 Good morning. This is House and Senate Judiciary Committee meeting on H317, an act relating to establishing the Bureau of Racial Justice Statistics and the Bureau of Racial Justice Statistics Advisory Panel. There is a companion bill in the Senate, S108, but through agreement with Representative Grad and myself, we're dealing with the House bill at H317. This all has been going on for quite a while. One of the frustrations, every time we try to deal with something as the matter of what it is, it's in the criminal justice system. We lack statistics. We lack information. We don't have that. The Justice Oversight Committee and the Racial, I always get it wrong. HATON's group, he's the chair of that, but they have done a lot of study. We've done a lot of study on what we should do, and this is actually presenting today a plan forward to have good statistics in Vermont that we can rely on to make good policy choices. When you're making policy choices without statistical information to back you up, you often make the wrong choice. This will also help us in making sure that different agencies take government follow, as well as local government follow what we present and be able to understand. That's basically the impetus for the bill. I welcome Representative Grad to make some comments before we hear from Eric. Thank you. I think Senator Sears really covered it all, and I really appreciate Senator Judiciary joining us today, so we can all start off on the same page as well as our witnesses. This is a very important bill, very important concept, really, in terms of moving forward in our criminal justice work. With that, should we turn it over to legislative counsel Eric Fitzpatrick to do a walkthrough? Does that work? I did forget to mention one thing, if you don't mind, Representative Grad. When the Justice Reinvestment Group from the Council of State Governments Justice Center were in Vermont trying to make recommendations regarding racial disparities in Vermont's criminal justice system, they were unable to, in a large way because of the lack of adequate statistics, and they're a data driven organization that relies on statistics. I think that was one of the parts of the bill of the effort on Justice Reinvestment 2 that wasn't as successful as it might otherwise have been because of our lack of statistics. Great. Thank you. Eric. Eric, welcome. Thank you. Good morning, everybody. Good morning. Eric Fitzpatrick with the Office of Legislative Counsel here to walk the committee through H317. As Senator Sears mentioned, there's a Senate companion bill as well as 108. Both of them identical introduced in both bodies, but they're both entitled, an act relating to establishing the Bureau of Racial Justice Statistics and the Bureau of Racial Justice Statistics advisory panel. As you can tell from the title of the bills, essentially what's being done here is the creation of two different entities that are charged with collecting and analyzing data that's, I'm going to quote from the language of the bill now, related to systemic racial bias and disparities within the criminal and juvenile justice systems. So it creates two different entities that are going to be involved with that project that were just mentioned. And as a moment or two of background before we actually look at the language, it's helpful to know that this proposal is coming out of, started really with Act 148, the Justice Reinvestment Act because it was in that act that you folks, the legislature charged the racial disparities in criminal and juvenile justice systems advisory panel with taking a look at this issue with a number of other parties involved also, of course, but analyzing the racial disparities in the criminal justice systems issue. And out of that study came a report. And the RDAB report to the Joint Justice Oversight Committee last year, toward the end of last year. And within that report is the recommendation for the creation of an independent entity to study this issue of racial bias in the criminal and juvenile justice systems. And that recommendation forms the basis of the legislation you're looking at today. And that obviously, there's a lot of details within that. And very many of the details are also reflected in the bill for sure. But in the big picture, you know, it's that recommendation of the establishment of an independent entity to look at racial bias in the criminal and juvenile justice systems that came out of the came out of RDAB's report to Justice Oversight, that forms the basis of age 317 and S108. So that's kind of a moment about where this all came from. And the entity that the entities, I should say, that were as a concept recommended in the report are reflected in the Bureau of Racial Justice Statistics and the Bureau of Advisory Panel that we're going to look at in just a moment. I also want to mention, though, that conceptually there's also some history of these sorts of panels and these sorts of biases being established in Connecticut specifically. And that Connecticut model was mentioned in RDAB's report and was also used as I was drafting it as a basis for where I was pulling language from and sort of the concept of how this was all coming together. So I think it's helpful to know that as well. And I think that I think, in fact, the Connecticut model, and I'm sure the chair at time will talk more about this, but was specifically referred to in some detail in the RDAB report. And obviously that also was able to serve as a basis for the legislation, the bills that you're looking at now. And the concept there you'll see that's reflected that's both in Connecticut and in the bill is that you have these two different entities. You have one entity, the Bureau of Racial Justice Statistics, that's really an IT entity. You know, these these those are IT professionals who are data analysts and collection professionals. And that entity really collects, organizes, assimilates the data on on racial disparities. Whereas the other entity that works with and oversees the Bureau is the is the advisory panel. And then they're more of a policy entity. So you kind of have a data collection, data analysis entity that's really crunching all these numbers. And you have another body that works with them, oversees them, advises them, and also connects to the legislature. You know, important that you have a sort of a voice with the legislature sort of analyzes that data that the Bureau is creating and can come up with recommendations for where the shortcomings are, where the where improvements need to be made, what legislation might be needed, for example, and they they can connect with the legislature. And in fact, the