Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Meredith Pelkey]: Okay.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Welcome, folks. This is past corrections and institutions committee. It is Thursday, April 2. This morning, we are following up on some of our work that we did last year on the victim notification issue within DOC. Folks remember, last year, we set up a victim notification task force with all the players, being members of that task force to really work on the issues, resolving how the victim notification system works, working with DOC with their VINE program or platform that they use, as well as working with victims and working with the criminal justice system as well, trying to really address where the glitches are, where the problems are, and come back with recommendations. The group came before us to give us an update where they were back in January. The task force does sunset in the February. So it has sunset. So now that we've got some time to focus because we were so busy with corrections issues and the task force was still meeting, had finalized their report or any of their agreements that they were working on or an MOU that they were working on at the time. So, now that we have some time to focus, because now we've got the capital bill out, we can start focusing on this. So, we've got some documents that have been posted on our webpage. And I think we have a whole list of folks who are here to testify, members of the task force, as well as a survivor. Kelsey Rice has been here with us before, so on Zoom. And I think I'll start with you, Jennifer Pullman. If you wanna give us the update in terms of where the task force ended and which document you will be starting to justify on. So, welcome, Jennifer. If you could identify yourself for the record.

[Jennifer Pullman]: Good morning, committee members. My name is Jennifer Pullman. I am the executive director of Vermont Center for Crime Victim Services, and I was also the chair of this task force. I'm sorry I can't be with you all today. I think you all know how important this issue is to me, but I am really feeling quite

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: unwell. Join the club because half the committee is sick. So you would have been in good company.

[Jennifer Pullman]: First, I do again want to thank the committee for highlighting this issue. You've spent so much time on it the past two years, and I know Chair Emmons has been in the weeds during the off session on it as well. But for this committee's attention to this issue, it would not have gotten the attention that it deserved. And that attention resulted in so many significant improvements in terms of how practice, different forms and products, and also some legislative actions that we are working on as we speak. This was a very active task force, both in terms of the members and the non members. We had a lot of comment from other stakeholders. And while the journey wasn't always smooth, it was very, very productive. And ultimately, we landed in a very good space where I feel that we all agreed relationships were grown and enhanced. And, you know, sometimes that's one of the most important pieces. But there are a lot of other important pieces I want to speak to. I'm basically going to be focusing on the memo to your committee that, was submitted by the Task Force because that includes some really significant updates and areas where we were able to kind of put a bow on things to say, you know, to some extent. We did meet an additional three times after we were all in this committee in January. And what you'll see in the memo reflects a lot of that additional work that we did do. I expect my testimony will be simple and straightforward, but I should know better than to say that. But that's what I'm hoping. First, I want to start with the three consensus recommendations for a legislative change that came out of the committee. The first one I want to speak to, and we've testified about this before, and it reflects some concerns this committee had about the gaps when somebody is detained and victims not being notified in that process. Before the person is brought before the court those gaps. We took a serious look at that. Certainly, you have heard from Kelsey Rice, that is a significant gap, and I know this was a real concern to this committee. One of the things we looked at was law enforcement has obligations under 13 VSA 5314 to provide certain information to victims upon the initial encounter. What we did when we looked at that form, and it was actually a form that the Centers developed in various iterations over the years with other stakeholders, was that there was no information about the offender locator system that DOC has or about signing up for Vine. So as we've testified before, we did modify that form to include that information. That form is translated into 12 different languages. It's made available to law enforcement and is trained on. What we thought was important, though, was a legislative change to 13 VSA 05/2014, which would add a subsection that would require that information to be provided upon that initial encounter. Again, we're not tasking law enforcement with anything more. This form that we've developed was always meant to be a tool to assist them and it tracks the actual language in the entirety of thirteen fifty three-fourteen. Currently, that recommendation is in the miscellaneous judiciary bill, which as you know, passed the house and is on to the Senate. We are going to be certainly hopeful that that will pass.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So, Jennifer, can I just interrupt you there? I do have the language in front of me that's in the miscellaneous. Yes. Judiciary bill. Did you see the language that house judiciary did put in in the bill because it's, it doesn't, it's not your language verbatim. So did you see the language that was in the?

[Jennifer Pullman]: Yes, did. And I testified to it and that would that we felt that was, I felt that that reflected what our intent was.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Okay. So let me read it because I know committee members don't have it in front of them. So this is coming from law enforcement agencies. So when a person is detained in a facility, they would get this form, correct? This is what you posted the confidential.

[Jennifer Pullman]: Oh, that's the booking form. Now the other form is included.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: This would be from the state. This is from the state police.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: That's a different part of the process.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Different part of the process. So

[Jennifer Pullman]: I can send the form on. That's a part of the actual report. It's in the appendix section of the larger report that was submitted in November. So I didn't resubmit And I can certainly send it on to the committee at the minute that I'm off the Zoom call.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Can I ask a clarifying question? Yeah. So this portion, first bullet point in the memo that you sent to us that is currently in the miscellaneous judiciary bill is really just putting in statute a requirement, I'll say, that arresting officers across agencies inform the victims that this is a possibility, that they can register for this possibility. Does that feel accurate?

[Jennifer Pullman]: Yes. All they have to do is utilize this form. We've worked with VSP, over the years, to develop it, and including this latest iteration. Actually troopers can fill, you know, troopers have printers in their, in their cars and they can actually use the form to, you know, fill it out. And it is printed or available in 12 different languages. So we're trying to make it accessible for law enforcement as well. We're not looking to create more work or more chaos at the scene of a serious crime.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: The way that the language reads, and this is concerning the victim's right to know, if the defendant is held at a correctional facility, the victim would know where the defendant is held, if the defendant is released, and how to locate the Department of Corrections Vermont Offender Locator website, and then how to register for automatic notifications when the defendant is released. So, the victim could be notified where the person, what facility the person is being held at and when the person is released. Is that correct? Yes. And then if they're moved to another facility, they would be notified.

[Jennifer Pullman]: Yes, and it's knowledge of the offender locator system too that we realize that victims have no clue whatsoever that even exists. And I see my colleagues are in the room, Director Pelkey and Director Farr, and I'm sure that they can speak more to what that looks like on their end.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Whoever the law enforcement entity is, is the one that will work with the victims to carry this particular language through? Or is it DOC? Because it's under the law enforcement information from law enforcement agencies. So it's up to the law enforcement entity?

[Jennifer Pullman]: On this end, and again, I'll defer to Director Farr, but my understanding was that her unit, her victim services unit, is committed to providing training about this to law enforcement in the state.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yes, did you just identify yourself?

[Amy Farr]: Yes, my name is Amy Farr, I'm the Director of Victim Services for the Vermont State Police. The form that Jen is gonna send to you, there are multiple obligations that law enforcement officers have to victims. And over the years, there have been many iterations of this form that gives victims information that law enforcement has to give them. And one of the things that we want to add to that is the ability for them to sign up for law. So we've added that to the forum. So this wouldn't only be state police, hopefully it would be every This law enforcement forum is already provided to people as they're going through the academy to the recruits. So everyone is seeing it now. We're just recommending it to add the information about the DOC system. There's already a lot of information on it, which you will see when Jen sends it to you.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So this form would be given to the victim after the defendant has been arraigned and is So, sent to a correctional

[Amy Farr]: in theory, it's given to anybody whether the person is being incarcerated or not. If you are the victim of any kind of crime and the case is gonna eventually go to the state's attorney's office, you should be given this form that says here are your rights as a victim and their rights to compensation and rights to different advocacy programs and rights to protection orders. So it gives them a lot of information. So the form that we're talking about now is not connected to booking at all.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: It's not being the language you're saying. But what it has added is

[Amy Farr]: the information about how to sign up for Bind so that if you want that notification after someone is in the custody of corrections, you will have access to that BIND program.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: But you'd have access to the BIND program when you were held as a detainee, but you would not have access to the BIND program if you were not held as a detainee. Sure.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Yeah.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Okay. So that's how the language is written. That in order for the victim to have access to the DOC buying system, the defendant needs to be detained. That's why the language is written.

