Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Welcome folks, this is Health Corrections and Institutions Committee. It's Thursday, February 26. And we have before us H. Five fifty nine, and we have a new draft, 3.1. It deals with our work on the parole board. And we have some new language, and it's been highlighted in yellow. And I would recommend, Hillary, that after you introduce yourself,

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: we go right to where the new language is. Perfect. For the record, Hillary Chittenden aims for the Office of Legislative Council. I'll go ahead and share my screen. All right, so we have draft 3.1. First changes are on page four. The changes on page four are the ones that we talked about yesterday, two days ago, Tuesday. Two ago. That this is page four, lines nine through 10, that the external legal support will provide annual training to the board, including on topics related to due process and parole violations. So it can include topics other than that. On page four, line 13, Agency of Human Services clarified that the coordination between the Attorney General's office and the board regarding the contract will be with the Agency of Human Services as the contract holder and not the Department of Corrections. So that replacement is made on line 13. And the last change that we had talked about on Tuesday is on line 19, that the report back date about the operation of the external legal counsel pilot project will be on 11/15/2026, not November 1.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yes. So what I'd like the committee to do is read section four line by line. Read the language. Understand what it says. Now's the time to ask questions about it. We're setting up a pilot project that right now is 25,000 that we've allocated to it. Committee has discussed adding another 50,000 that we would find for 75,000. It's a pilot project to go out for an RFP to see about legal advice general to the parole board. So please read the language. Now is the time to ask questions. If you don't understand the language, now is the time to ask. People clear with the language.

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: Questions.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So it's the AG that will go out with the RFP. It's my understanding. But we coordinate with the parole board and agency of human services. It doesn't say who within the agency of services. We're interpreting that it will be from the secretary's office when we say agency of human services.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Instead of saying secretary designee, is that the implied question?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I'm kind of wondering. I mean, DOC is the Agency of Human Services sitting there. So

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: that's but I

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: just put that on the table for folks to think about. As our discussion was that it should be IRF within the agency than DOC. That our discussion.

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: I mean, it wouldn't hurt to clarify Secretary's office there.

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: As a preview, the new language that talks about proposed budget submission does use secretary of the Agency of Human Services. So easy enough to do that in both places, if that's the committees. I'm going

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: to reach out to Mary Jane. I hate to put you on the spot, but could you just identify yourself? Does it really matter?

[Mary Jane Ainsworth, Director, Vermont Parole Board]: Good morning. Mary Jane Eamesworth, the Director of the Co Board. We fall in the organizational structure in the agency's org chart under the agency of human services central office. So we fall down the line in the central office. And last time we went out to bid, it went out of the central office contract office. Don't believe and I would look at Ted as well. I don't think we need to specify that specific. I think agency of human services would be sufficient as the agencies holding the contract out of their contracting office. I believe that would be sufficient.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Do you want to weigh in? For

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: the record, Ted Fisher and Vermont Agency of Human Services, I'm the principal assistant communications director. I'm tending to be Brendan. I just want make sure I understand the question correctly. The question is whether central office should be specified. I would say that the answer to that is no. Central office is just a term. It may be illegal. I'm not 100% sure if it's defined in statute, but it's really just a term of art. We are the agency. DOC is the agency, but it's constituted separately in statute. So if you say AHS, or the agency of Human Services, we will make sure it goes where it needs to go, and it would be done at the central office level. That's just a somewhat nebulously defined term for our internal purposes, but for the committee's purposes, agency and community services is fine. Really the aside from a couple, just for the committee's reference and background aside from a couple of special units like the healthcare reform office, and it's really just our secretary's office and our finance office that are in central office, but we're just organized under that terminology because we are, as the committee knows well, a very, very large agency and state government with mostly staff organized interdepartments. Appreciate your time. Brian?

