Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: We're live.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Okay. Welcome back, folks. It's House Corrections and Institutions. It is Wednesday, February 18. It's our 03:00 meeting, and we are working on House Bill five forty nine, which deals with identification cards and driver license and permits for folks who are in our facilities. Do they sentenced or detained? And we have a new draft, 2.1. So welcome, Hillary. Maybe you can explain to us what the draft with all the highlights mean and start walking us through the new changes. Sure.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: For the record, Hillary Chittenden aims for the Office of Legislative Council.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: This is draft 2.1 of a strike all amendment to H five forty nine.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Before you go further, was this sent to both Monique Sullivan at DOC and Nancy Prescott?

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: It was not by me.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Because I know Monique is here on Zoom. And Nancy is unable to be here, but as long as she has the draft, she's gonna be able to break. Thank you, Chittenden.

[Monique Sullivan (Department of Corrections)]: I did get a draft.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: You did? I did. Okay. Great. Thank you.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Perfect. So this version makes five changes that we talked about just yesterday. The first is that just yesterday. As the previous version provided for non driver identification cards, operators licenses, and learners permits for sentenced individuals. But for detained individuals, it only provided that DOC would obtain documentation for non driver identification cards. So this version expands that so that for everything that sentenced folks get the card for, DOC will collect the documents for detained individuals. So it adds collecting documentation for operators licenses or permits for detained individuals. I have a question, I

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: need, before I forget this. So the trigger is for a sentenced person a detainee to access this one of the triggers is they need to have been sentenced or detained for six months. And the question came up yesterday, why six months? And I know we asked this a few weeks few years ago, and I don't remember what the answer is. Do you, by any chance, know at all what that six months is?

[Monique Sullivan (Department of Corrections)]: I'm sorry. I do not. That was in place before I got to this position. I can ask.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I think some of it might have been to make sure the person wasn't cycling through quickly. Right.

[Monique Sullivan (Department of Corrections)]: We do have a number of people who come in and then a week later they're out and then they come back.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Right. And for sentencing, sometimes it's could be a sentence interruption, that type of thing that they're for three months. It it varies all over the place. And I think six months was just something we may have landed on. We felt comfortable.

[Monique Sullivan (Department of Corrections)]: I can look into it, though.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yeah. Is that just to be clear. Sorry, Hillary.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Not a problem. So that's the first set of changes. The second is that after a detained individual is released, they go to DMV with their documents. This adds that they will be able to obtain a non driver ID, operator's license, or learner's permit at no cost. The third change, there was a request for some clue in Title 28 that this existed elsewhere. So if someone is in DOC world in Title 28, they know that this exists. So this adds a clue in Title 28 that we'll cover. Fourth area of changes, made some edits to unclear language to clarify. And the fifth is for effective dates. The DMV request was that for sentenced folks, the 07/01/2026 effective date was doable under their current system. But that for the provisions pertaining to detained individuals, they needed until 01/01/2027 to able to set up their systems. So this bill reflects those different effective dates for the different provisions, which is why it now has six sections plus the seventh section on effective date to provide for the different effective dates for the different groups. So section one, this is what you've seen in the original H549, 23 VSA section 115. It's on page one. The new change in section one is on page two, line 11, or really lines 11 through 14. And this is adding that when the detained person is released, they go to the DMV with their documents. They do not have to pay a fee. A fee of $0 to get the card. That is the only main change to non driver identification cards. That's section one. Any questions there before we move on to the other sections and licenses? Monique. Monique?

[Monique Sullivan (Department of Corrections)]: Hi. Thank you. It says that the person shall be provided with a non driver identification card only if they want one. This sounds like everybody has to get one. But if they don't need one

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So since this is for detained individuals, this means that if the detained individual goes to the DMV after being released and submits the documentation, DMV

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: will give it to

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: them for no fee. But that kind of first language upon proper application and submission, it means the person wants one because they're showing up at DMV with their paperwork and and asking for it.

