Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Good luck. Great. Thank you. All right. Welcome everyone. This is the joint rules committee meeting. This is, wow, November 18. Is it November 18? Twenty fourth. Twenty fourth. Wow. My goodness. Is It is lying. We have one agenda item for this morning and it is the State House Security Camera and Data Retention Policy and Procedure. So I think what we're going to do is we're going to start with a high level overview of how we got from 2022 to here with camera policies. We'll have a walk through of the policy and we'll have discussions. So with that, I will turn it over to our Clerk of the House, Betsy Ann Rice. Thank you. You, Madam Speaker.

[Betsy Ann Rice, Clerk of the House]: Hello, Can you hear me? Okay. For the record Betsy Nras, Clerk of the House and for this biennium clerk of this committee. You have one agenda item on your agenda today, and that is to review and possibly vote on the State House security camera and data retention policy and procedure. This document was drafted by the Office of Sergeant at Arms in collaboration with the Office of Legislative Counsel and pursuant to review by all legislative office staff directors. The Sergeant at Arms and the Chief of the Capitol Police will further discuss this draft with you as they will be the entities that would administer it. I first wanted to give some background on why this matters before this committee today. And the big picture is as described in joint rules, this committee has jurisdiction over matters of common concern to and involving joint action by the two chambers, and that includes public conduct in the State House. And also as set forth in joint rules, it's the Sergeant at Arms that has general supervision over the conduct of the public. And statute further describes the Sergeant at Arms responsibility to provide security within the legislative branch and statute created our Capitol Police Department within the Office of Sergeant Arms for this purpose. And so, it was pursuant to those authorities that this committee in October 2022, granted approval to the prior Chief of Police to proceed with the installation of a state house security camera project for three areas on the outside of the state house on the legislative it infrastructure and on the hallways and common areas of the state house and I provided a link to those October. It's on the last page. Those are posted online too. If you want to look at that. So, to that approval, those security cameras have been installed. And so now this policy and procedure for you to adopt. To summarize, the document provides the policy for the use of these security cameras, and it provides the procedure for the limited retention of the footage that they record. The policy confirms that the cameras are for the purpose of protecting safety and security within the legislative branch and the surrounding community. So therefore, one of the things this document does is it confirms that these footage records are not subject to the Public Records Act because they're not intended for public access. Those are that general principle that they're for safety and security. Public access is what is our separate live streaming cameras operated by the Office of Legislative IT are for, those are separate than the security cameras operated by the Office of Sergeant at Arms. Also note that this document, the Sergeant will, likely address this, but it provides that this, policy may be supplemented by a JLMC policy. And so big picture, if this committee approves this policy, that language would authorize JLMC to adopt a policy to use this security camera footage in legislative employment matters, but that's separate from this policy, and it would require approval by JLMC. It's a separate issue. The procedural aspects of this document controls the retention of this footage it requires that these records be erased after fourteen days unless they're used for a legitimate policy purpose. And it requires the chief to periodically review those saved records. That's the big picture, madam speaker. Unless there are any questions for me on this, I'll turn it over to the sergeant Arms to get further into the details.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Thank you. Any questions for Betsy Ann? No? All right. Thank you. All right. I get that. Please come on up.

[Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms]: Thank you very much. Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms. And thank you, Betsy Ann, for the overview. It is a relatively succinct policy. So I thought if it's okay, we could go through it together, line by line, if there are any questions.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Why don't we do this for questions? Just since we're in or hybrid here, Let's have, I guess, go through the document and then we can open it up for questions. Okay. Okay. Great. Thank you.

[Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms]: And just as a little bit more background, kind of the system itself, There have been cameras in the building for a long time at the entrances of all of the doors to the State House and then a few inside the State House. I think six total. And this brings this project that was approved by joint rules in 2022 adds about 50 more cameras. And these cameras are all visible. You can see all of them with the naked eye. They do not record audio, as Betsy Ann said, and they are all in public spaces, as Betsy Ann said. So they are in the building, they're outside the building, and they are on the complex grounds in places, for example, like the light posts on the State House lawn. And this is again for the safety and security of the building. So I'll just go through the document. Section one, the purpose. This document outlines the policy related to the Vermont General Assembly's use of security cameras to maintain safety and security. That phrase safety and security underpins the entire policy. You'll see it throughout in and around the Vermont State House and the procedure for the retention of any data recorded or produced by the State House security cameras and related systems. Section two is the scope. So the policy and procedure this document applied to the following. The security cameras under the control and operation of the Office of the Sergeant at Arms. For this purpose, for the purposes of this policy and procedure, security cameras may include any camera placed inside the State House. So those are the ones that are in the public areas of the State House. No private offices. For example, they are not in the legislative lounge. They're not in the House Clerk's office. They're not in the Senate Secretary's office. They're all in the public parts of the State House. At the entrances to the State House, attached to points on the outside of the State House or fixtures on the State House grounds. So for example, we have some that are attached to the Pink Lady and also for Baldwin. And as I mentioned, the light posts on the lawn or placed on state buildings and space used by the Vermont General Assembly. For the purposes of this policy and procedure, the term security cameras do not include cameras that are used by the Office of Legislative IT. So for example, this camera in this room or the cameras that are in the chambers for streaming, those are not included as part of this policy. Any records produced by the security cameras and related systems, including the footage of the cameras, so this policy applies to the records that are produced and any records associated with the operation of the security camera. So if we had instructional manuals or policies, this policy applies. Section three is camera use and responsibilities. The Sergeant at Arms and the Chief of Capitol Police are authorized to oversee and coordinate the use of security cameras, including installation of the security cameras and monitoring the footage captured by the cameras for the purposes of this phrase is throughout safety and security in and around the State House and the spaces used for the operation of the Vermont General Assembly. And that helps us because we don't know where we're going to be, what buildings we're going to be in over the next few years. We could be in the pavilion, we could be, we don't know. So this kind of keeps it open for spaces for the operation of the Vermont General Assembly. The Sergeant at Arms and the Chief of the Capitol Police shall ensure compliance with the policy, and the Sergeant at Arms shall control all access to operation and monitoring of the security cameras. It goes on to kind of define what an operator is. Someone number four, operators shall be trained in the technical use of the security cameras, the policy and in cultural and diversity awareness issues. And so we are contemplating that the operators will be the Capitol Police and members of legislative IT. So they will, Section five is they'll receive a copy of this policy and procedure and provide written acknowledgement that they have read and understand its content. Move on to B, which is the general principles. Security cameras shall be used for monitoring. This is kind of the heart of the policy. Section right here. Security cameras shall be used for monitoring and recording by the Office of the Sergeant in Arms and the Capitol Police Department to protect the safety and security of the General Assembly, the State House and the surrounding community. The cameras shall not record audio. Monitoring and recording shall be conducted in a manner consistent with this policy, House Senate joint rules and any applicable federal or state law. Number two, troubleshooting routine maintenance and minor repairs of security cameras and related software may be handled by IT. And number three, this policy and procedure may be supplemented by a consistent policy duly approved by the Joint Legislative Management Committee. And that's what Betsy Ann was referring to earlier. It opens a door for other uses of the security cameras outside of safety and security. Section four, access to security camera records. Any records produced by the security cameras or related systems governed by this policy and procedure shall not be subject to the Public Records Act and shall be kept confidential. Video footage may be released for the purposes of ensuring safety and security. Thought it might be helpful to hear an example. When might we release video footage? It is not uncommon. It's a common practice where if we know that someone is coming into the building and they are a person of concern, if we have video footage of them, we'll print the photo and discreetly disseminate it to key offices so that we can keep an eye out. So that's an example of the footage being released for safety and security purposes. Section five,