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: I mean, lines thirteen and fourteen, there are kind of two tasks, right, to identifying the contract. And it seems like the identifying is going to go to the AG and the board, And then the contracting goes to AHS. We don't need to specify,

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: do we, about how they

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Well, the AG is the one that's going to be putting out the RFP.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: But in terms of identifying legal expertise, none of that's going to rest with AHS, right?

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: Again, to a vision for the record, to wrap Minier's point, and I am not the attorney general's office, but I do remember that counsel or AAG Delos mentioned this yesterday. As the AAG is, so is the agency. We are governed by contracting procedures outlined in bulletins. My concern is that if you specify a procedure in statute that's more specific, then it may or may not make We know how to do the I guess, to put it more plainly, we know how to do the contract. If you just reference that the contract needs to happen, we can take it from there, working with the AEG's office. If you put more specific things in there, I'm not an expert, but it'd be worth making sure that it doesn't potentially bind our hands. I know the committee had some concerns the other day about making sure that this was as available as possible and as likely to be filled as possible. We do a lot of contracting. We don't necessarily need specific statutory or session law references in order to do so. So if you just reference that it shall happen, it can happen.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: I think that's the argument for going abroad. We don't need the secretary's opinion on something.

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: And this is pretty standard for shall coordinate language. If you say several entities shall coordinate, you don't specify precisely which aspect of the coordination each entity is doing. It's identifying that among the entities who are coordinating, these are the things that need to happen.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Are folks comfortable with the way the languages would be?

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: I am.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Are you comfortable, Mary Jane? And Ted, you're comfortable?

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: This is section two. B.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: 12 Yes. Through So for section four itself, committee is okay? Mary Jane, are you all right?

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Yeah, think just one question, this would pertain to section five as well. You you're seeing a lot of legislative We're

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: not there yet.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: I know, but it encompasses both, I think, with the report coming back. I'm wondering if we want to express both in this case and in Section five more clarity about what the committee is deciding when they get these reports back. For instance, does it make more sense to have an house counsel in this case? Does it make sense to have a separate line item in the other case for Section five? Because we're just going to report back and that's great. But if there's different people in this seat, what are they considering?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Well, on D, up there, the report in November of that RFP going out, it's a written report detailing the operation of the pilot project.

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: You could add something like the report shall also include a recommendation about legal support for going forward.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Yeah, I think something like that, right? Yeah.

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: I've seen that in other report backs on pilot projects. So that's certainly something you

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: can think.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: And, yeah, I'm skipping ahead, but I'm thinking the same thing for the next section there. I guess that'd be section six.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Because it is a pilot project, and it wouldn't be ongoing money. So they do need to make the recommendation. It, I mean, part of it does ask and see that the agency of human services and DOC would coordinate with the board to evaluate the project and determine resources needed to continue the legal support for FY '28.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: You're So I think that's bit different.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yeah. Your report would clarify that you need to recommend how to move forward with it.

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Great. So something like the report shall include a recommendation regarding legal support for the board going forward

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Uh-huh.

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: That works for the committee?

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Yes.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Good catch.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And the resources needed?

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Sure.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I have another draft. With that, are folks comfortable? Section four, Ted?

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: For the record, Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services. Some concern with subsection C. May the new language around budget development, and I'm not an expert in this, but there's a very defined budget process as the committee knows well between the administration and the governor's recommended and the appropriations committees in the legislature more generally. So I'm not sure that this will be a problem, but I just want to flag that if it raises any concerns on our side, it might be something that is

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: not

[Unidentified Committee Member]: just doing

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: this House appropriations. I checked with my finance team and they said that generally speaking, there tends to be some concern both on the appropriation side and on the agency administration side around just kind of putting things into law, really, with how the budget development process goes. Seems like This not in statute. Fair enough. I understand that. I apologize if I misspoke. I think that what I'll just say is we're in a pretty tough budget environment at this point. So I know that the governor's office thinks very, very carefully about how resourcing the state government happens. I just wanted to flag that. I don't think we have any specific concerns about this, but we are still working on some of the financial pieces related to this.

