 All right, so I think Ameron, if we're ready, if you want to do a walkthrough of S-155, and I will say again that a lot of, we had a draft last year that didn't really have a number and a lot of work went into it over the summer by the commissioner and by Bill Sorrell and the criminal justice council and Ameron. So there are, and Representative Colston contributed a number of suggestions that were incorporated in here. So there's a lot of inputs that's been put into here, into this, into 155 from what we had before. So Ameron, do you want to? Yes, for the record, Ameron Aberjaly Legislative Council. So this is a lengthy bill. Madam Chair, if there's any points where you would like me to pause for questions, just let me know, otherwise I will just keep going. I would just say that if committee members have clarification questions, but not policy questions or anything because Ameron doesn't deal with those, but if you have questions of clarification, just raise your hand or speak up. All right, so I am looking at S155, which was posted with today's materials on the committee webpage. This is an act relating to the creation of the Agency of Public Safety. As Senator White mentioned, this is an updated version of the bill draft that this committee looked at to some extent last session, but there are changes throughout the bill. So I will just do a full walkthrough as if this is all new to you. Yeah, that's a good idea, thank you. So section one concerns the creation of the Agency. This would add a chapter 69 into title three. The chapter would be the Agency of Public Safety. Sub chapter one is subdivisions. You'll see there are definitions beginning on line 16 of page one, running into, all the way through line seven on page two. Among those agency throughout this bill means the Agency of Public Safety. Commissioner means the head of a department responsible to the secretary for the administration of the department. So it won't just be the commissioner of public safety. You will see several commissioners mentioned throughout here that would be incorporated within the agency itself. Department means any major component of the agency. Director, the head of a division of the agency and then division means a major component of a department. Yes, so a different level than a department. And then secretary, we're referring to the head of the agency of human services. Excuse me, secretary means the head of the agency of public safety. I'm sorry. Section 6002 on page two creation of the agency. The Agency of Public Safety is created for the purpose of ensuring the coordination of all state public safety resources, including reducing redundancies, increasing efficiencies and standardizing policies, training and data collection. Subsection B outlines all of the departments and divisions within the agency of public safety. First would be the department of fire safety emergency management, which would include the division of emergency management, the division of fire safety and the office of training. Two would be the division of law enforcement, which would include the Vermont state police as well as the division of motor vehicle enforcement, the division of, excuse me, and then for sub division three on page three, we would have a division of support services which would report directly to the agency of public safety and the office of community engagement, which again would also report directly to the agency of public safety. Neither of those would fall within another department. Subsection C is a list of all of the boards and commissions that the agency is providing administrative support. So this would include fire service training council, law enforcement advisory board, state police advisory commission, the search and rescue council, the animal cruelty investigation advisory board, the electricians licensing board, the elevator safety review board, the state emergency response commission, the plumbers examining board, the Vermont access board and the enhanced 911 board. Section 6003, beginning at the bottom of page three is advisory capacity, except as otherwise provided in this chapter, all boards and commissions that are a part of or attached to the agency shall be advisory only and the powers and duties of the boards and commissions, including administrative, policy making and regulatory functions shall vest in and be exercised by the secretary of the agency. However, in subsection beyond page four, notwithstanding subsection A of this section, boards of registration attached to the agency shall retain and exercise all existing authority with respect to licensing and maintenance of the standards of the persons registered. Section 6004 is personnel designation, the secretary, deputy secretary, commissioners, deputy commissioners, attorneys, division directors and all members of boards, committees, commissions or councils attached to the agency are exempt from the classified state service, except as authorized by section 311 of this title or otherwise by law, all positions shall be within the classified service. Sub chapter two concerns the secretary, 6021 appointments and duties, the agency shall be under the direction and supervision of the secretary, who shall be appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the Senate and shall serve at the pleasure of the governor. The secretary shall oversee the activities of the division of support services and the office of community engagement. The secretary shall supervise the commissioner of fire safety and emergency management and the commissioner of law enforcement. 6022 budget and report, the secretary shall be responsible to the governor and shall plan, coordinate and direct the functions vested in the agency. Now I'm on page five, section 6023, deputy secretary, subsection A, the secretary with approval of the governor may appoint a deputy to serve at the secretary's pleasure and to perform such duties as the secretary may prescribe. The deputy shall be exempt from the classified service, appointment shall be in writing and filed with the office of secretary of state. This is a fairly standard language for deputy secretaries. Subsection B, the deputy secretary shall discharge the duties and responsibilities of the secretary and the secretary's absence. In case a vacancy occurs in the office of the secretary, the deputy shall assume and discharge the duties of the office until the vacancy is filled. Section 6024, advisory councils or committees, the secretary with the approval of the governor may create such advisory councils or committees as the secretary deems necessary within the agency and appoint their members for terms not exceeding the governor's term. Section 6025, transfer of personnel and appropriations. Subsection A, the secretary with the approval of governor may transfer classified positions between state departments and other components of the agency subject to personnel laws and rules. However, in subsection B, notwithstanding subsection A, members from different divisions of the Department of Law Enforcement shall not be reassigned or transferred outside their division unless the member requests the transfer and the commissioner approves the transfer. Subsection C, the secretary with the approval of the governor may transfer appropriations or parts thereof between departments and other components in the agency consistent with the purposes for which the appropriation was made. Subchapter III concerns commissioners and directors. Section 6051, commissioners, deputy commissioners appointment term. The secretary with the approval of the governor shall appoint a commissioner of each department who shall be the chief executive and administrative officer and shall serve at the pleasure of the secretary. 