[Betsy Ann Rice, Clerk of the House]: I believe this is the

[Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms]: last section, data retention procedure. The Chief of Capitol Police shall work with the Office of Legislative Information Technology to configure the camera settings as required. So that's all the work that's been done this summer to get the cameras up and configured. Camera shall be configured to store recorded video material for video media for a period of fourteen days. After the fourteen day period, recorded video media shall be erased except as provided in subdivision D of this section. So if we are saving footage for safety and security, then D, recorded video media may be retained for longer than fourteen days if being used for a purpose permitted by this policy, which would be for safety and security or any other duly approved policy governing use of state house security camera footage. Which would be what JLMC may approve. Any media retained for these purposes may be stored on a multimedia storage device in accordance with applicable requirements. For the media that is saved, the Chief of Capitol Police shall periodically review at least every six months stored images to ensure that any footage retained longer than fourteen days under this policy and procedure is erased when no longer useful for the purposes for which it was retained. And that is that is the policy and procedure. Are there any questions? All right. Before we move

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: on to Chief Polway, we'll open up for questions with Agatha. Representative McCoy?

[Representative Patty McCoy]: Thank you. Just I'm sure they're pretty easily answerable, but fourteen days and where we're placing these cameras, is it consistent with other state houses in the New England area? Are we aware of? Yes. The capitals do the same that we're doing?

[Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms]: Yes, thank you for the question, Representative McCoy, because we did deliberate on that length of time. And we look to what is happening in Vermont state government with the different branches, the executive branch, the judicial branch. We did look to what other state houses are doing. 14 was kind of right in the middle. So some state governments, non legislative branches, they will hold it for twenty four hours up to three days, and then others all the way up to thirty days. And through the conversations that we've had in developing coming to the 14, I think it really depends who you ask. Law enforcement will always want thirty days. They'll want the maximum number of days. Non law enforcement will want the lowest number of days. And law and law enforcement includes lots of different professionals, HR, legal. And so fourteen was kind of satisfied both all groups, fourteen days. I will say that if we find that more than fourteen days would be useful, that we would like to come back to the committee and recommend a different retention period. But we thought that fourteen days was a good starting point. Okay.

[Representative Patty McCoy]: So, other question is just a wording. You have that it's the safety and security of the State House. And then you have in surrounding community. I'm not quite sure that's under our purview or our jurisdiction. I understand the the cameras on the grounds on the light posts because that's within our purview, I guess. But the surrounding community, I don't know if that we have jurisdiction over that. I don't know. I'm just asking. And I just wanna double check on, it is not in anybody's offices. Right. It's not in it's just in the public areas, not in bathrooms, not in, legislators, personal offices, if they have them council if they're in our okay. Alright. Okay. And if I'm understanding correctly, we have 50 cameras installed inside and outside our complex grounds, and they've been budgeted and paid for. But there are three additional if I look back on the minutes that the the clerk sent to us, it is not in the chamber, and it's not it's not in the house chamber or the senate chamber or house and senate committee rooms at this point? Correct. Okay.

[Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms]: Yes. And I did count the cameras the other day. I think there are 55 total, so I shouldn't be accurate about that.

[Representative Patty McCoy]: Okay. So if you could just get back I mean, that's my only concern, was the surrounding community.

[Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms]: Yes. And the intent and we can work with counsel to clarify that. The intent is to it says say surrounding community and B1 and in other places in the document, it says around the State House and the spaces used for the operation of the Vermont General Assembly. So the intent is that we are monitoring or we have access to see areas in the complex. And I will say that BGS has been consulted on this project throughout. They are the ones that have jurisdiction over the State House lawn. And so the chief has been working with BGS security to ensure that this project aligns with their objectives jurisdiction. There's actually a collaboration, I would say a very healthy collaboration between the two departments. But the intent would not be to surveil or monitor communities outside of where the General Assembly is using. It is to protect legislative operations. We can work with legislative council Maybe and to clarify

[Representative Patty McCoy]: we say surrounding capital Complex instead of the community. Maybe that's the answer, but that's just my question.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Thank you. You.

[Representative Patty McCoy]: Appreciate your answers.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: I recall

[Legislative Counsel (staff)]: us discussing the surrounding community language. I believe it relates back to for example if there is a person of interest by the Montpelier Police Department and that an individual say down in the city center, this is a complete hypothetical, was in the city center and was moving toward us here at the State House that, and then the person entered the State House, that could be a possible use where that surrounding community connection is made with that language.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: President McCoy, did you hear that?

