 Tom Burdett I'll be chairing the meeting to start Maxine is a representative grad is at another meeting right now, and we're going to be looking at h644 and act relating to decriminalization of a personal use supply of a regulated drug. And the first witness we're going to have is Melissa story. Hello. Thank you for having me everyone. My name is Melissa story, and I'm a person in recovery, and the chief operating officer at recovery Vermont. Recovery Vermont is an organization founded in 1997 as a signature program of the Vermont Association for mental health and addiction recovery for over 24 years recovery Vermont has served as the hub of all things recovery. The core of our mission is to celebrate recovery and as part of that mission. I'm here to strongly support the passage of h644. I'm sure you're wondering why an organization that's dedicated to creating a path of recovery for people with with substance use disorders, would support a bill decriminalizing the use of drugs. So at recovery Vermont, we see the path of recovery as one that is holistic. You need to take a holistic view of someone's life. And from that holistic view, we can truly meet people where where they are and understand how they've come to use substances. There's been obstacles and obstacles to recovery such as lack of housing and employment, lack of access to healthcare and transportation, lack of childcare. All of those examples constitute much needed connections in people's lives, and recovery is about connection. And that's what's clear to us and what's supported by science and public health is that adding criminalization for drug possession and use in most cases does not support recovery, because it makes these connections, more and more difficult. In fact, for the Vermonters that we intersect with in the recovery community, it's the criminal criminalization that looms over them, not as an adequate deterrent to their use, but as a deterrent to addressing the underlying issues that have led them to use substances. Criminalization creates more barriers and takes away the vital connections needed to get help. In fact, if we're taking a true harm reduction approach, which to me is the most humane approach we can take for addressing drugs and drug use. We would never utilize criminalization for drug use or possession of drugs, as it's the engagement with the criminal justice system that introduces additional harm and reduces the paths and the chances to health and recovery. I wanted to point out that Recovery Vermont really supports the way that this bill has been drafted. In particular, we support the makeup of the Drug Use Standards Advisory Board. We think it's essential to have a diverse group of voices at the table, including voices of impacted people as part of the process of determining how the law will apply to them. And this bill provides for that. The provision is an innovative way to incorporate the ideas of those with lived experience, which will hopefully lead to the development of policies that have had the greatest possible public health impact. We also support the bill, providing people with an option of either paying a $50 fine or calling Vermont Help Link. Keeping this fine relatively low is important for the many that struggle economically, while allowing the fine to be completely waived if a person seeks assistance through Vermont Help Link. This can provide an opportunity for people to access health and treatment services. Substance use disorder is a health condition and should be treated as such. And relapse can be part of this health condition. People struggling with substances should be offered the same amount of tolerance as say a diabetic who can't stop eating sugar. People with diabetes aren't shamed by their health care provider for not sticking to a perfect diet. Instead, they're seen by their doctor, perhaps referred to a nutritionist, or given medication to get their blood sugar back to normal. They're met with compassion and given another chance to get their health back on track. And that is exactly how we should be treating people who struggle with substances. In my own recovery journey, it took several attempts before I finally was able to get into recovery and turn my life around. Every time someone told me that I was a bad person because I couldn't stop drinking, it set me back tenfold and it made it seem impossible to change. I really wanted to stop drinking for years and it just felt like no one understood where I was coming from or what I was going through. But finally someone did something different. They met me with love and compassion and understanding. And this was all it took to create a little sliver of hope that made me feel like I was worthy of another chance at life. This encounter made all the difference. I got my health back. I went back to school. I started my own business. I volunteered in my kids classroom. I learned the meaning of gratitude and the importance of being in service to others. And all of this was due to having someone take the time to listen to me, to see me and to connect me to the recovery supports that I needed at the time. And this was a decade ago before Vermont had the thriving recovery community that it has now. We're really lucky to have a state and a Department of Health that believes in recovery from the hub and spoke system to placing recovery coaches in every hospital emergency department around the state. Vermont has a wealth of support to draw from when someone's in need. Overall, recovery Vermont is excited to be supporting this forward thinking legislation and to have the conversation about continuing to move Vermont's policy toward one of humanity, harm reduction and compassion. Thank you for listening and for your attention to this important issue. And I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you Melissa. Any questions. Yeah, thank you very much. I'm sorry. It's very helpful. I think I need you to reiterate I'm not sure I caught it. That's the problem with trying to multitask I was trying to look at the