6052, mandatory duties. Subsection A, the commissioner shall exercise the powers and perform the duties required for the effective administration of the department. Subsection B, the commissioner with the approval of the governor shall so organize and arrange the department as well best and most efficiently promote its work and carry out the objectives of this chapter. The commissioner may formulate, put into effect, alter and repeal rules for the administration of the department. Subsection C, in addition to other duties imposed by law, the commissioner shall, one, administer the laws assigned to the department, two, coordinate and integrate the work of the divisions, and three, supervise and control all staff functions. Emron, can I just stop for a minute here and say this is pretty standard for commissioners and secretaries, right? I mean, this isn't going outside of what commissioners and secretaries normally do. This is standard and relatively standard. Okay, just wanted to make that clear. I would say a subsection C is probably just the slightly more specific language from page six into page seven because it's talking about administering the laws assigned to the department. So that is specific to this agency in some respects. Section 6053, permissive duties, approval of the secretary. The commissioner may with the approval of the secretary transfer classified positions within or between divisions subject to state personnel laws and rules, two, cooperate with the appropriate federal agencies and administer federal funds in support of programs within the department, three, submit plans and reports, and in other respects comply with federal laws and regulations that pertain to the programs administered by the department, four, make rules and policies consistent with law for the internal administration of the department and its programs, five, appointed deputy commissioner, six, provide training and instructions for any employees of the department at the expense of the department in educational institutions or other places. And lastly, organize, re-organize transfer or abolish divisions, staff functions or sections within the department. This next one is specific to the commissioner of the department of law enforcement. So with the approval of the secretary, the commissioner may designate or change the rank or grade to be held by a member in accordance with the rules adopted by the commissioner, assign or transfer members within a division to serve at such stations and to perform such duties as the commissioner shall designate and see determine what certified law enforcement officers other than state police officers shall give bonds and prescribe the conditions and amount. And then once again, as you saw similar language to above subsection C, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this chapter, the divisions within the department of law enforcement shall not be abolished or transferred and members from different divisions of the department of law enforcement shall not be reassigned or transferred outside their division unless the member requests the transfer and the commissioner approves the transfer. Section 6054, directors. A, a director shall administer each division within the agency. The commissioners with the approval of the secretary shall appoint the directors for divisions that are part of the department and the secretary shall appoint any other directors whose appointment is not otherwise governed by law. Each division and its officers shall be under the direction and control of the appointing authority, except with regard to quasi-judicial acts or duties vested in them by law. This is fairly standard language, I would say for directors. Subsection B, no rule or policy may be issued by a director of a division without the approval of the appointing authority. Moving on to sub chapter four on page nine, this is where you start seeing more of the breakout between the different departments and divisions within the agency. So section 6081 creates the department of law enforcement. Sections 6082 creates the department of fire safety and emergency management and also specifies that the commissioner of fire safety and emergency management as fire marshal shall be responsible for enforcing the laws pertaining to the investigation of fires, the prevention of fires, the promotion of fire safety and the delivery of fire service training. Section 6083 creates the division of support services. This division is administered by the deputy secretary of the agency and provides the following services to the agency, including personnel administration, financing and accounting activities, coordination of filing and records maintenance activities, provision of facilities, office space and equipment and the care thereof, requisitioning from the department of buildings and general services, supplies, equipment and other requirements, management improvement services, training, including diversity, equity and inclusion training, communications, including dispatch and radio technology, fleet services, information systems and technology, including the Vermont crime information center and the sex offender registry, grant management and then any other administrative functions assigned by the secretary. Other permissions of the law notwithstanding, all administrative service functions are delegated to other components of the agency shall be performed within the agency by the division of support services. Next 6084 is the office of community engagement. The office of community engagement is created within the agency. It is to be administered by the deputy secretary. The office of community engagement shall, now moving into page 11, one, create and execute a process to engage public safety stakeholders in the development of key agency policies with broad stakeholder interest. Create and maintain a variety of mechanisms for community feedback and engagement regarding the operations of the public safety system and three, maintain a list of relevant public safety stakeholders. So that was all section one of this bill which outlines the creation of this agency and its various components. Section two, you may recall from last year, there is anticipated that there will be sort of a staged transition for some of these current divisions and departments into the agency over a period of, I would say a year and a half to two years. Senator Kalmar. Yes. Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. I don't mean to interrupt everyone. I'm just trying to, in my mind, get the schematic, if you will, settled and wonder how different it is from what currently exists. So as I understand it, there is a department which sets above everything else that under the department there are divisions and under the divisions there are, well, under the divisions, there's commissioners and deputy commissioners and then there are directors underneath them but sitting on top of all of it is the secretary and deputy secretary of the agency. Am I recapturing, and it's not? Well, let me start with what currently exists. That would be helpful. So right now you have the Department of Public Safety, right, within the, and within the Department of Public Safety, you have both the state police as well as fire safety and management. All of those are currently within a department. So this would sort of remove all of those current structures. You would have a new agency, not a department, but a new agency that's overseeing a new Department of Law enforcement, which is where the state police would reside. You would have a new Department of Fire Safety, which previously was underneath, was a division of a department. So that, so the fire safety and management would become its own department. Law enforcement would be its own department and then you would also have two more, not departments, but divisions. You would have the, excuse me, not, yeah, not departments, but sort of divisions. You would have the office of community engagement and the division of support services which both directly are administered by the deputy secretary. So, and then in addition to that new structure, this would also take some pieces of other public safety functions that are currently outside of the Department of Public Safety and move them into the new agency, right? You would have the E911 board. You would be taking the law enforcement division from the Department of Motor Vehicles that would also be moving over. So I think for the committee's discussion next time, I will just map out sort of what the current structure is and what this new structure is so you can visualize it. It is hard to visualize it without seeing it on paper because some of the names remain the same but have either been shifted or elevated within an organizational structure. Thank you, I really appreciate that. Thanks. You're welcome. All right, so I will continue on. So now we're moving into some of those sections that govern how this transition will happen. So first in section two, we're talking about the transition of the Enhanced 911 Board. So the Enhanced 911 Board in section two, this authorizes all of the financial assets and liabilities that are currently with the Enhanced 911 Board, including any appropriations, all of those would be moved over into the agency of public safety when the Enhanced 911 Board becomes part of the agency. This would also authorize positions, equipments and supplies and inventory. Similarly to move over, this is fairly standard language for incorporating a separate component of government into a new component of government. Then subsection C, the Enhanced 911 Board shall have the administrative, technical and legal assistance of the agency of public safety. And then the rules of the Enhanced 911 Board shall become a subtitle under the rules of the agency of public safety. So you'll see a similar type of transition section on page 12. This is concerning the transition of the Department of Motor Vehicles enforcement officers. Once again, subsection A is about the transfer of duties, obligations, responsibilities of those law enforcement officers at the DMV over into the agency of public safety within and once again, the division of motor vehicle enforcement that's currently at the DMV would be moved into the Department of Law enforcement within the agency. Subsection B, all financial assets and liabilities of the DMV enforcement division, including appropriations would be transferred over to the agency of public safety. Subsection C, all authorized positions, functions, equipment, supplies, inventory of those officers again would be moved over to the agency. Subsection D, the certified law enforcement officers shall maintain their relationships with and support of the Department of Motor Vehicles, other components of federal, state and municipal government and private sector collaborations. On page 13, we have general transition provisions. Section four, the Secretary of Public Safety shall coordinate with the Secretary of Administration, the Commissioner of Finance and Management, the Commissioner of Human Resources, the Executive Director of the Criminal Justice Council, the Chair of the Criminal Justice Council, the Executive Director of the E911 Board, the Secretary of the Agency of Transportation and the commissioners of the Departments of Motor Vehicles, Fish and Wildlife and Liquor of Liquor and Lottery and their directors of enforcement as necessary to enable the organizational modernization and most efficient operation of state law enforcement divisions and resources. So beginning on page 13, line 13, this is where we start getting into some of the statutory corrections that, or I should say conforming changes to current law to reflect that the transition is being of the E911 Board from where it currently sits into the agency. So you'll see section 7052 of Title 30 in section five is being amended to point out that the Board shall advise on and assist the Secretary with the selection of the Executive Director of the E911 Board. Previously, the Board appointed subject to approval of the governor. And then you'll see on page 14, the Executive Director shall submit a budget to the Secretary. The Executive Director shall not be under the direction and control of the, excuse me, did I say the Secretary? The Executive Director shall not be under the direction and control of the Secretary, except with regard to the budget and other administrative functions given to the Director or the Board by law. Section six is once again is referring to the E911 Board. Most of these are conforming changes, referencing the new chapter 69 in subsection A, noting that the Board shall consult with the Agency of Human Services, the Agency of Public Safety as the Department of Public Safety would no longer exist. And then those are all, and so moving into page 15, so those are the changes that we just looked at for the E911 Board, next we're moving into the statutory changes regarding the Motor Vehicle Enforcement Officers. So section seven would amend section one of title 23. Again, making a change of the word Commissioner to the Secretary of Public Safety. And this is, I believe, a requested change from the Department of Public Safety to this statute. This would remove, cooperate, and carrying out all the statutes and rules adopted to implement the