[Representative Patty McCoy]: I did.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Okay. Great. And Is that

[Representative Patty McCoy]: I have no issue with that, but it's the Capital Complex that they're asking for. If we happen to have any footage of this particular individual, it would be on the Capital Complex grounds, which is I'm assuming would be public if we're saving this stuff for safety. I'm sure the Montpelier police or whomever can actually either, you know, FOIA the information or get the information via, you know, for security purposes. But it's I don't know. I just have an issue with us stating it's we're protecting the community. Protecting the capital complex, I absolutely do. But I don't know. I'm just hung up on that wording. Yeah.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Okay. We

[Legislative Counsel (staff)]: can work on that.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Yeah. We can pivot to Chief Polway to see if he has any further clarification on that question and to give him a chance to speak. Then we can circle back to this, Representative McCoy. Any other questions for Agatha before we go to the Chief? Go ahead, Representative Dolan.

[Representative Karen Dolan]: Yes, thank you. So first, I'll just start by saying, fully support this direction. And I have a couple of questions. I guess it comes under I don't know what the section is under responsibilities, and it is number four with the piece on the last section of cultural and diversity awareness issues. I don't know if you can share more of what the expectation was with that. I'm assuming it is bias, implicit bias, that type of thing, but I feel like a lot of things could fall under that. So I'm curious what that is and if you considered kind of spelling it out more or if there's a specific curriculum, something to that.

[Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms]: Yeah, that's a great question. Thank you for asking it. The culture cultural and diversity awareness is pretty standard for any camera policy, state government, other other entities, and it is to protect how the system is being used. And Chief Polway can talk about this a little bit more, but police officers as a regulated profession have cultural and diversity awareness issues integrated into almost all of their training that they're required to do annually on a regular basis. In addition to that, the special training or awareness that's raised with the law enforcement profession as legislative employees, we undergo training. HR sets up training for us as well. DEI. I don't want to get outside my lane by talking about all the trainings, but we do have cultural and diversity awareness trainings that are part of being a legislative employee and in addition to that as a law enforcement officer. So we didn't go through the exercise of listing all of them because it changes, it can change what the name of the class is called or how often it's taken, but it is to get at protecting the individuals that will be caught on footage or captured on footage. So Chief Polway, do you have anything to add to that?

[John Polway, Chief of the Capitol Police]: So in terms of the cultural and diversity awareness issues or concern, it really goes through the lens of fair and impartial policing, which is a state mandated policy that exists for every law enforcement agency within Vermont. And it's a reminder to officers about things like implicit bias, ensuring that we're treating all individuals with care and concern, and all of that is through that lens. So we wanna make sure that when we're using the cameras that we are considering a a statewide policy, which obviously we have adopted, something like fair fair and impartial policing. As as it has been stated over and over, this system is really it's all about situational awareness, threat detection. It's It's about safety and security concerns. Also, to to touch on the issue of community, I think what we were striving for there was really, I do agree that it it it's limited to our jurisdiction, which would be the capital complex. But, if if our efforts, can enhance another agency's investigation or within the confines of our policy, then it's helpful for us to, engage in that type of practice. So if there was something in the judiciary or at one of the other, buildings, within the complex, and we could assist BDS, I think that's what we were looking for in terms of speaking about community. I don't know if that adds any clarification to your concerns.

[Representative Karen Dolan]: If I may follow-up. I appreciate both of those responses. And so, what I'm gathering is I feel like that phrase is defined well for each of you, so there doesn't appear to be more clarification needed. I just want to make sure that it transfers long term, that it's clear what that cultural and diversity awareness training is supposed to be when two of you aren't there, that that's the goal of it. And I guess my other piece with this then goes to the piece of data retention. And I think it makes sense. You have the fourteen day period and then that the Capitol Police can pull some of those longer and then they're reviewed every six months. That all makes sense. I didn't know if you considered any reporting back of, like, the number of images or videos that are kept past the fourteen day period? And I guess where I'm going into this, of seeing this as a new policy for us, is there just a plan to revisit this regularly so that we're checking on this? Is this within the bounds of what we need, or do we need to tighten it up or loosen it up going forward? So

