 Welcome, folks. This is House Corrections and Institutions Committee. We're back on S18. I know we're running probably a little late. Logistically, we're trying to figure out how to get another draft. We're looking at a strikeall amendment to incorporate the amendment that we received this morning from the Attorney General's Office that really is a clarification amendment. And we're thinking the best way to approach this is to do a strikeall instead of having a floor amendment to the bill. But we're trying to find a draftsperson to do the strikeall so that we can get ready to vote. So in the meantime, Representative Taylor has proposed that we change the name of earned time to earn sentenced reduction. And we did put it up the flagpole in the other body. And they're not supportive of that name change. So we just need to get a feel from committee members on that. So I'll open it up to committee members. Sarah, you did have your hand up, right? Yeah. I could just offer. I mean, I think I understand the spirit behind the desire change. But I think when you look at how these programs are spoken about nationally, the name earned time and and good time are really used to describe these kinds of programs. And I just so I really feel like it can cause some confusion, even though it would probably be in there. And I really it's one of those things where I know we're already changing it the language from earned good time to earn time. And that's kind of consistent with what other things are doing. I think I just think at this point, to push for that kind of change, it feels like it could cause it's not just a detail, I think it could kind of cause some confusion. Can I respond or you want me to wait or do you want me to how do you want to handle this? Well, I'm seeing if there's other hands first. Okay. Okay. I want to see if other folks want to weigh in. Karen? Yeah, so I will share. I kind of could go either way. If there was momentum from the committee, I could see changing it. But if the majority of folks are fine, I'm not pulled either way. I think as Representative Coffey was saying, like, I understand the like how it helps define it, but I also understand how it could be confusion. So if that's helpful at all, but just putting it out there, like, I don't have strong opinions either way. Scott? I'm thinking about to what extent earned time is kind of a term that people use. Good times is a term that people use. And earned time seemed pretty closely related to that. So if it's sort of a national brand, you might say, then I think we ought to go with that. I'm thinking back to the Global Warming Solutions Act, which was passed out of the committee that I was on last biennium. And I hated that name because it's not solving global warming. It has little to do with solving global warming. It's about preparing for climate change, really. But, you know, that was the brand. So other states have passed Global Warming Solutions Act. So that's what we were passing. But, you know, so I guess I guess I'm thinking that I'm going on Sarah's recommendation that earned time is more consistent with what people understand the term to mean nationally. I would just stay with that. Scott, then whoops, you just finished Scott. Lynn? Well, I can go either way. I hate to say that and be a fence sitter, but I do like earned sentence reduction. I think it clearly defines what it is that we're trying to get at. And that's it. We can start a whole new group of words instead of good time. So that's my opinion. Thanks. Linda? So I still find a distinction between earned time and good time nationally. So and how they're used. However, since I did ask that specific question to our alleged council because of that concern and because Vermont did not have that distinction. And it's defined in the bill. I'm comfortable with it with the way it is. Comfortable with earned time? Yes. Other folks. So earned time and good time are a term of art. It's well known throughout the whole justice criminal justice system correctional system. And in looking through. Oh, great. I have a draft. I have a strike off. It just came through. Did you get that? Oh my God. I didn't go through editing, but that's okay. And looking through through it, we'd have to do some quite a few changes here within the bill. It's not just changing the name, the title on section two. We have to get into the language in the bill. Wherever it says earned time would have to be changed for that. And the longer we delay this bill, the more stress we're going to put on DOC and the more complicated it's going to get. In terms of implementing it. Because this will not be accepted in the Senate. And then it will come back to us as an amended version. So you're adding on at least at least a week to 10 days. So we just keep turning in circles. So I just say, leave it the way it is. I mean, that's going to be the reality of the folks. I'm just laying out the way of the land in terms of how it will