[Monique Sullivan (Department of Corrections)]: Okay. Thank you. Sorry about that.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: No. Of course. Yes.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Alright. Moving on to section two. This is page three, line five. Section two refers to replacement licenses for sentenced individuals. The new language here, the first change is on page three, lines 18 through 19. This was my concern, the upon release piece. Yeah. So we have one option here, and then there is even another option if this does not meet your concern. So for Subdivision two, the new language would say an individual applying for a replacement operator's license pursuant to this subsection shall be required to provide proof of Vermont residents and the individual's mailing address upon release from the correctional facility. The idea was that an individual applying for a replacement operator's license places us before release, when they're applying. And those are the two kinds of documentation that they need to provide.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So in one, you've got to go to one. That deals with

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: the eligible for replacement. Yeah. So Subdivision 1 essentially says, this exists. If you meet these requirements, you can get a replacement license. It's kind of establishing who can get a license under what circumstances. And here it's which sentence folks can get a license if they satisfy these requirements. Subdivision two is specifying that in contrast to an individual who's not a sentenced individual who is applying at the DMV counter, who is providing evidence of their current residential address, it's specifying that for someone who is sentenced and applying through this subsection through the DMV DOC collaboration, they're not providing proof of their current address. They're providing what their address will be when they are released from the facility.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: It's still to me, they can apply for the replacement license while they're incarcerated.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Correct. Correct. But when they're doing that, they are stating what their mailing address will be upon release. I

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: still think that this is interpreted differently. I may be off I may be off base, but the process while they're incarcerated is they are going to apply and submit documentation in advance of their release from a correctional facility and be provided a replacement operator's license. So they're physically gonna get that license while they're incarcerated. This is for sentence folks. That's in B. And then in two,

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: an individual applying for a replacement operator's license pursuant to this subsection, which we've already taken care of that in B, they've already applied for, while they're incarcerated, shall be required to provide proof of residency in the individual's mailing list upon release from national facility. Subdivision two isn't chronological or sequential to what is happening in 1B. 1B is saying that if you meet these requirements, you can get the license. And it doesn't refer to, it just says submission of documentation required. Subdivision two is essentially specifying what some of that documentation means. Because for people applying under this subsection, some of that documentation is different because it is not their current residential address. It's their mailing address when they are released from the facility.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Still looks to me that they have to provide the same thing that they provided in 1B upon their release, both of their residence and the individual's mailing address. DOC would submit while they're incarcerated their residency and their social security number. They would not submit their mailing address per se. So the goal is when the person is released from the facility, they need to go to DMV to provide the current mailing address. They already have the driver's license. They're not applying for a replacement they've already received while they're incarcerated, right?

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Am I overthinking this? No, understand your concern. I also understand that, but can we say following release from the correctional facility, or can we say mailing address that the individual will use after release? Individual's mailing address. My two best. Individual. What if we Following release?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Well, an individual shall be required to provide proof.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: For use upon release from the correctional facility. Mailing address for use upon release.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: The DMV. Post release. Post release or something. It just looks, they've already applied for the license and they have already received it. What we're trying to get at is they're incarcerated, they qualify for replacement license. They apply for that. DOC submits the documentation.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: My understanding is that subdivision two comes in there, that the documentation that DOC is submitting includes the proof of residence and the mailing address upon release. That's why I understand subdivision to be getting at. It's not something they do upon release. It is specifying that when DOC sends that documentation, they're sending those two things. Right. So if that's right. Well, is. They submit that to DMV.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: DMV takes that documentation and certifies that the person is who it is, well, that's already been certified per se. And then they issue the driver's license to the person who's incarcerated. This is for So some other when that person is released, they already have that driver's license. Yes. They need to go down to DMV to verify their mailing address?

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: No. My understanding is no.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: I don't think that either.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: If that's incorrect, Nancy would probably be the first person.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: She'd be the first person.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Knowing that the committee is short on time, I think I appreciate the concern and that this proposed language doesn't clarify it as much as would be useful. So with the committee's permission, when Nancy reviews this, I can check with her. And we will bring back another version of