legislation will see requires them to report to the legislature every year. I think the at least the concept there is that there will be sort of this this, you know, this ongoing communication. So that as the data is collected and analyzed, the recommendations can be made and can be sort of a circle of communication between the legislature and the bodies that are working in that area. So one last sort of background common as well before that the language I also wanted to mention the fact that sort of where these entities are placed in statute is also something to sort of keep in mind, because that was also an issue of discussion. You'll see that the way that the way the bill is now these entities are placed in the executive branch, specifically in the in the agency of administration, sort of where to house this is certainly a policy decision for you. I think that the two main possibilities, not that there aren't others, but the two main possibilities that were being discussed. So we're sort of on the one hand, it could be a completely independent entity, right, not housed in any existing government office, but could be completely independent, say, like the victims compensation board, something like that, there's plenty of models out there for that as well. Or on the other hand, could be housed within an existing branch of government the way the bill does. And there's, you know, positive and negative to both approaches. On the one hand, full independence, you have the sort of idea that wouldn't be any potential impact or influence by existing, existing branches of government. On the other hand, you don't have really administrative structure in place to help out with the way the committee's functions are meant to be. So it's really a discussion for the committees to have. And it's not that there's a wrong answer. But the one at least for purposes of getting the discussion started was to put it in the administration, which makes some sense. I'm just going to pull up one document here to let you guys see that. Also, I think it's helpful to look at the existing chapter where this goes in. I'm just going to make sure that I'm a co-host, which I am. Thank you very much to whoever did that, Evan or Peggy. And we're just going to see for a moment, Chapter 68 of Title III, which is where this is proposed to go, which is where the Executive Director of Racial Equity and the Racial Equity Advisory Panel exist currently. So you'll see that the, here it is right here. So this is Chapter 68 of Title III, which is, you'll see it's the, this entire chapter is called the Executive Director of Racial Equity. But as well, the position is created, which is works with overseen by, advised by the Racial Equity Advisory Panel, and both of them are already there in Chapter 68 of Title III. So it made some sense to add the Bureau of Racial Justice Statistics to this existing provision of law. And you'll see right there, if we turn to the bill for a moment, you'll see what that does, is it just adds, it breaks up the existing Chapter 68 adds a new retitles the Racial Equity as sub Chapter 1, and then adds a new sub Chapter 2, which would be Racial Justice Statistics. So there is some logical sense to having it there. But as I say, as a sort of policy resource matter, that's certainly open for the committees to discuss. But that is the reasoning as to why, at least as to get the discussion started, the Bureau was housed. In this location, you'll see, in fact, when we look at the language that the language of the Bureau of Racial Justice Statistics Advisory Panel is modeled very closely to to the language that's in this exact existing chapter on the Racial Equity Advisory Panel, very similar to the roles are sort of similar in that they interact with, with another body in a similar sort of way. So having said that, I could, since we have the language up on the screen, I could start right in with the walkthrough, but I'm going to hold off pause for a moment to see if the chairs want to pause for questions before we start that, or whether whether you're put your preferences for how to proceed next. Senator Sears. I was muted and I, I'm fine with going forward. I just wanted to mention Senator Benning is not here this morning. He's been delayed by a court hearing. Unfortunately, unfortunately, unfortunately, his job sometimes is a defense attorney requires him to be. Great. Thank you. Great. Go ahead. Thank you, Eric. Thank you, Senator Sears. All right. So let's move right into the language then. So I know the committee has a lot of witnesses scheduled to come up to us. I'll try and move pretty briskly. But as always, I can't see hands. So if anyone has a question, please, please interrupt and stop me anytime. Happy to, happy to pause whenever it can make sense. So as I just mentioned, the, the proposal is to establish the Bureau of Racial Justice Statistics and the advisory panel in Chapter 68 of Title III, where the Executive Director of Racial Equity is currently this Bureau, as I also mentioned at the beginning, remember the Bureau is the information technology arm of this process. This is the, this is the entity that collects, analyzes the data. So, and you'll see positions are created for that later on at the end of the bill. So the initial language states right off at the beginning that it creates this Bureau within the executive branch, as I mentioned, the Agency of Administration specifically. It's a charge is in lines four and five, collect and analyze data related to systemic racial bias and disparities within the criminal and juvenile justice system. So it's charges laid out very clearly. The Bureau is also told to work collaboratively with and have the assistance of so other state agencies, all state and local agencies are instructed to work with the Bureau for purposes of collecting this data. And you'll see that in quite great detail here, the types of data, and that's what subjects and C is now to deal with next. So now the Bureau is established. Now it's charged with collecting data. And so the obvious question is well, what data? And so that's, you know, identified next. And this goes into quite a lot of detail. This, these recommendations came out of the hard apps report that I mentioned that the report went through the data that it felt would be useful in quite a lot of detail. So that formed the basis or some of this, the data that's used in the Connecticut statute also went into the selection of this data. Again, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it also went into the selection of this data. Again, it's, it's an initial take on it. So obviously changes, additions, subtractions, whatever