provisions of this title. And in case of agreement as to division of work, the Governor shall decide, and instead implements a system where the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles and the Secretary of Public Safety would enter into a memorandum of understanding to ensure that enforcement needs of the DMV, the Agency of Public Safety Division of Motor Vehicle Enforcement are achieved. Section eight amends this section so that references to Commissioner, which is currently Commissioner of Public Safety, would then be a reference to the Commissioner of the Agency of Public Safety Department of Law Enforcement. Section 16, we have statutory changes for the Department of Public Safety, no longer existing and there instead being an Agency of Public Safety. So some of those references where you see a, within statute where you see a reference to the Commissioner of Public Safety will need to be amended so that the Commissioner of Law Enforcement within the Agency of Public Safety. So section nine amends section 2101 of title three. A cabinet is created within the Executive Branch of Government that shall consist of Secretaries of such Agencies as are created by law as well as such Commissioners of the Departments created by law as the Governor and the Governor's discretion shall appoint to be a member of the cabinet. Section 10, the Vermont Emergency Management Division. This is entitled 20, section three. There is hereby created within the Agency of Public Safety Department of Fire Safety and Emergency Management, a division to be known as the Vermont Emergency Management Division. Section 11 changes section 1871 of title 20 concerning contracting. You'll see there's the deletion of the language around there being a Department of Public Safety and a Commissioner of Public Safety. And then moving into page 17, this would now read that the Commissioner of Law Enforcement and then goes through how the Commissioner of Law Enforcement would be able to contract for security and related traffic control. Subsection B, the Commissioner of Law Enforcement shall collect fees for the termination of alarms. And the remaining changes are all subsection renumbering based on those changes all the way down through to page 19. You'll see where there are references to Commissioner of Public Safety. Those are changed to the Commissioner of Law Enforcement. And now I am down onto page 20 in section 12. This is a new section from the last time you saw this bill. This amendments section 1872 of title 20. This deletes the language saying that the Commissioner of currently the Commissioner of Public Safety would serve as the fire marshal because at present the division of, excuse me, the division of fire management and emergency services is currently within the Department of Public Safety. So with the division of fire management and emergency services becoming its own department, that title of fire marshal will travel with fire management and emergency services and not remain with the Commissioner of Law Enforcement. Section 13, amendments section 1874 of title 20 talking about organization of department by Commissioner. Once again, we're adding, we're changing the language here so it's not the Commissioner of Public Safety but it would be a Commissioner of Law Enforcement who would need the approval of the governor and the Secretary of the Agency of Public Safety. Shell organized the Department of Law Enforcement. Again, a reference over to chapter 60, not the new chapter 69, which is the creation of the agency. So I would say those are mostly conforming changes for the new agency. Looking at section 14 on page 21, this amendments title 20, section 1883, State Law Enforcement Memorandum of Understanding. So subsection A, in anticipation of consolidating all certified law enforcement resources into the agency of public safety, the Secretary of Public Safety shall develop and then it goes into the memorandum of understanding that currently exists between the agency of, excuse me, the Department of Public Safety and those other departments, Fish and Wildlife Motor Vehicle and Liquor and Lottery. And then the memorandum of understanding, it removed the requirement that it's reviewed at least every two years but kept in the majority of what the memorandum of understanding should address, consolidating collective resources and reducing or eliminating redundancies and implementing a methodology that will enhance overall coordination and communication and standardized training and policies while supporting the mission of individual enforcement divisions. There are some minor word changes in subdivision two, removal of the word interagency for, and just to say ensure cooperation and collaboration and changing the words individual enforcement agencies to individual enforcement divisions. This would repeal subdivision three which creates a task force, creating a task force concept that will provide for the sharing in disseminating of information and recommendations involving various levels of statewide law enforcement through Vermont that will benefit all law enforcement agencies as well as citizens. New subdivision three, developing an integrated and coordinated approach with the goal of creating a force multiplier to be coordinated through the new Agency of Public Safety Department of Law Enforcement. Subdivision four, providing for the Secretary of Public Safety with the approval of the governor in accordance with the state emergency management plan to assume the role of lead coordinator of statewide law enforcement units in the event of elevated alerts, critical incidents and all hazard events. And that is it for outlining portions of the memorandum, excuse me, components of the memorandum of understanding. Moving on to section 15 on page 23, this would amend sub-chapter two of chapter 113 entitled 20 around certified law enforcement officers, specifically section 1911, examinations, appointment, promotion, probation. You'll see that there's the deletion in some instances of the term state police to instead say certified law enforcement officers assigned to the Department of Law Enforcement. Then in addition, where certified law enforcement officer positions support the work of agencies or departments outside the Agency of Public Safety, the commissioner and in this instance, we're talking about the commissioner of law enforcement shall consult the agencies or departments concerning the qualifications for the positions. All certified law enforcement officers assigned to the Department of Law Enforcement shall be on probation for one year from the date of first appointment. Next would be some changes to section 1912, Bond and Oath, again, replacing the term state police to say that it is all certified law enforcement officers assigned to the Department of Law Enforcement. Those are the changes on the bottom of page 23. And then we just have some style changes on the top of page 24, capitalizing terms. Then into section 1913, uniforms and equipment, once again, replacing