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

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: Yeah, I mean, it really just boils down to a requirement that there's some coordination to determine resources needed. It doesn't say anything about appropriating for those resources. Just an identifier. It says these are the resources that the Pro Board would need. This does not feel like an overreach in any way. I think that's just good budgeting direction that these are the folks who need to be at the table when this particular topic is being discussed. And that it came out of out of testimony here that the parole board has been absent from that table. And and this this corrects that absence.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: As does section six.

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: I absolutely hear you, Representative. I absolutely understand. From an operations perspective, there may be more the agency can do to make sure that we are supporting both the parole board and DOC in working on this budget development. And again, I'm not an expert here, I'm feeling in this week. So I apologize for being poor replacement for my colleague. But I know that there are, as a matter of course, budget processes happen and the work happens. It's not something that necessarily needs to be defined. And again, I don't have an answer yet, so I apologize. But I did just want to flag for the committee in case we do have concerns down the line. I don't want folks to feel surprised or like we've changed our approach just to the point of the chair asking if we had any concerns. I'm not 100% sure that we do yet, and maybe that we don't. If it's something that we think is going to be impactful on operations or something that's going to be we're very careful about this because we recognize that you, as a collective body, pay our salaries, resource us, so we want to make sure that we're doing the process right.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So the language is pretty it's prescriptive, but it isn't. It's as part of the FY twenty eight budget development process. So that's the process that occurs in the fall, in the 5th Floor, in the respective agencies and departments to go out. And so you've got to live within this 2% increase. How are you going to do it? Okay? That's that budgeting process. And during that, the agency of human services will submit based on requirements of different departments in their agency what they're proposing for their FY twenty eight operating budgets. And the language is just saying that the agency of human services and DOC would coordinate with the parole board. The parole board is there. As an entity that determines whether folks are released from a correctional facility or not. And that's pretty high level of decision making that needs support. And we want to make sure the board has appropriate support in doing their due diligence, and that would include legal support for them. So, by setting up that pilot project would help determine what legal training the board needs to receive and any other legal advice that the board may need during board hearings. To give us a base of do we provide resources for the board for more legal support going beyond the pilot. That's what that paragraph is saying. The pilot project is successful and brings forward, yes, the board does need legal advice and let's include some resources in that. When we submit, the agency submits the FY twenty eight budget request to the 5th Floor. Doesn't tie the 5th Floor in putting it in. Doesn't even tie the agency in putting it in. It's just saying the agency of human services and DOC were coordinate with a PERL board. And all three would evaluate that pilot project and determine the resources that would be needed. That's what it says. It's not tying anybody's hands.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: That's how I read it.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So we're submitting on c. Okay with the language or not? Folks?

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Yeah. I'm on Google.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I see a thumbs up. See.

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: See a guy staring at the screen.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Oh, I'm sorry, Shawn. I forgot.

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: No. Shawn.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: So I'm thinking back to last year with H219 with Kids Apart and I remember really clearly that this is where we got in trouble and it came back to bite us or am I wrong Alice? Because remember it was a funding thing and it wasn't clear and then it got vetoed by the governor. So I'm kind of, I don't know, is that Ted over there?

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: It is. But

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yeah, but it'll But do

[Unidentified Committee Member]: I think Ted's bringing up a valid point that I don't want to disregard because I feel like this could be the same thing, but maybe I'm wrong.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: The concern I think with the kids apart was we were locking in future legislators to fund it. That's not what we're saying here. Okay. That's not what we're saying here. What we're saying is during the development, when the administration develops their budgeting, The fifth floor reaches out to the agencies and departments for their requests. And what we're saying here is that the Agency of Human Services and DOC needs to coordinate with the board to look at this pilot project for legal services and see if they want to include that in their budget requests. So it's not locking anything in. I don't believe. Troy?