committees, preferences are can be made. But for the starting, starting the discussion, it's quite detailed and quite specific and sort of goes through the entire juvenile and criminal justice processes. That's the attempt anyway, from the beginning to the end, collect all the data related to and again, look at lines 10 and 11, the data related to systemic racial bias and disparities within, in this case, the juvenile justice system. So data related to that, in connection with, and just moving right through this list. The first one, it's demographic data involving offenders, parents or guardians of offenders. Remember, we're in the juvenile justice system. So that's why the parents were guardians. Pieces here are included. Attorneys, judges, GALs, DCF, law enforcement officers, witnesses demographic data about all those actors in the system. Number two, you start at the beginning, again, sort of the chronological process of, of the juvenile justice system. So the first sort of point in the, on the chronology is the interaction between the offender and whoever they might be interacting with. So you see, that's what this talks about. Encounters with law enforcement officers, DCF staff, mandatory reporters, school staff, school resource officers, any person who, you know, might be involved in that initial encounter. And that data would, it would specifically include information about where the encounter happened, the location, who, with whom the encounter occurred, whether that initial encounter resulted in release, citation, custodial arrest, basis for initial arrests, the level and length of any detention prior to the court appearance, any reports by mandated reporters, any data regarding particular schools and counties with justice involved youth as well. So remember that's pre, pre-charge. Now you have, you move on to any post-charge diversion and community justice program, pre and post, I should say. So this is really related to diversion community justice systems and data about, about those programs, including referral rates and who, who it is, which entity made the referral, acceptance and rejection data, length of the program, completion, failure rates, type location and outcomes for any risk assessment tools used. That was number three, by the way. So moving on to further down the, the timeline of the proceeding, next you get to the delinquency petition. So a petition is filed, data on that, including initial and amended charges, challenges to the charges, pre-marriage dispositions. You got data on defense counsel, including counsel's legal experience and the offenders access to an assignment of defense counsel during all stages. You got data regarding detention and other custodial statuses. So you've got pre-trial detention, release, discharge from custody, any conditions of release, level place and duration of detentions, custody reviews, status changes, number of placement changes. So moving forward in the proceeding, you know, we're now past the filing of the petition. What about the agreement data that also is here, including offers made, total numbers of agreements entered into elements of final agreements. Disposition data, so juvenile case disposition data, length of time until the final disposition, minimum maximum sentences, location and level, fines fees, restitution, probation terms and conditions, any other disposition alternatives. And lastly, data regarding any sanctions and disciplinary actions against juvenile justice system participants. So data about other actors within the system to be available, made available. Eric, can I just break in there on line five, page four, minimum and maximum sentences? Do we don't have that in the juvenile system? Yes, that's a good point. That might have been left over from the, that was probably language that inadvertently carried over from the adult system language. So it should be, you're right, A, the length and time of the disposition should be there, but it should be, should be a reference to dis, final dispositions, not sentences. The length of time and custody or those types of information. Yes. Thank you for that. I'm just noting that real quick here, but yeah, I think that probably was an inadvertent. There also wouldn't be fines and fees. Unless they're motor vehicle offenses. Right. The fines and fees. Yep. There's a whole, I mean, that section probably needs some work to update for the juvenile justice system. Also curious about where the youth offenders come in. Yes, I think you're absolutely right. That whole subdivision be there. I think was just came over from the adult section. So that needs to be reworked. Thanks for catching that. Okay. So speaking of the adult criminal justice system, that's what you'll see next. The language here will be very similar to what you just looked at. So it's really just very parallel on, in many cases, identical data regarding the adult criminal justice system and the racial bias and disparities within that system. That you just looked at with respect to the juvenile justice system. So again, pause me if I go too quickly, but since we just looked at most of this once, I won't hesitate too much as it would go through. But again, the demographic data regarding all the participants and parties within the system is present. First data regarding pre-charge, you know, again, it's similar to the initial encounter that led to the charge with whomever it may be custodial arrest, length of pre-arrayment detentions, diversion and community justice program data. Again, also mentioned in the juvenile sentence context rather, including cases eligible, number of cases referred, and acceptance and completion rates. Charging data, also similar circumstances around the charges, including initial and amended charges filed, challenges, pre-trial dispositions, data about defense counsel, including counsel's legal experience and offenders access to and assignment of defense counsel. Again, diversion and treatment program data, which we just looked at as well, referral rates, who made the referral acceptance and rejection data about that. This is all identical to what you just saw in the juvenile language, length and completion, failure rates, outcomes, pre-trial detention release, including conditions of release, bail amounts, defendants held without bail, bail reviews. This is all unique to the adult system, obviously. Changes to pre-trial detention status, conditions of release, revocation of bail, conditions of release. Plea agreement data, offers agreements centered into and elements of final agreements. Data about sentencing, length of time until final sentences. And this is actually a C subdivision