the term state police with certified law enforcement officers assigned to the Department. And once again, the commissioner shall consult with agencies and departments that are supported by certified law enforcement officers assigned to the Department of Law Enforcement on the uniforms and equipment necessary for these positions. And this is in recognition of other divisions that are not currently within the Department of Public Safety, such as the law enforcement officers who are currently at the DMV who would be moving over. This term would now encapsulate all of those certified law enforcement officers within the Department of Law Enforcement. That changes towards the bottom of 24. And then onto page 25, section 1914, powers and immunities. The commissioner of law enforcement and once again, all certified law enforcement officers assigned to the Department. And then again, later, same replacement of the term state police with certified law enforcement officers assigned to the Department. Section 1933 of Title 20, around DNA sample required. On page 26, specifying that we're meaning the commissioner of law enforcement, not the commissioner of public safety. Section 17 again is the changing section 2352 of Title 20 to specify the commissioner of law enforcement, not commissioner of public safety. Section 18 repeals the Department of Public Safety listed as a component, well, of where it is currently listed because there would no longer be a Department of Public Safety. So that would repeal that language. And then conforming revisions. Now in section 19, this would authorize the office of legislative council to make revisions throughout the statutes as needed for consistency with this act so long as the revisions have no effect on the meaning of the affected statutes. So in this instance, it would be replacing Department of Public Safety with Department of Law Enforcement and revisions that are substantially similar to that. For example, replacing commissioner of public safety to commissioner of law enforcement so long as it is otherwise consistent with this bill. Section 20 on page 27, this is a report requirement. Honor before November 15th, 2022, the secretary of the agency of public safety shall report to the governor. The leadership of the general assembly and the House and Senate committees on government operations and on judiciary on the status of the organizational transition and recommend any legislative changes needed to continue the orderly and efficient organizational transition of the agency of public safety. And then some section, excuse me, some section B, the secretary shall study the effectiveness, efficacy, efficiency and delivery of state public safety law enforcement services and shall report to the governor and the general assembly. Honor before October 15th, 2023 on the feasibility and advisability of transferring the operations of the department of Fish and Wildlife certified law enforcement officers. The department of liquor and lottery certified law enforcement officers, the Capitol Police and the department of labor relating to VOSHA project work safety and tramway safety, excuse me, passenger tramway safety to the agency of public safety. Subsection C, honor before November 15th, 2023. The secretary shall report to the governor, the leadership of the general assembly and the House and Senate committees on government operations and on judiciary on the status of the organizational transition and recommend any legislative changes needed to continue an orderly and efficient organizational transition. So section 21 is effective dates. You may recall when we were looking at a very early draft which was a bit longer, it had a different method of implementing these statutes in order to make this a bit easier to read what I've done here because I have included basically all of the legislation as it will look by 2023 within this bill, but the effective date section specifies when certain components will be added into the statute. So what you have seen, what you see now is the whole of it as it will look if all of this is implemented over the next two years. But you'll see in the effective date section, the creation of the agency would take place on July 1st, 2022, but you'll see that the E911 board and the motor vehicle enforcement division officers would transition to July 1st, 2023. So it's sort of a two-part transition, one to create the agency and eliminate the current department of public safety and make those changes to making the department of law enforcement, the department of fire safety and emergency management, the division of support services and the office of community engagement. And then after a year, you would have the incorporation of the E911 board as well as the law enforcement officers that are currently over at the DMV. And then from the report section, you'll see that you would be receiving a report concerning the possibility or feasibility of incorporating additional law enforcement officers that are not addressed in this bill, such as those at liquor and lottery at Fish and Wildlife, I believe the Capitol Police and certain officers with the Department of Labor. That was very lengthy. Thank you for sticking with me. So committee members, are there any clarification questions? Not questions about why we're doing something or what the impact will be or anything, we'll hear that from people who are going to testify both for and against this, but are there any questions of clarification? Amron, I think you did a super job of it. You've gone on mute, Senator. Oh, yes, I moved my papers. And did you hear me ask if anybody had questions of clarification? And I think I went on mute, right? As I was saying that Amron did a great job of explaining. Okay, good. We heard all that. Okay. And you did, Amron, thank you. You're welcome. So if I don't see any questions of clarification, what I think I'll do is have my commissioner, Sherling, talk to us and then Bill Sorrell about the, and we will be hearing from a number of other people I know. So if you would like to talk to us, excuse me about this commissioner, that would be great. Certainly. Good afternoon and for the record, Mike Sherling commissioner of public safety. Unless the committee feels the need for me to go into the same level of depth that we were in, really for the last two sessions, but certainly during the last one, we've been working on this since I arrived at public safety in the fall of 2019. In large part, I'll just direct the committee's attention to the fact that the organization of public safety assets in Vermont has been a topic of discussion. And the subject of many reports, studies, et cetera, launched from a variety of different angles, both legislative, executive branch, external consultants, Vermont legal cities and towns. And it's been studied approximately two dozen times since 1969. There are two main sort of avenues that those studies have taken. One goes toward the regionalization of safety services to increase efficiencies and create