Meetings
Transcript: Select text below to play or share a clip
[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: We are live.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay. Richard, here and everything. Okay. So this is center of preparation. We're taking our bills today, Thursday, March 19. And now we're gonna take up s one ninety three. We have lodge counsel to just give us the high notes, particularly why you made the the bills and appropriations.
[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Okay. Would you like me to share my screen, or should I just give you sort of a overview?
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: You can give us an overview. I don't I don't think we need to see the languages because we're not gonna get into that kind of level of detail.
[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: So Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel, s one ninety three is a bill about forensic facility. I know you have seen several bills about a forensic facility over the past, let's say, ten years. This variation is a little bit different in that this is a forensic facility that would be operated by Department of Corrections. The population that would be eligible for services at the forensic facility is greatly narrowed from previous iterations that have come to you. In this particular iteration, the individual would have had to had committed or alleged to have committed a serious violent crime, and the person would have been found incompetent to stand trial or not guilty by reason of insanity. So that's the population that is served by the forensic facility. In the bill itself that came out of Senate judiciary, there is not a lot of detail about what how the forensic facility will be structured, and I think that's maybe what you're interested in. Like, is it a standalone facility? Is it not? But since it has come out of committee, Senate Health and Welfare and Senate institutions where I'm going next has been doing some work on an amendment to provide a little bit more guardrails, for lack of a better word, regulation around the clinical services and protections that would be in place for individuals receiving care in a friend's facility. They have decided not to have language that the facility has to be a There standalone is language that individuals receiving services at the facility would be in a community like residential setting, and that they would have access to 20 fourseven care that would be available available to them. I'm trying to think what else. Oh, there's also language that it the language that there would be an opportunity for multiple forensic facilities or more than one if the clinical need of individuals dictated that there were forensic facility services, you know, provided in two different locations. But in terms of, you know, a specific where is this gonna be, what is it gonna look like, the bill doesn't have that. It has a report back for more of that information. But the bill kind of creates the court process to allow for persons to come to a forensic facility and has some parameters around the clinical services they'll receive there, some rule making provisions, and some report back provisions. And the forensic facility language, I think, takes effect let's see. We said eighteen months. So 01/01/2028. I have to double check that.
[Patrick "Pat" Brennan (Clerk)]: Yeah. Okay. Did I remember The rulemaking begins on 07/01/2026 and then section four a, I remember what that one is, that happens the next year and then that's the forensic facility definitions. Yeah. So 01/01/2028
[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: is when the process, the court processes by which somebody could come to a forensic facility would be in place.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: So maybe I was gonna ask the commissioner of corrections here, but I'll ask you first. So the part of the bill that says the Commissioner of Corrections shall establish and operate a locked secure facility. That's on page 11. Is that either not going into effect right away or that's the part that I think people think, well, that means you gotta have a forensic facility.
[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: That takes effect 01/01/2028.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay. So that's the key part. So between now and '28, what happens to these
[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Rulemaking. Okay. And to
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: these court back. These individuals?
[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: The status quo. So if somebody is determined not guilty by reason of insanity, they would go to the community. Or if they have a serious mental health condition, have a clinical need for an order of hospitalization or nonhospitalization, they would be treated through DMH's system.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Okay. And that happens January before January. Rule making?
[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Rule making? Yes. Hold on. That's in the amendment.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: I have a rulemaking amendment? I don't think so. It gets on second five of the
[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: you probably don't have the amendment in front of you because
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Is this an amendment?
[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Actually an amendment coming from all of the members of senate health and welfare. They decided on that this morning. Potentially, members of Senate institutions are also going to sign So on
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: to do lot of strategy. And
[Patrick "Pat" Brennan (Clerk)]: then And over there next
[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: to see who wants to sign on. So let's see. The rules section five, rulemaking. The rulemaking takes effect on 07/01/2026, meaning they would commence the process of adopting rules on 07/01/2026. And there has been testimony that the eighteen month window between when their authority to adopt rules and their authority to open a forensic facility would be sufficient to get rules in place. And then I know this committee is curious about more structurally what the facility would look like. And there is a report back that asks for more details on that piece. Where is it going to be and how is it going to be structured?
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Yeah. And that's why we asked the commissioner to come in and maybe give us a little so if there are no other questions for the council, we'll ask the commissioner to come up. Thank
[Commissioner John Murad, Vermont Department of Corrections]: you. Okay.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Thank you commissioner for making yourself available on short notice.
[Commissioner John Murad, Vermont Department of Corrections]: Thank you, sir. I am John Murad for the sake of the record. I'm John Murad. I am the commissioner for the Vermont Department of Corrections.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: So the main question is, yeah, because we're mainly concerned or mainly concerned about the finances or what kind of cost impact. So you're required to do a lot of things in this bill. There's no appropriation in here. So I just wanted to make sure we heard from you that if you think there's unfunded mandates of your department in here or if you're concerned about those kind of things.