bill. Did you say a concern that I have is whether we are prepared in Vermont. I think it's a good point to be able to address. Drug use, or I should say, substance use disorder through the health care system that we have now I know that you know I understand the definite difficulties and dealing with the criminal justice system putting that aside. What needs to be done to bolster. Or am I wrong, are we in a position where we can address this solely through the health care system. If not, are there any suggestions on what is needed to try to bolster that system. I think that's a great question. I think we are definitely not there yet, although there are new programs and new initiatives happening, like so frequently now it's really encouraging. A couple that come to mind are rapid access to medication which has been happening for a little while now, but people can go to their emergency department and immediately attain buprenorphine or medicine that they need in order to start their recovery. This is 24 hours seven days a week, and then they're, they're followed up with this is also happening in the if somebody has an alcohol use disorder, people are, you know, helping give them the medication that they need the wrap around services that they need in an immediate fashion. But I think when it comes to, you know, expanding these services. I think what needs to happen is, you know, just not as many silos, and you know the more we can show that this is a health care issue. You know, it's one where where it, it requires many voices at the table and, you know, it's, it doesn't discriminate. So, I think that we have a ways to go but I also think that we're really lucky to have a lot of the, you know, immediate access to recovery that we do here in Vermont. Second unrelated question and I'm not sure how this fits in with this. But so are all are all independent. This is probably a dumb question I'm going to ask it anyway, are all users of these various drugs that are illegal. Are they all in need of recovery. It's kind of one question I have. And is there some way to address a situation where an individual doesn't necessarily need to be in recovery. Did that make any sense. I mean, I know that there could be recreational drug users who really are suffering from substance use disorder. I don't know if you can comment on that or if that made any sense at all. Yeah, yeah, it makes sense. Yes, people, not everyone who uses drugs has a substance use disorder. That's correct. Right and is there, should we be treating individuals with substance use disorder or versus people who just occasionally recreationally use drugs, any differently. I mean, if we were in the health care realm, I know we don't really do that. Well, we kind of do that in the criminal justice realm but if we were just doing this with a health care system. Maybe that's just too out there as far as a question I just Right, I know because it's there's such a there's such a difference between somebody who's using wreck recollect recreationally and somebody with a substance use disorder and it's hard. It's hard to know that when if one of these people is in their doctor's office say it's hard to tell if somebody has a substance use disorder so you know I think treatment should be widely available to everyone and regardless of if they have a long standing substance use disorder or not. So, so I know in our criminal justice system, if somebody is gets caught with a misdemeanor level of drugs, drugs that would lead to a misdemeanor there. They're automatically in most cases, diverted to treatment. It seems in that situation they're diverted to treatment whether they have substance use disorder or they just happened to be caught of because they were out partying some, some evening. So there isn't really any distinctions in our current system. I'm just kind of wondering if there could be in the other system but I appreciate your answers to the question. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions. Thank you Melissa. I have a question on the screen I'm sorry. Thank you I want to just thank you so much for your very thoughtful and articulate testimony and for being so generous with your personal sharing your personal story. It's those are the stories that make a difference so thank you. I just you talked about it a fair amount in your testimony, but I just wondered if there's anything else you want to add about the kind of barrier that you know we know about some of the collateral collateral consequences that come with justice system involvement. Things like lack of lack of access to housing and employment. So that that's very well documented but I'm wondering if you have any other final thoughts you want to offer us just about the way that stigma itself becomes barrier and the way that criminalization kind of contributes to stigma. All right. Yeah. Yeah, yes. We, we do a lot of work. We train recovery coaches at Recovery Vermont. And we have a specific training where our recovery coaches work with people who are coming out of corrections and reentry and we at these trainings we always have people lived experience of being incarcerated and is something from being incarcerated for drug use or possession. Just the stigma just follows them their entire life and just makes it so difficult for them to feel like they can become a member of society again. And not only is it the stigma externally you know from just trying to get a job and seeing that they have a felony on their record or you know whatever it may be. It's the internal stigma that really can take somebody completely away from, you know, every everything. It's the internal stigma that is so incredibly damaging and disconnecting. So, so, yeah, I would say that it's, you know, it's unfortunate that so many people have these types of records that they are trying to deal with and trying to reenter life. And it takes it really hard and we just need to be as compassionate as we can be with these people, because they certainly deserve a second chance, or another chance. Thank you. I really appreciate you really appreciate your answer. Is there any other questions for more. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. Testimony. Yeah, I'm sorry I missed your testimony. But now they get to watch it with you to which is really a nice. Nice COVID silver lining. So, thank you. Is Mr. Oh, they're right. Mr Franklin. Welcome. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. It's really great to see all of you and my testimony today. So my name is Daniel Franklin. I'm the vice president for advocacy and community relations and get to work with Melissa, which is such an honor and I came in today today knowing that, you know, nothing that I could say and sort of a formal testimony could be as powerful as what Melissa had to share and I was really honored and thankful that Melissa told her story and and shared what our organization believes about this bill and appreciate all of your questions as I might my testimony is going to be a little less formal in the sense that I just want to kind of respond to a couple of questions that were asked and, you know, I think I look around the room and see, you know, representative Rachel said who worked at, you know, one first along and represent Colburn has been such a huge supporter of harm reduction and overdose prevention sites and and and representative Christie and Kaya have done incredible work on equity and and just important work to create a level playing ground for people around the state and J Diaz from the ACLU and representative Donaldia, a social worker. It strikes me that this is a really amazing committee to be doing this work and that it's a remarkable thing just for you to be having this conversation about, you know, about the gradations of decriminalization and sort of how our system deals with substance use and possession and things of that nature and there are of course other bills that are sort of around the same issue, not just, you know, you know, gradations between misdemeanors and felonies and so forth. I wanted to, you know, this, the question was about, you know, the medical the, you know, treating substance use disorders within the medical system, and it would be really nice if the medical system was the only place that we would have to care for people with substance use disorders but the reality is that ships past and people are criminal criminal justice system is, you know, overrun with people with substance use disorders who have this hanging over them for the rest of their life and I was the director of my work for four years. I was the director of the of North Central Vermont Recovery Center and in Lamoille County and, you know, fully half of everyone that the Lamoille restorative center served had a substance use disorder 20% 27% had an opioid use disorder. You know, and there's so many no, you know, nodes within our, our system of care that are affected by the way that we have created punitive measures, which are unequally, you know, there's been recent reports about racial inequity in terms of traffic stops and searches and seizures and other other forms of inequities within the system related to substance use and possession. So again, I just want to thank, you know, chair grad and your whole committee for taking up this issue. Mostly want to just say I'm a resource for all of you will continue to work. Representative Colburn and I said on a couple of committees together, which is, which is wonderful. And all of our work together. It's in the medical system it's in the, it's in the recovery community it's in the treatment centers it's in a lot of different nodes within the system. And inevitably it's tied to issues of inequity in terms of how how people are treated and the stigma around substance use. And so if there's ever anything that I can do on behalf of our organization to answer questions or or help to, you know, provide information around this issue I'm very happy to do so. Representative Colburn has a question I'd love to love to hear that for our comment. Well, thank you. Yeah, go ahead. Okay, thanks. I don't want to cut off your so if you had more to say. I'd love to hear your thoughts. Just, I mean, I guess I wanted to dig in a little bit more to represent a no one's question earlier about this question of, you know, like, do we need the criminal justice system for now to be the place where we're intervening with folks who might be struggling with their drug use, because we're not adequately in the health system. It's just that doesn't seem like what I've heard but I as someone, I mean, you're right that we've embedded a lot of things in a lot of different systems out of necessity, really, but yeah, I just like to hear your I just like to hear you weigh in on that question as well, you know, do. Yeah, so all this is, I'll tell you my personal opinion, which is, you know, and I think that the evidence would back this up but you know it's less statistically based than just what I've observed. So I think that the problem is that, you know, whether it's the stigma or the laws around substance use and possession have have resulted in a lot of people going being incarcerated for for essentially having a substance use disorder or being, you know, but it could be anything it could be that one time that somebody went to a party and had some something in their possession and would just, you know, wrong place at the wrong time doing the wrong things in that moment or it could be a lifelong battle, you know, there's so many different ways that this manifests. What I would say is that and kind of what I was trying to get at is that our criminal justice system has been slow to react to the fact that people that that there are a very significant number of people in our prison system, who are there partially related to substance use at one time 75% of all of the women that were in the South Burlington correction in the women's correctional facility had either one of two, either a substance use related offense or possession related offense, or and or survivors of sexual or domestic