Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Unidentified Committee Member]: You're live.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Welcome, folks. This is Staff Directions and Institutions Committee. It is Friday, April 10. And we have with us the Executive Director from NAMI of Vermont. So Laurie? Yes. And if you could identify yourself for the record and weigh in on s 193.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: Thank you very much. And thank you for inviting me to testify today. For the record, my name is Laurie Emerson. I'm the Executive Director at the National Alliance on Mental Illness of Vermont. We are an independent state chapter of the National Alliance on Mental Illness, and we're a statewide nonprofit grassroots organization. And our competency is our lived experience. So as an organization that's been established since 1984, We help support individuals with mental illness, their family members and the community. And we do that through support, education and advocacy. And who we serve in the community is really anybody and everybody because we all have mental health, and it's always on a continuum. I want to acknowledge before I start my testimony that the complexity of this bill, and also my testimony by no means is trying to be offensive to victims of crimes. We focus on the system of care and improving the system of care. And my testimony will mostly relate to the forensic facility in the bill. We've been criminalizing mental illness for a long time. And we oppose this bill, because of the forensics being in corrections. It is the wrong place to be able to help people. And the correctional system has really been the de facto system of care for those with mental illness. And this bill really reflects that and reinforces that as well. Miami Vermont supports treatment over punishment. And there are a large number of people that are in corrections that do have mental health concerns, much more than those with the three percent with severe functional impairment. And there is a medical system there in corrections that does help support people. I hear from family members that medically, sometimes their loved ones actually get better care because they're right there and they can get care through that system. However, with serious mental illness, and a forensic component. I don't think we're really looking at this bill in a way of what's really needed for care. Having a, for instance, a forensic psychiatrist will be needed because these are people with very, very special needs. And everybody is very unique in that treatment plan. And we can't have the expectation that somebody with a medical license will be able to provide this care. And we have built a system of care that supports people with mental illness. It's a very specialty care. It takes special training. And being able to put a forensic facility in collections is not the way to go. We're really going backwards in that direction, that if people are to get forensic psychiatric care, they need it with those experts that can give it to them. Just to kind of go over some of the how we want to prioritize treatment and not punishment. We need to remember that mental illness affects the way people think, feel and act. And psychosis is a symptom of mental illness, where someone loses contact with reality. So bringing somebody restoring their competency to be able to stand trial. You know, there's lots of concerns in the bill with that particular area with having the contracted healthcare system be able to provide that care for somebody with psychosis. What they need is twenty four seven care until they are stabilized. And the mental health system of care really wants that least restrictive care which NAMI Vermont supports that, you know, our goal is to be able to have the right care at the right time, and in the right place. So asking yourself those questions as you go through this bill, is this the right care? Is this the right timing to get the help? Is this the right case? And I would say no to all of that. We really want to focus on those community supports moving this upstream, it's all about prevention. But there are some that do have a serious mental illness. And that's one in twenty Vermonters. But this is more of a complex situation where there's also a crime involved in that. So what could treatment look like? You know, looking at other best practices, looking at evidence based programs, it's being able to provide the right medication, therapies like CBT, cognitive behavioral therapy for psychosis, having peer support, education, case management, social workers, and other therapies that might be needed like electroconvulsive therapy, transcranial brain stimulation, all of these methodologies can help. And it's not just one thing. It's not just medicine in order to achieve recovery. And that's what we all want. We want rehabilitation for people who are incarcerated. However, looking at this bill, it really looks like it's punishment. And it's not rehabilitation. Especially looking at how people could be at any correctional facility, there's not going to be just one facility. How can you get the 20 fourseven support for those special needs of that person? You would have to hire people in every single facility. And as well, looking at that, they're in general population. We really don't see that as a therapeutic environment for people. The correctional officers would be the mental health technicians. They don't have the training, they don't have the clinical experience, but that would be the expectation. So what if that person is in crisis? What will they do? Do they have the training to intervene? Those are all the questions you need to ask yourself with this bill. We need specialized care for this small group of people. We need a forensic psychiatry unit. We need to have a system of care in place. In the bill, it also mentions that while in corrections, they're gonna restore competency. Is this a best practice? Is this evidence based? No. How are you gonna put all of those things in place that are gonna help restore somebody to competency in a correctional environment. Let's also look at the correction system, they have the medical healthcare, they have a certain formulary that they also go with in corrections, which may not be the same formulary that they use at a psychiatric unit. And restoring somebody's competency may involve that medication. And are these medications going to be supportive of restoring competency? I'm just concerned that the only focus will be on medication and maybe not the right medication for somebody who needs a different type of care plan. There are many different rules and standards if you look at psychiatric inpatient care, and you look at corrections. So, some of these rules, if you're an inpatient, they're going to make sure there's no ligature risks. They are monitored and there are standards with CMS that they ensure people are going to be safe, that they will not try to take their life. And if they do, they hopefully prevented all of those means. Corrections? No. That doesn't happen. What about seclusion and restraint when that's needed for a patient? What does that look like in inpatient? What does that look like in corrections? Seclusion and restraint and corrections is very traumatic. There is no time limit. Or maybe they do have a time limit, but if you're an inpatient, it's minimal time. It's using right what do I wanna say, strategies to be able to administer a involuntary treatment correctly because it is very harmful. It can be very, very harmful for people. Also looking at the staffing ratios. What kind of staffing ratios are we gonna see when they're in corrections? Your correctional officer overseeing things. This is somebody with special needs that needs medical attention. I'll stop there and ask if you have any questions.

