 | | |  |  |  | 2007 Town Meeting Legislative Report by Representatives Bill Frank and Gaye Symington Dear Bolton, Jericho and Underhill neighbors, This legislative session has been very challenging as we work to ensure Vermont is a prosperous state for generations to come. Below is a list of reports, just click on a topic to go to a report. It is simply not possible to include all the work of this session in one report, if you do not see a report on a topic you are interested in, please e-mail us and we will get you the information.
We hope to see you at town meeting this year. Or, join us for coffee April 16th at the Village Cup from 7 - 9am. We look forward to hearing from you with questions, ideas or concerns. Thank you for the honor of serving you as your state representatives.
In 2005, the legislature passed a bill on Advance Directives for Health Care, which are written statements that guarantee a person's wishes for health care are carried out if that person is too sick or otherwise unable to make decisions for him or herself. One part of that bill provided for the establishment of a statewide web-based registry that would make Vermonters' advance directives readily accessible to health care providers.
The Vermont Advance Directive Registry became available on February 2, 2007. The Registry web page can be viewed at www.healthvermont.gov/vadr and provides instructions and forms for completing and registering advance directives and a link to the Registry. Vermonters may submit their entire advance directive to be included in the Registry or they may send a description of the physical location of a copy of their advance directive to the Registry.
In June 2007, health care providers, health care facilities, and residential care facilities will be required to check the Registry when a person who is unable to communicate his/her health care decisions is admitted or provided services to see if that person has an advance directive. This will also apply to funeral directors, crematory operators, cemetery officials and organ procurement organizations since advance directives may contain an individual's wishes regarding arrangements in these areas.Back to list of reports The question of how Vermont can grow its rural economy, from the core to the corners of the state, is a primary focus of the legislature as we work to ensure a diverse agricultural base. The legislature recently passed a $3.2 million bill for interim assistance to our 1,110
Vermont dairy farmers and is developing long-range goals for a viable agriculture in Vermont.
The assistance bill will encourage our farmers to remain in business while they face an inadequate price for their milk, steeply rising costs for energy and feed, and low quality and quantity of forage from a rainy crop year when all 14 Vermont counties were declared disaster areas by USDA. We are working vigorously on ongoing dairy price and production cost issues.
Our long term goals for Vermont agriculture include supporting programs and policies that foster a robust and diversified agriculture that is profitable, environmentally sustainable, preserves the necessary agricultural infrastructure, attracts new and young farmers, and encourages on-farm energy production. Other issues we are looking at include slaughter and processing facilities, worker's compensation, and marketing and promotion of Vermont agricultural products. Back to list of reports Back to list of reports Budget There are three primary aspects to the work of the budget writing committee. First, we adjust the current year's budget (FY2007) to reflect unanticipated needs or shortfalls. Second, particularly this year, we are identifying mistakes or immediate crises that require additions to the governor's budget proposal. And, third, we make adjustments to the upcoming year's budget (FY2008) to reflect the priorities of Vermonters. Additionally, the budget committee reviews the plans for bonding and transportation spending. In each case our concern is that the governor's proposals would increase pressure on the property tax by shifting costs to local communities. In addition, the budgets as proposed do not adequately prepare for future years.
In adjusting the FY2007 budget the House made several changes that will lower the pressure on the property tax. We increased the town highway emergency aid by $2.7 million so that towns don't have to carry large interest charges while waiting for reimbursement. We set aside $7 million of general fund growth to make up for a mistake in last year's budget calculation that under-funded the transfer to the Education Fund. We added funds for PILOT, a "Payment in Lieu of Taxes" to towns that host state facilities. We increased the grants to towns that are mapping ancient roads. And, we dramatically increased funds for public safety, reflecting the increased number of armed robberies in rural communities.
Since the Governor first proposed his FY2008 budget several new challenges have come up. These add up to about $10 million of funds that must be found in an already tight budget:
$3 million to make up another miscalculation in the General Fund transfer to the Education Fund; $3 million in emergency aid to dairy farmers hurt by severe weather, high grain costs, and low milk prices last year; and funding for the immediate relocation of state employees who work in a "sick" state office building in Bennington.