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: And I will just punctuate that this is in here based on testimony that was broadly acknowledged as accurate from the agency, from the department and from the parole board that we have not done a good job at having the parole board in the room as these conversations are happening. That was acknowledged by the agency. And I can understand that they don't want to be told what to do. Nonetheless, we're here because there is a problem. A very, very easy, benign solution to that problem is having the parole board at the table when these conversations are happening. That's all this does.

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: One option the committee could consider to further clarify that the intent of this section is to coordinate as part of the process. The verb determine, you could replace that with consider as a way to clarify that. You don't have to adopt any particular resources needed, but you have to coordinate and consider what is needed when you are engaging in the budget development process. Just an option for the committee to consider. I don't think there is necessarily a problem with the word determine, but that could be an option.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: I'm good at this.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Good at the determine. I think it's Yeah. We're okay the way c is written Yep. By the committee? Let's go to five. This is where well, section five goes from the other draft. This is the 25,000 that is in the current f y twenty six budget. In the governor's proposed f y twenty seven budget, that 25,000 was zeroed out. So what this language is saying is that we're gonna use that 25,000 for the legal services. Now I know the committee wants to find an additional 50,000. We were at 75,000. We didn't make it up to 100,000. There are places that we could look. Because I don't wanna go in with this bill and then appropriation to approach without saying where where they could look for the money.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Because I think if we leave it as is, it's not gonna work. Right?

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: Like

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: No. Not gonna Yeah. So we're gonna have to spend some time today, tomorrow, finding that 50,000. K?

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Let's go to section six. And just one note about if the bill is going to appropriate 50,000, we need to add appropriation language, and I would just need to know where the money is coming from and where it's going. And

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I gave the heads up to the chair of Appropes that this bill's coming to us. And I did say there'll be money attached to it, but we'll find the money for it or make a recommendation.

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: All right. Section six is new. It's about parole board budget submission in fiscal year twenty twenty eight and fiscal year twenty twenty nine. So as part of the fiscal year twenty twenty eight and fiscal year twenty twenty nine budget development processes, the parole board director shall submit a proposed budget to the commissioner of the Department of Corrections and Secretary of the Agency of Human Services. There was some discussion yesterday about whether that should be to one or other of the entities. Witnesses here today can weigh in. For subsection B, this also includes a report back. So on or before 12/15/2027, the parole board director shall submit a written report to the House Committee on Corrections and Institutions detailing the budget development process. December 15 is another default. That is something the committee could change. And it sounds like there's interest in adding at the end of subsection b a line like the report shall include a recommendation regarding the parole board submitting a budget line item in future years or going forward. Certainly something we can add. Questions?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So right now, this is testimony we received from Brenda that they are kind of working this system out right now. And we just wanted to emulate this over the next couple of years. It's in session law. It's not in stone through statute. It's in session law to indicate what we want them to do for the next fiscal year cycle. So FY '28 should beginning next, they will begin this fall. For FY '28. And then for FY '27, process will begin in the 2027. So it gives them two fiscal years to kind of work out the kinks. And then report back to us so that we can decide what is that final budget process going to look like. It could look very, very different than what we're thinking. So that's the intent of this language. Questions from the committee? Mary Jane, does this seem to work in your world?

[Mary Jane Ainsworth, Director, Vermont Parole Board]: This person, my role is in fact we have instituted a process in the quarterly budget meetings with the DOC accounting office, where our budget sits, AHS central office staff is going to be present at those budget meetings. So I just wanted to give everyone an update of what is already I had started the budget meetings. AHS is gonna be at the table as well. So we're already starting the process for these budget meetings. So we can look at our current spending and our forward in our needs.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Ted, do you want to weigh in?