violence there's a huge crossover there, you know, and our system has been very slow to react to, you know, what has happened. And that recovery coaches there's a program in Rutland, which has really pioneered this to provide services in the Rutland correctional facility, where coaches engage with people while they're still incarcerated, try to build a bridge back to services out in the community, engage with people while they're back out in the community, and there it has dropped recidivism rates dramatically. It's a very high recidivism rate for people within the first six months, and often related to recurrences of substance use. Unfortunately, because of the sort of uncomfortable partnership between our correctional system and its funding models and the independent contractors who run these correctional facilities, especially out of the house out of the out of state. Like recovery coaches and recovery centers and other services have not been made available within the correctional system and therefore we can't help to do that work when we would be more than happy to do that. People who would like to offer meetings within the correctional facilities have not been allowed to do that. And as you know, I'm sure it was very, very difficult to, even once it was legally allowed to engage to provide medication assisted treatment within the criminal justice system. And there were lots of ways where our systems fed recidivism essentially setting people up to fail, so they would either go back to jail. As a year point representative Colbert and like housing is a major, major issue. You know we, if we don't prepare people to go back into their communities and have both housing and the supports that they need around the particular things that cause them to be incarcerated in the first place, then I'm not sure why we expect a different result. And the fact is there are people in jail at this moment, who are there because they didn't meet the Department of Corrections requirements around quote unquote safe housing. But if we don't give them the race if we don't have the resources or give the resources for somebody to have a quote unquote safe home that doesn't have substances where they're not with the same people places and things, then I'm not sure it's kind of a, we're kind of putting them into a catch 22 there. We find people come back to our communities without the supports that they need. And, you know, the, whether it's recovery centers or recovery coaches or, you know, other service providers, try to create some kind of safety net but it's often sort of come a little too little too late. We'd rather have a bridge back to communities and create connections. It's connections that are going to really solve these issues. So, sorry for the political soapbox but that it's kind of, you know, that's, that's what we've got. You're in a political environment so what other any other questions are I do see a barber. Thank you. So, thank you for your testimony. I know that some of my colleagues are thinking, because of some of the questions from the other day. If we minimize and treat people using drugs and don't send them off to court and possibly prison. That people won't that we're saying it's okay and that people won't seek treatment. Can you talk a little bit about experience because I know you have way more experience working with people who struggle, certainly than I do and I haven't been doing this work for a couple years. But it would be helpful I think for people to have context of does prison and court, make a difference. What I'll say, you know, I don't, I don't think it's fair to entirely throughout the idea of of restorative justice and the fact that, you know, some people it saves their lives if they can be kind of removed from their situations and break a cycle. You know, I don't know the percentage is I don't know the data around that. Think that drug courts have been extraordinarily successful relative to to prisons themselves. I guess, you know, the thing that immediately popped in my mind when you asked that question was quite simply, it's, you know, jails or prisons correctional facilities are not healing environments. They do not provide services if you were put in an eight by eight cement box for a while with other people who, you know, are triggering. I don't think very many people come out better than they were when they went in. And when they're denied their rights and their services like recovery coaching like supports like meetings like anything that would help them to be better prepared to come back out into the world. Then that then then we're inevitably, you know, we're we're we're further injuring them. The other thing that I would say is that and again I'm expressing stronger opinions than I was planning on going into this but the reality is like substance uses is is well. Again there are gradations from severe substance use disorders down to recreational use and it's not fair to treat all of those things the same but but when we are talking about long term and trench substance use that leads someone into incarceration, you know, it's it's it's hard to deny the reality that a very large percentage of these people as exemplified by what's happened at the Burlington correctional facility with with the cross section of women with co-occurring mental health and substance use who have histories of as survivors of sexual and domestic violence. You know, that's just one subset of that population, if we don't do and this applies also to the treatment facilities, I will say as well. If we don't grapple with mental health and with underlying, whether it's adverse childhood experiences or the traumas that people have experienced that led them possibly in in these in some of these cases to use substances to self medic, I mean there's a lot of ways that people put it but self medic or to numb the pain or you know any number of responses to their traumas. If we don't address those things, then we're in fact causing, we're putting them in greater danger than they were in