[Christa Murray]: And because that's who the biases

[Amy Farr]: serves, people who are in custody of detention. So, it's really only available to that group of people anyway, but everyone is gonna get the information because at some point, even if they're not detained at arrest or shortly after, it may be possible that they are incarcerated after adjudication. So there are different times when someone might need to sign up for a bind. And we wanna make sure that everyone gets that information early.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So would there be confusion on the victim's end that the person has been released? They the victim has this packet that indicates that the victim could register for the Vine program, the Vine notification system, even though the person has you know, is not being detained. So because the information is going to be there. Correct. And how does a victim differentiate that the person is out on the street that Vine doesn't cover that.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Can I ask that question a little differently? If a victim gets this document from the agency It says, Okay, great. We're notified. Section three of this statute, what we're adding to this notification now. To that confusion, what happens to somebody who a victim who signs up for notification and that person has not yet been detained? Does it hold that person's notification request so that if the person becomes detained in the future for this crime, they are now being notified? Or does it just say you're not eligible for a Brian's notification because the respondent hasn't detained?

[Amy Farr]: So I've seen some people behind you shaking their heads, and I don't know Vine inside and out because that's not the agency. However, I would hope that no one would be encouraged

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: to sign up for Vine if that person is not being detained until that point comes. We're adding this very specific thing onto a document that applies to a variety of victims' rights. So

[Amy Farr]: can I just say, like,

[Christa Murray]: so for

[Amy Farr]: example, network programs are also on

[Unidentified participant]: here? And

[Amy Farr]: these are given also to people who are not victims of domestic and sexual violence.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Right.

[Amy Farr]: So law enforcement has a lot of obligations statute. And this is to help make sure that those are fulfilled. And so it has a lot of information, some that's applicable to some people and some that's not.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: How does the law enforcement agency, I'm thinking of your local sheriff department or your local municipal police department. How would they know that Vine system is not available unless the defendant's actually in a facility and that Vine's directly just for DOC? That's where I'm just, I don't wanna set up the victim thinking they're gonna have access to information that really isn't gonna be available to them unless the defendant is in an incarcerated court.

[Amy Farr]: I agree, and I would hope that any victim would know if someone is gonna be incarcerated. Like that's something that

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: I don't think we can count on that.

[Amy Farr]: No, don't think so.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And I'm worried that the law enforcement agency gives them this. And I'm not negating the need to do this. I just don't want to have a false expectation on the victim's piece and that, oh, I can get information that this person is in my community from Vine, is in my community, and I know where they are or whatever, and DOC cannot release that information because the defendant isn't in a facility. They never went to the facility to begin with. They were released at arraignment. So, maybe DOC could weigh in here a little bit. Don't know. Yeah,

[Meredith Pelkey]: I think that is a concern. You identify yourself? Oh, Meredith Pelkey, Director of Victim Services. I guess that is a worry, right? Wouldn't know, DOC wouldn't know if somebody was cited and released.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: But you would know if they were a detainee.

[Meredith Pelkey]: We would know if they would,

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: once they're booked into our system, somebody can register for buying. But I have already been control know that they're not gonna know once the person released. But law enforcement may not, you know, it's a I don't wanna negate this, but I wanna make sure we're not setting up a false sense of security for the victim.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Can I just ask Meredith a quick clarifying question? It's the same question I just asked. So if a victim is given this form by the arresting agency and for whatever reason, the person is not detained. But the victim still has this form and they get to this section of the form and they say, oh, I can register for a Biden's notification. And they do that. So now you'll get an indication that this person is requesting notification. Do you send them something back saying this person is not detained? No. Or do you hold it in case that person becomes No,

[Meredith Pelkey]: no. Somebody has to be detained and in a facility in order for somebody to even register.

[Haley Sommer]: I would also add for the record, Heather Summer, Director of Communications for DOC, and apologies that we did not submit this form as one of the documents. But the form itself does clarify that if the accused is at a correctional facility, then you have the right to find out where they are through both the offender locator or through FindLink. There could be opportunity to make that language even clearer, but it does note it's specific to someone who's at a correctional facility and that Vine is for automated notifications upon release.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: So what happens if the request to get Vine's notification is submitted by a victim who did so erroneously? Do they get a notification that you don't have access? Or do you just let it sit?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: They might just not be able to

[Haley Sommer]: sign up with the payers.

[Meredith Pelkey]: Won't be able to find the person so they won't In order to sign up they have to find the offender.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Who has to find the offender?

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: The victim.

[Meredith Pelkey]: The victim on bind in order to register for notifications. So if they're not in a detainment facility, they're not gonna find

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: the person. I think they've interpreted the DOC's taken the information from So

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: does a form just need to be state very clearly, you will not have access to the Vine system if the accused has not been detained or something like that? I don't know. I don't need to wordsmith the form.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I want a false expectation out there. They don't know that mine should not be available. Jennifer, you wanted to weigh in.

[Jennifer Pullman]: Wanted

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: to This mention is the first little piece.

[Unidentified participant]: Right.

[Jennifer Pullman]: Yep. I should have known better to never say something's going to be simple. Did send the form over to Tate, but I see Tate's out of the office. I don't know if the person filling in for him.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And you have access to that.

[Christa Murray]: I just send you an email with my contact information.

[Jennifer Pullman]: Okay, perfect. So I will. I will follow-up with that.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: She's on a different system. Yeah, she's the executive branch. It's a different system. We'll wait until we get the form in order So, to we do have a committee member. Kevin?

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: I'm having a hard time understanding a situation where we have a known victim and we have an offender that the offender isn't held. Therefore, there would be notification of what happened after they were detained. What would be a situation where you know someone's been offended and you know who the offender is, that the victim wouldn't have notification of what happened after that. I can't think of it.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Amy, can follow-up. Amy?

[Amy Farr]: Yeah, I think the space that we're talking about is that when someone is not held and that someone tries to go and sign up for Vine and they're not in there. And I don't have an answer to this question, but I do wanna appreciate what you're saying because I think with any service to victims, and I said this last time, it is not easy to be a victim. So often, like also on this form is you have the right to a protection order.

[Meredith Pelkey]: A lot of people go to

[Amy Farr]: seek protection orders that are not available to them. And so it's the same thing with victim's comp. So this form is trying to say there is a world

[Unidentified participant]: of things out there for you

[Amy Farr]: and victims still have to navigate that, obviously, and it's not always easy. So I know what you're saying, and I also know that the form, I don't think could wordsmith that without being a short novel. Yeah. That's why we exist in a way to kind of help people figure that

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: out. And

[Jennifer Pullman]: if I may, the form is designed and always has been to track the language that the legislature has put in place as obligations on law enforcement under 5314. It's sometimes overbroad, but it's actually a lot more targeted, this version, than it ever has been before. So it is a tool for law enforcement. And in this particular case, once the case goes to court, that victim gets a victim advocate at the state's attorney's office. So there's that level of assistance that they don't necessarily have in every detention before that happens. So it's designed to address a very small but really critical period of time so that a victim gets at least some sense of what their rights are and resources that they can reach out to in that critical stage. It's not a panacea. And once that case goes to court, they're going to have that advocate who can hold their hand through these processes.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: And

[Jennifer Pullman]: I tried to resend the form on. Didn't all I the only information I got was from Megan, so I don't know if that was the right person. Didn't get any other contact information.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Okay. Anyway, it well, I'm looking at at section fifty three fourteen, and what it deals with law enforcement and what it basically says is information to all victims. After initial contact between a victim and law enforcement agency, the agency that's responsible for investigating the crime would give these particular things in writing to the victim. An explanation of victim rights and information concerning the availability of assistance to victims, including medical housing counseling, compensation for the victim, protection for the victim, including protective court orders, and access by the victim and the defendant to records related to the case, which are public. And we've added that the victim would be notified that if the defendant is held at a correctional facility, where the defendant is held, and if the defendant is released, it would indicate how the victim could register for the automatic notification through the buying system. So it doesn't indicate anything. They get that form that indicates they could hook up with the bind system, but you have to be very clear that the person has to be detained. If they're out in the community, the bind system, they can sign up for it, but they're gonna get nothing. So, that's what we're kind of grappling with. So, while Haley is working with Daphne to try to get copy that will be given out. Let's keep going through. So, Jennifer, what's your next bullet so we can spend half an hour on that one?