sustainable models in a rural state. The other is the organization of the state government public safety assets. And this one speaks primarily to the latter. The overarching goals are to bring a variety of things that overlap but aren't co-habitated in state government to modernize the way that we organize those assets to be the most efficient and effective for Vermonters. There's a variety of ways that that happens. And ultimately, while it won't save any money upfront, we do believe that it could flatten the growth curve of the investments that we make in public safety operations on an annual basis going forward. It not only reorganizes for better efficiency of operations, reduces duplication and makes efficient use of the limited taxpayer resources that are in play, but it also provides better supports if it's crafted properly to public safety operations in a variety of arenas to include those that aren't even contemplated to come in here. So as we, for example, create more stability and consistency with the way we approach communications, communications infrastructure, engineering and the operations of our communications centers and the underlying networks that provides better support to emergency medical services, which is in the Department of Health and there is no plans that I'm aware of to fold that into an agency of public safety at any point in the future. So not only does it provide additional stability, efficiency and support to the entities that are touched by the reorganization, but also to some that exist outside of the reorganization. Another area that a focus here is to adopt a mindful, equitable and fair and most importantly along those lines, a reproducible system of criminal justice and public health service delivery. So we take a variety of components of state government and we bolt them together and take the best parts of each and replicate the best parts of each across the entire agency if implemented correctly and as we envision it being done. An example of that is in this isn't part of what's being contemplated in this initial round, but by way of example, the data analysis that's done in the Department of Liquor Control in their enforcement division has some very creative and innovative components and simultaneously in the state police, the fair and impartial policing unit and the co-managers there have a robust program in place that isn't in place in other components of the system throughout state government. So taking those are just two examples of taking sort of the best practice from disparate components and leveraging the assets together to create better outcomes for Vermonters by sharing those resources under one umbrella. Important again to note that in this iteration DLC is not envisioned to move but it was sort of a top of mind example that I had. Little tiny bit of history, the prior runs at this have prior efforts to execute this kind of a plan have failed for two reasons. They have been efforts at saving money in an arena where we don't spend enough already in public safety operations generally, we have under invested for decades. We're not suggesting that we increase the investment, rather we're suggesting that by creating better efficiencies, you actually get more out of each dollar that's spent. So a couple of examples unifying the way information technology and all the security overlays that go with that occur. Security of facilities and having single system instead of multiple systems across state government. Facility sharing and equipment sharing. So one of the things that I've talked about last year was the fact that we buy specialty vehicles across multiple different verticals in state government and we paint specific agency or even division emblems on them rather than buying an asset and sharing it across multiple divisions or departments of state government whether that's in the fire service or in law enforcement operations or elsewhere. So sharing those assets, sharing radio infrastructure, all those kinds of things have economies of scale that allow you to leverage limited dollars for better outcomes on a day to day basis. The other reason that these initiatives have failed is because they have been historically seen as folding in public safety assets into the Vermont State Police. That is exactly the opposite of what we're trying to do here or trying to break off the law enforcement components and actually create under this construct an additional layer of supervision and accountability in a secretary's office. So not only would you have a commissioner but you'd also have a secretary and you'd compartmentalize the law enforcement assets. Again, being able to share the key components that I've described previously but while not having them be subservient to other components of the operation and we very mindfully in our version of this last year and again in the one that Amaran has so definitely constructed puts those in a division of support services that by the very way that it's organized it actually elevates it above both the department of law enforcement and the department of fire safety and emergency management specifically so that those keys operational support services don't get sublimated to either one of the departments. And that's done by having a deputy secretary who put in a very rudimentary way out ranks the commissioners is the one who runs those support services. So ensuring that those support services can be both inward facing but also outward facing to support statewide public safety operations from one end of the state to the other. And I take that opportunity to also refer the committee back to our modernization strategy from early 2020 which has been modified a bit but still has the same general constructs and one of the core tenants of that strategy is for the department hopefully eventually the agency of public safety to be even more focused on providing requisite supports for emergency operations first responders and public safety organizations throughout the state through radio infrastructure technology and a host of other things that historically they've had to pay for in many instances we're trying to strip away some of those costs and have them be fundamental to the operations of state infrastructure in general. There are sort of nuances around each department or division that I can get into but I think Amaran has very adequately sort of walked you through the nuts and bolts of how they will function and rather than spend 30 minutes walking you through each one and sort of the highlights that it may make more sense that the chair's discretion for me to answer operational questions in those arenas. Thank you. I think that that does make more sense and I'd like to make one comment and then one question for you and then open it up to the committee members for questions. So you mentioned that there have been efforts for quite some time but they have failed and I will say that I personally have been working on this issue since Keith Flynn was the commissioner under Governor