Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Okay, we are back in Senate institutions on 04/15/2026, and we have Commissioner Manoli and Commissioner Mirat, respectively, Department of Buildings and General Services and Department of Corrections. And we're here to get information on the women's reentry and correctional facility. So thank you for being here. Thank you all. Thank you. So I know that we I know Joe Major came in. I believe it was on Tuesday or Thursday of last week and did an overview of this project and the cost estimates. If I am correct, madam chair, you were out that day. And so I've asked we've been asked to come in and just kind of give a high level, I think, on the policy and some things that are occurring. So roughly or currently, there's approximately a little under I think $15,000,000 that is currently appropriated to the women's correctional facility from previous capital bills. And we didn't seek any further money for this project at this time because as

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: you

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: are well aware, we were working with Essex. We had completed a permit. We had put in working with the community of Essex and looking at some state owned land in Essex to build a women's correctional facility. It's really when the commissioner and I really got an opportunity to meet and start working together and to visually thinking about what does this mean, where does it go, what are the needs. I think all of you know, if you don't know that the community did not support the placement of the woman's right shoulder. I feel that the community worked really hard and asked really good questions and we were able to work together with them and provide them, but at the end of the day our request to rezone the property to fill the correctional facility was not approved. So, after that, the commissioner and I and our teams, we sat down and VGS looked at where do we go from here, let's have a conversation, let's talk about it. We talked about reuse of the South Burlington facility. There are opportunities, there are limited opportunities at the South Burlington site and would have a long term, we'd have to move the females out to reconstruct. We do have some limits with the site and the design basically would be a multiple floor design, which is not a preference from an operating standpoint. So we looked at that. We looked at could we look at reentry differently and somehow use that site. We talked about do we wanna look at Windsor? And that sorry, something. Do I look right at you when I said that? But the Windsor property is permitted. So we started looking at where do we have existing facilities that we are already permitted for this type of puncture and is that gonna make more sense? So we explored Windsor and I'm just summarizing and please jump in if I misstate. Windsor's a beautiful site. We could. I don't think the community would be pleased with us because they've had other visions of that site for a long time. Also, distance. I'll let the commissioner speak to this, but his workforce is from Chittenden County and people who work within the correctional facility that support that function and those services live around that. There are more that live around that area than ones that commute. And the commissioner has been very, very sensitive to that because, let me talk about just about how, with the number of staffing that you have there.

[Sen. Russ Ingalls (Member)]: Yes, so we do, there

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: is a difference between male prisoners and female prisoners, and they are, the way in which we approach them is different, the way in which we house them is different, the programming that we offer is different, The opportunities that the community wants to give to incarcerated women are different than those that they want to give to incarcerated men. And as a result, there has grown up around the facility in South Burlington an entire ecosystem of services and opportunities that includes the staff who lived there and who are experienced in working with women and have grown. That's where they commute. We don't have staff members there who live down in Brattleboro, for example. The services, the Lund Center is right across the street, essentially, right around the corner, and offers a program called Kids Apart to ensure that mothers are able to maintain contact with their kids, incarcerated mothers. There are a lot of things that are grown up around that site. Therefore, keeping it in a specific area is really opportune for us. It's certainly what we want the most. But there are a lot of things that we would like that we may not be able to get. The perfect piece of land and the perfect situation with regard to geography probably doesn't exist. Certainly doesn't exist in a way that we have ready access to. Okay. And so we did end up, we worked with BGS hand in hand to promulgate an RFP around asking for certain kinds of property within a certain area. It does not get anywhere near Windsor. Windsor, again, positives, state owned, permitted, ready to go, some experience, or long experience with having a facility there. Downsides, way too far for the current staff of CRCF to relocate. Probably too far for many of our service providers to continue to provide service. So those are really large challenges for us. The RFP instead looks at, essentially, Middlesex up until up through Milton, essentially, on the on in on '89, and then essentially from Charlotte ish up through Milton on set, and says, what can we find? You know, is there anybody who wants to give us or wants to offer property for sale in this area? I don't, I would turn it back to you to talk about what we did or did not respond to that. I would, if I may though, I have here a picture of the women's population that just says this is a really, really dire situation for us, very, very challenging situation for us, and one that, while nothing that we build is going to address this immediate situation, this speaks to a component of the stress on us right now, which is this sense of where the population has gone. So, just to sort of contextualize the need for this.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Okay, so yes, would like to hear about the RFP, but then I'd like to also hear about what's the plan with Yes, the

[Sen. Russ Ingalls (Member)]: ma'am.