[James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Just articulate your thoughts or your position. I'm not hearing and correct me if I'm missing something. I'm not hearing you necessarily opposed to a secure lock facility that provides appropriate psychiatric care. You are opposed to that secure lock facility being a correctional facility. Does that feel accurate?

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: I want to see the right care in the right place. And that is not it.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: The correctional facility.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Right.

[James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: What I'm getting at, is when we're talking about the intersection of the significant mental illnesses that we're talking about with the criminality that we're talking about, is your organization opposed to still considering a secure locked facility?

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: The inpatient psychiatric units are secure locked facilities. And sometimes it is for the safety of people.

[James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Okay. So there's not an opposition to that in and of itself. Is that what I'm hearing? Correct.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: Although we do want the least restrictive care. It's only as needed for those safety reasons. And there are some family members that talk about how their family member may run off because of their psychosis, and that could be a danger to them or others. But the majority of people are not violent. Right? It is for this very few people that we're talking about Luneau's bill. Thank you.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: I'm thinking about the case if this bill does pass and this does come to fruition and what could be done in those facilities. And so there's this concern that the formulary could be different. Doesn't have to be true. There's a concern about ligature risks, which I think DOC is already trying to be aware of. Certainly not to say that it's perfect.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: DOC has to be aware of?

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Yes.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Yes, they do.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: They have to have their facilities.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: There was concern about being in gen pop. We don't necessarily have to do that. There was concern about having people in every facility. I think we've been led to believe that it would be two or possibly three of the six facilities. None of this is ideal. I guess what I'm asking is, could you see it working? What are the absolute obstacles? The one that stands out clearest to me, I'll just say, is the COs acting in place of mental health professionals on a 20 fourseven basis. That's one that's a glaring problem to me.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: It's not creating a system of care that's a therapeutic environment that will help in that recovery of somebody. And that really needs to be the focus, treatment, not punishment. And if you just want punishment, with how the bill is written.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: And I guess DOC would then respond that they're supposed to be a rehabilitative enterprise for our constitution.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: But Vermont doesn't have that as far as competency restoration. It's building that system as well. That system is not in place.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I want you to say that again. Because that was gonna be my question. Do we have a system of care in Vermont for the restoration of competency? Regardless of this bill, do we have currently a system in place for the restoration of competence to stand trial? I would

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: say there's not a system, there are strategies in place. But being systematic means that you're using best practices, evidence based models to be able to create

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: a program that restores people. We have that or we do not have that?

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: I don't believe we have that. I believe that people are being restored by going to an inpatient facility, being treated with medication. But that's not for everybody, right? Restoring competency, there's many different factors of whatever that condition might be to restore people. And there are many states that do it actually quite well and maybe investigating those models.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yeah, and then Joe.

[Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: I agreed with everything you said. My concern is what you just said is I'm not sure we have capacity today to do what we would like to do. So the question in my mind is, what should we do in the interim to protect the individuals who have broken the law and the people who haven't broken the law? That's and and this this in my mind isn't the best but it's better than what we're doing today. That's that's what I'm trying to understand is what would you recommend in the absence of this which is a step in the direction. I would love to have a separate facility with everything you described so that the individuals who broke the law would be secured from the outside to hurt others, but get the restorative help that they need. But we don't have that today.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: Right. I oppose this bill and codifying this bill says that Vermont is okay with putting a forensic facility in corrections and not giving people the right care. So it's a step in the wrong direction. What happened when a few years back when they can bring this forward, there was talk of putting a forensic unit in the same location as the Vermont Psychiatric Care Hospital.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And now we're talking about having it in corrections. The issue there was we lose Medicaid funding for the state hospital because Medicaid does not cover forensic beds. That's the issue.

[Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: Yeah, it's a dollars and cents problem. Everything else is good deal.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: It's a difficult decision. We don't have an answer. All I can say is how do we support people with mental illness?

[Unidentified Committee Member]: And it always Alright. So this bill contemplates individuals who, if if they were deemed fit to stand trial, could could face a life sentence. That's that's the only class that it includes. And by and we've been advised it's around five or six people at any given time, which means it'll always be a money problem. But I'm curious if the questions ever asked if they're joining states with more critical mass, like New York or that that have these facilities. I and I don't know the answer to that. Or maybe the state could just have give you some sort of interstate compact for these individuals. Somebody must have asked this.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: That would be on our policy committees. I

[Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: don't know.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: I I don't know

[Unidentified Committee Member]: the answer to that. But if, you know, five or six individuals, you might be able to get them, you know, the service they they need, in which case, the choice we're being asked to make it, you know, maybe it's a false choice. It's not only building these facilities. You then have to staff them. And even if everybody's in the same shit in music today, that's something that's probably years away. It's a creative thought. Actually, it wasn't even my thought. There was a member outside this morning.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: A

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Burlington member, not this guy. Brian

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Minier.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Is there any world in which you take all of your concerns and they get addressed by having the right formulary, by having these folks in their own wing, by having the correct sort of peer support, by having the right of staffing. And I know it seems very unlikely that all this is going to happen, that this is acceptable in my correctional facility.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: In a correctional facility?

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Yeah.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: Not with other inmates.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: And even if they're segregated from them in a separate way?

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: I mean, it's a possibility. I think that's the decision, you know, you folks need to make. It's this is really tough. And it was really, really difficult for me to even put our testimony together. And really our position is we need to treat people when they have and mental illness is a medical illness. And then it's a complex issue because you're bringing in criminality with this too. So you need a very specialized expertise to help this population.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: I I guess I'm asking the difference between can't work and won't work. This can't be made to work or this isn't going to work because we know about human nature, know about state finances, we know that problem's over, they can't or won't, or both.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I'm

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: just gonna say we oppose the Fair enough. And this specific strategy to achieve this.

[James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Yep.

[Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: So I appreciate the fact that you talked about, because we discussed it yesterday about when years ago, a few number of years ago, we talked about the forensic possibly being in the medical hospital in Berlin, and again, for the reasons you heard. I guess where I get a little challenged in the discussions, and I don't know what your working relation has been with the agency of mental health. But discussion about a forensic facility has been going on for many years. And we seem to keep going around the bend and never getting there to really do the right thing to have a facility that keeps not only the person who unfortunately committed the crime with mental illness and the general public safe, where are they in this picture? I'm really challenged, and I was very challenged by their lack of testimony the other day when they were here. And I don't see forthcoming from there, but what has your relationship been with the agency of working with them? Do you see a picture of the direction that you think is appropriate to go down, or have you worked with them and have been said, no, no, no?