These pressures are in addition to some difficult "holes" in the governor's proposed budget. Here are just a few examples:  | State police are funded at $1 million less than was appropriated to them for 2007, even though the state police are dealing with a spike in armed robberies. | | The state continues to forgo $10 million a year in federal support for our state hospital because it provides such poor service it cannot be certified. Yet, there is no plan to seek recertification and there are no concrete plans for finding the $80 to $100 million required to build a new facility. | | Child care subsidies fall $14 million short of what is needed to support child care for low income workers. The state already faces a shortage of child care and many providers say they cannot continue without a change. Employers know that reliable child care is critical to a stable workforce | | The governor's budget did not fully fund the Special Investigative Units, a critical element of last year's Sexual Violence Prevention Act. | | Public defense and state's attorneys in Chittenden County are so short staffed we have been told, "Justice will soon cease to exist in Chittenden County," meaning low income Vermonters are losing access to basic level prosecution and defense of their cases. | | Higher Education receives a 3.2% increase when the index for Higher Education costs is at 6% and Vermont ranks nearly last in the country in its support of higher education. | | The governor's budget uses money from the Catamount fund to pay for Medicaid costs, before the Catamount product has even begun to be offered. |
On top of these General Fund concerns, the legislature is concerned that at the pace of funding school construction in our capital bonding budget as proposed by the governor, we will fall $85 million short in four years - the equivalent of the entire state hospital! When the state takes years to fund its 30% share of school construction, communities carry extra costs of interest that translate into higher school property taxes. For that reason the House has recommended a moratorium on promising state reimbursement of school bonding until there is a plan for more adequately meeting this need. We should not be making promises we then don't fund.
And, the House is working to remedy a 10% reduction in state aid for town highways in the governor's proposed transportation budget. Our towns take care of two thirds of the roads in the state and when the state does not provide adequate funds for those needs, towns have nowhere to turn but to increase their municipal property taxes. That is not a solution we want to impose on our towns.
Back to list of reports Catamount Health & Beyond The Legislature and Governor Douglas passed significant health care reform legislation last year. It contained over 35 new initiatives that help control health care costs, increase access for the uninsured, and improve the quality of care. The most well-known of these is Catamount Health, the new affordable insurance product for the uninsured that will be offered starting in October 2007. This summer, people who are uninsured will be able to contact an insurance company to enroll this summer for coverage that starts in October. For more information on Catamount Health rates, enrollment and the other programs, go to http://www.leg.state.vt.us/HealthCare/catamount.htm or http://hcr.vt.gov/
Catamount Health is funded by premiums for individuals who enroll and by state dollars from tobacco tax and an assessment for employees who are not offered health insurance. Employers who need more information about the assessment should check out the Department of Labor website. This is a great resource for information on the employer assessment, with forms that help you go through the exercise of calculating the assessment. The address is: http://www.labor.vermont.gov/ Look toward the upper right hand side of the page and click on: "Employer Health Care Contribution." If you find the employer assessment confusing please contact me.
Catamount Health puts Vermont at the forefront of health care reform in the country. Legislative leaders believe there is much more to do to make sure all Vermonters have health care they can afford. Health insurance rates have increased dramatically in the past year, some by as much as 20-30%. Individuals and businesses are finding it too costly and, as a result, are forced to reduce coverage or increase co-pays. In the end, this just shifts more costs onto consumers and will ultimately lead to more people being uninsured. This crisis isn't unique to Vermont. However, we have a unique opportunity to do something about it.
The first priority this year is to ensure that last year's Health Care Affordability Act can be as successful as possible. Implementation of the Catamount program is complex and there are a number of issues that have come up over the past 7 months that need to be addressed. For example, we are considering modifying the assessment charged to employers of seasonal workers.
Beyond Catamount, we need to relieve the increasing strain on our primary care providers. The best and most cost-effective place for care is in primary care practices. Yet many of our primary care providers are struggling to make ends meet, new doctors aren't going into primary care in Vermont and many practicing doctors aren't taking new patients. The legislature will consider other ways to further support primary care. These might include paying better for certain things such as chronic care, helping to pay medical loans for providers who agree to move or stay in Vermont, and providing incentives to invest in electronic medical records or other health information technology.
In March, we will begin to examine possible next steps in health care reform. Questions we will consider will likely include: Can we expand the number of people who can buy into the Catamount Health Plan? How about small businesses or people with very high deductible plans? Or can we allow a shorter waiting period for people to qualify for Catamount Health (currently a person has to be uninsured for 12 months to qualify)? What else can we do to make insurance more affordable for people who have coverage?