[Commissioner Manoli (Department of Buildings and General Services)]: So the document that was handed out, it's a cut from the request proposal. So first of all, I think it's important. We did a request for proposals. We didn't do a request for a bid on land. And what we did is working with the Department of Corrections for critical elements to get into detail and we sent them to brokers because these large obviously acreage types of sites that we're looking for are usually under a broker and they can do a massive search. So you can see the document that I handed out just really quickly, minimum of 20 acres, talks about municipal water services, power, internet. It's the site must be gained from a paid city or town highway. That's for preference. Here are the exits that the commissioner was talking about, and the location needs to be near public access. I think all of you have employment opportunities, This is really part of the reentry program that's very critical. I think to the vision of what corrections is trying to provide here. It's pretty generic. And then what we received is from brokers, we received one bid. And I do know within that one bid, there are two properties. We now do an evaluation criteria which aligns with this and we look at, and and some other criterias. We have not completed that task. We're almost done and, we will sit with corrections and review the two options. I don't know. I don't look at the bids because of being commissioner. I know. So, I don't know if they both comply. I don't know if one does, if neither do. I just know that that evaluation is going, is occurring. So hopefully they didn't submit something that doesn't meet our minimum, because these are really our minimum criteria. If the sites are not suitable, one of the things I'll just say to the committee is we do have some strategic conversations occurring. I think we're starting on Friday this week, the commissioner and I with our deputy secretaries to talk about what if this doesn't work, what are other things, how are we looking at it? I think because there's a host of things. I think planning, I think we're doing good planning. We're trying to find the right location. I think the scope of the project and the desire and the vision, that's all there.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: It's finding a community who wants to support us, who wants to host us, and it's finding the appropriate property that we can build on. But in the meantime, I think the commissioner, I'm going to sort of I'm going to give them the role into this. The commissioner is, you know, what do I do in the interim? What are we looking at in the interim and how do we do it? And we are, you know, we will be talking about are there some improvements at the existing facility that we need to make and, you know, what would that look like to keep it. We should not let a building because we think we're replacing it continue to

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: Deteriorate. Deteriorate.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: That really that that that concerns me. So that is one of my priorities, but I also have to see what is the need, what is the money, and where does it come from?

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: It is a deteriorating building. It's a building that we have deferred major maintenance on, owing to the belief that another one was coming. And that's not to say that we've been, I think, know, certainly BGS is responsive, we've made changes that were mandated by ADA compliance, and so we're, you know, we don't want anyone in our custody to be unsafe in a facility owing to its infrastructure. But are there things that we maybe could have done or even should have done in the past several years had we known that this process would be only at the stage that it's at right now? Yes, there are, and we did not do those. And so we need to decide now to do them really, even though hopefully we're even closer to the end than we were when we decided not to do them in the first place. But we really cannot put some of these things off, and that includes some restructuring inside in order to try to increase the number of general population beds slightly. We are currently using the gymnasium because of the degree of overflow that we have overcapacity. Can we section that in some way to make part of it general population housing, part of it still function as a gym, so that they can perform the task that it's designed to perform? Those are open questions for us. Are there ways to move women out of that facility into other locations that we already have, also open questions. But we certainly, the document that I shared speaks not to the problem, speaks to the generalized need for a new facility, but what it really speaks to is the need for some more immediate remediation.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Right, and then I'll I'm sorry, go ahead. And I think, you know, I will express, and I may have shared this, I'm not sure. Even if we were to buy the land today, I think you all have a a really good understanding of how long planning takes.