[Commissioner John Murad, Vermont Department of Corrections]: As I read, when this bill was in its earliest stages, and I will confess I'm not fully aware of all the changes that have made in the current version as it may exist. Mean, even some of the things that council just mentioned are slightly different than versions I had seen. So forgive me for that. But as we as it was discussed initially, frankly, this did not represent a tremendous change in operations Corrections. Yes, it would entail some additional personnel primarily through our healthcare contracted healthcare provider WellPath. And that is a service that they can provide, we would have to have contract adjustments, of course, of unknown amount at this time. But certainly not, you know, we're not talking about tremendous increases in staff or in capacity. And that is a service that they do provide in other states to other correctional clients. With regard to facility, frankly, the people this is envisioned to address are already in our custody. We have a number of people in our custody who are currently awaiting trial for charges such as those envisioned by this proposed bill, charges mostly that have to do with murder and have to do with extreme acts of violence that would result in potential life imprisonment. Many of those individuals are in our custody and are currently incompetent or are in various stages. Competency can be fluid. Sometimes you can have it and then lose it again and then regain it. And a component of this is the provision of medical services that would restore competency or or make efforts to restore competency. In that respect, this does not represent a significant change to our operations. It represents an additional level of service for people who are already in our custody. It also, I think, clarifies in the law and for any number of parties that these individuals should in fact be in a correctional setting while awaiting trial. That is not always clear at this moment. There have been instances in which people who are accused of really horrific crimes have been moved back and forth from corrections to a community location to corrections again, while awaiting competency restoration or while undergoing competency evaluations, let me say instead. I think this clarifies that and would make correctional facilities the default. And that's, I think, a good thing for public safety in the state.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: So it could be a forensic facility, but it's fully within the correction facility, an existing correction facility. Like, these cells or this part of the facility, we'd say that's our forensic facility.
[Commissioner John Murad, Vermont Department of Corrections]: Just as we do right now for people that are helped with us in this capacity.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Yeah. Because I think in the past, there was always efforts to build a new facility. When people think this that's what they need in here, that you're you're gonna have
[Commissioner John Murad, Vermont Department of Corrections]: to build all of this. So That is not something that the Department of Corrections envisions, nor is it something that anybody has appropriated funds for. Yeah. Right.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: So that was the concern I think of the and maybe this was a a way of making it without appropriating the money more. So you can you can do this and plan to do it within your facilities. There might be an increase to the well path contract. Affirmative. It's different services. Yeah.
[Commissioner John Murad, Vermont Department of Corrections]: I think more than might be. I think that were we to do this, there would be an increase to that well path contract and additional services that we would require of them. And those services would be, you know, to meet the needs of individuals and get them to a place where they can then receive due process for the things in which they're accused.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Any comments? So we don't have an amendment because there's no real cost in here. This would just be a straight vote committee.
[Patrick "Pat" Brennan (Clerk)]: There's a lot of work in it, but there's not a lot of cost.
[Commissioner John Murad, Vermont Department of Corrections]: There is I believe that the the report in October would be where we would understand what those costs may or may not be.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: And you have some expense for rulemaking.
[Patrick "Pat" Brennan (Clerk)]: Rulemaking. There'll be a look report with DMH, Dale, and, you you know, within the AHS to look at options and opportunities within them. That that's in the health care proposed amendment that you see. It's and it's on our web page so you can see it there. Okay. Wonderful. Thank you. Be in judiciary tomorrow. Senator Norris?
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Yes. We haven't seen that amendment yet. I'm sure that's what the cost my question commissioner is, WellPath is already providing these services to what approximately three to five individuals within your facilities?
[Commissioner John Murad, Vermont Department of Corrections]: Not competency restoration per se, sir. They are capable of providing it in that they provide it for other states for people in other states, not for us, we don't have a mechanism for that. So what we provide is the medical care that we provide any other member of our incarcerated community. But competency restoration, which is a relatively specific kind of practice is not something that we currently address. That would have to be right now addressed outside or and that has at times been the rationale for removing people who are credibly accused of really troubling crimes out of a correctional facility in order to be able to obtain those kinds of services. I think being able to provide them inside makes for a safer situation for all involved.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Thank you. Okay, that's very helpful. Thank you. Any other questions? Okay, thank you for your time.
[Commissioner John Murad, Vermont Department of Corrections]: Thank you, sir.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: It was so available when I left our committee. I will entertain a motion to move. I'll move the bill. Okay, The clerk will clerk away.
[Patrick "Pat" Brennan (Clerk)]: Remember the bill last year? Last year?
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: Just a board. Just a board. Was there a kid or s 193? S 193. Think that's one ninety two. Senator Baruth. Senator Brennan. Yes. Senator Lyons. Yes. Senator Norris. Yes. Senator Watson? Yes. Senator Westman?
[Richard Westman (Member)]: Yep. Senator Perchlik? Yes. Who's reporting? I don't know.
[Patrick "Pat" Brennan (Clerk)]: Let's see their hammer. I better
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: I haven't seen the amendment, so it's all yours. I'm
[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: glad to report it.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: No worries. A lot about it. But you're Yeah.
[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: There's very little report.
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: There is. Okay. But there will be in that memo. Okay.
[Patrick "Pat" Brennan (Clerk)]: No. It will increase the well path. Yeah. Well well path was So came in today and
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: talked about to me. We'll take a break doing what we have to get pledge counsel here for 323.
[Katie McLean, Office of Legislative Counsel]: Oh, good.
[Patrick "Pat" Brennan (Clerk)]: 323. And then
[Senator Andrew Perchlik (Chair)]: And then we'll see if we can move up 222. We have 3 23.