Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Welcome back to the Senate Committee on Government Operations meeting on Wednesday, 02/25/2026. For our consideration is s two ninety one, an act relating to travel disclosures for legislators and certain executive officers, office service. And Tim Devlin, our speaker counsel, has joined us, I understand that there have been some suggested amendments to the bill.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: Yes. Thank you very much for having me, committee members. For the record, my name is Tim Duffel on the legislative council. We have, let's see. A new draft committee amendment. It's draft 2.1 to s two ninety one, an act related travel disclosure for legislators and certain executive officers. We have five new changes, some of which came from recommendations, basically, from the Sea Ethics Commission to reflect in testimony last time that we discussed the bill, as well as some other features that came in from to the consensus from committee members, committees they want to see if they had. In brief, they are changes to the date of file, requirement for disclosure of travel disclosure for tagalogs, that is for staff, family members, media family members. There's a de minimis exception built in for disclosures, And now there's some prohibitive language in there that, has been reduced to allow additional voluntary disclosure, for instances where travel was compensated by the state or state or out of pocket. And now there is kind of a Yes. A carve out for, hybrid travel. So when there's a mixture of third party paying for it with either state or out of pocket, the out of pocket state paid expenses, but it just looks only to date third party. So where those appear on the bill, we'll now have the language here. In section one, which will add three BSA twelve fourteen, And first, this is under flexibility, who and when should this disclosure be made. We first have an A2 halfway kind of towards the bottom of page one. We have the restructuring of that once prohibitive language that would have required there not to be a filing if travel was fully paid for by either the state or the state federal government or out of pocket. So the language now reads, notwithstanding, circumvention law, this section, a member or an executive officer of the COPSA is not required to file disclosure for travel, etcetera, etcetera. From in May. I want page one too. No. Page one. House. Yeah. I can do that. Moving down. You have the breakdown.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Point one.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: I don't know when to pass out draft. I'm not sure.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: I just have it as a note. There should be a note for that. I'll do that.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: I got it. Did you email it to us, or is it on the website?

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: It's on the website.

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

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: I can print it for you if you want. You always know I love it printed, but I'm happy to do it because then I can write my notes on it when it's printed. I can write my Maritals too. Here.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: That's the bell. Just use it and scroll down. Okay. Because I have it printed.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Oh, do? Oh, great. Okay. Thanks.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So we'll move on now to the de minimis So

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: this is under 2B, again, the bottom of the page number, again, on page two. See if the executive member or an executive officer is not required to file a disclosure that travel is of de minimis value, meaning having the value of $50 or less per source per occasion, provided that the aggregate market value of the individual item received from any one source shall not exceed $150 in a calendar year. Does that

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: align, I'm assuming you chose that because it aligns with the definition of de minimis in Covir like the ZFPs. Okay. So that is why you chose that, Mr. Chair.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I did ask, certainly, old

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: CEO here why 150 was chosen.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So does that mean the executive officers already have that as a guideline?

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: 50 and the 150? Yes, as far as accepting gifts, all public servants, including yourself, state employees, or the judiciary. Okay. The legislative executive branches have to abide by certain gift provisions, make sure there's a blanket prohibition on them, and then we go through a series of exceptions, on de minimis, and that's what we have. Okay. Moving on to there's two provisions about the hybrid travel that haven't been disclosed for items, even though the trip is overall maybe paid amongst multiple sources, within that trip, the specific items that come out of pocket or are paid solely by the state do not have to be disclosed. We find those in, let's see, B, contents of design and disclosure, going down to one, d two. I'm gonna add two. So follow on page two for reference. Yep. And also, and subsection f, the following page, which we read together. Let's see, and just to further orient the committee, this is where we have that with reasonable particularity, any expense made or reimbursement received for all costs associated with transportation to the from a destination and food, refreshments, tickets, and admissions. The entertainment launching in advance of value, cost, or in kindness of travel has to be disclosed in writing. Notwithstanding that provision, a member or an executive officer is not required to disclose any expenses or reimbursements from any travel fully paid by the member or executive officer, sorry, by the member or executive officer, this state or another state or another federal government. Yep. So then moving on to other things that need to be disclosed in writing. We have F, certain costs associated with travel were in part paid for or reimbursed by any other source than the state or the member or executive officer indicating what amount was paid for or reimbursed by, and we have some existing language that was kind of

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: utilized here. Does line three indicate

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: the state or other state? It is just the state, our state. It's not equal to state.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: It's on line 19 on the previous page, it has another state.

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

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: That's true. Yet those are different. We can, I can update that? If anyone wants.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Sure. I think we probably should be consistent.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Yeah. No problem. And I would advocate for it being just this state. Oh.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: Oh. Okay.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Just blocking that from?