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: It is.

[Jennifer Pullman]: Okay. The other one, and we brought this to your attention last in January, relates to a difference in the language that relates to victim notification around parole processes. There's language in Title 13 that speaks to it more as an opt in upon request. And Title 28 relates it has it as an opt out. And we as a group had all agreed that we felt that Title 13 should be changed to mirror Title 28. I did raise this in house judiciary, but they did not want to touch it without the blessing of this committee. I will be speaking in Senate institutions later today about this. And, it's just simply making sure the language the language matches because it doesn't right now.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So over in the Senate, there's a little bill that deals with the parole board. Is there a thought that you're gonna propose this to 559?

[Jennifer Pullman]: Yes. I don't expect it to be controversial. If it is, I'll withdraw it because I certainly don't want to get in the way of the good work that was done. But again, this was a consensus agreement and it's simply having the language in 13 comport with what's in 28.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So it was a consensus of the task force. Was there an actual vote or was it just It sort of

[Jennifer Pullman]: was unanimous vote.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: It was unanimous. And the reason why our house judiciary committee did not put it in the miscellaneous judiciary bill was because we in this committee had not weighed in on that.

[Jennifer Pullman]: Yes, and it was getting as you know, the bill was pretty late when it was taken up. So the chair did not want to do anything to without your blessing. So he said go after it in the Senate. So, that's what I'm trying to do.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Okay. So, a heads up to the committee that the parole board bill may be a vehicle for this, which then means the bill comes back to us for further review, to concur, to do another amendment, or to go into conference committee. So that would be the process.

[Jennifer Pullman]: The last thing I want to do is get in the way of what the committee has done on that bill. So if the sense is that would be not favored, then I will withdraw it.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Troy? And there's no willingness on the miscellaneous judiciary bills, so Senate judiciary can't put this into that?

[Jennifer Pullman]: I could ask them as well, but I was trying jurisdiction go in that direction. But I certainly would be willing to put it in the misjudiciary bill or ask for it to be considered. Whatever, if this committee has a strong feeling either way, I'm happy to follow the wishes of this committee.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: This change seems like a more fail safe situation. Yes, you're going to be notified. If you don't want to be notified, you tell us and you get off the list.

[Jennifer Pullman]: That was our feeling. It's a real crisis point for victims and survivors, and so much information is provided to them in the beginning. I see Kelsey nodding, so she can certainly expand upon that when she speaks. But having it as an opt out in this case felt to everybody on the task force that it was the safer way to go, and it just seemed like there was a discrepancy only in terms of verbiage between thirteen and twenty eight.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Do you have thoughts on which Senate institutions or judiciary might be a better one?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Think we just let Jen, you're testifying to Senate institutions this afternoon, correct? Yes. So why don't you circle back with us and see what your take was on that, and then we can figure out how we want to move forward.

[Jennifer Pullman]: Okay. Again, for me, it's just about respecting the committees of jurisdiction. And if there's a determination by this committee or Senate institutions that it should belong elsewhere, or maybe we just wait till next year, happy to follow with what the committee's recommendations are.

[Haley Sommer]: Shawn?

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: So, Jen, I I'm just getting in the weeds a little bit. I'm just reading five zero seven. So what when you say the notification is an opt out, what like, where is that in five zero seven? There's not a lot to it, but is that the are you saying that, like, it's a such notification may be waived by the victim in writing? Yes.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Is that That's

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: dropped out.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Okay. I I just wanted to get some clarity on that.

[Jennifer Pullman]: And the and the and the in writing piece is really helpful and important too, because, there are many areas all across, Title 13, where victims have rights, but they're not, provided and there's really no documentation for that. So we're certainly working towards that next year. Don't worry, it won't be in your committee. But, yeah, I think that writing piece is really important.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Okay. And just a follow-up, because this is a later this is title 28, and we're we're amending 13. Wouldn't 20 override 13? Like, how does

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: You gotta know what context 13 b s a fifty three zero five is first.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Okay. Well, I was reading that too.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: You got to see what context that's in.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Okay.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Track that. Alright. Because they may not be dealing with the same population. So you've got to see what's in 13. Why that is about versus DOC, why that's about to happen. Both

[Jennifer Pullman]: do speak to the victims rights and parole processes, just that 28 is the DOC code, the DOC title. So, it was put in two different places is our interpretation, but there was not a real reconciliation of both provisions.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Okay, thanks. Appreciate that. Both

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: of those versions, the intent is to protect the victim. Yes. So the victim makes that decision. Because sometimes if it's an automatic notification to the victim, a testimony that we have heard is that can re traumatize the victim. And it's really important for the victim to make the determination if they wanna be notified automatically or not. And that's why there's this opt in or opt out in either statute to protect the victim. Kevin?

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: The form that we just got at the backside under the right for information.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Let's hang on here.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Okay, but it pertains to the specific. This does not read as an opt out. This reads as an opt in. To register for automated notification, you've got

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: to call someone. Where, on the second bullet, is for folks who are on parole. The second bullet relates to parole notification. This pertains to when a person is arrested and has been arraigned and maybe is out in the community or is detained. It does not deal with parole. So the second bullet deals only with parole. Does not deal with furlough. Does not deal with the patient only. So we can go back to what was just handed out. Any questions on the second bullet?

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: No, just keep us updated on how it goes with some Yes, of the

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: of course. So let's kick back to the first bullet, which dealt with law enforcement information that's given to the victim. We have a copy Is this already started to be Is the wrong portion? Believe it. The notification's on the back. And it's a right to information and notifications. Let's read that to see what people are on the speech. This is handed out to the victim by a local office. Could be state police, could be care, could be your municipal. And, the clause that we're looking at is on the back, the right information and notification. So does that tend to cover our concerns that it's clear enough that the person needs to be at a correctional facility in order to access mine?

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: It's right there in the first clause.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Are we more comfortable with that first bullet?

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Yeah. I mean, from I I know Kevin still has concerns if this still feels like an opt in.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: It's up to the victim to make that determination. Knocked in or knocked out, it's up to the victim to make that determination.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Whether was you're forcing someone to provide yeah.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Either one. It's the person makes that decision.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: But within a traumatic situation, I would think we would go the extra mile and give them the information. Then if they say, I don't want any more information, then we take them off.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: To do that, you would have to say, you've just been a victim of trauma. Give me this information about yourself right now. People may not like that.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Kelsey, your hand up. So if you could just identify yourself for the record, please.