[Sen. Russ Ingalls (Member)]: Three to five.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: And with this, it could be a little bit longer because of the permitting. Right? So, you know, let's just say five years out. We have to find you know, you've gotta continue to find the money, but we still have a facility that that these women are housed in, and and we're talking about some other things. So I'm I have had some concern. I don't know what the cost what's the appropriate thing to do with the existing building to keep it at a minimum and how do we pay for that? And I can't give you a cost estimate today, but I think that if you are looking at money or looking at some of that money within that, giving us the ability to use some of that money for those improvements would be extremely beneficial. That's my it's your pitch. Well, it's I think it's a reality. Pitch. Yes. And and it's and it's truly a reality. Yes.

[Sen. Russ Ingalls (Member)]: Thank you, madam chair. After touring the facility

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: Oh, good.

[Sen. Russ Ingalls (Member)]: It it was disheartening and and I'm being when I said it. And I I understand, I completely understand the process. Thought, know, assets would come off board. And so I understand that as well. And I I I am committed to giving some dollars to to make sure that this because it's borderline a human rights situation at this point. I I and then I see the last number I had was a 156, and and I know that said what that and now I see it's at $1.85. It's even more than and so I I don't I I I'm him and the pawn because I I we are in charge of of these human beings, and I I know it is a great deal of money for, incarcerated person, but we are in charge of it, and we have to make sure that we give them best life because my thought process on this is ideally, we want them to come out and to be productive members of society, and we're not even giving them the basics that they need to have a decent life. So disheartened, and I know that you've been committed to trying to find a place, and it's just, it's unfortunate right now. We've gotta do something about it because we're in charge of this as human beings.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Right, okay, oh, go ahead.

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: So you're talking about deferred maintenance on the correct unit facilities. What part of money does the maintenance come from? Is it from major maintenance? It from another part of the

[Commissioner Manoli (Department of Buildings and General Services)]: So it it is from major maintenance unless you give us an appropriation. And I think this goes to the discussion in what do we get for major maintenance and what projects have we started. And I, you know, I wasn't I I I'm not pointing. I wasn't here. I understand that there was such a fast track to get this building going that why spend money on on some things because we're gonna have new buildings? And that decision was made. But the reality is I think there are minimal items that we need to do. I use what major maintenance I can and that I have available. But I think to the point the commissioner made is that he is working he is he is exploring what do I do in the meantime? How do I fill the gap? How do I address this gap? And there's some options. But not having the flexibility or the use of maybe some of the money that exists for the women's correctional facility, to be able to implement that. So we come up with some really good ideas to help with the current state because that's what it is. It's to to keep the the current state a little bit better. And if I'm not speaking, okay, then, you know, how do you do that? Because without, you know, and I think I'm just gonna use for an example, you mentioned you're only looking at maybe you could refit up spaces, but we'll have to bring those up to code. We'll have to do certain things, right? If we're gonna refit them up to help set with the population and remove some of the stress. I just don't have an estimate yet because we don't know what that is. If you were to consider it, I'm not asking you to take from projects that we've already requested money for because I think we already have some concerns with the correctional items that we've talked about in the letter we presented. The locks. Yeah. Yes. And so, you know, one of the things if you there there is money we're not using right now that you set aside for this facility, then you could consider using a portion of that. Maybe up to like 1.5. We don't have to spend it to address some of these or 1,000,000, but that is something for you to consider. Yeah, I want to get a little more detail on what this is because my concern is that in some of the rooms, some of the cells there's two people and others there's three. Oh yes. So, part of the plan having four, what's the maximum that you would have in cell?

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: Honestly, believe three really is the maximum for most of those cells. Okay. But that's not what, that is achieved by using temporary beds that we are using at this time. That's not what we're talking about. What we're talking about is repurposing certain areas, the infirmary, for example. The infirmary could gain us a certain number of beds, know, half a dozen, eight, ten beds. But as the commissioner says, that does require permitting. It requires making certain that we're doing it up to COVID in a way that a temporary relocation to the gymnasium does not abide, not that it doesn't abide by code. We have codes there too, but it's not the same as building new space and saying permanently half of this gymnasium, it's now a it's now a one, you know, it's now a

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: one hoop basketball court.