play out in the Senate and then what the legislative process is after that. Lynn? I hate to admit this, but I didn't read the first sentence. It says an act relating to limiting earned good time sentence reduction. So it's in there. So let's leave it as is. Don't ask why I didn't read the first line. I have no idea, but I just didn't write in the title of that. I mean, I'm just laying out how that process will work. If we do change the name, I'm just laying out how that's going to work. In section two does the same thing. Well, section two says, right, it takes out good. It says earned time reduction of term. So, Kurt? I just did a quick Google search on earned time and corrections, and it does say that 31 states provide this incentive called earned time. So apparently that is truer than I expected. Because I assume the other states were calling it earned good time, and we were going to come up with earned time, and that would not be the same thing. So I'm happy with the earned time as the name for it. Well, I'm not happy with it, but I'm accepting it. Okay, so you would draw it. Madam Chair, do you need Brynn Hare to jump in at this point? She's willing to if you need her. Sure, that would be great. Just in case we need a legal person. So this has been sent to all of our emails, folks. Alice, can we do this where we go down line by line by line just to make sure everyone's on the same page? Sure. Yeah. So this is on our email, and this is a strike all amendment. And the only this is the same. Brynn is coming on with us at some point here. And I know, Phil, you're probably going to be in the process of putting this up on our webpage. I don't know exactly when is the appropriate time to do that, but we can talk about that later. Yeah, if you can be in the process of doing it now, I think it would help because there may be some people who are streaming in, and then they could go to our webpage. I know it's going to take some time to get there, but... So you mean the thing, the document that Eric sent us, you would like it posted? Yes. It's draft number 1.1. Wait a minute. I have a question about that. Yeah. Well, it's because it's a strike all. So that's why I was not sure what the draft would be, but it's really draft 1.1 to the bill. It's not a separate amendment, so it comes in as draft 1.1 to the bill. Because it's very clear that the House, if you read the introduction respectfully report, they have considered the same and recommends that the House propose to the Senate that the bill be amended by striking all, or striking out all after the enacting clause and inserting in lieu thereof, where if you scroll down to section four, this is section four, section three, two, page four, section two, number five, where it says notwithstanding, this is where the language was incorporated from this morning that was highlighted. Notwithstanding, one BSA, section 214, an offender who is serving a sentence for a disqualifying offense, on January 1st, 2021, shall not earn any earned time sentence reduction under the section after the effective date of this act. So that's very clear that for those folks who were sentenced prior to January 1st of these, any of these disqualifying offenses, once the law becomes, once this bill becomes effective, they will not earn any more earned time. That's the only change to the bill. So if we can start. Brandon, thank you on short notice for coming in. We're trying to get this bill out. We had an amendment this morning, a technical amendment from the attorney general's office that Eric worked on. He did it as a separate amendment that would be offered to the bill. And in really thinking how to best present this on the floor, we thought the best ways to do a strike all to and incorporate that amendment. So that's what we're looking at here is the strike all because the goal is to try to vote this out this afternoon. Okay. So forgive me because I'm not and haven't been involved in this bill, but do you have a you have the bill from the Senate and you're trying to vote it out today? Is that correct? Yes, S 18 and Eric has just submitted to me draft 1.1. Okay. Can Phil send a copy? And is Eric isn't available for right now? Is that correct? Eric is unavailable. Okay. He's tied up with other committees. Okay. So he's unavailable. So Phil, have you you can email to brand the draft that Eric just did the strike. Yes, I'm doing that right now. Okay. Welcome to the world of zoom. Okay, it's sent to Bryn. Okay. Thank you, Phil. Welcome. And I know Michelle is not here. I'm not sure when Michelle she was in house judiciary, right? Yeah, I sent her a text just now. Okay. Is she passifying or is she I think she's introducing a bill? Yeah. Okay. And Madam Chair, should this be or Bryn, should this be labeled as draft 1.1 a strike call? S 18 draft 1.1. I think that's all that's needed strike all amendment. That's what it looks like. Yep. draft 1.1. Yeah, I just do S 18 draft 1.1. Yep. And then just put