B. That's the language that we just saw that was inadvertently included in the juvenile section. This is irrelevant to the adult section, not the juvenile one, which is minimum and maximum sentences, location and level of detention, spines, these restitution, probation terms and conditions, other disposition alternatives. And lastly, the same language you saw above about any sanctions and disciplinary actions that are publicly available against juvenile justice system persistence. Again, there's a typo. So that 10 should be in line, a line eight, there should be, there's a straight juvenile word, word, juvenile. So any info about sanctions and disciplinary actions would come in under paragraph 10. So we just went through all the data that needs to be collected, right? So then the next question is, all right, well, what happens to this data? And that's what is discussed next and requires a bureau to analyze essentially all of this data. And towards what ends to see a couple of different tasks that the committee is instructed to do with respect to this data. First of all, identify the stages of the criminal and juvenile justice systems at which racial bias and disparities are most likely to occur. So again, through this data that it's collected, hopefully it will be able to identify where the disparities are most likely to happen. And also significantly organize and sympathize, synthesize the data in a cohesive and logical manner so that it can be presented and understood again. So these are information technology specialists who are, who are, have been hired under the bell and charged with assimilating all this data. But the idea here is to, you know, be able to organize and present it in a way so that can be understood by, by any other actor or reader who, to whom it's presented. So. Sorry. If I, if I could just interrupt quickly. Eric on the bureau shall subdivision one. It says develop a system to standardize the data collected. Does that mean they develop a system that will be pushed out to the various law enforcement agencies. To use and collecting it, or does that mean that they will create a system to standardize data given to them in various forms. In other words, do they, do they have the power to, to develop a system that will be adopted statewide. By the law enforcement agencies. I think they have the power to develop that system and in fact are instructed down below to develop a standardization system as to how it's adopted. I'm just moving ahead here because there's a little bit that kind of addresses your question a bit, Senator Baruch. I don't think there's a requirement. That other entities adopt their system, but you'll see in subdivision two and three that it is. It's put out there. In subdivision three, for example, there's a recommendation that, that the panel comes up with, to recommend evidence based practices and standards for collection and retention. Subdivision two proposing methods to permit sharing and communication between state and local agencies. So I think that the system of standardization. That's talked about above is also could pretend to be part of what they recommend, but, but no, I think if I understood your question right, it's not a requirement. It wouldn't be sort of here's, here's what other state agencies have to do. It's more of a recommendation that they, that other entities could adopt. Okay, because I just wanted to flag that because that seems, that's the troublesome point. I come at it also from the agency of education and trying to standardize data around districts. And it's, it's participation in a standardized data plan. That's the, the failing statewide. So it seems like one way or the other. If we're going to ask for this sort of robust data collection. It should be uniform from the get go. Otherwise we're. We're hamstringing ourselves, it seems. Anyway, just wanted to put that out there. May I comment on that? Thank you. So I think that from the law enforcement perspective that they're already starting to standardize how they collect the data. And most of the system, most of them are already using the same system now, the same reporting system. So I think that that this goes to hand in glove with, with their attempts to already be standardizing the. What they collect and how they reported. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Not seeing any other hands and nobody's jumping in. Okay. Thank you. Go ahead, Eric. So moving on from what, what the. What the bureau does with the data. The data, you also see that the bureau is required to maintain a public facing websites as a transparency subsection basically. So you have a. Ability for the public to see what the bureau has been doing. And they have a website, a dashboard that specifically maximizes the bureau's transparency. And assures the ability of the public and historically impacted communities to review and understand the data. And that is the state has been collected and also it's being made public so that there's an ability of the public to see it and understand it. Beyond that, there's some reporting requirements. You see that's an annual, annual reporting requirements. So on December 15th. Starting this year and every month thereafter, the bureau has to report to the panel. So we haven't gotten to the panel yet, but there's a requirement that the bureau is going to remember that the bureau has a policy. Policy. Charged arm of this, the structure. And so the bureau collects the data. And synthesize it and provides this analysis and recommendations to the panel every year. And then as well, January 15th of the, of the year after the bureau reports that same data analysis recommendations. To the judiciary committees and the government operations committees. And you'll see similar reporting requirements for the advisory panel as well. Which I'll pause for a moment. Just to see if there's any questions before we talk about the panel. So again, as I mentioned, the panel is the more the policy oriented body within the structure. Specifically has the administrative legal and technical support of the agency administration. And so the bureau has five members and you'll see there that actually I'll just take a moment. To look back at the racial equity advisory panels. I mentioned. The structure here is very, very similar. To the existing racial. Equity advisory panel, which works with. The director executive director of racial equity. And you'll see that for example, A through E, the members, and of the members who does, who makes the appointments, how they. How their terms are going to be staggered. All of that is just exactly the same as the existing practice for the racial. Equity