[Kelsey Rice]: Yes, I'm Kelsey Rice. I'm a resident of Wyndham County, survivor of domestic violence. I'm so sorry to interrupt, but I have to get off very soon, I would love to make some comments. I'm happy to start with what you're discussing right here in this moment. Thank you for the time and inviting me today. Yes, absolutely. When victim of crime, in particular a violent crime, in the immediate moment aftermath, we are still engaging and still in trauma response. And so I can tell you that absolutely, did not retain all the information that was given to me verbally. It may have been handed papers, but I don't, you know, who knows where they went. It's very difficult to process information while you are experiencing a traumatic event. And quite often, and certainly for myself as a survivor of domestic violence, the choices and decisions I made in that moment were not the same choices and needs that I identified needing later on as the situation progressed. And so I absolutely agree and fully support the making it an opt out option. If giving me this information and telling me you need to go register and sign up and you have this opportunity, I'm not able to process that in that moment. Opting out, the information is given to you, the offender locator, where they are, what's happening, what's happening next. If you decide to opt out, here are the instructions on how to do that. Fully support that piece. And also want to lift up what you're all talking about. We can't really dive into the weeds today, but I continually talk about giving this information and these options immediately, but also the importance of across the continuum. Because again, depending upon where you are in your recovery, your choices very, very much may change. I wanted to speak to the DOC bringing back menu options. I know you all haven't made it there yet, but I just want to lift up how important that is and that they have stated the language needs to be changed in Title X 28. Very important to give those options because for many of us, it's not just an opt in or opt out. Some of those notifications are lifesaving and needed. And yes, some of them will be re traumatizing, and you don't need that information to disrupt you during your day when you're trying to live your life. So, giving those options in that menu is very, very important if we can bring that back. And again, I think my biggest message today that I'd like to leave you all with, both for the task force, the committee, and for all of you, I cannot express in words how grateful I am as a survivor that has experienced harm for the gaps in these systems, that you have listened. And, you know, I I choose to share my story and offer up these very traumatic experiences in service to victims and survivors who do not have a voice and may experience many more vulnerabilities and barriers to navigating systems than I do. And it I it is incredibly heartening and paramount to my recovery that you all are taking these issues seriously. You have so much on your plate, so many issues to navigate for all of us here in Vermont. This work that you're doing is it not only does it change circumstances for the victims and survivors who experience that crime, but it has a generational impact. The more trauma we experience as we navigate these systems, it's going to continue to trickle down. So thank you, thank you. In particular, also the GAPA notification around when suspects are detained after hours and weekends. I think you all know that that piece is very important to me. And I fully recognize there's a delay in moving forward with this wonderful, the confidential victim info sheet that Vermont State Police has come up with. So grateful for that work. And the delay, I imagine Department of Corrections, there are a lot of moving parts to sort out how do they work that into their systems and what their staff have to manage. And at the same time, I really hope we can move forward with that step. It won't be perfect, It's not going to work seamlessly in every circumstance, but it's a step in a very important direction. I'm happy to answer any questions before I pop off.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Thank you, Kelsey. This is just really, really helpful. I really appreciate you being so open and willing to share your experiences with us, because that's how we as legislators really learn how the systems impact folks who are living out in our communities. So, I really wanna thank you, because it really did help us a lot. Questions? Shawn?

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: No. And Kelsey, I'll say

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: the same thing. I think your courage helps us find the right thing to do here. I mean, that article was so important a year ago that we read, and it it it it shined a light on something that we needed to work on. And and I hope we do keep, you know, trying to figure it out. So thanks for for still, you know, hanging in there with us and and and helping, you know, helping us find the, you know, the right direction and the right thing to do.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Thank you. Thank you, Kelsey.

[Kelsey Rice]: Thanks, everyone.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Thank you. So, Jennifer, let's go back to you, and that is a good segue into the third bullet.

[Rep. Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: Yes, it's perfect.

[Jennifer Pullman]: As you heard from Kelsey, the third piece that we're looking to change is in Title thirteen fifty three-04B, that relates to the responsibilities of state's attorneys' victim advocates. Victims have an ability to opt out of any service that the victim advocate provides. The trouble for DOC in terms of reinstituting the menu option, which you've heard about many times, is that in Title 28, all the responsibilities that DOC has are obligatory. And I'm sure that Director Peltier will speak to this. So what we recommended, again, a consensus recommendation, was that there be language placed in Title 28 that would give victims that same ability to opt in and opt out to certain notifications and give them that choice. That would allow DOC to reinstitute the menu option. Right now, And again, I'll defer to Director Pelkey, but right now they don't have a choice. They'd be in violation of statute if they didn't provide those notifications. So I'm hoping that that can land in the miscellaneous judiciary bill in the Senate. So I'm just looking for a vehicle for that. But that's really critical. We started this conversation last year talking about the menu, and we can't get there if we can't help DOC to be able to do that in a way that doesn't force them to violate their statutory obligations.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So was there a task force vote on this particular bullet?

[Jennifer Pullman]: Yes, everybody voted in favor.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: It was unanimous?

[Jennifer Pullman]: Yes, it initially wasn't. DOC, and again, I'll defer to Director Pelkey, but they needed to speak further on it and speak with counsel. And when we met after we all testified in January, there was agreement that this was a needed change.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So, while we're here, I'm just going to shift over to DOC.

[Meredith Pelkey]: Meredith? Yes. So, we agreed that Title 13 should mirror the language of '28.

[Haley Sommer]: Right? Are those the two? No, sorry. I think we're talking through a few bullets here because there are a lot of statutes being contemplated, but I

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: can't think off the top of

[Haley Sommer]: my head the exact references that in Title 28 that would need to be changed, and I apologize for that. Although DOC does agree with the notion that victims should be able to choose which notifications that they get. And right now, the statute as written in Title 28 in various places, does not allow for us to do that because it doesn't All of the notifications that we provide are statutorily obligated through Title 28.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So it might help to, Amy, just to give us some examples of what notification you do provide to victims.

[Meredith Pelkey]: Releases, when somebody's released, right? When somebody has a full hearing, which is what we're talking about in this title. When somebody's reincarcerated, as long as it hasn't been more than a year, because once somebody is released and they've been out a year, their information leaves fine. The incarcerated individual. As long as Does that pertain as well

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: to furlough? If a person's been on furlough for a year and a half, if they're still under DOC custody? Yeah, so if

[Meredith Pelkey]: they were to come back, they would get a notification.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Because they're still under DOC? Yes. Question? Yeah, Shawn?

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Why would we let go of stuff after a

[Meredith Pelkey]: year? Because I think that's I don't know why that was agreed upon because that was before my time. But for now, what happens is once somebody's released and they're out of our custody, the information goes away

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: after

[Meredith Pelkey]: year.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Because they would have been a detainee and then a year later, six months after being a detainee, they were released. If they were released at court, right. You have information on them for a year Yes. After If they maxed out. If they maxed out. Have information on them for a year.

[Meredith Pelkey]: For a year. After a year

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: it goes away. They don't get re incarcerated. If a person's on probation.

[Meredith Pelkey]: Still in our

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: system. It's still in Vine. Yeah. Person on furlough is still in Vine. Still in Vine. Person off rural is still in Vine. Yes. And then when they complete all that, they're still in Vine for a year and then after that. Is that year timeframe by statute or by your directives? I don't think it's in statute. No, directed. But I'd have to look. It's so direct. You want to get that minutiae? I want to hold off. What other services, what other

[Meredith Pelkey]: We're bringing back facility transfers. So, if somebody transfers to another facility,

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: a victim will get that. In earned time. That's an opt

[Meredith Pelkey]: That's not an automated notification. That's a notification we would do if a victim opts in, which is the language Jen maybe can track

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: for the language in what bill that was or statute.

[Jennifer Pullman]: That was language passed last year. And if a victim opts in, then, the Department of Corrections Victim Services Unit would provide that notification no less than every ninety days.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Troy and then Shawn.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Can I is there a general sense from DOC about how many points of conflict with title within title 28 this exists currently? Do we wanna change 28 to align with fifty three zero four b?

[Haley Sommer]: Yeah. I think we looked at it maybe a few months ago and identified those statutes, but I don't have that off the top of my head.

[Jennifer Pullman]: If I may, I think what's helpful about what's in fifty three zero four B is that it's just a blanket statement. So it doesn't go through every and identify every single right because that would also need to be changed then, as things are changed. So 5304B's language is very general, and it simply states that a victim has the ability to opt out of any service that is provided under this chapter.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: So are you saying a similar blanket statement in 28 would suffice, or are there multiple points of conflict in 28 currently that we would have to change?

[Jennifer Pullman]: Understanding, my understanding is that we would simply do the same for Title 28, and that would that would cover it wouldn't require frequent amendments every time something is added or needed, and it would serve the same purpose.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So if we're interested in doing this, we need to work with our Legion Council to figure it out.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: So, and where are we going to do it? It's the same question. Are we going to do this in senate judiciary or senate institutions?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Well, I think that would be for us to take more testimony from our legislature council, how involved it is, bring the players back in and just really figure out what direction we wanna go in and what language, and then we can figure out a vehicle for that. Because there's different ways. Of what

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: I just make sure I'm understanding? What I'm hearing is that if an individual is released a year after a convicted individual is released, after a year, there's no more tracking so the victim doesn't know what's going on.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I think you have to be clear when you say released.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: I know.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: What do

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

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: I want to make sure. They were incarcerated. Yeah. And after a year of release.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: But are they on furlough? Are they on parole? Did they meet their maximum? Yeah. Were they? Which one? Because it's different.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: No, I understand they're all different but but I'm hearing that after a year, no matter what that situation is, the victim no longer has any information available to them.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I don't think that's the way it plays out.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: That's what I'm trying to understand. Yeah.