[John Polway, Chief of the Capitol Police]: that's a wonderful, question and and observation. And to give it some context, right now, we are, really deep into our own policies and procedures within the Capitol Police Department. And that even once we're we have completed that task, it really is a constant evaluation of of all our policies and procedures as time goes on. And this and this camera policy would be no different. We wanna make sure that, what we intended it to do, it's accomplishing, or are there further needs that we haven't considered now that we put it into operation? Do things need to be adjusted? And I think with this policy, we're going to monitor it closely to ensure all of those things are occurring. And in the the event they're not, if there's corrective action that we can take, to achieve a certain objective or mission, then we can reevaluate it and and move forward with that. But I I don't think any of our policies are ever set in stone. I even see state policies that are adjusted over time, based on what we are experiencing. So, in a sense, they're always, like living, breathing documents, and always subject to assessment and adjustment as needed.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Thank you. Representative Dolan, I'm happy to put on the docket for '26, you know, check-in if that's helpful too.

[Betsy Ann Rice, Clerk of the House]: Happy to

[Representative Patty McCoy]: do that.

[Representative Karen Dolan]: I think that was great. I don't think it would hurt just to revisit.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Okay, great. Thank you. All right. Let's turn it over to Chief if there's any other additional information you want to add to the policy conversation.

[John Polway, Chief of the Capitol Police]: Of course. And again, I don't know if I announced myself for the record, John Polway, Chief of the Capitol Police Department. And I I just have a a few things. Some of it, touches on things that Agatha has already spoken about. But there have been cameras in the State House since the, early nineteen eighties. And in the late nineteen nineties, the Secret Service did an assessment of security operations, and one of their recommendations was, adding more cameras to to give a a larger view of activities. So prior to the new system, there were primarily six cameras that have been in use and continue to record, and they are the East door, the West door, the loading dock, infirmary door, the Lincoln doors, and the portico. These cameras are recording, and they record for approximately thirty days, and that's dependent on the amount of data it's ingesting. Really, as I stated before, the cameras are used for situational awareness, threat detection, safety and and security concerns. We use the technology as a force multiplier quite honestly. You know, we are limited in our number of officers. Seven is the highest we have we've we have had, which is great, but it we're still limited. We can't be everywhere, at all times. So the cameras help us in that capacity. And we're gonna be using the these these cameras the same way we've been using the other cameras. We just have more of them, quite frankly. They are not hidden, and they are visible if you look for them, as Agatha had observed. They exist in common areas only and areas that contain, critical infrastructure within the state house. They're also positioned for covering high risk and choke point areas. And in security, we would consider a choke point area as a strategic location where, multiple attack paths converge and at that moment before they reach a critical asset. So, we have focused our cameras, on those areas, through assessment and consultation, and we think we we have a good, view of of what we need to see in terms of, safety and security. If we can get an upgraded security system, these cameras can be used for threat detection and they can actually integrate with the the cameras can integrate with the security system. It's something that we have as a long term goal, and we're to explore that. The old and new cameras do not record audio, and they do not possess facial recognition capabilities. That's another concern in terms of cultural and diversity awareness. So facial recognition, there's sometimes attached to it a concern about those things. And it does not compile faces. It does not collect faces as people move through the state house. The new cameras have what is referred to as appearance search, so we can focus on things like hair color clothing or backpacks If we do receive intelligence, and we are looking to identify a particular person or, based on the number of school groups that we have that come into the state house. If we had a lost child and we had a description of what they were wearing or a red backpack, we could, scan our system to try and identify where that individual is. So that's really, I've just added a bit of context. I'd certainly be happy to answer any questions if there are any.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Thank you, Chief. I'll open up for any questions. Any questions for the Chief? All right. We've got one more second here. All right. Thank you, Chief. Really appreciate it. All right. So that brings us back to the policy. Representative McCoy, do you want to offer a friendly amendment on the capital complex edit? Or would you want staff to talk about it a little bit more, and we could revisit it if needed? Oh, you're muted.