advisory panel under section 5002. Title three. So that is repeated here. Again, so this is the, the bureau of racial justice statistics advisory panel. And that has same similar, very similar five members, and that is one by the committee on committees, not a current legislature, one by the speaker, one by the chief justice, one by the governor. And one by the human rights commission. Identical language about the backgrounds of the, of the members that would be drawn from diverse backgrounds to represent the interest of communities of color and other historically disadvantaged communities throughout the state. And have experience working to implement racial justice reform. And that is one of the most important, the most geographically diverse areas of the state. Some rather boilerplate language that you next see about the staggering of the terms, the idea is to make sure that since you know, this panel is just getting started that they're going to be staggered at the beginning, they're going to be three year terms, except that, you know, they're going to try and stagger them so that everybody doesn't expire at once, especially during the first year, but that's pretty standard language. I'm sure the committee has seen. The, the members of this panel elect by majority vote, a chair. And the idea is to get them appointed on or before September this year, so they can get ready for when their terms begin in January. So moving on to the duties and responsibilities of the panel, you see that again, very similar to the. Executive director of racial equity relationship. So the panel here works with and assists the executive director of the bureau of racial justice statistics to implement the requirements that we just went through. In other words, all their data compilation and reporting requirements work with them on that advise the executive director to ensure ongoing compliance with these purposes. Now here's a crucial one though, this sort of starting to get into the policy role of the advisory panel. So their role is to evaluate that data and the analysis that they get from the bureau and rake recommendations as a result of the evaluation. So there's this back and forth communications loop. They look at the data and consider what other steps need to be taken or any other recommendations as a result of the policy goals of both bodies. And then every year on, on or before January 15th report to the committees on judiciary and government operations with its findings. And you'll see their subdivisions A and B very important for what these reports have to contain the findings regarding systemic racial bias and disparities within the criminal and juvenile justice systems based upon the debt and the analysis that the panel received from the bureau. So they take that data from the bureau, synthesize it and on the basis of that they make recommendations. The panel makes recommendations to the legislature. That's the sort of information loop that I was mentioning earlier. And as well the report has to include the status report on progress made toward this, the goal of addressing systemic racial bias in the system. So it's sort of got a combination of recommendations, status report. What have we done? You know what needs to be done next. They got your period, your standard per diem compensation for each member of the panel language. As I mentioned earlier, you also have specifically positions created within the bureau of racial justice statistics. And as you can see these permanent positions are all with the exception of the administrative assistant. There's one administrative support position. But in addition to that one, the other three positions, including the executive director, they're all information technology data analysts. You have two staff persons who are IT data analysts and the executive director as well. So this is a very much an IT data operation. As opposed to the panel, which these requirements are not in effect. They don't have to be data analysts. The panel or as the broad diverse background meant to be the policy arm of the, of the structure. There's an appropriation as well. Appropriations based on numbers that I received from the joint fiscal office as to the support needed for the, for the four positions I just mentioned. Eric, can we go back to the executive director position? The one in existing law, you mean? No, one line 15, that's the exact, that's the current. Yes, sorry. Yep. The executive, the exempt executive director of the bureau should be an implement information technology data analyst. That's as want to be confusing as executive director of that in the executive director of their racial. Right. I didn't quite follow the, sorry, Senator Sears. That having two executive directors in the same department. Oh, I see what you mean. I think that I think there's only this one, though. I think they're all referring to the same person. I can clarify that it's confusing. confusing that the idea is that the so here's the executive director spot in the of the Bureau of Racial Justice Statistics. So that's the position that's being referred to in the and the panel works with the executive director and the panel I don't I think just has a chair right. Yeah, so the panel has a chair but there's only one executive director except as a but who's on as an executive director and we're putting it under her oh I see what you mean so how many you know wouldn't be I think it's confusing to refer to both as executive director right absolutely concerning me clarify that just to be clear though this position is not under the existing executive director separate from just so people know that separate chapter within the same chapter of statute but this this position is under this panel not this is under the Bureau of Racial Justice Statistics advisory panel this is where this executive director resides totally separate from Susanna's position representative and thank you senator so I I think one way or the other the titles of these two people are going to get confused one way or the other even though they're separate entities and I think that it's strange that the only qualification that's listed for this executive director is that they be an analyst like don't we want somebody who is committed to so so it does seem like the the executive director has other duties besides being an analyst and that muddies the water it also said that this position reports to the governor unless the governor uh uh delegates that responsibility to the the commissioner or the secretary of administration and it'd be good to talk about that too to just see if there are any nuances about that if it gets delegated um and