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: It's a half court because we turn the other half into six, you know, into 12 beds. Right. That's a different kind of permitting and it's that kind of code. I'm not suggesting that that's a path we wish to take at this moment. There are other things that we're currently looking at. The senator recommended that we discuss, that we talk to Maine, and we have, and we are exploring any number of options. When the situation is as acute as this is, we really have to take a look at anything that we can look at, but it's

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Good, so just one sec, just on, you have a sense of some folks are gonna be finishing their sentence. Yes. So do you have projections of what the population will be?

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: Yes, not on this chart, obviously. We've done sort of a, to use the meteorological term, a cone of uncertainty out from the current population, and it's quite wide. It's a wide mouthed cone, and the reason it is is that what we do not know right now is whether or not the patterns we have seen over the past two years with regard to detainees are going to be continued. We currently have, our population at CRCF is fiftyfifty detained and sentenced. That's really unprecedented for us. It's normally 25 to 30% detained and sometimes even lower. You'll see, you know, just the exodus that was created during the pandemic, and it was a purposeful one, but it wasn't one that was ultimately conducive to public safety as the conditions of our community showed. That exodus was predominantly, certainly anybody detained was no longer detained, and sentenced people. We we moved sentenced persons out to probably earlier than they ought to have been under any other circumstance. We can't we don't we're not in a place to repeat that, and nor, I believe, is that would that be compatible with the governor's stated goals around both accountability and community safety. Sure. So the cone of uncertainty is, is this new pattern an increase in detainees, is that merely a function of the precipitous release of detainees at this stage, and then the backlog of reports, and now finally getting to in general, women commit crimes that are, in triage sense, lesser than those of men. They don't involve violence as often. And as a result, their cases were disproportionately delayed in the court closures compared to male cases. I think that a component of what we're seeing is the fact that the women's cases took longer to be focused upon by the courts as the courts got back into gear. But then being said, oh, golly. In the meantime, you've also racked up multiple new offenses of the same type, still relatively low caliber in the sense of violence, but you're doing it a lot, and it's really causing havoc in our communities, and so we're gonna detain more of you than we've ever detained. Is that going to change? It could. Might we see a good summer as the rest of the nation's already seen over the last two years in which crime really does decline in a noticeable measurable way? We might. That could drive these population numbers down. It's not gonna obviate the need for a new facility, but it might mean that whatever measures we take to try to give a release valve to this population are temporary.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Okay, so some of these folks need to go through the judicial process before they They have to So others are going to get out on their

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: own, presuming

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: that they don't Will

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: be maxed out or will parole out. Yes.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Right. So it would be helpful.

[Sen. Russ Ingalls (Member)]: And

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: I

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: would But more will be be clear that at it. All right, well

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: This is a business that does, if you look at this pattern, the only massive decrease really was an artificial one of the pandemic. All of the measures that we've undertaken as a state with regard to and and for that, I would look at this side, you know, the the side of absolute population. All the measures that we've undertaken as a state with regard to justice reinvested, with regards to different ideas, with regard to every statute increasingly, increasingly, increasingly saying things like, know, least restrictive method possible, has not changed the general line of what we have. We have a certain percentage of our population, small thankfully, that commits crimes, and that don't go away. And the things that we try to do are effective once we intervene, but they don't necessarily prevent new people from coming up with these same criminogenic sort of factors committing crimes again. I don't think that this is a business that we are going to be seeing less of. Okay.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Are you considering, have you considered, will you consider having detainees at a different location?

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: Yes, we are considering that. We're considering, and it wouldn't necessarily be only a split between detainees and sentenced persons. I mean, ultimately, we're gonna treat the population something, because sometimes you have detainees who are far more difficult to deal with than incarcerated individuals, so we wanna reserve the right to mix and match as necessary for the efficacy of the facility that we work with, and the staff, the safety of the staff, and the safety of the people in our custody. But yes, the bulk would probably be detainees in one spot, and sentenced in another. Right,

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: so can you come back and talk to us before we finish this session on actual actionable plans?