Shumlin. So this is not a new concept for any of us. But my question is you said that the reports generally pointed to two paths that we could follow. One of kind of the reorganization of the department and the other regional approach to providing law enforcement and following this first does not preclude working on regional approach to law enforcement. Am I right about that? That's exactly right Senator. They're two different paths but they're parallel not, they're not alternates. It's not one or the other. I don't think that any, I'm not aware of anyone ever suggesting that the state should take over law enforcement or fire safety or emergency management for the entire state and all 251 municipalities. The organization of state assets has always been envisioned if done correctly to provide better supports to the then hundreds of other agencies that exist on a local or county level throughout the state. And the regionalization studies have all been about how do you do sort of exactly what we're describing in state government except do it regionally around Vermont. So not just law enforcement but fire service, emergency communications, emergency medical services, sharing assets and leveraging the economy of scale by creating basically fewer larger operations than having potentially 251 smaller scale operations which have to then replicate every component of their operating environment 251 times instead of sharing the assets and the ability to do administrative and management tasks, apparatus, all those kinds of things. And we've seen some great examples of that happening around Vermont, but it's certainly not ubiquitous. Right, and we will, I don't wanna go too into the weeds on that approach, that regional approach because we will be taking that up outside of this conversation in a different conversation we'll be continuing that conversation. And if I may, I should just say for the record we're at the Department of Public Safety our position on regionalization is it is a valuable thing for communities to explore. It doesn't, but beyond that we're supportive of it and we'll do whatever we can to help people facilitate it if they decide that it's the right choice for them. But it's not something that I think is our role to specifically push with one exception that I'm sure we're gonna get to later in the session. Yes, yes, but I don't want us to go there now because we really need to look at this organizational bill. So committee members, does anybody have any questions for the commissioner? Yes, Senator Rom-Hinsale. Just waiting to see if anybody else did. First of all, commissioner, I just want you to know on the state police advisory commission website four of the six members have terms that have expired. So I'm not sure if the term dates need to be updated or the members of the commission. Thanks for flagging that. I think it's largely the need to update the website but we'll get into that and figure it out. Yes, we have talked about that before. And so that was from my departure point on the complaint investigative process page which looks like it's in the Division of Internal Affairs. Right now there's an internal investigation that goes up the chain of command and ultimately the commissioner has the last word on an investigation and whether or not there was misconduct found. How would that change or stay the same in an agency? We've gone back and forth on that and I actually would refer to Amron relative to what the final draft of this bill says but the ultimate answer senator is it could be either you could stop at the commissioner of law enforcement or you could elevate that to the secretary's level or you could bifurcate it in a way that it's based on severity. So at the General Assembly's discretion I think you could do either one but differ to Amron for how it's currently drafted. Amron? I'm sorry, Senator Rom-Hinsdale, where? I'm looking on the website. I'm looking out looking at the, as you discussed kind of a side by side I don't know where in the language right now it says what would happen to independent or it's not really independent but what would happen to internal investigation of misconduct? I may have the answer Amron. I think it actually would because it's not specifically drafted in here it would lie at the end where the replacement language for commissioner in that section would likely be replaced with the commissioner of law enforcement but we could specify that to be the secretary and maybe Amron has a different thought but that's my read as I look at the bottom of this. That would be, yes, I believe that would be the case. This is not addressed specifically in the bill which means that to the extent that it's currently outlined in statute that that authority ultimately rests with the commissioner of public safety it would then translate to the commissioner of law enforcement. And has there been any consideration of giving that investigation authority over to the criminal justice council instead depending on the level of severity? There hasn't and the primary reason for that is they're parallel tracks so the criminal justice council needs to maintain its independence relative to the licensing component. So for the severe events, they get another level of review relative to licensing so they're parallel things and I don't know that we'd want to co-locate them. And how many complaints were made public in the last year? It says there's discretion from the commissioner to make public. Great question. You can see that right on our website. We, when I arrived, one of the things that I wanted to do was make the outcomes of all the internal investigations public while we're prohibited in releasing certain components by statute, we now release every six months a breakdown of all the complaints, the nature of that complaint and the outcome. And they're the last, I think we've been doing that now for 18 months. I've been here for two years. So there should be three reports available on the Department of Public Safety or State Police website. I can send you a link, I just have to find it. That would be great, because there's no link in the investigative page itself for the complaint page. It's not like it's linked right there, which I think would be helpful. So I'm going to, unless there are more, I guess technical questions for the commissioner, I'm going to jump to Bill Sorrell because I'm aware that at 315, we are supposed to be walking through the planning office, Bill. And I would say that we're going to have a lot of discussion on this. This isn't our only chance. So I have a lot more questions. So I can hold them for another day. Okay, thank you. So thank you. Thank you, Senator. And let me first clarify that I had a bit of trouble using the link to get in. And I think I was maybe a minute, I didn't get on until like a minute or two into Amarons going through the bill. So I was listening carefully. I didn't realize quite frankly that this was a new bill different from the one we were discussing last spring. And so let me put