If you have thoughts on health care reform, please contact me. And for more information on the Catamount Health plan go to http://www.leg.state.vt.us/HealthCare/catamount.htm or http://hcr.vt.gov/
Back to list of reports Capital Bonding & Construction The legislature faces hard choices each year in determining how to allocate state bonded dollars to capital projects like building improvements, pollution control facilities, and school construction. The $49.2 million allocated for FY 08 is far less than needed, as there was $155 million in requests. It appears unlikely that any general fund money will be available to help out.
Of interest to local communities, the House version of the Capital bill contains $4.45 million for water pollution grants, state match for pollution control and drinking water supply revolving loan funds, and other municipal projects. There is also over $1 million for community grants for historic preservation, historic barns, cultural facilities, recreational and educational facilities, broadband, and human services.
School construction aid is a growing concern. This year, the Education department's request was for $33 million for school construction, but governor recommended only $9 million. In the House bill we were able to find $10.5 million. Most of that will go towards construction aid, emergency repairs, energy renewal, and projects that extend the life of a building. Some funding will be directed to vocational center equipment and tech centers. The bottom line with regard to school construction aid is that the state is nearing a crisis point and the pressures will only increase in the coming years.
There are other pressures on the Capital bill as well. To name a few, the state needs to replace its health and forensic labs, replace the state hospital, alleviate pressure on storage of the state archives, perform yearly major maintenance of state owned buildings, and create a new correctional work camp.
Back to list of reports Containing Education Costs While Maintaining Quality There is probably no greater civic responsibility than the education of our children, and Vermont's public schools are consistently ranked among the top in the country. Vermonters spend in excess of a billion dollars on our public schools. And we expect a lot from schools, more than ever before. Schools now provide substance abuse prevention, harassment and bullying prevention, breakfasts, lunches, fluoride treatments, and warm clothing. Without these services children are not able to fully participate in learning.
Early in the session, legislative leaders and the Douglas administration agreed on a framework for containing property tax increases while maintaining Vermont's standard of school excellence. The goals of this work are to:
| Support the excellence Vermonters expect of their schools | | Maintain Vermont's commitment to equity in public school financing | | Examine what Vermonters expect of their schools and how to more effectively deliver those education services | | Lower the rate of growth of public school spending, making it more affordable for taxpayers | | Finance schools in a way that makes more transparent the basic dynamics affecting school taxes and where school taxes are collected in an efficient manner |
Based on weeks of testimony in legislative committees, these are the initial areas that promise to contain increases in education spending or give school districts the tools to achieve greater efficiencies:
Governance Changes. Richard Cate, Vermont's Education Commissioner, has proposed consolidating existing supervisory union districts into one district with one governing board. This would mean that the number of school districts would be reduced from 283 to 53. This is NOT a proposal to consolidate schools or close small schools. The focus is on more effective school governance.
Spending Controls. The Governor has proposed a cap on education spending. The cap would be set at 4 percent the first year and 3.5 percent for the following four years. Communities could exceed the cap with a super-majority vote. Our primary concerns with this proposal are: | The proposal would hit the lowest spending schools hardest, since they would start at a lower spending rate and therefore be limited to lower increases. | | Districts that tuition all or most of their students have little control over the tuition they are charged and so cannot affect the spending growth | | Special education costs can dramatically fluctuate in one year, especially in small schools. We propose to address special education spending separately |
The legislature will recommend that we modify the current high spending threshold that applies to school districts that spend significantly more per pupil than the statewide average. Under current law when a school district spends more than 25 percent above average, the district is assessed a higher tax rate for the spending above the threshold. The high spending threshold in current law appears to work - school boards actively avoid reaching the threshold. The legislature is considering a lower threshold - 15 or 20 percent above average. School districts will be given lead time before the change takes place.
Helping Voters See the Impact of Their Spending Decisions on Tax Rates. There's an inherent tension in Vermont's system of funding schools. Voters determine Vermont school budgets at the polls or at town meeting, but the funds are raised entirely through state taxes, including the statewide education property tax. The education spending per equalized pupil varies from a low of $7,330 (the current base education spending grant) to $12,600, indicating that voters make widely divergent choices for their schools. One suggestion is to include with tax bills a chart that helps voters see the connection between per pupil spending and school tax rates and understand how the spending in their district compares to the state average spending per pupil.