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: I believe that we'll be able to do that, yes. Okay.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: We're gonna have to address it. Date, are you, are you saying before you're done with capitol bill? I'm gonna ask you. No, no, because that's Friday. Okay. You know, I just didn't mean to end

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: the session, but Yeah. You know, last year was June. I I hope it's not that I hope it's not so this year.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Let's say May let's say mid May, if

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: you can We're going to have to I believe we're gonna have to address this before then. Good. Not just telling you the plan is to do so. I think we're gonna have to take steps to do so. Good.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: All right, and so did you have?

[Sen. John Benson (Member)]: Yeah, well, I've heard a couple of things. I mean, I heard you say we need to make some changes in the current facility to bridge the period between now and when, hopefully the new prison is built. And then I heard kind of two sources of revenue that you might tap for that, or at least my interpretation of that. One was sort of tapping into the major maintenance line item in the capital bill, and I think I heard you say, which is not part of the capital bill, but tapping into the $15,000,000 that's set aside for the new women's prescience. So those are two very different kind of tracks.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Yes.

[Sen. John Benson (Member)]: And in both cases, at this stage, you really haven't flushed out exactly what you want to do and what that may cost. That

[Commissioner Manoli (Department of Buildings and General Services)]: You're kind of spot on. So, major maintenance is used every day, and a great example is we just had to do some repairs to the drains and treat the drains because we did not have a nice situation. There's some unpleasant things happening in our There's some very unpleasant things And so, we have major maintenance was used for that, and and we believe it's resolved. Everything's sealed and treated, and I haven't heard of the anything, so don't let me know. Not sure. But to accommodate, and I've just had a conversation with the commissioner, I think it was last week, and the deputy commissioners, to accommodate the gap or the increase and managing that and trying to create a better living space, a more manageable environment. The numbers are way up. The facility wasn't built for that. If we're to do some, as the commissioner said, there's some temporary things that they can do, but that's probably not sustainable. But if there's some other things that we can do within the facility to get the right number in there and have the right number of beds, we might need money for that. I would not be able to use my major maintenance for that. And that's my concern because it would be a construct right? It truly could be a small renovation project within the facility or within multiple facilities to accommodate. Right. So, example, Windsor facility, I know that would be hard.

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: Windsor doesn't exist as a facility, but that would be brand new.

[Commissioner Manoli (Department of Buildings and General Services)]: Well, maybe there's a wing in one of the vents. Affirmative. Or in St. Albans. Correct. Yes. Yes. And I mean, we need to look at everything now, right? So having the flexibility and having trust and knowing that that's what we're doing, that if there if you know, to consider an amount up to specific for that, we'd report back, and we can't use it for anything else. But it would give us the opportunity. Yes, this makes sense on the policy. Let's see what it's gonna cost. Can we do it? How quickly can we do it? And what difference does it make?

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: And forgive me, Madam Chair, you're correct. Incorrect. Windsor is there. It's just Windsor is not has been closed for nearly a decade at this point, and it's not I don't even know that we could rehab it or or put anybody in it. I mean, that it it would be a tear down. Plus, they're not conducive to staph. The staff Right. That's two hours.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: But I there I believe that there are people in that area who

[Sen. Russ Ingalls (Member)]: So you're what are you gonna do?

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: Are you gonna displace the the staff that's there and just say you're

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: out I'm of I'm thinking of it as an additional facility.

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: As overflow.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: So, there are existing facilities there, Madam Chair. We have spent no dollars in, basically, we've closed up the buildings, the water systems running, safely use it to do some tactical exercises. So could you I haven't seen the facilities in a long time, you know, Are there opportunities there? Yes. Would you be able to do a quick fix at Windsor, like, in one of the facilities? I think it would be expensive, madam chair. That's just off the cuff of my my abacus. But it would make sense for somebody to go there and look at it.