[Meredith Pelkey]: No. So, once somebody is released from DOC custody, so that means if you're on probation and you are done, if you're on parole and you're done, or you're incarcerated and you max out. So, after a year, yeah, the victim, if they're no longer in our care and custody, then they don't have information.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Okay. If they're still on probation, they're still on furlough, they're still on parole, then the victim does have notification. Because they're still under the custody.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Thank you. That's what that's for.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: When they're completed, or if they were detainee and the victim has to be notified while the person's a detainee, the court releases them the next day, a year later, the victim has no access.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Got it.

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

[Haley Sommer]: Brian.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Well, we can certainly discuss that year, but that's not something we're seeking to change today as I understand it, right? So

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

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Yeah. Process. Right. The assumption.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So let's continue, Jennifer. Progress updates, language access.

[Jennifer Pullman]: Well, I'll defer to Director Pelkey to speak about that. I'll just say briefly that the Department of Corrections has really fleshed out a lot more of language access and really pleased to hear that. And she can speak more about that. I do want to say that, other victim services, state agencies or state agencies that serve victims, need to also, improve what they do. We learned some other pieces about how that interaction goes or doesn't happen. So, I'll defer to Director Pelkey, though, to explain, more on that. And I don't know if you want to just cut away to her now or just let me run through two more things and then Why

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: don't you run through two more things? Okay.

[Jennifer Pullman]: Buying technology. Again, I'll defer to director Pelkey. I do want to say one of the things I'm most pleased with is the adoption of victim centered trauma informed language. We went through all the notifications as a task force, and we had the consultation with Disability Rights Vermont and came up with language for all the notifications that again everybody was in complete agreement with and DOC has adopted. The MOU status, I know Attorney McManus is jammed up and downstairs, but at this point there is no change to the MOU aside from the fact that we're just waiting for the Attorney General's office. And she expects to have that completed within the next month. Then she indicated that she will send on the completed signed MOU to this committee as soon as it's done. Otherwise, all other parties to the MOU, which is obviously the Department of State's Attorneys and Sheriffs, DOC, the Center, and the state's attorneys and sorry, Vermont State Police have all agreed to what is in the MOU. Again, I'm

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: waiting for heavy the email. That's

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: lift.

[Jennifer Pullman]: Yes, and I'm really thankful to Attorney McManus for doing that. Even though we haven't signed it yet, I think we all agreed that that process was very valuable just in terms of getting us all to the table and having us have those conversations around clarifying roles and how we support each other and how we interface. And then finally, the other important piece, which Director Farr will speak to, is another way to address that gap and notification when a suspect is detained. That is the booking form that I did attach. What we discovered was that when the paperwork comes over from law enforcement to DOC when somebody is being detained, there's no easy way to access victim information and it might not even be available. And so Director Farr took it upon herself to develop this booking form, which would have this as a cover sheet that is right there, easy to access. The victim can choose to provide that information or not choose, but then that could be entered in as well. At this point, it's just about finalized, but this would be a critical way to make sure that information is being transmitted because, again, what we found was that it's not available and or it's not accessible. I'll leave that to her. But at this point, I want to make sure that my colleagues are heard from. And Again, really appreciate the time. I will definitely get back to this committee with what happened in Senate institutions and look for your guidance as to how to proceed on that bullet and as well as the third bullet around helping DOC to be able to put that menu option back in place.

[Rep. Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: Thank you. You, Thank you.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I know that the task force working through went away the February. And I know when you were in here last time, there was concern of maybe losing that task force. Is there still that concern or do you feel pretty confident that there's enough tools in place that people can still stay connected without the task force?

[Jennifer Pullman]: We all agreed that it was really valuable and that we planned once this very busy session is over to continue to meet on a monthly basis informally and just bring forward other issues, not just about victim notification, but so many of us work in silos and having conversations about trends, concerns, things that we're seeing in our communities felt like a real important way to structure our meetings moving forward. And we're all on the same page, so having those conversations. We thought it was valuable and we plan to do that.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Finally did something good.

[Jennifer Pullman]: You did something really good.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Thank you you. For all the work that you've done, Jennifer. We appreciate the report and it appears as if it was pretty unanimous, pretty much unanimous in terms of the recommendations that came out of the task force working group, which is

[Jennifer Pullman]: In the memo, really wraps up the report in a constructive way, I think. And the last three meetings were very positive and focused, we tied up, again, a lot of those loose ends and came up with agreement on these pieces.

[Rep. Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: Mary? Alice, do we need to think about for the future, say all of these good people aren't part of this discussion, do we need to indicate a group needs to go forward? Because I would hate to lose the momentum that has been gained by all of you working together if some of the players should change, and then there's not that back and forth discussion. So I I just put it out there.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I wonder if we do this again, but I wonder if we sent a letter of intent.

[Rep. Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: Well, that's what I meant, something like that, to just keep the, you know, the most focused. Have

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: a change of a person, a entity that the continuity continues. Let's kind of noodle that a little bit, folks, so we could work with Hillary on doing something. Would that help you folks just to know the legislature is encouraging all of you to stay in touch?

[Jennifer Pullman]: I don't see that it would I think it would be helpful. I unfortunately don't see myself retiring anytime soon. But, yeah, I think to have that in the files to pass on to successors would be helpful. There's a kitty cat. Yeah.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I know the feeling really well. Anything else for Jennifer before we transition to DOC?

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Hope you feel better.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yeah, we're all on the same boat.

[Jennifer Pullman]: Thank you. And I'll get back to you later today.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Thank Okay, sounds great. Thank you. So who from DOC wants to

[Christa Murray]: come on up? Meredith? Yeah.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Do you wanna do this? And I just wanna give folks a heads up.

[Unidentified participant]: I'm sorry.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Have your day around will do before 11:30. So you keep working, please, if you're not done.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: It's 11:30.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Have a meeting to go to 11:30.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: 11:30? But you talk to keep working. So,

[Meredith Pelkey]: Meredith, you can identify yourself for the question. Yes. Meredith Pelkey, Director of Victim Services for Department of Corrections. So, if you want to hear about the language access piece, I'm happy to share that. We found out that we have contracts within AHS for a service called Proprio One. And now Victim Services has access to that service as well. It's live translation services 20 fourseven. And they have any language you can think you put an app on your phone, and when you're with somebody who speaks a different language, you simply put in the code of language you want, and you're directly connected to somebody who can do translation services. And they also do American Sign Language. So I feel like, at least for us at DOC, we have a really good handle now on language access, especially for victims. So when did that all come to light?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Have you known about that? Like, for the last year or two? Or is it just in the past few months?

[Meredith Pelkey]: I would say I started speaking to our language access person when we started this process, when we started the task force. So that would be during the summer. Yeah.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And who gets to download the app?

[Meredith Pelkey]: So, it would be us at victim services. So, if we have a victim who speaks a different language, we have the app on our phone and we can connect to somebody live.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So it's it's a DOC employee that would have access to that? Yes.

[Meredith Pelkey]: All of our employees have access to that.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Do folks, officers in booking have access to that as well? Kevin?

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Just curious, is that a live person or

[Amy Farr]: is it an Live AI person. Yes. Yep.

[Unidentified participant]: I know.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So is it used I mean, everyone in the facility has access. I know you're just dealing with victims. Is it widely used throughout the facility to help folks who are incarcerated? Think Access legal counsel? I think we would have to ask Jack's or do you know

[Meredith Pelkey]: the answer to that question?

[Haley Sommer]: I think both myself and Christa can speak

[Unidentified participant]: to it.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I'll let you tag on first.

[Christa Murray]: Christa Murray, Operational Systems Director for the Department of Corrections. So what we have done for the department is for the immediate need was we took a bunch of old cell phones and wiped them to just have the cell phone or the app, the Apple translation app, strictly that. And that is just merely for quick information for people of where's the bathroom and that. We've also received some iPads which we've installed the Proprio app onto for the booking officers to use, but also for legal counsel when they come in as well, since we don't allow phones within the facility. So the Proprio app is set up specifically right now for Northwest in Chittenden. So where there's Wi Fi in the areas in which legal counsel will use it

[Unidentified participant]: in the facility. Because it is a live person, it needs internet to have that. And that's limited in some

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: of the other facilities because of the Wi Fi.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: That's low class math.