These are just a few of the many proposals currently under consideration in the House. Others include changes to the Common Level of Appraisal (CLA) system, decreasing state mandates on local communities, consolidating the negotiation of professional contracts at the supervisory union level, changing special education reimbursement policy to encourage special education cost containment, and improving the data available for assessing school cost drivers. In addition, individual legislators are working to develop alternatives for the current education financing system; while these proposals are outside the framework agreed on by the governor and the legislature, they will be considered at a later date.
Back to list of reports Corrections Although "looming crisis" is one of the most over-used terms in Montpelier, the growth of Vermont's corrections population with its ballooning costs truly qualifies for that label. That's why the House Judiciary Committee, along with the Institutions Committee, is devoting much of its time this session to understanding and curbing this trend while also ensuring public safety.
Vermont remains one of the safest states in the country and has had a declining crime rate over the last decade. Despite that, our prison population has more than quadrupled in 20 years and our costs have doubled again in just 10 years. We now are spending more on corrections than we are on higher education.
Even now, we don't have enough space in our state for one-quarter of Vermont's inmates, so we send them to out-of-state prisons from which they often return more hardened than when they left. Perhaps this partly explains why we now have one of the highest re-offense rates in the country. So might the fact that 95 percent of our male inmates under age 25 have not even completed high school, severely limiting their prospects for good employment upon release.
Our legislature passed several broad and carefully drafted crime prevention bills in the last session to help keep Vermonters safe. Now it is time to also make wise decisions which keep dangerous criminals off our streets but use more thoughtful and less costly approaches for less dangerous offenders. Legislative leadership, the governor, and the chief justice have jointly invited the Council on State Governments to work with us, as they have in other states, to identify strategies for lowering corrections costs while maintaining safe communities.
Back to list of reports Global Warming and Economic Opportunity During the first few weeks of the session, the legislature heard from national and state experts about the challenge of global warming and the economic opportunity it represents for Vermont. Climate change is real and threatens to hurt Vermont's economy, particularly the ski industry, farming and maple sugaring. With this challenge comes opportunity. If Vermont addresses global warming in a proactive way, we can take advantage of opportunities for job growth. As the reality of global warming affects all aspects of our lives, it will lead to new inventiveness, entrepreneurial activity, greater energy independence, and economic growth.
The House has begun this work by focusing on how best to create more in-state, renewable electric sources. The Senate has been working to support the more efficient use of all types of power-electric and fossil fuels. By the end of the session we intend to combine all our work into one major Climate Change Action Bill.
Some specific measures the House Natural Resources Committee is considering: | Enhancing the standards governing the electric power industry to require the development of new, in-state renewable power through the SPEED program, which sets standards the electric utilities must meet regarding their mixture of power sources | | Establishing a clear and predictable tax policy for newly built renewable power generation plants | | Improving the net metering law that allows homeowners to use small scale wind turbines or solar panels to make their own power | | Streamlining the regulatory permitting procedures governing wind measurement towers. Current law is too burdensome for people who simply want to measure the wind to see if their property might be appropriate for wind towers | | Giving more Vermonters a chance to voluntarily pay for green power-like the Cow Power program that CVPS runs where customers pay a little extra on their bill so that Vermont farmers can have a market for the power they make in a manure digester | | Looking into ways to increase the use of biofuels | | Studying the creation of an ombudsman that would help people and businesses that want to build renewable power navigate the complex permitting process | | Ensuring that new large scale retail buildings are built with the most energy efficient design |
These initiatives along with work being done in other committees including Agriculture, and Transportation, will help Vermont achieve greater energy independence, promote economic development, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Back to list of reports Mercury Over the last two years the legislature, in response to alarming reports about high levels of mercury in fish and some birds in Vermont, has worked to reduce the level of mercury in Vermont soil and water. Building on that work, we are considering legislation to require recycling of thermostats that contain mercury and banning the use of amalgam tooth fillings that contain mercury.
The thermostat portion of the bill would require the recycling of thermostats containing mercury. The industry funded program would offer a "bounty" of $5.00 per thermostat on thermostats that are taken out of homes and businesses. The companies that produced the thermostats would pay for the program, not only the bounty but also the collection of the thermostats at wholesalers and returning the thermostats to centers where the mercury would be collected and stored.