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: Ted Fisher from the Agency of Human Services. I appreciate the committee may not like this answer. And again, it is tentative because I am a replacement. I'm sorry I have to keep saying that. Sub A is unnecessary. Do budget development. It's great to hear that we're making some process improvement from M and A on this, and our commitment is to making sure that we are supporting the Parole Board. But this happens in some fashion every year because we fund the Parole Board every year. So I don't think The language seems benign, but I don't know at this moment whether or not it will trip up along the way. So I just wanted to get on record saying that if we decide to come to your colleagues and another committee with concerns or changes, I don't want the committee to be blindsided by that. It doesn't seem, it reflects our current process at a high level and our process for every one of the boards and commissions we submit. So I think sub A is unnecessary, sub A is a reporting requirement. I'm not sure to what extent we, and I'll leave it to our finance folks and operations folks to decide whether we would want to build a budget development process that's radically different from other boards and committees we support. I absolutely understand if the committee feels, given the testimony they've heard, that they want to keep it in. I'll just make a more general comment, Madam Chair, if I may. The agency, to your point a moment ago, we strongly support the Earl Board and absolutely recognize the important role they play. We acknowledge that there's more that maybe needs to be done to support them at the agency level. It is very important that they are independent of DOC. And I recognize that we are all one big team at AHS, including the Department of Corrections. That may seem slightly academic in this context, but we may have more to do at the central office level to make sure they're supported. That's an operational problem that we need to solve working with M. J. And her colleagues and her members rather than a legislative problem. So we are committed to doing that work. We're already making steps in that process. I have any concerns based on my scope of knowledge with this language, but I don't want the committee to feel blindsided if down the road we do have concerns as this moves through the process. Of course, we'll do our best to make sure you're in the loop before agreeing to other committees, but I did just want to get on record flag today. It's

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: like if the process you're trying, you've alluded to is sort of in the works and working towards that.

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: I'm happy to speak a little bit about the budget development process at the agency and also some changes we've made recently. I understand this committee has heard about the Department of Corrections' budget, but maybe not received a presentation about the agency's budget as a whole, which some of your colleagues, for example, on House Human Services have received this year. We have made some pretty significant changes to that process over the last two years and we're quite proud of the work that we've done there. I'm happy to speak a little bit about it. I'm an imperfect spokesperson from that, but if you're interested, I'm happy to speak.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: A testimony we received is that this has come to the attention that the parole board has not when been at the DOC submits their proposed budget to the Secretary of the Agency of Human Services. And when that came to their attention, based on the conversations we've been having in this committee, they decided to really look at the process. And this language is to emulate the current process they're trying to look at. And it was just testified that right now, there's also some quarterly budget meetings that are happening that would incorporate this type of process. So if this is currently happening, the language tracks what's currently happening.

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: Else and suspenders.

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: Yeah.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: The other alternative that we have looked at is to totally separate the parole board completely from DOC and have its own function, its own line item in the budget and not go through DOC. Which then if they did if the parole board had their own line item in the big bill and not part of the DOC budget, They would have to go through the same process that DOC goes through to submit their budget to the Secretary of the Agency of Human Services.

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: It would be a bigger cost.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And it would be a bigger cost because they'd have to have administrative support. They'd have to have fee for space. They may have to hire more folks. So right now, their budget's about 600,000. It would increase. So we're trying to keep the cost in line. But also give them a voice because right now they don't have a voice in terms of what their budget is. That's just determined by DOC without conversations with a parole board. That's the testimony we've received. Correct, folks?

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Yes.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So we're trying to find a middle ground here and not do a single line item, but try to really make sure that role board has can submit what their real needs are in the budget process. Doesn't lock the agency in. It allows the parole board to be at the table. So where's the committee on this language?

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Okay.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Prepared. You may go to the Senate. Anything else? So with there'll be some changes in this. There'll be changes in section four to be very clear what the report would say coming back. And then you were gonna change this one a little bit as well or not?