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I mean, I'm sorry about this. But when I read it, it's like, wait a minute.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: We aim for clarity. We can get there.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: And that's the thing. I I don't read it that way, and other people don't.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: But the fact that it's not equal to multiple readings means there's space for me to do an even better job.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: But the process for them to already get that license, they have to have already submitted their residency and their social security, or they don't get it. The key is the mailing address may be different once they're released, but their driver's license is valid, they already have it.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Yeah. So I think the idea that they have to go and update a mailing address later if it changes, I think that's covered generally by other parts of the statute. And that's not what this is getting at. But I fully appreciate that there has to be a clearer way to capture that here. So we will work on that.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Can I which ones? Getting a dead horse, but this post release mailing address, so it it was just a sentence diagramming issue? Post release mailing address. Right? Yeah.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: I think it's not just a sentence diagramming issue, but I will keep that in mind as we move forward. I think if the concern is that you want to make clear that subdivision two does not happen after release and instead is describing the documents that DOC has to give DMV to get the card, that it be a subsection C or otherwise be closer to the part of this provision talking about DOC submitting the documentation. Basically making clear, like when we say documentation in subdivision B, what we mean is proof of residence and the mailing address when released or the post release mailing address.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: On that, they need their Social Security Network. Right. They need proof of residency and Social Security number. That's the two things that they need. So For Vermont residency, they can't do it for out of state, but for the Vermont residents and their Social Security number, that's that's the documentation that DMV needs for the verification of the conventions to get a license. Once that's submitted, then DMV does processing and issues the license for the permit.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Yeah. My understanding is that DOC also needs or sorry, DMV also needs the mailing address after release at that point because they're putting it on the card. Right? And that's what this is getting at, but I appreciate. So I think we have a common understanding now, hopefully, among us of what Subdivision 2 is trying to do. And I will come back with another option. What we had talked about or one of the things I had talked about was the application shall include proof of Vermont residents and the individual's post release mailing address. That way, you're clearly talking about the application when you're applying. So that is one option.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I'm going to ask Monique. When DOC is submitting that for a person's incentives as part of their reentry planning, would you have their mailing address that you could also submit to DMV? You're muted.

[Monique Sullivan (Department of Corrections)]: Sorry. Most of the time, yes. If a person the only time that we wouldn't is when a person maxes out and they're not going to be under the supervision of the DOC, they're not required to tell us their address. Sometimes they won't. But for the most part, people who release are releasing to some kind of other supervision in the community and are required to provide the address.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So if a person is maxing out, they will have been in there quite a long time.

[Monique Sullivan (Department of Corrections)]: Sometimes.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And their license may have been expired and not renewed for nine years, Which then means they have to go through a test and the whole nine yards. They wouldn't be able to avail themselves of this opportunity while they're in pressuring. Correct.

[Monique Sullivan (Department of Corrections)]: Sometimes a max out is a year.

[Unidentified committee member]: Yeah, sometimes max outs are short, if you still don't have to go through probation, you might take three weeks over three years of formation. Just do your three weeks and max out on your sons. Yeah.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Then you're in the community. You go in for a

[Unidentified committee member]: period of weeks or a year, whatever it is. Yeah. You're you're just you're just done with the OC.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So I have to be so complicated. We'll deal with the next out folks next year.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: So with a pin in that, moving forward to page four, the last changes from the previous version in section two are technical ones or grammatical ones. On line 12, this was a representative Gregoire catch that the language should be released from the correctional facility, not custody of the commissioner of corrections. And because we now, this version has two subsections that both use the word correctional facility, we don't need to say it in both places. So you'll see in the next section that there's just one time in section six thirteen where we say, when we talk about correctional facility, we mean the definition in 28 BSA section three. That's So the only reason it's removed here is because it's now included in the new section three. Section three is adding essentially after the subsection that is added in section two. A subsection talking about replacement licenses for detained individuals. And the reason that these are in two different sections is because they have different effective dates. So the statute will read if you ignore lines 15 through 17 on page four, the statute will read right through as drafted. But we put them in two different sections so that different effective dates. So section three, replacement licenses for detained individuals. Subdivisions one and two, these are the same eligibility requirements as apply for sentenced individuals to obtain a replacement operator's license. The one modification in light of the circumstances of detained folks who are getting their documentation and then released at some undetermined time later. This just specifies this is on line 20 on page four, running onto the next page. At the time the individual submits an application to obtain a replacement license pursuant to this subsection, they must hold an unexpired license or a Vermont operator's license that expired not more than three years prior. This is because if someone has an unexpired license or a less than three years expired license after they've been detained for six months when DOC goes to get the documents, if enough time passes, you could have a license that has expired more than three years prior when the person actually goes into DMV with their documents to get the card. And under that circumstance, DMV won't be able to give them the replacement license because the former one had expired for too long. So that's just why this specifies that at the time that the individual goes into DMV to submit the application, that's when they have to have an unexpired license or a license that expired not more than three years previously. So where are

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: you again?