strike all amendment. And my pardon, but is strike all in the way we use it hyphenated or not? I have no idea. I don't think so. Is that print? It says striking out all but we do a strike also. Um, no, it's not hyphenated. All right. All my pay grade. Should be it's a compound adjective. Oh, sorry. I never was good in grammar or pronunciation or any of that stuff. Okay, folks. So let's go through section by section here. Section one really clarifies that going forward when this becomes law that it's sentencing time or any time when they're dealing with making an agreement for a plea agreement or any of that that the victim is informed of the maximum amount of earned time that the defendant could accrue and that earned time only affects when the defendant is eligible to be released is eligible for parole consideration but doesn't necessarily result in the defendant's release. It only means it's eligible. And this is one thing that was really important to the committee that the victims are notified. Hey, Alice, in the very beginning of this draft, they forgot to take out the word good. The second sentence. Right. Second sentence. It's in several places throughout this. It's been taken out. Well, it's a crossed out. Yes, but yeah, but that one isn't crossed out. Wait a minute. Are you in line? Line three, first page. I'm not seeing. I don't before. See where it says to the House of Representatives. That's the title of the bill. That's the title of the bill. Yeah. That's not it. That's not going to be in the green books. Okay, because they've got the word good in there. Right. That's the title of the legislation. Where it's going to be in the green book starts in section one. What about line 16 on page one then? Through good time credit. Mine is not labeled by the names or by the lines. So are you in section one D? You're looking at the draft or the bill, Mike. You got to be on the draft. You got to be on the draft. The one that just sent email to us. Right. Draft 1.1. Yes. Well, the one I got does have numbers. So it's the sentence that says, unless I got the wrong thing here, it says defendant shall serve. In an incarceration through good time credit. It's six lines down and six lines down in section D. Yes. Yeah. It's actually line 16. Mike was right as far as the one I just picked up. They don't have line numbers. Dependent shall serve in incarceration through. There are line numbers on the one that I just posted. Right. That's what I'm looking at. Me too. So, Bryn, that may need to be changed to earn time. Okay. So you just posted one, right, Phil? It's going to be easier to look with the... Yes, I just posted it. Okay. Draft 1.1. Strike all amendment. Okay. That makes it so much easier. And it's got bigger and it's bigger writing. Yeah. That's always good. So, Bryn, I know this is Eric's bill and I know that you worked with us last year on good time. I'm thinking we've got to change that line, whatever it is, line 16 take out good and replace that with earned. Okay. So that's another amendment. Yes, because he's done that throughout the bill. Would you leave credit in or take credit out? Oh, they're getting credit. So you got to leave credit in through earned time credit. Good catch, Michael. Yeah, that is a good catch. So in section two, the title has been changed and this is talking the rules have been changed, the implementing earned time program. And then it goes in line 13, earned time program. Lines 18 and 19, bring in the interrupted sentences. It's not, we cannot earn time if you're serving an interrupted sentence. And an interrupted sentence is sometimes people just come in on the weekend and then go back out and that's geared for folks sometimes so they can keep their job. And then this is the top of page three explains that the program, those are the offenders ability to participate in receiver and time in the program shall be determined pursuant to subdivision five of this subsection, then we'll have to go down the subdivision five because that is, that is where we have the not the standing language. Correct, yep. Number four, line 17, page five, page three. Yeah. How come they took off arson causing death? Where are you? Under disqualifying offenses. The first one was arson causing death. I'm on s 18. That's what I'm looking at is s 18. As it came over from the Senate. Yeah. I have murder and violation of 13 vsa 2301. Me too. I have murder. I don't have arson anywhere. Yeah, it was struck out that whole portion was struck. It's that may have been the version is originally introduced. We're looking at the version that passed the Senate. Yeah, I'm sorry introduced. Yeah. Yeah, you got to go to the one that passed the Senate. So what does the red italics mean? Brink any I don't have that. I think that's the language that got changed. Red italics. Is that true? Brink when we if it's a strike all that then the official version shows the version that was introduced with red strike out. And the red italics