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: Yes, ma'am. I our options are better at existing men's facilities and if the problem becomes even more acute than it already is, it would be an attempt to figure out whether or not some portion of women could be relocated to some men's facility, and then the men would have to be then relocated and redistributed. Our overcapacity issue with males is not as pronounced as our overcapacity issue with females, but it is there. We are not quite at 100% of maximum, we're well over 100% for gen pop, however. We could move, if we were to move 40 men out of one place and put 40 women there, we would, those 40 men would not all be able to be absorbed within the state. We would then have to send more men out of state, which would also be an allocation. The, you know, the challenge is, of course, where to do that. Women and men must be separated by sight and sound, and therefore it's not as simple as even just saying a wing of a facility, it's more complicated. It is a challenge.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: All right, so, and you're talking to Maine, or you have talked to Maine, or?

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: Yes, we had discussions with Maine at your suggestion, I entered into those, we've certainly not made any choices yet,

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Are they at this willing to take, are some of our folks?

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: We're in those conversations, yeah.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Okay. So there are other options. Oh, and the, just got the, when we were looking at the capital bill, at Springfield there's 20 something acres that we're about to get rid of. But that's always been at the agreement.

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: Yeah, that's separate. That acreage belongs to the town so that they can put in a business improvement district of some sort?

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: I don't think it belongs to the town yet, but Would you like me to address that when you're ready? Sure. Well, I'll just say to the committee, so in 1999, the state of Vermont entered into an agreement with the town of Springfield, this land was carved out for industrial development. The and so we have an original MOU that lays this out and what's to be done. Within the MOU, there's another agreement that when they use it, then they're gonna take some of the responsibility of the road, etcetera.

[Commissioner Manoli (Department of Buildings and General Services)]: So, there's a few layers. A few years ago, it was brought to this committee that Springfield came in and asked for the link that to ask for language to be put into the capital bill, that it didn't go for industrial use and that Springfield could use it to actually build a town hall and a town fire center or something for that. Right? Yeah. They're gone. That that leadership's gone. And I met with the new city manager who said, we really want an industrial park. I said, well, why'd you change the language? I'm you know? But because we have it in MOU. We didn't need the legislation because it's all lined into this other agreement that we were required to do. After revealing it, we knew we needed the committee to amend the language. So I think John's done a really good job where he's amended the existing language, but deleted the other language. So there is the industrial area has never been talked about in acreage, and that's approximately how much acreage is there after we protect the deer yard, which we're required to do after we protect the brownfields, after we do all of these other things. So that's always been the plan and the intent. It's important for this committee to know in Springfield, we have within the fence, all of this land is outside of the fence. Within the fence of the Springfield Correctional Facility, we were required to build infrastructure to support, I believe, 250 more beds.

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: I'm not certain of the number. It is another it's essentially another building compared to the ones that are already there. Yes. So essentially a fourth building.

[Commissioner Manoli (Department of Buildings and General Services)]: A fourth building. We have what we built Springfield. We ran all of the wiring, all of the piping, everything to this location, and we have the design and what it would look like if you were to build there. And so the capacity and the growth at Springfield was determined many, many years ago. Okay. Does that answer option?

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: That is an option for men. The likelihood of doing it for women is but then space becomes a fungible and we just sort of say, okay, we'll move, other movements would be possible. That would both potentially address the capacity issues that we currently have, and potentially bring back even more of our out of state population.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: And maybe do CTE, Career and Technical Education, because that was planned to be in Springfield, but it wasn't ever built, you know, that, So

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: There is some infrastructure for it already there. Right. There's also some infrastructure at Northern for that. There's definitely space at Northwest for that, in that Northwest's industry. The correctional industries have withered owing to the fact that we're just not a market competitor when it comes to furniture no longer made owing to market forces, other kinds of things.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: I think those were choices that we made. I don't know if it was marked, but

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: Fair enough. And I'm sure you have more information than that.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: No, not necessarily. Just a lot of