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Well, could be by another state. Let's say you were being brought down to Connecticut to testify on a bill that you had proposed. Another state could be paying for you. Well, just

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: But I'm not saying that's nothing in this says you can't do that. It just says that should be disclosed. Oh, yeah.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: So it's a policy decision whether the committee wants another state or the federal government's picking up the bill? Who do want that to say?

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I think Well, the one hand, in the provision earlier, it says that it's not required any expenses or reimbursements for any travel fully paid by the member, this state, another state by the federal government. However, it's a hybrid situation where some of the travel was picked up. I don't know why we wouldn't wanna be consistent.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I know I do want us to be consistent. I'm just advocating that we the way we'd be consistent is removing another state and just sticking with our state or the federal government.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: So on nineteenth,

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: you wanna strike the That is in because and maybe Tim can ease my concern, is how is state defined necessarily? I brought this concern up in other instances.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: These state capitalize reversely at this state. Yeah, right. No others. If it were saying states plural or any states lowercase, that would be any of the 50 states.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Only any of the 50 United States.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: Yes, if we meant like a state, then it's

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: more A nation state.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: A general state. Yeah, nation states. That would have to be defined. So

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: by saying another state, is very clear that it only means the 50 United States. And what about their territories?

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: So let's say if Puerto Rico was paid for something, yeah, I'd have to check to see. We have some general construction interpretation statutes in title one. And I to see if they're

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: And what if Puerto Rico was paying to lobby me to no longer be a territory, but instead to maybe be a state or to be its own thing. Like and and that that's where it gets tricky for me with me. I the definition of another state feels really important to me.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I guess I don't understand the distinction between whether they fully pay or partially pay.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: What I'm saying is depending on the definition, I think they it should be disclosed in both instances if it is another state.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: But that

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: isn't what they said.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I know. I'm asking to have it changed. Oh. Oh. We all agree.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I know. We start off agreeing.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: And I have to deal with.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So if you could add another state No.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: No. No. No. I I don't wanna add another state to the other spot. I wanna take it out everywhere.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Oh. I would disagree with you. I think that, first of we don't want to talk about the subject of why anybody is going because that, I think, is a dangerous and slippery slope. I think you only wanna talk about who in your professional capacity is being asked to go to another state to do whatever they're going to do or another territory. And I think I would be happy to include including other US territories. I I think that is I think as it's written now is is fine. I don't care what the subject is, and I think that's really dangerous to start going to what why they would they would be being asked.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: So then what do we also think it's fine for another nation to pay for us to travel no matter what say that. No. I understand that. But the reason that I feel kind of strongly that it should be our state or the federal government is to attend why I have concern about the definition here. I think it gets murky. See,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: I don't I just suggest being asked you know, another state would only ask us probably if we had some a bill of interest or we were sponsoring a bill or working on an initiative that they valued so highly that they were willing to ask you to come and be willing to pay for you. My guess is most of those states wouldn't offer to pay

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: for you.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: That's

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: probably true, but I think that if we are working outside of our state or our federal government that we both belong to, then we should disclose it.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So should we add a federal government here?

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Isn't it already there? No. No, do have federal government here. Yeah, we do.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: If the committee wants, I understand it, if a legislator or executive officer is their travel is paid in part or fully by another state, territory, etcetera, if there's a lot for disclosure there, I can go through and basically kind of frame it in negative, and I'll scratch the referenced state of our, and that's how we would accomplish it.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: And then it would be consistent throughout?

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: I can do

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: that. Just congressional Our

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: state and the federal government, or ourselves.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: Okay. So

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: if you go to Connecticut, you're off the hook. You don't have to report that.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: If I pay to go to Connecticut, wouldn't have to report it anyways. If Connecticut pays for me to go to Connecticut, then I think I should disclose that.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: But that doesn't

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: That's what I'm

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: asking you to change. Yeah. And I guess If if we're if we're letting us go to the federal government going to Washington to testify, I don't know why we wouldn't allow ourselves to go to Connecticut or New York to testify.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: We're allowed to in disclosing whether or not you have had it paid before. I think they're kind of also, here's where I I disagree. I I belong to the government of the state I am in, and I belong to the government of the the United States. I do not belong to the government of Connecticut.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: No. But they may be asking you to represent a something that you've done here that that they may be considered.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: And I can still do that. I just would disclose it because I don't have a membership to the state of Connecticut.

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

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Okay. I'm open to it. Fine.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: I said I'm gonna go to the house hopefully anyway.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So we wanna put federal government back in the second provision, which is the partial reimbursement status.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: So I'll rework Okay. The various mentions throughout the bill so that there will be required disclosure for another state, etcetera. At another country. Yes, that's already Yes, right. And, yeah, there'll be disclosure required if there's partial or oral payment.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: So we do I think we do agree. We were just saying it. Wonderful.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: I'll tell you the rest of the committee's thrilled. So

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Last break time.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: The rest of the committee's thrilled. Sometimes you're being sarcasm. Oh, okay. Okay. That's not infectious. Tim, you have a sense of what I'm trying. Yes. Okay. So

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: are we now on to, on page?