The other provision in H 121 would limit the use of mercury in amalgam that serves dentists as fillings for our teeth. There are personal health concerns but H 121 deals only with the environmental impacts of the mercury used in our teeth. Passing this provision as of this writing seems problematic. Dentists claim that amalgam is the cheapest and most versatile of fillings for decayed teeth. There are alternatives that several dentists who do not use any amalgam use successfully but the practice is not widespread. Testimony and debate on this portion of the bill continues.
Back to list of reports Patient Choice and Control at the End of Life The "Patient Choice and Control at the End of Life" bill, H.44, has been introduced with tripartisan sponsorship. The bill would give a terminally ill, mentally competent person, who has been diagnosed with less than six months to live, the option to request prescription medication, which, if taken, would hasten the dying process.
The bill stipulates that only a patient who is a Vermont resident can initiate a request for the prescription, and the request must be both written and verbal and reiterated after a 15-day waiting period. The request may be rescinded at any time. Two witnesses must attest that the patient is acting voluntarily and not being coerced. A patient's doctor must determine that the patient is competent, within six months of death and under no external pressure to make the request. A second doctor must verify the patient's diagnosis, prognosis and competency and attest that the patient is acting voluntarily and not being coerced. If either physician believes the patient suffers from a psychological condition or depression, the patient must be referred for counseling. The bill was patterned after the Oregon patient-directed dying law that was passed in 1997.
In the last two biennia, bills were introduced that referred to "Death With Dignity." The legislature heard testimony in 2005 both in committee and at a public hearing in which over 150 people spoke. During the summer of 2005, a group of legislators met informally and made improvements, including additional safeguards. In February 2007, the committee took testimony on H.44 and held another public hearing. The committee has formally reviewed the bill including the safeguards that are built into the process. If the bill passes the Committee on Human Services the Judiciary Committee will take it up before consideration by the full House and then the Senate.
In February, 2007 the committee again held a public hearing and took several days of testimony. The committee formally reviewed the bill including the safeguards that are built into the process. The Committee on Human Services passed the bill by a vote of 7 in favor and 4 opposed on March 1. It will next be taken up by the Committee on Judiciary. Back to list of reports Small hydro As the legislature explores responses to global warming, one of the options being debated is developing smaller hydropower sites around Vermont. Legislation currently being considered would reduce permit requirements for development of these sites, including those of the Public Service Board in their Certificate of Public Good review and the Agency of Natural Resources for environmental impacts on the rivers of VT. Eventually Historic Preservation will become part of permit review but is not included in the bill.
The bill proposes to lower the review requirements on hydro facilities rated for 5 megawatts or below. The committee reviewing the bill feels that 5 megawatts is too large a facility. To put that level of hydro plant in perspective of the 88 dams in Vermont only 18 of them are larger than 5 megawatts and those that are larger include the dams on the main Connecticut River.
The committee is moving toward creating an ombudsman position within the Department of Public Service who would facilitate the development of these sites.
Back to list of reports Transportation A prosperous future requires a reliable transportation infrastructure, particularly given Vermont's rural setting. Unfortunately, that infrastructure is deteriorating. About 25 percent of our roads are currently in "very poor" condition. At our current rate of spending, in five years, that proportion will double. The situation is no better for bridges. As of this year, almost 500 bridges along our state and local roads are structurally deficient, and over 1000 bridges are over 60 years old (bridges are generally built for a 40 year life cycle).
Thanks to Senator Jeffords' work last year, federal funding has helped chip away at our transportation infrastructure problem, but the problems persist. Revenues coming into the transportation fund (from fees, gas taxes and purchase and use tax) continue to be less than projected. For this fiscal year we face a $10.5 million deficit, which has resulted in project delays. As projects are delayed, the costs escalate and the purchasing power of our revenues decline. The gap between what we need to accomplish and the funds we have to do it continues to widen.
The governor's proposed transportation budget for the next fiscal year (FY '08) delays many important projects, which will cause considerable increases in taxpayer costs in future years. Significantly, the governor's budget decreases funding for town highway aid programs by $6.5 million-a 10% cut. Municipalities are responsible for maintaining two-thirds of the state's roads and bridges. Local road budgets depend upon local property taxes and reducing state support for town highway aid directly increases pressure placed upon local property taxes.