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: it had to do with the fact that wooden furniture was more expensive than most purchasers wanted in the face of modular, etcetera, which was not a competitive, we weren't competitive.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Is what I The departments were choosing the modular furniture over the space. Departments because Dallas really appreciated that furniture. Yeah. Actually, it was much better than what tops normally have. Anyway, do you have a

[Sen. John Benson (Member)]: Well, I wanna just this is a different issue than than corrections, which is what we really need to focus on, but I'm just looking at language that's in here for the transfer of the property to Springfield. Uh-huh. And it's all one-sided. It's town gets everything, state pays for everything. So I'm just curious here is that in the original agreement because saying the state's going to get the zoning permits and so forth, that's usually who's ever developing the site, the town's developing the site. Don't understand why the state's being responsible for doing some of those things, and upkeep of a sewer in the water that's usually done by user fees.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: There's another agreement where if they build on there, would go to the user fees. Want I'm

[Sen. John Benson (Member)]: trying to understand what our previous agreement is versus what's being said in this document.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Yeah, I'll be happy to get a copy for you and I think this agreement is a reflection of what communities are asking for as we look at building prisons. And and I just and, you know, because you caught because you did session law on the transfer of this land instead of having the state modify the MOU, We've now sort of added like another layer, but I'll share the original document, but that is the case and then there's letters of agreement where

[Sen. John Benson (Member)]: That's fine. Just wanted to But I want So, it's pretty one-sided.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: So, Senator, I will say in some cases in placing a correctional facility, it is about providing services and support to the community that is going to house it. And we'll talk more about that too because we have a lot of other things to talk about in the Capitol bill that we don't have time to talk about now. Is it Thursday? It certainly does. So we We have helpful. No, this is good. We have ten more minutes. So I just want to keep focusing on the women's facility and, that it's in dire straits. I'm glad that you're going to come back or hopefully actually implement something. I'm not sure what authority, you know, by your own authority perhaps you can implement, don't think?

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: We can't. We just don't have the money. Correct. Internal movement is under our authority.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Yeah, all right.

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: Other cases are communicated with governor, with the secretary, and with the governor, we make those in a joint sort of way, and that's why I am not giving you as many specifics as I might like them. Still working through some of it.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Okay. So, and you said money is not, under your authority or or that could be an issue for you. So right now, you're talking about the the funding that you have in the existing budget, which is not our purview. No. Well, it is. No. The existing budget

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: is this year's budget. Budget that is being presented for f y twenty seven does not include Because of all this pay down. Business is coming up. Right. The the the yes. These movements, if made, would ultimately, in all likelihood, require a VA. And we would be coming back for that in order to increase the out of state contract, in order to make certain kinds infrastructure alterations, in order to incentivize, you know, programmatic movement. Whatever, whatever things end up happening, that would ultimately part, be part of a budget adjustment. It is not a component in the budget as presented. Alright.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Alright. And I just not to disagree because we are just working on it, but when it's a capital expense, and there's existing funds that you might be able to redirect so we don't impact budget and budget adjustments. Just carry

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: away, ma'am. She's obviously more expert than I. And so

[Commissioner Manoli (Department of Buildings and General Services)]: That would be No, for this year. It would be Okay. So of the money that you have appropriated, giving us some flexibility to do the infrastructure improvements that come out of this planning so there's money available. Yes, if you do something with moving the people that you oversee, there might be a budget adjustment. But to utilize some of we're not gonna spend, Madam Chair and committee members, not spending $15,000,000 in the next six months. I think you know that. And we do have facilities, a facility that's in need and to be able to have a little bit of that money to be able to utilize to support this planning that Corrections is trying to do to relieve the crowdedness and to make some health improvements in the facility would be beneficial. We don't have an estimate. We are bringing it up today. We're talking about it and we're just saying consider. All right. Well, we will be here. It's obviously not just us. There's other committees.