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: My Great. So now we move on to the Tagalog Proposition. A member of the Tagalog Proposition. A member or an executive officer who also makes the same sorry. Member or executive officer shall also make the same disclosures described in subdivision one, as all the self reporting things, of the subsection for any staff, an immediate family accompanying a member or executive officer on travel. These disclosures shall include the name and title of any staff only the nature of the relationship or the immediate family. And immediate family is defined in its data already, and I can put that on.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Is staff defined? Because

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: Yeah.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I am wondering if would that include an an intern? Would that include It

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: could.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Because the way everybody understands that other than that Well, that's that's why I I just wanna make sure

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: It depends on the nature of the essentially, is there an employment relationship? Is it not? We can define that if you believe there's room for ambiguity. I don't think the state ethics code references a term staff that's standalone, and not a conflict resolution industry because we don't have trauma and dysmorphism. So we can build out a definition of that if it wanted.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I mean, I just wanna make sure it captures like, I would want it to include it in turn. I would want you know, if someone that's doing the legislative work with seeing then if they may be doing so for school credit

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: or in a different Yeah.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: Then I would think it's probably needed to slow that up to some staff, typically in the clients pay it. That's more than a company.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Should we say paid?

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: No. I I I don't wanna say that. And here's here's why I have seen it happen where a conference is happening, and they're like, well, we'll pay for you and your staff. And because we don't have staff, someone asks their friend like, hey. You wanna come and you can just be my staff?

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: Oh, okay.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: So you want them included? Yes. If yeah.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: But it's a friend and not a staff member. I mean,

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: the staff member applies actually. Plus also, if I wanted if if the state of Connecticut were really interested in the work that I did and that Caroline did all the research for, they said we'll pay for both of you. Or I'll use it Norway. If Norway said we want you and Caroline to come and bring this research that you did, we're going to pay for it. I think that should be disclosed. So it's both of us.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Oh, yeah.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: So something along the lines of paid volunteer or credit or pay a pay. Sure. That can be it. Beautiful. I have the definition of immediate family of interests Thank you, Stephanie. The wife of immediate family. Already in stat statute, that means an individual's spouse, domestic partner, or civil union partner, child or foster child, sibling, parent, or such relations by marriage or by civil union or domestic partnership, or an individual claim as a dependent for federal tax. So rather than restating, I've ever You're

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: just gonna go out of reference?

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: Well, not in cross reference, but it's in the same chapter. Oh, okay. So then we move down to subsection c at the bottom of page three, where we have filing dates. And member in the general assembly or an executive officer shall file disclosure with the following the conclusion of trial.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Three days. I

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: think it.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Okay. So you'll make some additional changes and come back. Okay.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: What's today Wednesday? Today is the twenty fifth.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: You wanna try for Friday? Sure. Then we could vote it out. We could.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Whoops. Because the only thing we have on Friday right now I'm I'll be very transparent. Friday is the final day before the break. Some people may have reservations that would necessitate early dismissal.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Oh, they aren't going to town meetings?

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Some of us do not have town meetings. We have everything done by Australian ballots.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Anyway, I brought that up. Still at galleries.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: To offer that we might be able to since the floor is early Friday, if we take up the Burlington Charter, even if we don't pass it on Friday because, again, it's already meant crossover.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: We don't have to worry about anything that's come over from the house. So if

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: we put this on the agenda for Friday, we could probably still plan on

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: being able to leave a building at at a decent hour on

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Friday afternoon. What what time would you like to put

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: it on for? Well, right behind the charger, I guess. My battery is the Two.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Put it on at 01:30.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I I know. I think this is the last thing I already did. I'm trying to dig through my very very tired brain. I thought we had maybe a couple of questions that were for you when you were not available to testify, and I wonder if now would be some reasonable time to get that way in before we send Tim to make changes because Okay. There are more. Bill that he could smudge him. Well,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: can we just talk about where things are with the ethics committee's commission's request? Financial request, because it's inapproves, right? Aren't you inapproves?

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I testified, Doctor. Mulvaney, I testified before House Probes, House

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: Senate, and I'm

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

[Paul Erlbaum (Chair, State Ethics Commission)]: My name is Paul Erlnbaum. I am a commissioner and the chair of the state ethics commissioner.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: Oh, great. Thank you.