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: This is on page four, line 20. And then running onto page five, line one. But that's just why this is structured a little bit differently. It's the same eligibility requirement as for sentence folks, but for a sentence individual, they're getting the card when DOC gets the documents, right? DOC is getting the documents. DOC and DMV work to get the card. Card comes back. It's kind of one point in time for purposes of when the previous thing has expired. But for detained folks, could be a gap between when DOC goes and gets the documents and the person actually goes in to get the card. And this just clarifies that the license has to meet the expiration requirements when they actually go to DMV to get the card.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I want some clarity here from Monique. A detained person for the non driver ID, the way that we did it was DOC would submit would would not submit the documents to DMV. They would gather the resident's social security and keep that information with the belongings of the person while they're incarcerated. Then when they were detained, when they were released, they would receive that information and then they could bring that down to the DMV office to get a non driver ID. Correct. So that would be the same process for a detained person with a replacement license, if they qualified for it while they were detained, you would gather their residence and social security information and hold it for them until they were released. Correct. And then they would go down to the DMV office with that, and then their license could be reissued if it was in that time frame

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: of the three years.

[Monique Sullivan (Department of Corrections)]: Correct.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So what this says,

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: so just to clarify, one and two are the same eligibility requirements. Subdivisions three, four, and five on page five are the same procedure as for non driver identification for detained folks. So it's the same. If you look at Subdivision 3, that's DOC gets the documents. Subdivision four, individual after being released goes to DMV, can get the license for a fee of $0. And then subdivision five on line 20 on page five is that DOC and DMV shall coordinate about that documentation. So you still have to meet the eligibility requirements for having an unexpired license or expired within the last five years. That's the same as for sentenced folks because that's DMV's ability to replace a license. But then the procedure for all of the kinds of credential for detained folks is the same. DOC collects the documents. The person can then take them after release to DMV and get the replacement for a $0 fee. And DOC and DMV will coordinate about that procedure. With an eye on time, I just want to make sure we touch on the other key new pieces. So in section four, section four covers learners permits for sentenced individuals. The only new changes in section four are the appropriate language for in a correctional facility instead of committed to the custody of the commissioner of corrections. And on page seven, lines four through eight, our pinned language that we're going to clarify. Section five, this is the bottom of page seven on line 21. Section five covers learners permits for detained individuals. And so turning to page eight, on line three and line 12, these subdivisions explain that the requirements for DMV to issue the learner's permit, that someone has an unexpired permit or it's been expired not more than two years prior. That's true for sentenced folks. That's true for folks out in the community. And that is also true for detained folks. And then subdivisions three, four, and five, which are page eight, line 15, running onto page nine, line eight. It's the same procedure as for detained individuals for all the credentials. So just like for non driver identification cards, just like for operator's licenses, for detained folks, DOC gets the documents. The person can then, upon release, take them to the DMV, get the replacement learner's permit for a $0 fee. And DOC and DMV will coordinate regarding that process. Happy to answer questions, but I just want to cover the rest before

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: This is fun. So we really have to read the language. So I'm going to really encourage folks overnight to read this language and understand it. We've gone through it too quick because of the time constraints, but it's really important for people to read this. I have a small particular question.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: So on Where'd I go? I ran away. On line five of six, it's a section and it's crossed out 34. Is that supposed to say four? Or is it really supposed to be 34? And on the back page, says section seven. Is that supposed to say seven or is 47 correct? And there's a reason for The

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: sections have been renamed. I know it's much like section seven. Right, know. It's the same thing. The line has gone through two, four.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Sorry, so page six, line five. Should be sections.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Yeah,

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: unfortunately, the way a four is structured, you can't see the strike through. That's stricken. So that says section three.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Just that.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: It's just section four.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Sorry. Section three

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: is on

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: page four. Section four is on page six. So what it looks like, you're crossing out three, but it looks like it's lining up with four.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: I get it. I get it.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Tate also has a clean version. I

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: was like, is there some weird thing going on that? That

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: would be an important thing to catch if we had section 34 in

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: the middle. Since you're doing that, page three, ten, line eight, is that C? Is that C there in front of the one? Yes. Yes. Okay.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: It's another part. If you go up there, there's three dots above that, which means there's an A and a B. We're just not seeing it.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Yep. The current section six thirteen has an A and B, and this is saying we're going to add a subsection C underneath it. But because we're not changing subsection A or subsection B, they aren't copied here. The three asterisks are a whole thing. That