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: Back a few commissioners back, there was the strategic plan of Vision 2030. And one of the things that was not really highlighted in there was this collaborative relationship between Department of Mental Health and Department of Corrections, because there are times when it's become the de facto system of care in corrections. There should be more collaboration there, but yeah, it's more separation because you're either under the Department of the Commissioner of Department of Mental Health or the Commission of Department of Corrections. So there really needs to be more integration that didn't really come out. That was one of my concerns in the report was lack of focus on that. And I think here in Vermont, we've been advocating for a different system of care too, where we had 989, someone to call, mobile crisis team, someone to respond, and then having mental health urgent care facilities somewhere to go. That must have taken a good ten years of talk before we finally got to that point. I would say I'm hopeful, but it takes too long. It takes a really, really long time of, we got to keep advocating over and over and over and over for this to be able to get something done, and bringing it to the forefront. It is improving that system of care and it's slow going, it's happening, all of that. 988 is 20 but the others are not 20 and they should be, And that could help. We need to move this all upstream so it doesn't get to this point that we're building more institutions. We don't want to do that. I don't know if I answered your question. Probably do.

[Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: I just had wondered what your relationship being that you've been a long time group dealing with mental illnesses. Just wondered kind of what your interaction.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: Yeah. I'm on a lot of advisory committees. I'm on a lot of state advisory committees. So always wearing the hat from the family perspective, which includes individuals with mental illness. And I'm at the table to voice that perspective. So I would say we have a good relationship where we can share that information.

[Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: Well, you must also well, you not must, but I would think you would also see the concern for the victims as well. And that's it's a tough, you know, fine line there. Yeah. Because they're struggling very hard as well with what's happened to possibly one of their loved ones and trying to find a place. Actually the folks that I've spoken with in our area that have had situations that have been pretty tough. They've always said, and they said, you know, we want the person to be who's committed the crime to be safe as well and have the therapy, but also we want the public as well, so there is a combination of the two.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: Yes. Yeah. There is quite a balance. And we feel great empathy and sympathy for the victims of the families. And how do we build a system of care that will not only support the people, those five people that are in it, but also to create a system of care that it doesn't get to that.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Have a lot of questions here. Shawn.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Sure. First, Lori, thanks so much for coming in with less than twenty four hours notice. Glad to absorb. With our colleague, Donni, you're not here at the moment. She often has that phrase, Nothing about us without us, right? And kind of piggybacking on Representative Morrissey's question, I'm just wondering if there was stakeholder input throughout the process on developing a plan for this forensic facility and relatedly, if the mental health advocacy community had an opportunity to weigh in on the Senate side because the 29 to one vote is a bit peculiar to me because I'm seeing real issues right away here. I'm just wondering if people had all the information they needed to make an intelligent decision on this.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: Right. Advocacy organizations definitely need to be involved in this process to be able to hear that perspective. And I understand the complications that the state has and the administration has, but yet, you need to weigh everybody's experiences. And we're an organization that can advocate for that improved system of care, whereas the state really can't. But they're trying to put a system in place. We don't agree with it. We should have input into this process. We did not have input into this process.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Thank you. Kevin, Shawn?

[Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: I don't I don't wanna put the committee through the personal story that I'm aware of, but I wanna put it into a question. Is there any capacity within Vermont, any mechanism within Vermont other than petitioning the court to have an individual who is, has demonstrated the tendency to harm themselves and the real potential of harming others to, I'm gonna use the word, force them to get the help they need.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: There is laws in place to do that.

[Kevin Winter (Member)]: That's by petitioning the court.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: And

[Kevin Winter (Member)]: then them finding them in need of this help. Of

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: treatment, yes.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: And then where would they go?

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: So first there would be an assessment to determine whether they need treatment. And then there are many different legal steps. So you may want to get somebody, maybe legal aid, to talk about all of those steps that need to happen before somebody is involuntarily committed. It is quite a long process.

[Kevin Winter (Member)]: Right. But if the court says we agree with the petitioner, where do we provide that help for these people today? Right. Well, what do we have?