[Paul Erlbaum (Chair, State Ethics Commission)]: So I've testified before both senate and house government operations committees and both Senate and House appropriations committees. Haven't heard anything. You tell me, am I supposed to have to do anything else? I'm a novice at this. Well, I should

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Definitely that. Yeah. Well, given lobby advocates, will gets the.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: And I believe because we don't have a bill that the request for your staffing is in. I don't believe it. It was

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: not in my bill, but I know towards the end of testimony, the question came up because I believe you had some things you had questions about and wanted to be out of this bill. Yes. And I think along the way, there might have been some other questions that did his best to answer, but also sort of said, it might be better to hear from Baltimore.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Oh, so is this something that Tanya you're thinking of adding to this bill? To the I think some

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: of the Senate's advice wanted to make that proposal. Yep.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: So I think that is a great idea. Oops.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Is it in the governor's recommend? I wish. I don't know that we could draft a letter. Alison

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: is Yes.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: I'm happy to draft a

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: letter voted in the bill.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Tim to draft a letter to the appropriations committee supporting the the a a a more robust ethics commission, which we need to have, but we never it's never could survive. And so I believe that you're you could get your testimony to a probes to us. Tim and I can oversee and and create a draft Oh, sure. Of that. So if you could get that to us soon, that'd be great.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: I will be glad to Yes. Do

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: The answer is the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and I will be on house appropriations like nobody's tomorrow.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: So maybe just a lean out of the chair and ask what's the status? Sure.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Okay. Yes. Thank you for the

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Do you have any suggestions about the bill?

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Attract two ninety one.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Right. Two ninety one. I endorsed the changes that Tim has already made as far as the original bill, and then there were three or was it four, I think it was three changes that Yeah, Tim had just gone over. No, total amendments, one having to with the quorum for that ethics commission, and one that's correcting the Scribner's error in Act 171. We must have already done that.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Yes, we

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: But I think that was discussed last week. Yeah, Fair enough. TJ said that you might have questions from me about those, but I'd not be glad.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I don't think so. Okay. So, to be right, was there anything else that you were hoping to put in this bill, was it just the money? It was mainly the money. Okay. That's what I was hoping you said. Okay. Because I know there was also some discussion about I wouldn't know a couple of years ago, perhaps. Oh, around investigating power? Okay. Yeah. No. I would definitely but my understanding is they don't want the investigatory powers until they have the staff.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: They have no staff

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: to do it. So if we were going to move forward with expanding your scope, I don't think it would be appropriate without the staff members, which I think you've testified to.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Right, I mean

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: So if we're gonna do, if we're not gonna put the staff and positions in this bill, Okay, I guess I'm well if we're gonna, if we are gonna do that,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: then yes that's what's gonna get us your ass to approve.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Okay, let me know you can can do that. Yeah, Let me look, what's your

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Money for staff. Yes, and also for office expenses, you know, to accommodate staff.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: But where are

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: the other things, the quorum bids? Where are the

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: They're already in the bill.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: They're already in the And

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Tim is drafting that as a tag along to S-two 91. Yes, we currently have two unfunded mandates, and coming up in September 2027, we'll have a third. So, yes, that's it. Okay. Thanks, Paul. I appreciate it. Did you have a question?

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: I did. I just wanted to make sure, like I said, cannot remember every word of the testimony you had on this previously, but I do remember there were a couple of points where people had questions that, and now maybe they don't have

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: them anymore. Okay. Oh, we probably do. We may have just forgotten. Yeah.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I'll you wanna go through your notes?

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Yeah. But it is helpful to get your way in that the the changes we've already made for you, though, are you. And you don't have to She will change. Thank you.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: Thanks again. Okay. Thank you, folks. And And,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Paul, if you could email us Before the night is over,

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: I will be happy with this.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: And email it to you, Tim, and to you,

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: to Tanya and the chair.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: Can send it to the senate under

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: I can just send it to the committee.

[Tim Devlin (Legislative Counsel)]: Go check. See it. It will the

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: is there any did you have something else at all?

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: So yeah. Because the arm The arm is in the bill. In the new draft. In the new draft. Thank you. Which I don't care.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: It wasn't highlighted because it's already was included online.

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: Yeah. But it's on the new draft, which I don't have. Okay. Great. Thanks. Yes. It is there. Thank you. The reason I asked. Yes, we

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: felt like this was a reasonable vehicle to make those I think it's a clarifying

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: Does the committee have anything else today?

[Sen. Alison Clarkson]: I would remind you all about Farmers Night, and I which is gonna be fabulous tonight. And I would also remind you about CSG at Hugo's from four six to eight.

[Sen. Tanya Vyhovsky (Vice Chair)]: And VSDA. Right. And VSDA. 04:30 to 06:30. And Schwartzman's Caucus. Is somewhere at some time. In the cafeteria. Thank you.

[Sen. Brian Collamore (Chair)]: With that in mind, why don't we adjourn