[Representative Patty McCoy]: There we go. Grandkids, psych, grandkids. Yeah. Are we also, I noticed in the minutes that the clerk provided that we only adopted the first three. Are we going to be asked to adopt the others? Because my understanding is we don't have it in the house. We don't have it in the Senate chambers. So is that in addition to this policy today?

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: It's just this.

[Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms]: Just this. So there were contemplated further phases of of the camera project. And I would say that that is not we're not looking to preserve pursue further phases.

[Representative Patty McCoy]: Okay. So, yes, I would like to I I just really have an issue with us. Perfectly understand. And and is there a way if we just put the I will address this to a chief polway. Is there a way to if we put the Capital Complex area that the those other entities that may want to access our information can still do that without saying the surrounding community. Because if we're looking at camera footage that's specific to our complex, I'm hope, I'm hoping we're not looking at the surrounding community that's outside of our purview. So if we put the Capital Complex instead of the surrounding community, do you think that is a deterrent to say the Montpelier police to access information? If there No.

[John Polway, Chief of the Capitol Police]: I I don't. And actually, if we could move forward, if I I would be accepting of that compromise. Okay. Again, because the the spirit of what we're trying to do would still exist. We still work, in collaboration with our external law enforcement partners, and we would continue to do so. So I don't think by changing that one word or into that phrase that it takes away from the spirit of what we're trying to accomplish or our cooperation, again, with our, external law enforcement partners. So, personally, I'm okay with that, and I would certainly ask the sergeant at arms to see what her opinion is as well. But I I don't think it changes the intent of what we're doing, by by making that switch. Okay.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Great. Thank you. Agatha, do either of you have any further comment on this?

[Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms]: Well, we were just conferring. If we change the word community to area, surrounding area.

[Representative Patty McCoy]: I still think it's the capital complex that is within our purview. It's not the surrounding area. Yes. We don't. So I would prefer the Capital Complex, which we, that's our purview.

[Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms]: I am my only hesitation, and I I didn't study this before coming in, is I think the capital complex is defined in statute somewhere, and I don't know if it bumps up against BGS and their jurisdiction. So if we could look into that, that would be

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: helpful. Or

[Representative Patty McCoy]: other areas within our, something like that.

[Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms]: The other idea was in Section three A1, the last sentence, safety and security in and around the State House and the spaces used for the operation of the Vermont General Assembly.

[Representative Patty McCoy]: Yeah. Where is that now?

[Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms]: That is in Section three A1, the last sentence. So it defines the space as in and around the State House and the spaces used for the operation of the Vermont General Assembly.

[Representative Patty McCoy]: Okay. And then where is the surround where's the surrounding community language? Can we just insert that there?

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Yeah. That's three B1 where it says, and the surrounding community in the middle of the paragraph or one on page two.

[Representative Patty McCoy]: Yeah. So can we just delete that and insert that language once again? I'd be happy. Yep.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Just give staff one second to take just a second look to make sure there's no unattended impacts from changing that language?

[Legislative Counsel (staff)]: Yeah, so in 3B1, we would be saying the fact that safety and security of the general assembly, the state house, and the space it leaks for the operation of the Objection Company Assembly. Okay. I am just pausing here to digest this change just to ensure that it would still allow for example that hypothetical example that I gave of the person of concern leaving the city center coming here and that the chief would still be able to provide if that person of interest entered our state house if needed the chief would still be able to provide hypothetically Montpelier Police Department with that with footage to assist with whatever was causing the concern of that individual.

[Representative Karen Dolan]: If

[Representative Patty McCoy]: they're within the if they're within the capital complex, my assumption is the, the both law enforcement agencies are working together anyway. And the language in for that last sentence that allows the chief to release or the sergeant to release video footage for the purposes of ensuring safety and security.