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Yes. So I can pull that up for the committee now just so you can see. All right. So this will be a new draft 4.1. It's not letting me highlight it, but anyway, draft 4.1. In section four, adding to the report back provision in subsection D, that the report shall include a recommendation regarding legal support for the board going forward and the resources needed. And then in section six, adding to the report back provision that the report shall include a recommendation regarding the Toro board submitting a budget line item going forward. So that language can be tweaked, but those were the two changes that we had discussed. And then a draft 4.1 would also include if there are going to be further funds appropriated, we would add a section for appropriating those funds. And this is not set in stone. Committee was

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: just thinking about that wording. Would include recommendation regarding the board submitting.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Does it need to be a separate

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: line item or something? There's something there that I don't let me see. Submit the board. Out and process, the director would submit a proposed budget to DOC. Okay. And then the report would include recommendations regarding budget line item going forward. Would it be better to say regarding the Pro Board submitting a budget line item going forward to the Department of Corrections budget?

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: It's already clunky and I can't

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: I can't is really clunky.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Know it's clear.

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: But I can't come up with anything.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: This is not submitting a budget line item going forward. It's not a separate. It would be a line item. It would be recommending their budget as part of the Department of Corrections budget.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: If you want to get more recommend regarding the parole board being removed from title 28 and submitted as a separate line item?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: That's a big one.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: A bigger go home, you know?

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: That's what works for that.

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Other language in a Senate bill on the parole board that was considering language to capture submitting a separate line item was the parole board shall be responsible for submission of an annual budget to the governor.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: An annual budget to the commissioner of DFC.

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: So the report shall include a recommendation regarding the parole board submitting an annual budget to the commissioner

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: of of the Department of Corrections. I think that works a

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: little bit less clunky at least.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Submitting in Yeah. Should it be Anne in April? Nice. Feels better.

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: It sounds better.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yeah. It just feels So, what's the committee feeling on the bill? And Mary Jane, whole bill is feeling good. We don't have the AG's office in here, but we do. And Ted, you've expressed your concerns on these two sections. Is there anything else in the bill that the administration agency of human services sees?

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: For the record, Ted Fisher. I've been seeing still a $25,000 carry forward. The committee made reference to other numbers on Tuesday. Is that still being muted?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: We are Right now, there's 25,000 carryforward that's in the FY '26 budget that we're saying would be used for the legal services. That gets zeroed out in the DOC budget. So the committee is gonna spend some time finding 50,000 to add to the 25. So there's 75,000 total to go out for the pilot project. And that is what we'll recommend to the appropriations committee. I

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: absolutely understand and respect Megan and appreciate it. The Agency of Human Services cut, I believe the summary is accurate, roughly $9,000,000 from our budget last year due to some serious issues with the fiscal forecasts we're looking at. Those are extremely difficult decisions to make, so I recognize the committee is concerned about this number being zeroed out in our current budget. What I'll say is we take this work very seriously, but we have a large book of hard decisions to make on this work. So if the community is able to find them elsewhere, I absolutely respect that. Are confident having spoken to A. A. G. Delos after the fact and recognize there were some questions about the analysis that he provided to the committee, we are confident that $75,000 is not going to be needed for this work. And also, we are in a very difficult budget environment right now. So that number is a concern to us.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I'll just let generally.

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: If he's able to find money for it.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Right. Well, let me put on the table, there's one program that there's $2,100,000 for that program right now. And we don't know if the program's going to go forward. Totally. We'll need some money from the 2.1 for sure. But we're not sure we're gonna need the full 2.1. Okay. There's also some budgeting for some employees where the positions are vacant that will stay vacant. And that came in at 250,000 total between salary and bennies. So I think we could find 70 50,000 somewhere.

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: Can I can I ask a clarifying question? Are you saying finding 50,000 within DOC's budget?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Within some appropriations that are being requested.