The House Transportation Committee is working to redirect some of the governor's funding proposals. In particular, the committee seeks to restore some of the cuts to important projects and to develop a dedicated revenue source for the town programs, so that local budgets will not continue to bare the brunt of a declining transportation fund. The House is also working on funding proposals to assist public transit providers' shortfall in funds for rides for elderly and disabled citizens in need of dialysis and cancer treatments.
Once we pass our transportation budget, the House Transportation Committee will review the transportation sector's impact upon climate change, and look for ways to address this challenge.
Back to list of reports Vermont State Hospital The Vermont State Hospital (VSH) has been an area of legislative and public concern for some time. Over the last ten years, the state has put resources into building a community system to care for our friends and families who struggle with mental health difficulties. While we have built a community system that has some true assets, the State Hospital, now for our most acute patients, has suffered from serious neglect.
The federal government has recognized the difficulties with quality of care at VSH and is not willing to certify the hospital (costing the state about $9 million annually), and the Department of Justice who found that we had violated patients' civil rights here in Vermont. We have known about the problems at VSH for three and a half years now, yet the administration tells us that it will take more time to correct these problems. Many of us have lost our patience as the administration continues to fail at taking the necessary steps to achieve a minimal standard of care for this population of vulnerable Vermonters.
Back to list of reports War in Iraq With the federal administration willing to send our men and women to war for extended periods of time and sometimes with inadequate equipment (while at the same time cutting funding and services to our returning military personnel), and with Vermont paying a disproportionately high price in human lives, the legislature is dedicated to supporting our troops in any way we can.
This work has taken place in a number of areas. In February, the legislature passed legislation calling for the orderly withdrawal of American military forces from Iraq. Although House members voiced strong and heartfelt differences of opinion on our policies in Iraq all House members are of one mind and heart in support of our troops.
The legislature also heard dramatic testimony on the use and exposure by veterans to depleted uranium weapons and the virtually non-existent safety training or post service testing for presence in the body of this toxic material informs us to the real health needs of our veteran and active military personnel. The legislature is looking for more information on this seriously ignored problem and exploring creative ways to respond at a state and a federal level.
Another topic under consideration is inequities in the pay and benefits for National Guard personnel when called up for state duty as opposed to federal call-up. In response, a legislative committee passed legislation to equalize pay regardless of official status. Among other provisions, a state activated guard member becomes entitled, in the unfortunate instance of death in the line of duty, to the $50,000 death benefit that would have been his or hers if on federal status. Additionally, the legislation corrects an inequity in college tuition reimbursement that previously favored army guard members over air force members.
Legislation also drafted in committee extends to 15 days per year a time away from work provision for National Guard training and assures reemployment for guard members returning from deployment.
The is a clear message from legislation in our committee and elsewhere in the House that, whatever disagreement may exist over policy matters on the conduct of the war in Iraq, we are all, without reservations, behind our troops.
Back to list of reports Workforce Development/Next Generation This year, the legislature has undertaken the challenge of meeting Vermont's workforce needs, for today and for the future. Employers from every part of the state are voicing frustration that they cannot find enough qualified workers. This not only burdens businesses today, but is the key factor in limiting expansion as opportunities arise and as the market dictates. And what about Vermonters? Hundreds, even thousands of Vermonters all over the state wish they could get into these better paying positions. Employers need good workers -- and Vermonters want these jobs. Yet, too often, the two are not connecting.
It is this disconnect that the Legislature is working hard to get a handle on. Legislation currently under consideration would provide more training for adults to move directly into guaranteed jobs create high school and college internships with Vermont employers. The training will bridge the gap between an individual's education and work experience previously received, and the exact needs of an employer. The student internships will create the pipeline of future workers for Vermont employers. The bill also provides funding for scholarships and loan repayment.
Internships accomplish many goals: (1) students explore careers and build resumees as they make job and future school decisions; (2) students are inspired to pursue further education when it is required for their career plans (3) employers get an early "interview" with a prospective employee; (4) direct relationships are created between employers and schools; and finally; (5) the "Vermont Brain Drain" is reduced, as students develop direct meaningful relationships with future employers. We know that these training programs work, and that they provide an excellent return on the state's investment of dollars.
Back to list of reports |  |  |  |
|