[Haley Sommer]: I think there might be a class, but I don't have that off the top of

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: my head.

[Meredith Pelkey]: There is a class, but I don't know what it is. I

[Unidentified participant]: think the agency pays it.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: How often is it used? In the facilities or for victims? Both.

[Meredith Pelkey]: We haven't been asked for translation services yet. We haven't encountered anyone who needed translation services.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So otherwise, how often is it used? I have not asked

[Haley Sommer]: the facility recently. However, when you all head down to Northwest in the next couple of weeks or so, I'm sure the superintendent, Greg, would

[Unidentified participant]: be happy to chat with you

[Haley Sommer]: about what it looks like on the ground and then how often those devices are

[Christa Murray]: being used. The iPads were just dispersed, I believe, last week or the week before. And who

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: were they dispersed to specifically?

[Christa Murray]: I believe just Northwest and Chittenden.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: But to all the staff or just booking staff?

[Christa Murray]: Don't know those specifics. I believe for the legal counsel, they were going to be kept in DC for booking, as legal counsel came in, it would be provided to them.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: How many pads per site? Pardon? How many pads per I do

[Unidentified participant]: not know the answer.

[Haley Sommer]: We do get the answer, but I

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: don't have that on top of it.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: But Okay. Each facility has some

[Haley Sommer]: Right now, Northwest and COCF have them because tend to be the two facilities where there are the most language access needs. Then we've also installed very limited Wi Fi

[Unidentified participant]: to be able to accommodate those applications. The iPhones don't cover as many languages

[Amy Farr]: Right. As the

[Unidentified participant]: And they're completely offline, but really no need to update them unless they came out with more languages.

[Christa Murray]: But they always at least work without Wi Fi,

[Unidentified participant]: so it can be used with any unit or anybody who cannot speak English or broken English. And so the officers have that to be able to communicate.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Is that also available to WellPath at the infirmary?

[Haley Sommer]: I believe that WellPath might have their own translation services because there's a different network that they use. Many of these initiatives were somewhat implemented in the last couple of months. So, if the committee were interested in setting up some time to discuss that specifically, as I don't want to take away from the topic at hand, we arrange for that.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Yeah, don't want to derail this either, but I would love to know a lot more about that.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yeah. Hope this is helpful. Thank you. Yes, I think it's great that we have that option. So, let's keep going.

[Meredith Pelkey]: Yeah, I'm happy to answer any questions anyone has about the report.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: About the buying technologies status.

[Meredith Pelkey]: I'm going to turn it over to Christa Murray for that.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Do you have anything else that would be yours in terms of expansion of Vine or anything like that? Okay. So why don't you switch places?

[Meredith Pelkey]: Thank

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: you. Let's see.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: I do have a question. Maybe you're not the right person.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Hi.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: I got the impression that people facilitating communication to the victims are way overloaded. That they would have way too many victims to keep in touch with.

[Christa Murray]: Is that still the situation or do I have speak state? That's the state's attorney.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Okay.

[Meredith Pelkey]: Yeah. So they would have to speak to that.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Okay.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So welcome again. If you get to slide down for sure.

[Christa Murray]: Krista Murray, operational systems director with the Department of Corrections. So I, for those who don't know, manage the offender management system, which connects directly with Vine. We've now taken on the translation devices and on the side of EHR. So what we are currently doing for the Vine system is we are working with a different set of people at the vendor to look at the system to ensure that it's working properly. Kind of when it was initially set up. It was before my time. But it was also when the system, the offender management system, was new and hadn't been touched since then. So we looked at what the vendor was using of the data that we were pushing out to them that drives the notifications and made some modifications because we have, of course, changed practice in how we do things within the system to get better data and capture movement between facility and field and legal statuses a lot better. So I think with that and some of the changes that it looked like there may have been some Band Aids that were thrown on. So we've really been focusing. And I'm not on the task force. One of my teammates, Joe, is. But he's been focused on working through the process with the vendor so that the vendor understands our system and how we function because we are a unified system. And they work with court, they work with just jails, prisons, etcetera. So everybody's system is a little different. So we are in parallel building a system beside it to ensure that it's working properly, but is less convoluted on their side so that they can support it better. And as we move forward with, if we were to get more pretrial people, if that was to expand, then we can expand the system so that it works works properly and without any hiccups.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: The

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: vendor is expansive. They've got a lot of sites, I would imagine, across the country.

[Unidentified participant]: Yeah, I think most.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Yeah, so they've got plenty of other systems that if you're looking for the vendor to do something, they're possibly or probably even doing that somewhere else already. So they've been fairly responsive, binds

[Unidentified participant]: the Yes.

[Christa Murray]: When we started this revamp, we had somebody dedicated to us to work to understand how we are. We've changed a couple of our how we were pushing data because we weren't pushing the right thing to trigger some of the notifications.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: And you said this is the first time you've really reinvested or relooked at that sort of partnership since the onset of the company?

[Christa Murray]: Yeah, we've always worked with them, but It was more about enhancements and not really going backwards

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: That's to look at good. I have a similar vendor for a similar sort of thing in my other job, and I have found kind of collective head scratching. We wanna do this better. Can you help us? And so I'm glad to hear that they're responsive to that.

[Christa Murray]: Yeah. And I think what had happened was it was just kind of found something wrong, fixed it, and it was, as I call it, Band Aids. And so now we're just kind of making it very straightforward without a lot of different things. I think there's a lot of decision points in it that weren't needed. Who was the vendor? Afris, but they're now Equifax as well. And they're one of the only providers of victim notifications. But they deal with not just corrections, but I know they have a system with, like, Uber drivers where, like, you know, if somebody pops up in one of their systems and they're an Uber driver, Uber, like, suspends until they get that. So yeah, they have a pretty robust

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So if you can continue. So I just want to make sure DOC's on board with the reports here, this full report that Jennifer presented, and then the pieces that pertain to you as well. So as a member of the task force, you folks also signed up. Yes. So, we went over the MOU development. You wanna weigh in on that, you can. And then I would like to-

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: They don't want to.

[Meredith Pelkey]: We haven't seen their whole street.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Can't see.

[Haley Sommer]: Yeah, I've been running the

[Unidentified participant]: best student to speak to the

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Who would be Kevin?

[Haley Sommer]: I know that she's tied up this morning.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Kevin, and Ben, before you go, Kevin, figure just finish going through this, if you could, for, like, gapped a notification unless subject is detained. I would maybe defer that to VSP. And I know that

[Haley Sommer]: there is one other topic around the expansion of use of mine, but that conversation was happening to other entities. So that would again must be in DOC's lane to chat. I might defer that It would not I might defer that back to Chittenden.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So if you can relate that to the committee so we can follow-up terms of testimony. But I think it would be important also to go over this one, Amy, and that would be the notification unless a suspect is detained to go over that. And then figure out where the committee wants to go with further testimony while you've got the partners here to see who else should come in and testify and what more works. I know we've got some work to do in terms of the beginning with Jennifer looking at title 13 with some fix and title 28, but if there's other things that pop up. Okay. So keep going. And for the committee, we will be back here after the floor.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Mr. Kevin?

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: So an MOU by definition is things that everybody agreed with. The tough question is where we're still having some sticking I know that everybody wants to improve the system. There's still areas where you haven't been able to figure out how to compromise. What are those areas?