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: So there are inpatient psychiatry hospitals. Some take involuntary patients, which is if there is a legal mandate, it would be involuntary. So I think that there are maybe three that take, three or four hospitals that take involuntary patients.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Okay.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So this is the state hospital. The state psychiatric hospital takes involuntary. There's 14 beds at the retreat that takes involuntary and there's six beds in room. There's about 50 beds in the system that's state operated. Then there could be some within some hospitals.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: And then they're moving through the system of care because it's all about the least restrictive care. So they're not gonna stay there. They're going to keep stepping down. And eventually some people will make it to the River Valley Therapeutic program in Essex, where it's a very therapeutic environment, but still they need that security. So it is a locked facility.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Right.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: And that's more longer term.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And that's stigma. That's our sit down facility. So when someone comes into the state system involuntarily, and they could be housed here in Berlin, that's for your acuity. And once that levels off and you're stabilized and you're not in such an acute state,

[Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: you can then

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: step down to River Valley.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: So it's all about the We continuum of care, need those step downs everywhere until you get to the community and are being supported through the community.

[Kevin Winter (Member)]: Okay, so I think I heard you say fifteen, twenty beds.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Yeah, no, in the system we have almost 50 beds for the acute and the involuntary.

[Kevin Winter (Member)]: But the problem becomes the ones someone is given that help. There's funding for it or by mixing problems. Instead of these individuals being incarcerated in prison, could we utilize these 50 beds?

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: You lose Medicaid.

[Kevin Winter (Member)]: So that's the If problem there's

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: a criminal factor and it's a forensic. You can house them if you don't term it forensic beds. But if you term it forensic beds, you lose Medicaid for that whole facility.

[Kevin Winter (Member)]: So we're back to the dollars since that's

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: part of the issue.

[Kevin Winter (Member)]: Because an individual, just to finish and then I'll stop, an individual that's willing to take pills to try to take their life, That does work. Then alcohol would take their life. Then a combination of alcohol and driving the vehicle to kill themselves. Thankfully, he didn't die. Thankfully, he didn't hit someone and kill someone. So, the petition to get him into one of these 50 beds, I say that because I don't know how else to say it, to me would be the right thing to do. But right now, we don't have a vehicle.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: That situation there doesn't have a criminal factor

[Kevin Winter (Member)]: to it. No, but it could have because he could have hit someone and killed someone. Correct. That would have fled him into the situation potentially.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And I'll

[Kevin Winter (Member)]: bet you there's a lot more than five people in the state of Vermont that are in this situation.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: But then you get into the court, is there a hospital request for determining competency or is it a non hospital order? So then you get into that complexity, which is the judiciary world. So there's some avenues in there as well for that. And this particular piece of legislation would take care of that situation in case the charge of the criminal activity is punishable by a life sentence. That's very narrow.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Shawn? Hi, Lori. Hi. So quick question. Would it that people need do you see when someone these five people who are here, five, six people here in Vermont, is it important for them to be here in Vermont, or would it be okay if we could meet all their needs that you're talking about, but they were over at the psychiatric facility in Marcy, New York, would that be okay? Yes. I just a quick you know, New York has one of the largest and most developed forensic mental health systems in The US. They've built this already.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: I know whose jurisdiction? Is it the agency of human services?

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: New York State So, Office of Mental they're four hours away from us, right here, they have all the things you're talking about, but they wouldn't be close to their families. Right, and that's And I'm just wondering, what's more important, giving them everything they need except for the access to their families, or leaving them in prison right now, not getting anything? Because that's kind of what we're Right, looking at right

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: right. People need the right care.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: I know, and I get that, and they would get the right care there. They would get, actually, some of the best care in The United States there, and that's four hours away from here, and we don't have to build it, we just have to get them over there.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: And I think it's, you know, looking at that advocacy goal we have, the right care, the right time, in the right place.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: The right place we might not be getting on them. I don't know, it sounds like it's the right place as a place for them to go to get the care they need. But while we're trying to figure that out here in this state where we don't have any money to do basically anything, we can't even build schools for the kids that need them, to sit here, I get what you're saying, and I hear you, and I wish that I had a pot of gold that I could reach in and say, here's $50,000,000, let's build this facility, that's not gonna happen. So I'm trying to creatively find a place to take care of these people. And right there, right four hours away that way, we can do that for them. Is that something that you could get on board with is what I'm asking?

[Unidentified Committee Member]: If it was even an option.

[Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: I'm

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: just, you're here.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: I think this is such a difficult decision, right? I mean, this is a complex topic And we want people to get the right treatment. Eventually, yes, we need to be doing something here in Vermont. And it has to be the right thing. We shouldn't just be throwing people in corrections.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: This isn't a corrections facility either.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: No. But I'm saying if we go with this bill

[James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Right.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: Staying with the same model, it's

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Right. I'm just looking for another avenue to I'm Yeah.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: You know? Yeah. That's an option.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Because I I keep seeing us we're we're we have been looping in circles for twenty years. Right. So I'm just trying to say, what can we do for these people now today? And this seems like I don't know what it would cost for them to to to be there on a daily basis, but

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: You gotta negotiate.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Right.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: And you gotta negotiate under whose state are they subject to.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Just throwing it out there.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: It's for all of you too.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: How we

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: get to make it. That's how we get to the hospital.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: And I just wanna provide to you the concerns that you should be looking at as you make your decisions.

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

[James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: I just wanna clarify, you did say it's an option. It's an option.

[Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: My concern is in the absence of something, we are handling these five people some way. We are right now, yes. So, worst case, this at least helps us understand we need to be doing the best we can. Whereas in the absence of this, we're still gonna take care of them. But least there's some structure around this where right now we're making it up as we go. I don't wanna say it that way but. Yeah. I mean. I would. We're handling these five, six people but at least this has some structure.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: Yeah. I totally oppose the bill.

[Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: We we understand that. Yeah.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: One last thing too, just for the committee to hear is that New Hampshire is a prison based forensic state. So there is. Oh, okay.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: They they just built it's gonna be opening in June, they said, a new forensic facility.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: That's not prison based. Right? Correct. Yeah. So they are moving away from it.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Yes. Do know how many beds?

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: 26, I think.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Do you know where it's gonna be located?

[Unidentified Committee Member]: I'm not

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: sure. You can Google it.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: I didn't I didn't come in come up that day.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: But it's opening soon. It was, like, $23,000,000.

[James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Do you know when that started? I said 15. I did not. No.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: But I did find it in my research.

[Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: Think I haven't been interested.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: How long is the one in the Hampshire that's been under their correctional system? You know where it's located?

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: Don't. I don't. I'm sure you could probably find more information online. But just in my own research, it's been a long, long time that it's been housed in corrections before.

[James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: I'm going

[Unidentified Committee Member]: to look at the legislation to see

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: what it

[Unidentified Committee Member]: took to get that new facility to open in June. Might be

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Where it's located.

[James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Yeah.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Mhmm. Make a difference.

[Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: So so would that be an option as well? Would that be an option as well?

[Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: It's under construction in Concord, New Hampshire. Concord. And it's adjacent to the existing New Hampshire hospital.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Oh, all right.

[Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: It's expected to be completed in 2027.

[James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Or early? If it's opening in June. Anything

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: else for Laurie?

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Laurie, thank you so much.

[Laurie Emerson, Executive Director, NAMI Vermont]: Alright. Thank you so much, Laura.

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

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Started in the eighties.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: Started.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Or even earlier. It's been the forensics has been in correctional facilities in the No.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: That's the New Hampshire hospital.

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: Well, Yeah. So that would be rebuild.

[Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: That'd be a possibility as well.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: To get interstate contact. Yeah.

[Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: To be

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Oh, Marcy. Oh, you'll

[Joseph "Joe" Luneau (Member)]: never be able to say. We're looking at the I mean,

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So the committee, it's twenty at twelve. And so we have the defendant Thank you. Have the defendant general coming in at twelve. Okay, so we're gonna I'm gonna see if we can push him to 12:15 so you can get a half hour lunch. There's a half hour lunch. Come back at 12:15. I have a meeting at 12:30 that I need to go to. So we'll get you both started. It's gonna be on s January.

[Unidentified Committee Member]: Yep.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: My meeting will last a half hour, so just hang in there. If you can think of things that you want to take for scheduling next week, please do that ASAP Because he's working on the schedule for next week. We're going to be working on this 01/1993 next week.

[James Gregoire (Vice Chair)]: Sending you all the New Hampshire legislation. I haven't read it yet, but I think

[Shawn Sweeney (Clerk)]: If I find out more about Marci, I'll share with you guys.

[Mary A. Morrissey (Member)]: So this could be followed soon.

[Alice M. Emmons (Chair)]: So we're still live. So we will take