again I think the role of what this executive director is going to do and ultimately what the qualifications in the name are are going to need more discussion could I ask a question about that also absolutely thank you thank you madam chair um so I just wondered if we had a discussion about whether this the this whole bureau should be under under uh Susanna's um position as part of racial justice and instead of creating a whole new new office or new whatever um so I would like at some point to have that discussion and then um I'd also just question and I'm not sure Eric if this is for you but we have the bureau analyzing and having a website that um people have access to um before the panel actually does any policy work around it and recommendations and I I would just like to have a discussion sometime about how those two things fit together because it seems that the analysts can put forward information but it's the panel that's setting the policy and the recommendations and if if if we need to do some um adjustments there so those are two issues I would like to discuss at some point okay thank you thank you can uh definitely flag those thank you so much let me just our process that I the representative grad and I had planned would be for the house to take the first shot at this so they may solve that problem or get us um but certainly then if we come over to the senate obviously I'm hoping that we can do it this year okay thank you great Alice can I ask a question absolutely so I'm just wondering with regard to the um school data and the juvenile data I'm wondering um it seems like things are very specific with regard to the demographic data I'm not sure what the demographic data in this will include but I I don't see where um it addresses confidentiality and in terms of small numbers from certain schools that are very small how those schools won't be immediately put out in the limelight as having some situations that perhaps should be kept confidential so I'm not sure how is that being addressed or can that I'd like somebody to address that if it isn't somehow covered so I don't think it's specifically covered in the language center but certainly absolutely it's an issue that that you can just can address I'm I'm jotting these issues down as as um as the legislators uh mentioned them that the representative Rachel sin center white center series have mentioned these and I'm jotting them down so I'll jot that one down as well thanks yeah yeah let's see Selena I think I saw your hand uh yeah I was just gonna say in a couple of recent bills um that we passed where we had data collection requirements we worked with um crime victim services center and the crime research group to come up with some language about sort of reporting off to the point of um just ensuring protections for victims privacy in particular and so maybe there's a basis there and I can point you to some of that language if it's helpful Eric thank you that'd be great so that actually is the end of the walk through I could um should I pull the document down I think I'd mention the appropriation um the uh I can leave the document up or pull it down whenever the preference is for the chairs yeah the effective date July 1 2022 um I forgot why we did that yeah I think it was uh just as it often is wondering whether everyone involved needs more time but on the other hand maybe it really should be 2021 especially since you have the appropriation in there and their language we saw that indicated that the appointments needed to be made that were there always the goal was to have them applied sooner the house house can take that issue up as they work on it right consider if we can get this bill done this year so noted uh coach I see your hand sorry get unmuted um just thinking in terms of what representative uh Colburn uh had mentioned uh there is language and senator nick uh there is language in both human services uh and um education uh for that disaggregated data for small populations uh because we you know we've got schools that you know have very small numbers and when you identify a poverty uh student or a disabled student or a BIPOC student if they're the only family in the school it's pretty obvious you know where the the disparity is so there are provisions in both agencies for how that data is treated um so it would be worth uh maybe incorporating that with the other language that we used in the domestic violence related bills um as well just food for thought if i'm jotting that down too thank you representative christie great yeah and thank you thank you eric for keeping track yeah appreciate it okay i'm not not seeing anybody else okay great as always eric thank you so much for your your thorough walkthroughs and and drafting and this was a heavy lift big big piece of drafting we asked you to do this so i always appreciate it happy to help thank you i should mention the last thing that i missed i did mention this the title the bureau of racial justice statistics is in some ways drawn i'm sure people have heard that the department of justice has a bureau of justice statistics bjs so that's where i came up with the name just seemed like it would be appropriate to similar entity but targeted specifically toward racial justice statistics so that's where that came from great well thank you yep thank you okay there aren't any other questions and it works for you senator sears how about it with the um we go to um dr a tennes red and longo sounds great and good morning and welcome good morning thank you representative there you are i'm here i'm here can you hear me absolutely okay great great um for the record i'm dr a tennes red and longo and i am the chair of the racial disparities advisory panel and i'm here this morning to present their current thinking on this bill to you in hopes that it may be of use um as you probably know we meet once a month for two hours um and so since this bill came into being we've had literally six hours in which to discuss it and we've been working quite diligently quite hard on this talking about the location for this proposed bureau um i would also say that this has not led to a clear conclusion and that may actually be of use to you because it would allow some flexibility in in your thinking and i'm hoping to contribute to that um i have a summary here of some animating concerns behind the panel's discussion of the possible entities for housing this bureau first of all of these was the issue of independence um that was very very much prime in the minds of the panel as a whole again we didn't take a vote and so on for this but i'm going back over our minutes from the last three meetings and this was