[Meredith Pelkey]: Well, guess I mean, I think I

[Christa Murray]: can speak. I think one of the challenges was with individuals who were not in the custody of the department. And there was some talk of how to utilize Vine for that. Because as the conversation that we had, once they're out of our custody, then Vine doesn't do any notifications. And I think to the point that the victim's advocates have a lot of cases and a lot of responsibility on that side, they were looking to utilize Vine to be able to do that. The problem being that for our fine system and the way it works, they have to be in our custody. So I think the state's attorneys wanted something similar, the problem being and in the case of that form, if they're not in our custody, then we can't share information. If they and they don't know our ID of we have a master person ID, a jacket number. If they don't have that, then the systems can't talk to one another. So then it would rely on something like date of birth, social security number, etcetera, to be able to connect. But if they are going to come to us after their sentence, they would start at VSP and state's attorneys, and then it would be bridging that. And that's the challenge because of systems not really connecting or talking to one another and having that same point, which can be date of birth, social security number, if it's in the system that it needs to connect with.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: So

[Christa Murray]: in terms of an MOU, and I believe ours is about communication, it's having the communication, having the victim getting information when they have that first contact, and then knowing about Vine or the offender locator. We'd actually just updated our offender locator because it was running a bit slow and on an older platform. So our offender management system vendor just upgraded

[Unidentified participant]: it to be faster and a little better than it was.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: All right. Jen?

[Jennifer Pullman]: I just wanted to add, and I think it would be helpful to have the state's attorney's office because I do know that Director Lidos Dumont been working with they're implementing a new system and has been working with DOC to try and get us to a place. It won't happen overnight, but to get our state in a place where those systems are talking to each other, because I know that was a concern.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Yeah, we'll definitely have Tim and Kim.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Thank you. Did you have more? Okay. No. That's all.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: I know the boss wants us to hear from you, my friend, about this form. If you can walk us through that, that'd be great. You know, it's which places. Sure. I like it when everybody does stuff before I even say it.

[Unidentified participant]: We're ready.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: It makes me feel very significant.

[Amy Farr]: Good morning. My name is Amy Farr. I am the director services for the Vermont State Police. We've talked about the background behind this form quite a bit, but if you have the form in front of you, I just want to say, I was a little hesitant to send it out. I told Jen, because we created this at State Police as what we think would be a good solution to this problem. I don't think it's been agreed upon by DOC at this point. So what you have in front of you is our proposal to this problem. What we suggested, and the reason why it says confidential on it, is because for a long time, the reason why information wasn't given so explicitly about victims is because it was a safety precaution. So we are now kind of swinging, as we often do, and saying, Okay, actually, we need to do this, and we need to do it in a protected way. So the form that you have in front of you, it says confidential on it. The idea is that it would go to booking with the booking paperwork. It would have the name of the arresting officer, the name of the offender, the name of the type of crime, the name of the victim or who they designate and their contact information so that if someone is released, a phone call or some kind of notification can be made to them in real time. And because most of the people that are victims of, or I should say most of the crimes that lead to incarceration, ones that probably need some safety planning. And so we want that to be an in person contact and notification so that someone can get the information that they need and not have to call someone back. Want to really streamline this notification so that someone can get what they need when they need it. So our agency worked on this. I've given it to Corrections, and we're just kind of waiting to hear back. Once Corrections decides, yes, this works for us, or no, it doesn't, I don't know what discussions happen next. Our plan would then be to implement it as an agency, and in conjunction with that, talk about that change on the other sheet so that all of the officers know about Vine and how easy it is to sign up for it. So we would be training them on this form and also just how to talk to victims and community members about Vine. And as you are probably aware, there's no uniform practice for all law enforcement. But we would also then be pushing it out to the municipals to say, this is a form that we're using. And I would hope that corrections would be doing the same if this is something that we all agree upon. So that is the update on that. Yes. Yeah.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: I get worried that in 2026, we're still creating paper forms. And this is a byproduct of the fact that we don't have data systems that are talking to one another. As we're developing this, is there any of future talk, vision talk about finding that system? Because the more we create these sort of paper chase scenarios, So this allows the reporting officer to do their diligence. This is a form I've been given. I did my part. I handed it off, in this case, to DOC, and then it's lost. There's no follow-up. Whereas in a digital database, the arresting officer is inputting this in, it feeds the system that is uniform across the state, and then somebody gets an email or a ping when a release occurs and remember to do victim notification. That's my worry, that we're still in 2026 creating paper forms that are going to be literally handed from one person to the next, shoved into a file folder. And then that's what I worry about. There's not a question there, I guess, aside from the fact of how robust are the conversations about we've to do this better?

[Amy Farr]: Well, if those conversations are being had, I can tell you I'm not part of them. But I will bring that back. And the way that I approached this was just basically talking to troopers, saying, how do you give information to corrections? And this is how they do it. And so I worked from there.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Yeah, I get it.

[Amy Farr]: Yeah. But I will reflect that in my conversations. Right.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Yeah, I think I understood you to say or imply that it doesn't necessarily need a victim's name or contact information. Can they do a designee, so to speak?

[Unidentified participant]: Yes.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Okay.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yep.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: And do they also then and this is probably tricky with the paper that Troy points out, but

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: do they then have that opportunity to rescind if they want to?

[Amy Farr]: This particular form, I think yes. I think they would have to call back to the, I guess, the trooper. But also, we're talking about a very short window. Friday to possibly Monday. Because if the person is not released, this information's gonna go to the state's attorney, and they're gonna then either opt in or opt out there. So I see what you're saying. It says victim's name, but I would like to add designee to that because I think for safety reasons, like you were talking about trauma earlier, I think often safety prevents people from getting services that are out there. It's not just the trauma piece. But thank you. Yeah. Thanks. Sure.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: So, you know, and just getting just trying to figure out some clarity, Amy. Thanks for sharing this with us, and

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: we will not put this out on the web anymore.

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

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Who so it says at the bottom, you know, once notification is made, primary corrections personnel shall email completed form. So someone's going to scan this and emailing it or they're taking a picture of

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: it and emailing it, and whose responsibility is

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: to get it in a database? And then who wouldn't it be better if someone typed this? I'm just backing It seems to me if it just got if it wasn't on this, but it was it was put in, you know, Sure.

[Amy Farr]: I I think the problem there is that we all have different databases.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Right.

[Amy Farr]: And the reason for that follow-up, that loop back to the trooper is that sometimes the troopers don't even know, and people expect them to know that someone's been released.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Right. Gotcha.

[Amy Farr]: And so the reason why we put that in like that, I think we did that for our own kind of benefit so that we could also know. We want the victims to know, but we also want to know if the person made bail. Because that is helpful for us to know if there is a safety concern in the community. So we are kind of using this form to make sure that it also comes back to law enforcement that someone's been released. Important to us. And right now, we don't know that either.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Gotcha. So,

[Amy Farr]: know, I think I see exactly what you're both saying. And this is you

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: of you asking. Yeah. It's all it's I'm just piggybacking on Troy. You know, it just seem like, it just seems like we're, it's just there's definitely an easier way. Yeah.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: And why aren't they all the same database?

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Yeah. Again,

[Amy Farr]: I'm not in those conversations.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Like,

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: could that happen?

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Or she can't control that.

[Amy Farr]: No, I know. I mean. I I I don't know. Yeah. I don't know.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: That's that goes along with everything else. Our state where our IT systems are they don't match and they're antiquated. It's it's a much larger picture.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Kevin, did you have something? So I guess I wanna ask the same question. It says, shall email completed form? Is that a photograph of it? Or is it faxed through? Do have a, you know how that would work?

[Amy Farr]: I think that's a really good question. I think once we're able to engage in that conversation with DOC, maybe we can talk about what is the best way to do that. And maybe that changes. And maybe it is email the sending trooper to confirm that notification has been made. I'm merely showing you what we have presented. And we've had no conversations about how this could be implemented or what DOC thinks about it.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: It's a proposal.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Yes. A proposal

[Rep. Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: for discussions to have. Yes. This is easier and smooth and doesn't put a lot on any of the departments that are working towards getting a very solid program going through to help victims.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Yeah, I do.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: So so just trying to get a bigger picture on this and trying to wrap my head around this. I know we've probably heard it before, but we need to hear it again. So you're working on a separate

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: computer system and a compute a whole different thing than DOC and Vine? Correct. There are three different things.

[Amy Farr]: Right. And then if you wanna add in the state's attorney system and the court system, you're you can add a couple more in there.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: So is it our responsibility to try to, like, address that and fix that? Yes. I'm like I'm like the model.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: I'm I'm like, funny at the time. You got Right. I

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: mean, she's broke.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: I guess.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Yeah. So I so what I I'm just trying to understand. It is and and

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: I guess what I'd like to do is ask Haley

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: about that. Haley, is it important for you to have your own system or would you rather have a system that's shared?