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: And again, I'm not a finance expert, and certainly for example, we budget for vacancy savings. So what I'm hearing from my team is that those monies are spoken for, even if there are overruns, And again, I apologize for the lack of technical expertise in this area, but we are in a very difficult environment. So what I'm being told is we don't have additional resources within DOC's budget or the names AHS's budget to devote to this work. Even in cases where there might be vacancies available, those are usually we have mechanisms for we budget for vacancy savings, for example, as I shared a committee note. So we are concerned about the $75,000 whole number. It's maybe the best place to leave it for today.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And we are concerned that $25,000 is not going to get the results that's needed for the approval. We're not going into Appropriations Committee with them trying to find the money. We want to make a recommend to them. So submitting thoughts here.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Also a little bit

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: We're set, but we gotta find the money.

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: Know it's coming from repo.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yep, definitely a different pot

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: of money.

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: But we can do some horse trading.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: We can what?

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: Do some horse trading.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: We can do some horse trading. Yep.

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: Yep.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Figure out what would be the best way. Would it be giving recommendations to appropriations? Just trying to think how to move forward here because we haven't done markup on the capital bill yet, and I know what you're saying on that piece. So, do we leave the language as it is? And make us have a side letter recommendation to approves? These are the three places that you can look at for the additional 50,000. That's one thing. Should we put in the total 75,000? 20 5 carry forward plus an additional 50. So the bill itself says 75, and we have that side letter that explains where that 50 should come from. Yeah. You like that option? Yep. It's very clear. It makes sense to folks doing the latter?

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Yeah. What would the appropriation language bill refer to or where the money is coming from? So to be able to draft the appropriation, I need to be

[Rep. Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: able to send

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: something from federal funds. Well, could it just be just a general one line, there is 50,000 appropriated? Just do an appropriation for that. It has to be specific where it comes from? Yeah. Because it's three areas that can come from. Are they all under human services though? Well, the 2,100,000.0 is pretrial supervision. The other one to human services budget. Would it be that broad within the human services budget? I don't think you can do that. So the three places is pretty you got the part of the DOC budget, where they budgeted for four. They got two, and they're not gonna fill the other two. Then you got the 2,100,000.0 pre trial supervision. And then we've got the repo in the capital bill that could be exchanged for the cash. You get those three moving pieces, but we haven't gotten quite into a markup of the capital bill yet. We don't know where pretrial is going yet. Those are the three sources to pull 50,000. And how do you do that so we can get the bill out, keep the process going?

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: If the bill includes an appropriation, it has to say where the money is coming from. I can ask JFO if there is

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: some option. Because I've seen it, unless that's different, I've seen in the past that there's just an appropriation in the bill, and that doesn't say where the money's coming from.

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: So I don't know if things have changed in drafting. Our drafting manual, it's got to say where it's coming from. Again, I can ask JFO if they have some option for this circumstance. But the rule that's been drilled into me, If you are appropriating, you have to say where it's coming from with the kind of specificity that that carryforward does and where it's going to. But again, can ask GFO, the committee is interested, if they recommend other options. They are the budget language experts.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: I believe it does. Because when I was on hopes, you needed to know where we were shifting. Was fine.

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: That's where I was told upstairs.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Would Galfetti? Yep. Happy to see. So I think the committee would like to have the whole 75,000 bill. But we need a few more steps of testimony with other things to really figure it out where specifically we're gonna recommend it come.

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Understood. So I will check with JFO. I can let you and take note by email what they recommend. And then whatever next steps matter So to

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: from the committee, we're okay with this draft. Mhmm.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Yes.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So it will be draft 4.1? Correct. And then we'll work on the money piece. And I'd like to get that pretty taken care of today, if possible.

[Hilary Chittenden Ames, Office of Legislative Counsel]: I can email JFO right after this. Let them know that the committee is hoping to move forward quickly.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Anything else before we break? I want to thank Mary Jane for all the help. Want to thank Ted for pinch hitting. Megan and Hailey are just sitting through it all. And you got more to sit through.

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: So

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: let's finish up on this, and let's go off of YouTube, and we'll take a ten minute break and then come back.

[Ted Fisher, Vermont Agency of Human Services]: I don't

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: know what we'll talk about when we come back, but we'll figure