absolutely um the first determinant um in discussing locations next was trust in the results that the bureau comes up with um assert that would also of course allied with the notion of transparency um that there needs to be competence in the work that the bureau performs also another issue that was raised by several panelists was sufficient authority to do the work in other words that the bureau needs to be given the authority to request the data that it needs in order to perform this work and that may sound immediately obvious but it's not to some people who are very smart who are on the panel um that that needs to be made very very clear and then of course another important factor is that there need to be sufficient financial resources available to do the work one of our panelists Sheila Linton who is the co-founder of the Root Social Justice Center in Brattleboro said quite bluntly i strongly support an independent body on this we need to guarantee actual independence and the perception of independence we need public trust again that gets to what you've already put in the bill about the public facing website and such um but this was really a very strong sentiment that many people on the panel had um i prepared a slide not a very elegant slide that i forwarded to Evan O'Connor and i don't know whether you've all had a chance to look at it it was simply outlining the eight possible locations that the RDAP has discussed um i'll go through those the first was um oh there it is again as i say not extremely elegant but there you have it um the first was under the executive director of racial equity under Susanna Davis's office um there were some pros and cons on this and some of them were in fact expressed by director Davis herself um secondly under the agency of digital services next as a standalone body fourth in the legislature's joint fiscal office next the sec in the office of the secretary of state sixth the office of the Vermont state auditor seven the human rights commission and i believe there's been some discussion about that already and then lastly but not by any means least the national center for restorative justice which is a more an academic um entity that's housed in a variety of institutions including UVM we then had a bunch of discussion um about all of these from the standpoint of pros and cons James Pepper from the office of state's attorneys and sheriffs weighed in and he noted that for some like a standalone body the joint fiscal office or the human rights commission have the they would have this body would have the benefit of a fair degree of independence from political pressure um the task force that exists already obviously deals with similar topics others like the agency of digital services the state auditor auditor or the human rights commission have particular skills useful to the work of the bureau that they already use in their routine business like data collection and analysis conducting investigations and audits or investigating discrimination even with those there could be an awkward fit between their core mission and the bureau's mission some entities like those under the direct control of an elected official may experience political pressures that do not align with the bureau's mission rebecca turner another panelist um and i believe she's speaking this morning so i certainly don't want to take her thunder away but she contributed very heavily to this conversation she is a supervisor supervising attorney in the appellate division of the office of the defender general um she made the point that it doesn't necessarily make sense to put this body within the task force or under the executive director of racial equity just because it's on a similar subject matter um that similarity doesn't mean that the structure of that office is suited to this task and that is partly i believe if i remember correctly because those those offices report to elected officials and that compromises independence um she believed that the uh secretary of state of the auditor would have independence from the governor and a certain responsiveness to the people of the state um the auditor does investigations now and can support this type of effort the human rights commission obviously deals with similar issues and does investigations during this last meeting it was one of those wonderful moments when as a teacher you have an arc and then one of your smart students throws in a curveball you want to hit them but it's brilliant and absolutely to the point and at that last meeting that was tyler allen from the department of children and families and he was a wonderful i was completely thrown but it was marvelous um he asked if the collection and analysis would be handled by the same entity or would they be separated one should collect the others should analyze and the panel agreed broadly with tyler's question which was basically should there be one entity or two one for data collection and one for data analysis um and that that should it can and should be part of the discussion around choosing an entity or entities under which to house the proposed bureau um another person who's interested in this work was sort of helpful in this to me and that would be christopher laurus of the crime research group who drew my attention to h265 an act relating to the office of the child advocate um in i guess it's what chapter 32 subsection 3202 which is specifically on the office of the child youth and family advocate there is certain language at the end of that paragraph i'll quote while the office shall be embedded in and receive administrative support from the agency of administration the office shall act independently of any state agency in the performance of its duties i have not been able to bring this before the panel yet our meeting is a week from uh last night as a matter of fact but um i think um that there'll be broad support for including some sort of language like this in h317 um i think it would be helpful and prudent to put something like this in very explicitly um a broader problem that needs to be addressed and several of you have mentioned that already this morning is that um the data needed across all state systems of state government need to be analyzable extractable present and open to public scrutiny in short what is proposed here ought to be a template for all of state government to assume that the criminal and juvenile justice systems are separate is perhaps uh a bit i don't know what i would call it wrong uh certainly short-sighted um as we all know racial disparity exists in many locations we see it in health care the governor made some decisions about vaccinations based on that