are the new language as added in the strike all. So it's just the difference between the official version and the unofficial version. Okay, thank you. Karen, but she can't. That's what I said. That's what I thought. And I said that and I said, but I would ask you just to reconfirm that I was correct in my understanding. So I know I said I leave it open, but we're she has the ability to come into the committee room. She's not testifying. So she are we going to do it in a few moments? I think we're ready. Are we ready folks? Just say we're going to be voting here. So you make the motion. I'm going to pass it. I mean, I'm going to second it. Right. I mean, I don't want to cut her out, but she may choose to stay where she wants to be. And confirm, are we getting another draft or are we voting on this draft? We the motion would be to vote the bill out and vote the strike all amendment out favorably as amended, which would be probably draft 1.2. I think because it's just well, it'll be 2.1. 2.1. It'll be draft 2.1. The only difference is in the very first section one there. That was a pickup, a great pickup. Online 16 where we changed good to earn. That's the only change. And I think we'd be okay with that. So you're texting Michelle, right? Yeah, I did. And I'm keeping my eye on my text. I told her she can pop in. Yeah, this is where we were in the committee. We just go across the hall and pull her in. But if she can choose not to vote on it too, did you allow, did you let her know that that she can choose not to vote on it? She doesn't want to miss anything in Senate, in House Judiciary? Yeah, I just, in my first text, I just said I just wanted to let you in case you wanted to vote. And then just let her, no, she might be testifying. So she said, so I don't know. Can we do the vote and hold it open for a little bit until we adjourn for the afternoon? Well, after we vote, we'll be adjourning. Okay. All right. I can throw something out for conversation and filling out this form. I do need to list the reporter. Do we have that? We're working on that. We have, we've got one, I think. So do I just send it to Phil without that on that? No, no, we'll do it after the vote. Okay. We're trying, we were trying to figure it out so that right now we're thinking we're planning on having Linda Joy, because we need someone that really went through this in the past. And because there's some legal issues that came up here this morning, I think it's really important to have someone with some legal background on the floor. It looks like Michelle is testifying now. Is she? Yep. Well, I'm ready for a vote. We can do it. It must be on you too. Yeah. Yeah. Any, so she hasn't had a word here. Well, let's, let's make the motion. I would entertain a motion to pass out draft 2.1, which we understand the only difference from draft 1.1 to 2.1 is the word change on line 16 of the first page that changes good to earn. That's the only change. I second. Well, somebody's got to move it. Somebody's got to move it first. You move it, I'll second it. Okay. And Marsha seconded it. We vote out draft 2.2, 2.1, S18 favorably. Any further discussion? If not, Karen, please call the roll. Uh, Representative Taylor? Yes. Representative Sullivan? Yes. Representative Morgan? Yes. Representative Martell? Yes. Representative Dolan? Yes. Representative Campbell? Yes. Representative Boslin? Representative Bachelor? Yes. Representative Morrissey? Yeah. Representative Coffey? Yes. Representative Emmons? Yes. Yes. Thank you. Thank you all. So if we leave this open, we're kind of, some of us are going to have to stay here to still meet. So I'm not sure what to do at this point. Kurt? Kurt? There's something I'd like to say before we leave S12 completely. You mean S18? Yeah, that one, whatever. Whatever we just voted on. We're all ready to get rid of it. Yes. With you. They all gone. She just finished. If she's going to pop in. Okay. Okay. And Madam Chair, should I just send you a via Bryn version, the 2.1. Okay. So I believe I should post that as a draft. And then when we get the final copy from the drafts people, I can post it as recommended by House Committee on Corrections and Institutions. Is that correct? Yes. Okay. Committee, I need to leave now. Is that okay? That's great. Thank you, Bryn. Thank you, Bryn. So you're going to send this to the editors? Yeah. 2.1? Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Bryn. Thank you, Bryn. Thank you, Bryn. Bye-bye. So poor Michelle is going to come in here cold turkey. Well, I told her that we were holding the vote open for you. So like please come now though. It's going to be hard for her to process where we are in terms of a strike call. I think it'll be okay. I'm just going to say we're voting. You know, the motion was vote S18 out favorably with the language that was proposed this morning from the Attorney General's office. Here she comes. Because that's what we did, right? Should I tell her what the vote is for now? I let her know where it was. She would have heard that. Yeah. Welcome, Michelle. I know you're juggling a lot of things, but we we're at the point of having a draft and we're ready to vote. So the question, the motion on the floor is that we pass out S18 favorably that incorporates the the amendment that we discussed this morning from the Attorney General's office, that amendment. So we have done the roll and the vote right now is 10 in favor. And you're the last person to vote. Okay, I would actually like to vote now. So Karen, call the roll. Michelle, you're muted. Yep. Yep. Okay. So Representative Boslin? No. Great. So the vote was 1010 on the bill. Linda is going to be the reporter. So when we get the edited draft of 2.1, this has to be sent. I'm going to let the clerk's office know that we have a bill coming to strike all. And Linda, you're going to have to, I'm not sure if you sign something, because this is a bill that gets both normally you would take the original bill and the strike all amendment and walk down to the House clerk's office and they would have you sign the amendment. So I'm not sure how all of this is done electronically. Linda, I can send you the instructions that committee assistance got that explains what your responsibility is. Apparently we as committee assistance aren't able to submit it to the clerk's office. So I'm letting the clerk's office I'll figure it out that we have a confusing that we have a strike call to S 18 just voted it 1010 and Representative Sullivan, you're the only Sullivan, right? As of this year, yes. So I am just sending the clerk's office an email because they text they send an email out to the chairs every day to see if we have anything. I'm going to say it needs to go to editing. Representative Emmons, is it okay for me to go back to judiciary? They're still taking tests. We're done for the day and we're probably not going to need tomorrow. Okay. Thank you very much. So I sent it out. So I think we're done for work today and then I'm not anticipating working. I still have my little speech to go. I know. So our work is done for today and we're not planning on meeting tomorrow. We're still working on scheduling and maybe when we finish up here and get done. I don't know if Mary and Sarah you might have a little bit of time to work with Phil just to kind of confirm up our schedule for next week for that. Yes, I can do that. Okay. That should be fine. I just have to a little after four get off. Yes. Okay. Kurt? Yes, this is kind of in the vein of Representative Dole and wanting to know how we can avoid these things in the future or how we can improve on the process. And it's part of this that we haven't discussed much. But the fact that we did it two years ago or so or last year using emergency rules is has turned into I think it's added to the confusion because the emergency rules started the process January 1st. And there was we didn't have the public hearings as part of emergency rules. It was when they were developing the real world real rules that the public hearings issue came up. And this whole thing started percolating. It may very well have percolated anyway. But the fact was we used emergency rules when there was no emergency. And that I think caused a problem because we could not say. And even in the justice oversight, I believe meetings when they talked about this, we could not say well, we were in an emergency. And so we had to move quickly. And in fact, there was no emergency and we used emergency rules. And I think as a lesson for the future, we have to be very careful when we use emergency rules when they really there is no emergency. That's all I want to say. Thanks. And I know that was you kept bringing that up last year when we're working it through. I was I was trying to avoid saying I told you so. Yeah, well, the the bill did come back, did come over from the Senate last year. S 133. And it was quite clear that some folks in the other body wanted the emergency rules. And we appreciate that. And it was not going anywhere. Sarah, I'm sorry. I thought you had dropped it. I thought also that part of it was because the year before we had passed S 112, which was earned good time. And because it would have come into play play on a normal on a normal rulemaking process. But because with S 338, which was justice reinvestment to it encompassed earned good time that they didn't think it was. I thought the thinking was is it wasn't really fair to stop earned good time as we're developing this new bill and delay it even further. And that's why it was an emergency rule. That's that was my understanding at the time. Is that accurate? That's fair to say. And there's a that's a combination of why it came over in S 133 in the Senate bill last year with the emergency rules. And people were pretty adamant that they wanted the program to get up and running. So we had was no there was no emergency. There was no flood. There was no horrendous thing that was