before because if you get, you know, you think of an inpatient treatment facility or short short term jail stay. Maybe they have succeeded in in getting them quote unquote sober or abstinent in taking away the substances, but if that is a coping mechanism for somebody and then they no longer have that. First of all, it brings all of that to the surface and they have to deal with that and it's going to come out in some form. You know, again people build up resilience but you know it's not always possible to do that. And then secondly, we're dealing where we're in a time when even recreational drug use is more dangerous than it's ever been in the history of mankind of mankind. You know we've got fentanyl in at least 88% of all fentanyl of all overdoses. In fact, in the year 2021 the data shows that it was a 100% of fatal overdoses linked to opioids. You know, even recreational use can be deadly. And if you take, if you make someone opioid naive within a correctional setting or another setting, and then they do experience a relapse or recurrence of a substance use disorder, then they're much more likely to pass away from it. And you couple that with the isolation of having a criminal record. You couple that with the current circumstances around COVID and the fact that more people are using by themselves and are cut off from others. And we've got a really particularly deadly cocktail of risk factors. So I say all this to say that we have a really robust recovery system. Melissa's also the director of training and they have trained, you know, 100, almost 100 IC and RC certified recovery coaches. We've got some 500 recovery coaches around the state we've got, you know, all of our mental health and SUD workforce at play. But there is something there is a missing link that is occurring with whether it's with our correctional system or judiciary system, our treatment facilities, even the medical nodes that is qualifying the risk factors and is is a pretty significant contributor to how many people have passed away. And it's really, really important to note that, you know, the, the legislature does play a huge role right now in being, you know, like, I was in the, as a director like I was deeply involved in the emergency department recovery coaching program. And for the entire years of 2019 and 20 some 90 plus percent of all of the people who went to the emergency department for substance use was it was actually alcohol. Over time it's increased for cocaine, crack cocaine, methamphetamines, benzos and alcohol, benzodiazepines and other substances, but alcohol is a huge factor as well. And an example of a really injurious thing that happened was that the legislature allowed like curbside alcohol sales and now even contemplating delivery of alcohol, which is to say it's not all opioids it's a lot of substances that are driving what's happening. So I'll just, I'll conclude on that for, for that's that question. Does that, did I, is that a good answer to your question represented to Rachel sin. Thank you. Daniel I don't know if this is for you or Melissa because you brought up her with their with the recovery coach training but just wondering what's the uniform system throughout the state if it's the same and my pillar is it is in Rotland as far as training recovery as well. Oh, Melissa answer that. Yes, thank you for that question. Yes, it is we are the training hub for recovery coaches in the state so everybody goes through our 46 hour recovery coach Academy, they have to already be working in the field of recovery under supervision. So, but they all do receive the same training. And to build on what Melissa is saying and I think something that might be really pertinent to what you're asking about is that everybody receives the core same core Academy, but what will recovery Vermont and Melissa and her team are doing increasingly is preparing recovery coaches for any number of settings whether it's the correctional institutions whether it's drug courts whether it's. We've got specialized training for the emergency department we've got special we've got, you know, we're really expanding the repertoire to be able to place coaches in lots of different settings for those unique environments and also to I don't know. Maybe Melissa you could give their percentage but a substantial number of the recovery coaches who are trained actually work at what we call recovery adjacent organizations like treatment facilities, or, or like groups of organizations, lots of different settings, which is a really in my mind an essential piece of bridge of helping to deal with some of our workforce issues. You know, some of these and these organizations will employ recovery coaches who are not your, your really expensive nurses really expensive license clinicians, but they are highly trained recovery coaches, who can provide some very significant supports in those settings that and event and a lot of those are not a lot but some of those folks will go on to get become licensed alcohol and drug counselors or social workers or other types of professionals so. So we're, we're working on trying to use recovery coaching as, as a major force within their within the workforce to help address what's going on. So, so, and I should probably know this but so does recovery Vermont oversee all the recovery coaches in the state. So, yes, we were we oversee their training. If they are certified recovery coach, they will have to go through a certain amount of continuing education training in order to keep their certification. So, in that sense we absolutely oversee them. Since there are recovery coaches in all sorts of different areas like Daniel was alluding to, whether it's a recovery center or treatment center. They coaches would be under supervision at their the center where they work or volunteer. They would take turning point in Rutland for example, and so from that area. So is there somebody in in turning point that's qualified to do the recovery coach training. Is that the way it works. They, they send their people to us to