[Haley Sommer]: You're asking communications person about technology,

[Christa Murray]: which is never a good idea. I don't think I can answer that. I could. I'll answer it. So what it appears is happening is they're looking at, across the state, like a potential data warehouses or data lakes. So if we are going to all have different systems, then

[Unidentified participant]: in my opinion, would be into some sort of system that does what all of them need to do. Because you're not going to find a system that will support police and courts, safe juries, etcetera, likely why we all have our

[Christa Murray]: own different systems. So a

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: way to do it would

[Unidentified participant]: be to have a system that the data feeds into, that then does the data sharing. Okay. I don't work for ADS.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: That doesn't exist right now. Okay.

[Unidentified participant]: I think they're being built or there is some movement with, I don't know who, but I know there are some that are being developed, because we were talking about it for potentially using it for some of the data analytics we were looking to do across how our multitude of systems to be able to bring it together to report or look at all of our data.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Okay, thank you for that clarity. That helps.

[Amy Farr]: Who is doing this?

[Unidentified participant]: Or we were hoping it's screen shot.

[Christa Murray]: No, I believe EDS, but I speak That's to who we spoke to about doing analytics across all of our systems.

[Unidentified participant]: And they said that they had a data lake warehouse that we could potentially utilize to do that. Because

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: years ago, you could take many systems, figure out what data out of those systems that are standalone you want to provide. You download it into this one if you want to call query system, which has silos of information. Then anyone with the proper access can ask the questions that ties these different databases together. So, you still have the individual systems working. You don't compromise that, but the same data is fed to this one system that allows you to do queries. That would be

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: the short and funny answer is we're in 2026 acting like we're in 1986. Yes. Technology. '84.

[Rep. Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: They've been talking about the.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: No. No.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: I'm just. Oh yeah. Forever. I don't know what this means.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Yeah. ADS on

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: No. That was funeral panels.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Right. Yeah.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Yeah. The agency of digital services needs to talk to you if you wanna, you know Yeah. Yeah.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: I mean, some degree is bigger than that. I mean, there's much bigger entities than us that, for some strange reason can't make things work that should seemingly work. So any other questions on this specific thing?

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: So how long before this confidential draft gets approved so we figure out how to communicate this information to the right people?

[Haley Sommer]: That's on us. Yeah, and I apologize for that. We, of course, support it and want to ensure that it's not going to add too

[Christa Murray]: much of a burden on

[Haley Sommer]: our booking officers who are already very overburdened. And so there are conversations that we need to have with the facilities. Unfortunately, take accountability. I've not been persistent as much as I needed to be. So, we hope as soon as possible, and this is a good catalyst for continuing to engage in that conversation.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Because without this basic information, I can't imagine the buying system can work at all. I don't mean to be negative but I mean, this is most basic. You get me in a car accident. You immediately exchange information and then in my case, I find out that even though I thought the other person hit me, I'm at fault. But at least the information is exchanged so you know how to communicate. Right. And just to be clear, this is something that happens outside of Vine. I'm shit. Upload it. Yep.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Any other questions? And if not, then that is committee. Where do you guys wanna go from here?

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Thank

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: you, Ben.

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

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Is there anything specific, especially when we have these individuals in the world? We know we only get given, but what else? Is there anything else?

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: I'm going to be curious to follow-up on the language access piece and how many tablets and things like that, and who has access and who doesn't. It sounds like the DOC is going to see about doing that, right? Having more testimony about

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Yeah.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Details of that stuff.

[Meredith Pelkey]: Yeah. We're happy to do that.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Yeah. Awesome.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Number of Applets, you said?

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Or language access.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Yeah. Which places and how many and how does it work? Then All that's fine.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: You're gonna

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: find that out?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yeah.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Yeah. What else do we wanna know? We're just a second.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Why would it be reasonable to revisit this form and the use of it?

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: That's probably Who do think will be to give us that information now?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: The

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: The form, what it would be?

[Haley Sommer]: Think the conversation is going to take place between a couple of different folks and subject matter experts for DOC. So once we have that, I'll have a better answer for you. So it might

[Unidentified participant]: be best suited to speak

[Haley Sommer]: to it, but it might be

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: a few of us. Okay. And then James, I think this is probably already in the list from Alice, but that third bullet point, getting Hillary in here to see what we need to do to get the language from 13, let's say, to 28. Language. 13. This is to enable DOC to restore option. Yeah. The statute changes that we might need to figure out how to do this yet.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: What else? I don't wanna make everybody work until lunch. That's fine. Mean guy.

[Jennifer Pullman]: Mr. Vice Chair, I'm happy to send that statute right on to legislative council if that would be helpful to facilitate.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: That'd be great. You very much,

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Jennifer.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I'm sure Alice wrote that down,

[Rep. Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: but the intent for this group to continue to be meeting.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Right, Jennifer should have paid off.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: At least the monthly meetings going.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Everybody kinda

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: understands. Figure out to to date,

[Rep. Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: you know, because there are a number of questions. So

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Alright. So then but what we got this other thing. This is the memorandum. Do we need to go over this?

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: I don't know.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: That's still a work in progress. Yeah. Oh, it is. Yeah. So we don't need to that's okay.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: I don't think we need to do it right now, but we can. Mean, is there anything?

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Know if that's the

[Haley Sommer]: best suited to

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: This is a thing that this further testimony Kim can handle it. States attorneys. Yes.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Okay. Yes, Jennifer.

[Jennifer Pullman]: I already alerted attorney McManus that you will be looking for her, and she's the best person.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Great. Thank you, Jennifer. Alright.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Thank you. If nothing else, looking around. Well, yeah.

[Rep. Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: Or is there anything you need to share

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: with us? That we will oh, the boss is back. We we think we're done with the boss. We did all those things. We have a list of things we want to follow-up on.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: But Great.

[Rep. Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: Good. Sorry

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: I missed it. Well, we did fill out the form.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: We talked about some

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: other things. Jennifer is sending the language for thirteen USA to to Hillary. And then, you know, we said we wanna revisit this form at some point. Charlie said that they're gonna have a chat with DOC and somebody else before going back to us. We talked about language access and number of tablets, etcetera. And then we wanted to follow-up with Kim and Tim.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Good, sounds great. That's great. So we'll go through that. And of course, we're gonna have to Jennifer is gonna speak to some institutions this afternoon, then we can follow-up with Jen in terms of what happened there. And we'll talk to our legal counsel, Hillary Chittenden Ames, to talk about the Title 13, Title 28 connectivity, shifting possibly some things. So we'll be dealing with this a little bit more over the weeks ahead of us.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: And one last thing for Amy. Yes.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: So then what is the follow-up of this?

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: What does that look like?

[Amy Farr]: I'm waiting on DOC.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Okay. Yeah.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: That's what we just talked about.

[Christa Murray]: We'll work on it.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: I was

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: looking at my notes.

[Rep. Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: Do we have a time frame for that? Would hope that we could

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Perhaps.

[Rep. Brian Minier (Member)]: Okay. It's kind

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: of what you alluded to, few weeks, couple weeks.

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

[Christa Murray]: sure.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Hope you didn't, then maybe No.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: We can we can do that. Bye.

[Rep. James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Because we have you this week. Well, we didn't do anything.

[Rep. Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: That's we said. Mhmm. That's what we said in a couple of weeks. Yeah.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Okay. Brings it to April 15.

[Rep. Kevin Winter (Member)]: Thank you, ladies. This is Yeah.

[Rep. Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Anything else, folks? Thank you so much. Thank We'll be continuing the sessions, and thank you again. And I know Jennifer and the rest of you, but thank you for really coming together on that task force. So I think one thing maybe it did was build the level of trust between individual styles, which is really neat. Thank you. So Jennifer, you'll get us off of live. We are going to be back here four at one, and then we'll be back here at the floor with Eric Fitzpatrick to have a beginning conversation on the

[Meredith Pelkey]: forensic