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: means that there's previous sections.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Which is why I asked my silly question because I'm like, that's a weird way to have done it. But like by the fourseven and I was like, doesn't seem right, but wouldn't be the first time I was wrong in my life. Thank you for clarifying.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: Won't be the first time I am wrong either. So always happy to have.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: You guys heard that.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: On the record and everything. On page nine, this is line 11. This is a new section six. So this is the clue in title 28 that this exists. So if someone is reading about the world of DOC in title 28, they will be able to see that there is something motor vehicle related. This is this is 28 BSA section 102. And this provides a list of powers of the Commissioner of Corrections and of DOC. And it also has a very long list of responsibilities. One of four. There we are. So the three asterisks are a placeholder for the 24 other responsibilities that we are not changing. But this would add, as subdivision 25 that the commissioner has the responsibility to coordinate with the Department of Motor Vehicles to provide eligible individuals with non driver identification cards and documentation pursuant to 23 BSA section one fifteen m and n. So that's what's happening in section one of our bill. Replacement operators licenses and documentation pursuant to 23 VSA section six thirteen c and d. That's what's being added in sections two and three of the bill. And replacement learner's permits and documentation pursuant to 23 BSA section six seventeen and H. And that's what's happening in section four and five of this bill. So this is essentially a placeholder or clue in section 28 that points someone to where they can find all of the information in Title 23 relevant for sentenced folks and detained folks.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: That's gonna be very helpful.

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: The final thing before you go to the House floor. On page 10, section seven, not four, formerly section four, now section seven, are the effective dates. And as I mentioned, the sections that cover sentenced individuals have an effective date of 07/01/2026. So that's section two for sentenced individuals' operators' licenses. The new section four for sentenced individuals' learners permits, and section six, the DOC commissioner responsibilities, that placeholder entitled '28. Those all have an effective date of 07/01/2026. And then the sections of the bill that pertain to detained individuals have an effective date of 01/01/2027. So that's section one for non driver identification cards, section three for detained individuals' operators licenses, and section five for detained individuals' learners' permits. Speed run through. My action item, and happy to answer questions or come back and answer questions. My action item will be finding language that is even clearer and we like even better about when and how and for what purpose someone is providing their proof of residence and their address, their post release mailing address.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So we need to schedule you again, Troy, because this language needs to be submitted to Senate Transportation. And I have a this week, it has to be done. So are you available at all gonna be done? Are you available at all tomorrow at around 02:30?

[Hillary Chittenden (Office of Legislative Counsel)]: I could do 02:30 to three and have that blended supervised language ready for you.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So that means everyone read it tonight. You gotta read it tonight, but we also have to do it line by line before we vote it out. I'm not doing voting this out. We're gonna line by line.

[Monique Sullivan (Department of Corrections)]: Hi, one more thing. The question about the six months. I asked the person who was here before me, and he said I think it was the legislative mandate.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Oh, it was. Just trying to figure out why we did six months. I think it may have been just to make sure that the person in the Senate had been there for a while and was there for a couple of months. We figured half a year would be substantial enough. It was a legislative mandate. We just tried to figure out why did we do it. So please, committee, read the language. It's really hard to go through it quickly like we did, and read it and process it through. So please do some homework

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: to follow

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: us, please.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Taking it home.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Anything else before we go on the floor, which we're running late? Thank you, Hillary. Thank you, Monique.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Thank you.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And we're gonna be back here on this around 02:30 tomorrow afternoon. Okay.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Do you

[Monique Sullivan (Department of Corrections)]: need me back here as well?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I would appreciate it. And we'll let Nancy know as well.

[Monique Sullivan (Department of Corrections)]: Okay.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Again, Tate Tate will let Nancy know because it's so good.

[Monique Sullivan (Department of Corrections)]: Okay. Thank you.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Thank you. So we're off of YouTube. I think we're done for the day because I think it might be a long floor maybe for a little bit.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: It'll look great.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Tomorrow is Thursday, and we're back on the floor all morning tomorrow. We're on the floor at 09:00.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Right. I know. Oh, could you show up? She was awesome.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And we've got so much stuff We still need to read our recommendations to appropriations. And the piece that's really hanging out there is the 200,000 for the PNP folks, pretrial submissions.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Are you still alive?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yes, we are. So we got there's a lot of work ahead of us. So we'll see you tomorrow

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: morning.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: We're

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: off