under request that Amarons send me a draft of this bill that's being discussed today. But in listening to Amarons go through the bill, I only heard one reference to the criminal justice council and it was sort of late in the bill. And I didn't directly follow the provision that referenced the council. And so again, I would like to see a draft and have an opportunity to speak to the committee. Again, if on behalf of the council we have concerns about this draft bill, I would just say that on the issue of whether there should be created in an agency of public safety, the criminal justice council, we did not ask the council or I did not ask the council and council took no position on that. The council, at least all the members of the council who spoke to the issue of an agency of public safety, they spoke on the issue of the independence of the council from being within the umbrella of the agency of public safety. And for a variety of different reasons, council members thought the independence was important, not just in fact, independence but the appearance of independence. And quite frankly, there's been a couple of things since you recessed last spring, one we found out about a bill that came out of house institutions that put a lot of responsibilities on the council as it relates to both the training and disciplining of corrections employees. And we were very surprised to hear that and it was an ambitious timeframe that has slowed down, which is a good thing. The council feels strongly that an optimum running correction system is a hugely important component of a criminal justice system, but that bill was sort of putting things together at warp speed and council really did not have time to do justice to it. And I'm not sure that corrections did either. And the other thing I would say underscoring and other issue underscoring the preference for not only independence in fact, but independence and appearance of the council from an agency of public safety. I know that there is a Senate bill that's either in draft form, maybe it's been introduced, but that bill would give the council a very real role in investigating uses of deadly force by Vermont law enforcement. And I'm not sure where that draft is at and such, but that's gonna take some real homework on the part of the council to see if we can take on anything resembling those responsibilities. We are the final arbiter on professional misconduct cases of all state law enforcement. And if we were to have a separate responsibility in the use of force arena, that would be a big, big, big load on the council. So, but I think it does again underscore the council's views that if we're independent of an agency of public safety that that is good in appearance and substantive. So I'm going to just comment here that the reference to the criminal justice council in this bill only replaced currently the commissioner of public safety as a member of the council and all it does is replaces the commissioner of public safety with the commissioner of law enforcement. Well, I'm gonna sleep better tonight, Senator. That's the only. So, and I do understand that there are other issues that we need to deal with around discipline and responsibilities and everything, but they are connected to other bills. So I don't want us to get too into the weeds with those right now, but Senator Clarkson, did you have a question? Yeah, I just like a clarification just because what's going on in Springfield at the moment, I'm just curious Bill, whether the council is responsible for all internal investigations of police officers. And if so, why is a department having to hire outside detectives to do that work? Those are good questions. One, I'm not familiar with the Springfield case that you discuss. And actually, I won't be familiar with the case unless and until there is ultimately an appeal to the full council. We have a committee on professional regulation. It is a committee that meets weekly. We have had as many of 50 active cases before that committee, when there is an allegation of professional misconduct against a state law enforcement officer, no matter constable up to the kernel of the state police, we are to be apprised of the allegation, then kept in the loop on the investigation and what decision is made at the local level on whether there's been misconduct and if there's to be discipline, what is the discipline? That all needs to gets referred to our committee on professional regulation. They take a look, one, at the quality of the investigation that was done at the local level and determine whether there should be more investigation. It could be sent back for more investigation if that's the view of the committee, but you, the legislature in its last session authorized a full-time investigator for the council. And that I believe is being advertised right now or will be by sometime this week or next. It's over at a department of HR. So, and because there's an appeal from decisions by our professional regulation committee to the full council, only the council members on the five-person professional regulation subcommittee are familiar with cases that are before that committee right now. We just know numbers, we don't know names and whatever. And it's because if there is a public hearing before the council on an appeal, we want the council members, other than those on professional regulation to be in a position to vote and want me as chair to be able to preside over that hearing so I don't know names or specifics of cases that have been reported to the council but are solely within the confines of the public professional regulation committee. So I'm going to suggest that we are going to hear from the criminal justice council about their reorganization, where they are, all of these things. But, and I know everything in public safety and law enforcement is intertwined with each other, but the bill... You just muted yourself again. I think that when I shuffle my papers, it hits the bar. And I know that everything is intertwined and is related to each other, but I want to remind us that this bill, 155, is really just a reorganization bill. It doesn't deal with discipline, it doesn't deal with certification, it doesn't deal with any of that. It is simply a reorganization bill. I appreciate it, Madam Chair. I just, you know, the antenna, when Bill was speaking, I just had to ask him, while he was here. Yeah, I get that. I just don't want to... A burden in the hand is a bill in the hand. A bill in the hand, exactly. I just want to make sure that we don't go down those, those rabbit holes because there are a million things that we need to do around law enforcement and they include all the model policies that are coming out, which have nothing to do with this bill itself. This is purely a reorganization bill. And the only reason we would address any of those in relation to this, I believe, is if they, if somehow changing the organizational structure has an impact on those issues. And so I just want us to be really clear about that.