be trained to recovery Vermont to be trained and then within the recovery center there they have somebody who is trained to supervise them in their recovery coaching. Okay, great great because I know turning point there's a great job down there with that. Yes, they do. I'm bragging a little bit because my nephew works. And another piece of this there is that the. It's not just the Academy there are all sorts of other trainings that recovery Vermont provides and the CEOs for the international certification and reciprocity consortium. I see an RC certified coaches, which is sort of the next step up. So those trainings include things like boundaries and ethics and also I'm sorry I'm forgetting them all but maybe Melissa can weigh in but there's just many of them. There are, I would say a significant amount of training they receive is in motivational interviewing, which is an evidence based practice of the art of deep listening and helping to move somebody's inner ambivalence, helping them move through their ambivalence in order to make change in their life. Yeah, and then we have all all sorts of really interesting continuing education opportunities for coaches, some of which you know we are we work with the people where our coaches are are working or volunteering so say the recovery centers we work closely with the directors there to to see what they need in order for us to create a training. You know with it's really important to hear for these people and support these people who are boots on the ground giving service to. To people in need every day we listen to what they need for training and then we develop those trainings at recovery Vermont to keep coaches really on their toes. And if I can just kind of build a bridge back from that to what representative Rachel son asked and and I think a really central point of of this conversation is that this is this is a way recovery coaches are one of many paths to to bring greater equity and access to resources, no matter what phase somebody is at. We have to be real about this like not everyone that uses substances or has a substance use disorder is ready at all times to accept or seek help and that's just the way it is that's going to exist no matter what you know what laws or or recriminations or stigma we put in place the reality is people have to be ready for to seek help and to help and there are lots of different forms of help. But you know we always say like where there's life there's hope and our goal is to keep people alive and to give them access and to never give up. And, you know, so, no matter what somebody has done or no matter what somebody has been through, no matter what substances they use, whether they're ready or for help or not our job is to be there and ready for them when they are. And I think that whether we, you know, change drug classifications or decriminalize or sort of take a less opinionative approach as a society, the real the reality is we have to create a more trauma and form system, and we have to be ready for for for folks when they are ready for us and. And we have to be equity minded I mean it's a really important, you know, there, you know, we have to build up, whether it's in recovery coaches or in other settings, a group of people who represent the people that we serve, you know that can be prepared to connect with people in any setting. And so it's, it's ongoing, it's, it's going to be a long journey there's no easy solutions, but inevitably our judiciary system, our correctional system, our treatment facilities are community based providers we all have to kind of do a little bit better and and not just have these siloed nodes but an integrated system, a no wrong door approach, and we're never going to solve the problem if we just focus on substance use if we know that housing and food insecurity and all these other basic, you know mazla's hierarchy of needs the basic things that all humans want and need are are just as important as whether somebody uses substances or not. Yeah, thank you. So, there's a phrase that goes kicks around in the state House, often, which is, don't let the, and it's not just in the state House but don't let the perfect stand in the way of the good. And that's kind of where this question is going to kind of come from. It's looking at relative harms, and I know there's all sorts of the issues of harm and dealing with this issue there's the issue of harm. We also have substance use disorder who are not able to find recovery opportunities and that's, that's how much we're funding recovery and treatment and making sure that we have that available. But I want to look specifically at the harm of the criminal justice system right now in relative harms. So the bill would have a civil penalty, and presumably it's still to have that civil penalty there'll be some involvement of law who would be providing that ticket. So, so there's an interaction with law enforcement in this case it's with a civil penalty. In the other bill 505 it is a misdemeanor. We're trying to make it more of a misdemeanor instead of a felony. There's also the options, certainly a felony. But that's kind of one area where there may be differences in harm but it seems, you know, is there really a difference if it's a interaction with law enforcement. That's kind of one question I have. But I'm going to go ahead and just ask the other questions. As far as the amount of harm that we have if we have a misdemeanor, where we have a presumption of diversion into treatment. It's opposed to a felony where the chances of incarceration are higher. You know what's the levels of harm. I know there's harm and even the interaction with law enforcement or tell me if there isn't but, but I'm trying to understand, if we move to misdemeanors mostly for possession, have we taken care of a chunk of harm. You know if we move to civil penalties as opposed to misdemeanors that we dealt with that again. If we move completely away from law enforcement. And can you comment on that, as far as, you know that the relative harms, you know