean, I'm thinking, okay. A potential law enforcement officer in the brain is Retired. 63 wants to become a teacher.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Yes. Right. That's what I

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: was saying.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: Well, and and and just to be clear, mister chairman, if they are a group c member and they want to take that on and they're coming they would be able to retain that group c status. Yes. But I guess the point is that just in general, somebody who's currently working as a law enforcement officer and has group c status, they wanna transfer to the police academy, take on this new role working as a trainer. We wanna make sure that they're not financially disincentive. So that they'd be able to keep that that that set of retirement plans.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: And I'm sorry for so many fledgling. No. No. It's fine. Do you have any idea why F was ever set up? It seems like, to Senator Clarkson's point, if you're in law enforcement, should be a C forever.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: Well, so just to be clear, Group F is the I I I caution a little bit to describe it this way. But the way the retirement system is structured by and large is that there are a handful of groups, special groups that have their own retirement group. Mhmm. I guess an example of this off the top of my head, I believe, is correct. I believe either group a or group b is judges, for example. Group c is law enforcement. Group g is the group that was created by this committee and other folks five years ago, which senator Vyhovsky's bill will be addressing. And Group f, as it stands, is sort of, for lack of a better way to describe it, the none of the above retirement group. It's the broad retirement classification that the vast majority of VSEA members are a part of. So everybody from the folks upstairs in this building who are working for BGS to folks who currently are working as social workers to someone working in the state librarian's office. Okay. They are all group f members. And that at the moment is the status of people working at VPA unless we make this change, is that they would be in that broad sort of none of the above group.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I think, again, in order for us to do our due diligence, we'll

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: have to

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: hear from JFO to find out what the costs are and what sort

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: of pension pressure it might put. And again, of course, it's something that's a bit difficult to calculate because you can't know how many folks will take

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: But we're talking about small numbers, right?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: Are seeing something like that. Yes, that's right. Very small over the course of the entire funnel.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Regardless Okay. Impact.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I'm trying to think of that as our decision we might wanna have in on this, besides GFO, I don't know.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Is that because Digi? Who? Well, we have that. Besideg department labor or right? Human resource. Oh, she doesn't cover just the tribe or traffics office, the Penden people?

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Take some notes.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: And if you have anyone.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: That's Stigie and who else?

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: State treasurer. Barbara Hazalatman.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: You have a vision? I don't know why they would need that. Yeah, well, they oversee the decision. Doesn't human resources

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I think they do.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Help define it?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: Well, no. I mean, the the retirement groups are are senator are defined in statute and governed by the by the treasurer's office.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: But she could decide independent of us?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: No, believe, I believe. Oh, she's My understanding is that there would be a statutory change required to decide who is

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I guess I would like to know their opinion if they're but supportive of this we don't necessarily need her to testify. I just wasn't sure. I don't have a problem with it.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Just wasn't sure why. Given our general frustration the left of this building, it does strike me that we would be interested in eliminating any barriers to workforce advancement or career development that we have created. So it seems like probable yes, because we would want to enable this career growth or opportunity and reduce barrier to it. I appreciate that, senator. You know, Very like

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: a cliff. I guess I would say that our our members and our members throughout VSEA and members of the public and the government and general right now are talking again and again about how important they think effective public safety is in the state. And we're just trying to make sure that the folks who are responsible for making sure that our law enforcement officers are receiving the absolute best training that they can are being drawn from the pools of folks with the most experience, with the most knowledge, with the most time doing this work, and that we're able to draw those folks in rather than have them have to pursue something else or if it cuts off a retirement change.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Do you have any idea, Tom, how many teachers, for lack of a better term, there are now? Like, how big is a class? Is it 35, 40 potential law enforcement?

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: That's a good question, Mr. Chairman. I'm sorry, I don't know what a typical incoming class is. I do think it varies. I mean, I know, for example, I'm a little bit more familiar with the varying numbers at the Corrections Academy, and those really do vary during recruitment cycles from time to time. So how many folks are being taught at any given time? I'm not sure, but we get

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: a corresponding 30? I don't know.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: I wouldn't be surprised if that were correct, senator, but I I would wanna give you guys the the correct picker and stuff.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Okay. So we'll have your back in the first of the evening.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Shirt somebody. Senator Morley.

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: We used to have a hard time years ago

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: getting people in, they'd get trained, and then they'd leave the state. That's right. Is that still occurring? Well, can tell you I can tell you I mean, I think it is still occurring, and it's one of the reasons that we have been trying, not only with this cohort of folks and our law enforcement members, but also with regard to our members in the Department of Corrections, to ensure that the department is taking the steps to address the low staffing levels that are causing such severe mandatory overtime in New I mean, I'm up at Newborn. I know you're all too familiar with that situation, Senator, and, you know, I think what we found again and again is that when folks come out of, for example, in this case, the Corrections Academy,

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: they

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: come into a place where they're working routine mandatory overtime, they're being bordered over regularly, they're working sixteen hour shifts at times, The folks coming in fresh out of that academy say, this isn't what I had anticipated or what I had signed up for. And that is a very significant cost for the state of my colleague out of Norden, our our policy analyst, has done some work, on what it costs the state for every person that leaves, and I can ask him to follow-up.

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: No. That's fine. I just

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: let you see it.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Appreciate know that. Actually, that's an John, bring up such an important point, because we invest a lot in training people in all sorts of capacities. I mean, our workforce, we invest millions and millions of dollars.

[Sen. John Morley III (Clerk)]: It is pretty prevalent, though, at one point in time with state police. Yeah.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: Oh, it's a huge challenge.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: Yep. So that that's all the more reason that we wanna make sure that no. No. Just to agree with you, senator Chittenden. That's all the more reason we wanna make sure that the folks who are coming in are getting the best, well rounded training so they're understanding what it is they'll be facing in the field and be best prepared to stay and have a long and successful career to We

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: have a lot of coaching challenges that we address in this. Okay. Like, the police, the VSP, the Vermont State Police, coach from the police departments where the police departments are paid for all that training.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Yeah.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson (Member)]: It's an ongoing problem. Any

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: other questions for Chittenden? And we'll have VSEA back, whoever's Can both sides of the

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: we have drafted language, I guess, is my only question, because if we're going to add it to S-two 95, I'd like to see it.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: I don't know. We'll certainly provide it next day.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Alright, cool.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Okay.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: Thanks so much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, John. I'll be hanging out with you for just a little bit longer to hear your discussion of the next bill, so.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: If you could give maybe a ten minute break right here. Oh, okay.

[Tom Abelnour (VSEA)]: Go ahead.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: And we'll be back.