going to happen. That's why we had to put in the pack in the had to also put in there the fact that this would automatically be considered an emergency and override that if it were a real emergency, we wouldn't have had to put that in there. But one thing that we did do we did extend the date out of when the the rules needed to be the formal the permanent rules, not the emergency rules, but the other rules needed to be in place. Originally, I believe that was in I think that was in the middle of March, middle of February or middle of March. And we extended that out quite a bit to the end of June. So that's how we at least got some time on that. And so I think this is it for the week. I think tomorrow may be a short day on the floor because it is Good Friday. And we do traditionally honor that. And I'm not sure if there's much on the floor, but I'm not anticipating any committee time tomorrow. We're going to shift gears a little bit. We're going to start working next week on s 45, which is now that you get your head around earn time while somebody's incarcerated. We're going to be talking about probation, which is the front end before anybody ever enters into an incarcerated setting and how there can we worked on this last year about having some form of credit for time served credit for time served earn time on your probation, where if you are behaving and living by the conditions that the court has placed on you, you're not doing technical violations or new new prime of sorts, you could get possibly a shorter probation term. What we've done this time is have a check in about halfway through your probation for that. And that was a result of work that was done with the council state governments last year and the working group with that. So it it's a little different than what we just went through for folks who are incarcerated. These are for folks who are on probation. So you're going to get educated on what probation is because that's through the courts. We're also trying to set up some time to hear from the chair of the parole board. So folks can understand parole, parole is at the other end after a person's incarcerated. So you've got probation on the front end before they're incarcerated. You have furlough, which is determined by DOC. And then you have parole, which is determined by the parole board. And there's different conditions set on each one of those statuses by different entities. So we're going to start shifting gears a little bit. We're going to work on S45. And then we're going to do a lot more background information in terms of corrections just to help folks understand corrections a little bit better. And then we also have the RFP feasibility study that BGS and DOC put out with Hock, H-O-K. That looks like that will be available the week of April 12th. How much did they pay for that study? We put in $200,000, $250,000. We put in the money for that. Well, we knew most of what they reported to us. Yeah, but that made some foundation for what's happening for their second part. So that's going to be the week of the 12th, April. We're going to try to have a joint meeting with Senate Institutions Committee on that. That will have to be an afternoon meeting. I'm recommending more on a Tuesday than on a Wednesday or Thursday. And I do go over to Senate Institutions on Tuesday at 1.30 to finish the walkthrough on the Capitol which will probably take a good hour and a half if you're lucky. So, Kurt? Yeah, there was a very good presentation to the Council of State Governments about probation and how it works in Vermont at one of their meetings. If anybody wants the link to that presentation, I can probably find it just in preparation for probation. So what might be good, Kurt, if you find that, just email that to the members and Phil. And maybe once we start working on S45, Phil can post that on our webpage. Okay, I'll do that. That would be good to do that. It's very helpful. Anything else before we close up? I want to thank you all. We came together. We did the work on the bill. I want to thank you. And I'm glad it's behind us at this point. And then the report on the floor, Linda, we'll do the report on the floor, but we are there to back her up because you know, there may be quite a few questions on the floor and we're there to back up our committee member who is reporting this. We're not going to leave folks stranded out on the floor. And Linda, you know that at any point you can yield that, and hopefully I can help. If not, I'll yield to Sarah or Kurt. You got it. Yeah, Phil will be there holding our hands. Thank you all for butch. Yeah, I wish you could have butch report this. And you're absolutely right. Butch is the one that should be reporting this. I'll negotiate with him. I'll tell him. I'll text him and say butch, you're reporting this. We're getting the house to suspend the rules. That would be a good April false. So on YouTube, thank you folks for listening in. Our week is done. And we'll see