what we might be able to get done, if that is helpful what we can get done, etc. I think it's important to either Mr Franklin or or Miss story and and if Miss Morris and Mr Diaz want to weigh in on that concept. Appreciate it. So did you have any thoughts on that or I was going to defer to you since this has been more of your area. Thank you. I'm, I'm really, really interested to see what Miss Morris and Mr Diaz have to say because I think that, you know, I'm not a legal expert, but what I think is that what I'm trying to get across is that there's a way to build more compassion and empathy and and resource provision into our system in a way that is. It's not enabling it's not ignoring it's not. It's also not. My initial thought and our official position is like yes I love the, the concept of say a $50 civil penalty but if you go get treatment that or if you go if you go see seek help of some kind that you that that's erased. I don't know this the Senate can be I guess wonders whether $50 is going to do it whether like, you know, is it, you know if they if they get out of a $50 civil penalty but then they have to go pay 150 for a counseling session. Have we really, have we really done anything for them if they don't have health insurance if they don't have, you know, the basic things that they need to even get the help that we're talking about if they don't have transportation I mean, I mean, I know where I'm getting into other things but there are some really basic barriers and obstacles, and I've, and I don't want to get didactic and I'm going to try to really keep this great brief, but one thing I often try to explain to people in the human services system. And then there's another recovery center, somebody from say the AHS from the field office, who was trying to, you know that was this building and they had economic services and they had reach up and they had all of these programs right all in one building both rehab whatever. And they would say you know why doesn't this person come get help or why don't they, you know why don't they fill out this paperwork they would get X Y or Z thing and I said like, you have to understand how trauma and institutional marginalization and substance use affects the brain and the processes through which a person interacts with with our system. And there's a lot of alienation from from the community and from the resources available to a person. They've felt let down by, you know the judgments they've gotten in different parts of the system, you know they go, they go to get financial help and the person says well, you know you'd be fine if you stopped using substances and got a job you know you know the the stigma has caused them to be alienated, but besides that just from a neurobiological sense. Substance use especially long term entrenched substance use changes a person and how they, how they process information. And I think a lot of us here at this table, we can think of many many things concurrently and in and simultaneously and we can say, Okay, I have 50 things to do. What is, you know, I can do, you know these things, all at once or I can do these things in a row and it'll get have X result. You know, there, there are some biological reasons why it's a lot harder to deal with I call it kind of system overload, when you have so many things to do when somebody's asking you to, to go to a counselor and go to economic services and go to voc rehab or DOL to apply for a job or get benefits or any number of things. It's very, very overwhelming and it and a lot of people don't know where to start there intimidated by the system afraid of judgment. And I'm not saying that that's anybody's fault in particular, but the reality is our system is not as easy to navigate as we think it is, even as a provider for a long time. It's hard for me to, you know, by the end of my tenure as a recovery center director, I had to be an expert in housing and transportation and food resources and etc, etc, etc, etc. And recovery coaches, we always say their job is to listen and provide resources like they they're professional navigators, but it is not easy. And to try to bring this home on what you're asking, I, I would like to think that avoiding a civil penalty avoiding a cost would be a reason you know that we would like to think that that would compel somebody to go get to go do something else. But the reality is probably more complex than that I don't know that for sure I don't want to say that categorically, but I think you will see some some situations where people just aren't equipped to kind of think and not in those binary terms of hey I think more they may just say, maybe $50 is more worthwhile for, you know, because they can't conceive of changing the way things are. I, you know, I think we just, we have to build a more robust system that meets people where they're at and, and it accepts that it is not a binary state of using or not using of addiction or not of. We just, we like to think in black and white and there's, there's just everything in between. You know, and I hope I've, I hope I've addressed it but I don't think it's a bad idea some people it might help but the reality, but, but people are more complex than that and I'm just not sure that avoiding a $50 fine is going to be quite the the context that that we think it might be. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, Bob and then we're going to take a break. Oh, I mean, in our break time here, but thank you Melissa for telling us something really great program that you have in the recovery coaches, a great asset to your program here. What I was wondering was, under what circumstances do you come into contact with the majority of folks that need your help. Is it a walk in service, is it through the criminal justice system, how do you offer these folks your program and how do they get to you. Sure. Daniel, do you want me to answer that. Yeah, yeah, please if you. Yeah, it's, there's, there's a variety of different ways that people would encounter a recovery coach. And as we mentioned earlier, we have them in every emergency department so if you know that is a really great program that has expanded over the past three years, going on for now. It goes up to the emergency department and has been screened for substance use disorder, then they'll meet with a recovery coach and follow up with them for 10 days. They might walk into a recovery center and ask for recovery coach services. We have recovery coaches who come to our training who work in a lot of the designated agencies around the state. We have recovery coaches who are currently working with law enforcement. And so this is really an exciting program where we are really looking forward to seeing how that has is going to be developed so far it's it's working really well where a recovery coach will be paired up with a police officer and you know, if somebody's experiencing substance use disorder. They will have a coach right there to meet them where they're at, and they're actually speaking together the coach and this police officer that I'm thinking about at recovery day this year on February 16. So there's a variety of different ways and places where one could encounter a recovery coach, they can always contact us and we can place them help place them with a coach in their area. Vermont help link is another area or place where they refer people to recovery coaching all of the recovery centers. Daniel what else am I missing here. Yeah, no I mean you covered it and really the sky is the limit here I mean we could, you know we, we can continue to train coaches and put them in lots of different settings the limitation is what the or what the what the settings themselves want to do. But every you know the recovery centers are a big employer, a lot of different providers. As Melissa said, you know we do have a few pilot programs with law enforcement and trying to train. We're going to go into the state of Vermont State Police or local police departments there's the correctional system but I think, you know I hope that in some, some, some day we're going to, we're going to have recovery coaches and go into every correctional facility in the state of California you know that's, that's a big area of potential growth. And, you know right now there's a lot of conversation around embedding social workers with with law enforcement. But I think, and sort of mental health professionals, I think recovery coaches could also be one of those resources. There's a couple of, for example in Addison County, right now, you know because we don't have, we are not well enough resourced to have, for example, a recovery coach embedded at the police departments or sheriff's departments. What they did is they provided the police squad cars with iPads, and if a police officer encounters someone who has overdosed or had another substance use related issue. Then they, they can bring it up right in real time, and the person that they're working with can talk to a coach back at the Turning Point Center. So there's so many different models that could that could occur here. We just have to invest in them and really try to look at what works. We just have to follow up real quickly. So it sounds as though, rather than our judicial system or law enforcement, creating harm to these individuals that they are an integral part of the mission that you're trying to accomplish just by working with them hand in hand with these programs with these iPads and I assume that the majority, I don't see the majority, but a lot of these folks come to you for this help and for the system through the law enforcement agencies that you work with. Absolutely. I mean, there's been, I think COVID has actually pushed the envelope on this a little but law enforcement and emergency personnel EMTs, but to hone in on your exact point. There is a lot of benefit if a person does not feel cornered by a law enforcement officer but rather feels that that person cares about them enough to at least offer them resources. For example, one other thing that we did was to get harm reduction packs and Narcan into the hands of law enforcement and just simply the act of not of wanting to save their life and and like say, you know, sometimes it will be an action and a person, you know, the cop or the law enforcement officer has a limited amount of time to interact with a person, but if they can just give them some resources, some harm reduction packs of Narcan, whatever the situation might be, it can totally be their trajectory feeling that that somebody cared for them, and they weren't being punished but rather that that those law enforcement officers simply wanted to save their lives and help them. And sometimes in the moment, it'll seem like they don't, you know, that the person who was on the receiving end of this might not be in the in, in a, you know, fully receive it in the best way that we would want them to. But I, you know, we used to give out like the harm reduction packs, and somebody would throw all this information, you know, on their on their kitchen table and then later on down the road they they'd open it up and they'd find hey a pamphlet for, you know, a turning point center or another resource and they would, they would reach out for help. So they might not in the moment but they might down the road. And as you said, as long as they're alive they could they have the potential to get help so it's just trying to get that in their hands as many ways as we can. Oh, thank you all for your answers. I appreciate it. Thank you very much. I did want to take a break as to see we have not been able to get higher Mars on she just sign off and she can join us shortly after 230. I'm not sure. Can you question wait until after the break. Yeah, I can, I can hold my question for another time. And just making sure we have from other witnesses. Yeah, and I'm not sure if we're going to get to the CD as we are on the floor at three so let's take a quick break and come back in about 10 minutes about 25 hours so we can make sure that we hear from our representative time ours. Thank you.