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: It would be something like use for infrastructure improvements, of course, That's the language that

[Commissioner Manoli (Department of Buildings and General Services)]: mean, we use it could be to for you the Commissioner of Buildings and General Services and Consulting, you're right, okay. Consulting with a Commissioner of Corrections that we could use up to a certain amount. You know, even 750,000 would probably help. I'm just saying. I don't know if we'd spend that.

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: No. Or or million. We make sure that we

[Commissioner Manoli (Department of Buildings and General Services)]: we're keeping to be used to address, I don't know, and how you just articulated it, space and the realignment to support the capacity of the facility. We could work on language for that.

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: I think it's a recognition that the money is allocated for the creation of a new facility, but the creation of a facility brings with it repercussions around the old facility and what we do with Windham while we're building a new facility, and therefore, it's not out of keeping with what the money was allocated for. It's just a different facet of that allocation.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Yeah, but also what you're doing needs to be done well. Affirmative. So, correct.

[Sen. John Benson (Member)]: Yeah, the only other part I'd like to see with that is, and we don't know what that cost is, I mean it could be, as you said, $7.50, it could be a million and a half, whatever it is. And by the time you've got that figured out, you come back to present that to us, I would assume at that point you know whether or not one of the two properties is going to fit the need, let's hope. And so we know the 15,000,000 is there to move right forward with the planning and design. So we just need to be looking at whatever that short term need is doesn't somehow curtail the ability to move full steam ahead with the main project.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: So if I may, mean, we're not concerned at this time. With the 15,000,000, we know there's enough money to buy property. We already have done schematic designs because we've tried to fit and design this facility and and put it on multiple other properties. So, it's really about reengaging with the architect and bringing it back and looking at the site and doing the site analysis. And I think you probably know just from the business that you've been in, haven't tested it.

[Commissioner Manoli (Department of Buildings and General Services)]: I

[Sen. John Benson (Member)]: understand. That's what I'm just saying. Want to So there's

[Commissioner Manoli (Department of Buildings and General Services)]: plenty of money to get us through that. The one thing you said that I'm very concerned is that this is all fairly new, what we're, you know, some of the vision and trying to address the concerns. We are not gonna have an estimate because I don't even know exactly what we're doing now. So I think you know, considering, and we can come up with some language, we'll work on that for you to do. I think, you know, the best way to describe that concept. Well, no, but I think the best way to protect the money to cover that is that you don't let us exceed. You put a limit in a dollar amount and not to exceed and you give a broader what we do and then

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: we just report back on it. Sure.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: And if we don't spend it, then in reality it goes to that same pot of money.

[Sen. John Benson (Member)]: Yeah, and we look to you to say here's the schedule and what we're gonna need for funds in order to keep things.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Absolutely, but we're not gonna have that before you went. For this buildings, but you might, if you are, what I heard was you are going to work on a better system before we leave.

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: I wanna separate those two things. I think what commissioner is talking about is a prospective new site. Yes. And a prospective new facility and the build for the reentry and correctional facility. That, no. Even if one of these properties turns out to be absolutely just heaven sent and perfect, it is unlikely that the things that she just described would occur prior to the end of this session. Correct. The things I was talking about with regard to this really acute need of the fact that we've been hovering in the 180s for the past several weeks now, and that we are going to have to do something about that, that is going, we are going to have to take steps to address it one way or the other before the end of this session, and yes, we will be talking to you. If there are financial implications to those methods of address, some may be a BAA, and some may be able to be carved out of current allocations because it does fit in with the overall need for a new facility.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Probably with the approval of the housing. I did not mean to speak for the future. No, of course. But, and multiple solutions too. Doesn't have to be one item, obviously, right? Right.

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: We're, no, we're going to be pursuing several addresses on the acute need.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Yes.

[Commissioner Mirat (Department of Corrections)]: On the sort of bigger picture plan, as many as options as they're necessary once we figure out the properties.

[Sen. Wendy Harrison (Chair)]: Okay. All right. We're at our time. I am going, anybody else have any questions or comments? Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much for being here. Thank you. We wish you the best, but we more than wish we. Yeah. It's got to happen. Yes. Okay. So we are in.