[Legislative Counsel (staff)]: I think that language has broadened them I think to allow that release for this type of medical example. So I think it would work out. Okay. It's. Yeah, please.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Representative. Go ahead. No.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons]: Hi there. Jenny Lyons here. So I it sounds like we're wordsmithing a very complicated it's not complicated, but it's a it is a document that's been worked over the summer for a a long time. My I think I'm I would rather have the policy, go forward and allow for the committee to do an evaluation of two things. One, the policy as it's working, and two, to take into consideration the recommendations from representative McCoy. So I know this is this may be contrary to what everyone is thinking at this point, but given the work that's going on, has gone on with the policy, I think I'm fine with the language as it is for a lot of the reasons that I've just heard. I'll leave it at that.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Any other discussion? So we have an amendment here that we're talking about. Are there any other thoughts or feedback on it? Since we are modifying something that has been worked on for over, what, seven months now. I'm wondering, Representative McCoy, how you would consider if we were to, here's a proposal, to move forward with approving this, but coming back with further consideration with language for this committee to review in like two to three weeks. Patty, sorry, representative Quoi, you're muted.

[Representative Patty McCoy]: That's fine. I still disagree.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: I

[Representative Patty McCoy]: still disagree that it's outside of our purview and I like what I've done, but, or not me, but, the suggestion of the clerk of the house and cheap pull away. So, if we're going to revisit it in three weeks or when we come back in January, you know, I would be fine with that.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Okay. All right. Thank you. So any other thoughts or feedback on this new proposed plan that will move forward today? Again, we'll allow for discussion or any other concerns, but we could move forward with this policy and then revisit it to take a look at this language around surrounding community to address that. Any other thoughts or feedback on that? All right. Thank you, Representative Coy. Any other different talk, any discussion or concerns or flags on any other parts of this policy and procedure? All right. So with that, I would entertain a motion to accept this policy and procedure, again with the understanding that we will be revisiting this in the near future. I just want to

[Representative Karen Dolan]: say, Jamie, I just want to say thank you

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: to the team that worked on it.

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons]: I'll say, yeah, I'll also move with appreciation for all the work that's gone into developing the policy.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Thank you, senator Lyons. Any further and senator Rob Hinsdale, good to see you all on one screen. Any further discussion before I call the roll? All right. Seeing none, we will start the roll. Senator Baruch.

[John Polway, Chief of the Capitol Police]: Yes.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Senator Beck? We had slept. Representative Dolan? Yes. Senator Ron Pinsdale?

[Senator Kesha Ram Hinsdale]: Yes. Representative Houghton? Yes. Senator Lyons? Yes.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Representative McCoy? Yes. And I am a yes. So the vote is seven zero one. All right. That concludes our agenda for today's joint rules committee meeting. I really appreciate your thoughts and feedback on this. And we will do some work and come back together to address that one language flag. Will Agatha, any other thoughts or feedback?

[Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms]: I just I didn't want to I didn't interrupt you. I'm sorry. I had just a closing comment. That's okay.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Go ahead.

[Agatha Kessler, Sergeant at Arms]: I just wanted to reassure the members on the committee staff that there are a team of people who are working all the time to ensure your safety and security. This is just one of the many, many topics and conversations that we are having every minute of every day. And so I wanted you to know that there's a team of people who are working to ensure your safety and security, including this project. It's kind of wrapped up nicely in this policy. But just to let you know, there were multiple stakeholders on this project, FEMA, Homeland Security, State and Federal Historic Preservation. The directors of every office was a part of this conversation. Our state curator, our house clerk, our Senate secretary, our chief of police who really kind of inherited this project and worked tirelessly to see it through to the end during the shutdown, during all of the things that can complicate a project that has federal ties. And our legislative IT, which is fantastic and was lockstep throughout this entire project. So I wanted to just emphasize that to let you know that there are a team of people who are working together to make sure that your safety and security are taken into consideration the occupants of the building at all times. So thank you. Thank you very much for approving the policy.

[Jill Krowinski, Speaker of the House]: Thank you. Thank you, Agatha. We really appreciate everyone's really hard work on this and attention to detail. The fact that you've been working on this so long and really tending to it, making sure we get it right. I really appreciate it. So thank you and thank you Betsy and John as well for your work on this. All right. So that concludes our agenda for today. Appreciate everyone's time and contributions to this conversation and the meeting is adjourned. Take care.

[Legislative Counsel (staff)]: Thank you.