acknowledgement we see it in education um it would seem that this notion of standardization that came up very very prominently in the report that the panel released is still a prime importance and needs to be considered and perhaps considered very broadly um i'd like to wind everything up with just making a few notes on the issue of independence and why that is of such great importance here and i want to do that by talking about the difference between civil rights and human rights civil rights of course are always considered to be the rights of citizens to political and social freedom and equality whereas human rights are considered to be a right that is believed to belong justifiably to every person clearly there's a blending and a blurring here voting is thought to be civil but it also belongs at least in this country quote justifiably to every person unquote but apparently this isn't entirely true all of the time we're now looking um at a situation where in georgia if you're poor and cannot easily travel you will have problems voting given legislation that is currently pending another issue here would be water think of what happened in flint michigan at one point the water was coming very nicely from the lake and now it's coming from the dearborn river and that isn't turning out very well for the children of that community racial matters are always thought to be civil rights so our gender expression rights are people around sexual orientation and certainly around class and one cannot argue human rights they're inalienable except that they're not and we all know that they're not we argue these all the time civil rights are always held to be in some political realm where debate happens where disagreement happens where the statement people of good conscience can disagree functions it's the cornerstone of the democracy this notion of debate and disagreement and there's a connection here that's obvious i think between the civil and the political whereas the human is ideally believed to rest beyond the political even though in practice as i've just sort of mentioned it doesn't always i've always wondered as a as an individual as a black person as a jewish person as a queer person why my rights were civil rights why weren't they human rights i was always wondering why my rights were something people could argue about they don't seem arguable to me um that if we're talking about the pursuit of happiness which is a phrase that has been enshrined for over 240 years in this country i would say that's a human right but it doesn't get considered that way and there's a blurring here that i'm getting at between the civil and the human recently transgender people went through this sort of change in political wind and they did it quite dramatically and it's not over and it's not over there was a relative opening under the obama administration and that a dramatic closing for service members around issues of rights under the last administration and now i'm not sure we know there does seem to be opening under the biden administration but history tells us that that should not reassure anyone for the long term all it takes is an executive order all it takes is an executive order and the damages here are obvious among veterans in 2019 transgender patients had a more than two-fold greater hazard of suicide than than their cisgender compatriots did more than two-fold greater hazard and one can legitimately ask how this politicization of rights plays into this fact how does it play how did it play how does it continue to play into this horrible statistic i would argue that it's rather difficult to pursue happiness if you're dead that seems like a human right to me it doesn't seem very civil the fact of these questions just among this one historically stigmatized group demonstrates the need for independence in this proposed bureau this is why it is of critical importance to the our dad we think of simple matters of legal inclusion within the body politic as being within the realm of civil rights i suggest that they are not i would further say that politicizing efforts at equality becomes unavoidably a human rights issue when the matter of simple well-being or existence is factored into the social calculus people of color cannot depend upon the direction of the political wind for relief they simply cannot and this is why the our dad believes so strongly in this idea of independence and urges you to consider it with the same seriousness that we have used we ask you in closing to take these matters into account as you deliberate and debate and we ask you to think of the blurring of the civil and the human and the not necessarily monetary costs involved in this blurry thank you for your attention thank you thank you so much and and also thank you to your group for their very thoughtful um analysis and feedback and i look forward to us um hearing from from some of the members that are here today um senator sears how about if i turn it over to you because i know that you're well i know yeah we're we're going to be leaving in about five minutes and hopefully um you know and um and i'm glad that we got to hear um the testimony uh i would uh i don't have any questions right on um anybody on the judiciary committee that does we're going to be leaving at 1015 and moving over to um another bill for the senate judiciary committee the house judiciary committee will continue on testimony i i really thank representative grad eric aton for allowing us to join you this morning to hear the um important information on this bill we look forward to continuing to collaborate and work together whatever um folks decide on where to put this um whether it's an independent organization um the goal is to get adequate information um over a month to be able to make good policy choices and to make sure that we can explain and to look at why certain things have happened in our past and what what we can do to solve those and i i was you know disappointed when the justice reinvestment effort went on and was unable to come up with data um that would have informed us i think in a better way because the data didn't exist so whichever way we do this whether it's a standalone um however we do it we need the information um uh you know i think not having the information leads us to making wild speculation sometimes so thank you all very much and we'll see the senate judiciary committee over on the other channel great absolutely great thank you whatever that might be thank you thank you so much great thank you so much senate judiciary your shares bye bye um okay so why don't we we're about five minutes ahead but um why don't we take our break now and come back at