 This is Senate Judiciary Thursday, September 24, 2020, again, meeting remotely. Today is S24, a courthouse named for Judge Francis McCaffrey, and we've all had a great deal of respect for, but evidently the courthouse was named in a prior bill. S24 became a vehicle for corrections, racial equity bill, and we're looking at that as the committee with the responsibility for corrections policy. I want to start out though this morning by thanking Peggy Delaney, particularly from the Legislative Council staff, our committee assistant, who is in charge of all the committee assistants, and has done just a terrific job of organizing throughout this pandemic. We started in mid-March, meeting remotely, and I think it would not have been possible to even begin to think about meeting without her and other members of that team, particularly Mike Farron. A special thanks, Peggy, to you and to Mike Farron and all the members of your team for all the help in getting us through this. Really do appreciate it, and I hope you have a good rest of the fall, and we'll be back and raring to go, hopefully in person in January, but time will tell. Thank you, Senator Sears, and it's, again, I'll say it again, it's my honor and privilege. Thank you. We're going to start out. Senator Sears? Yes. I don't know if it's my computer or not, but you are very, very scratchy. Well, unfortunately, I'm outside, and that might be why. Okay. I'm going to try to turn off my, I will turn off my audio and turn it over to Jim Baker. Now, Dick, for some reason. All right. Okay. Maybe it's this thing. I think, I think that's what it is actually. How's that? Right. All right. Why don't we start with Jim Baker, who has an appointment at 1030 and then we'll kind of move along to others. Good morning, folks. Thank you, Senator Sears. For the record, I'm Jim Baker, the Interim Commissioner of the Vermont Department of Corrections. And I'm here to talk about the Department of Corrections racial equity and bias plan report. First, I want to say that we fully support the work that was done in house corrections and institutions. In fact, I'm sure representative Evans and Shaw will tell you that we work very closely with them on this language. From where I said, I talked to this committee and other committees in the legislature about where I see us as an organization and the work that we need to do, and equity is a huge part of that. For me, it's just not equity about our inmate population or those we supervise in the community. It's also equity for our employees. And with a heavy emphasis on the way we hire, train, promote and create the environment amongst the workforce that we think is the most effective way for us to carry out our mission. So I really don't have a whole bunch to add to we support this language. We were part of creating the language. And we see an opportunity here for us to generate a document that will be a blueprint for us that fits into the bigger conversation about equity in the state, but really holds in on areas where we can do work that create a more impartial system of corrections in the state of Vermont. So that's what I have to say about about the language in the legislation. Okay. I've Senator White. I'm sure I applaud your efforts for going forward with this, but I guess my question is, why would you think you need legislation in order to do this because we have an office of racial equity and executive directors who's on a Davis has been charged with looking at systemic racism throughout the throughout the state. And so I'm curious why you think you need legislation to do this. Because I think it makes a bold statement to the Department of Corrections about the importance of this. I can say it. But I'm commissioners, and maybe even in my case even more commissioners are only here for a short period of time, Senator. We're talking about a radical cultural change inside corrections. This is just one small piece of that. And I think I'm normally not a big supporter of legislative reports as some of you may know from my history of being around the legislature. But I think in this case, it forces corrections to take a serious internal look at its operation and create a document that goes, it's not something we're competing with Director Davis, it goes hand in hand with the work that she's doing. But it's, it's very specific to corrections and forces us to take a serious look internally. Now I'm serious about it, but I've got 1100 employees, and some of them may not be serious about it. So this to me is a bold statement about. I've taken a look at this directed from oversight committees from the legislature. And that's that's the reason why when Representative and spoke to me about this that I was supportive. Senator Benning. So commissioner, I want to. First, I'm still scratching my head as to how you're an interim and still here. But not only as a member of this committee, but as a member of institutions, I know you've been placed under a tremendous amount of pressure from the get go. And we may not have the opportunity to express publicly our appreciation. Thank you for your work today. Your words are reminding me of a bill that we worked on yesterday and I hope that there is a an attitude amongst law enforcement that will eventually come around to the position you've just expressed. To say personally, I think you've done a heck of a great job with the corrections department in the time that you've had to work with. And hopefully whoever your replacement ends up being should you ever decide you're not becoming interim anymore. There's a job opening apparently after your internship is over. I do want to say I appreciate the work you've done throughout the past few months it's been one heck of a ride and to watch you do that has been very interesting and informative so thanks. I appreciate those kind words. What I will tell you is that there are a lot of folks in inside corrections that were waiting for an opportunity to let the rains get down be taken down and let them do their work. It's happening right now. And this this equity piece is an example of this people inside corrections were waiting for the opportunity to be able to have this conversation. And I'm just allowing that conversation that's my role. What I will tell you the same thing I told us I do a statewide teleconference every Wednesday afternoon anybody in the department can get on. It's an open questions directed at me I usually give them. A little bit of a, an overview of what's going on in the department every week. Yesterday we spent time talking about justice Ginsburg and the impact of leadership and how that can impact corrections. I only tell you that because it ties directly in that. And the legacy that justice Ginsburg left behind around gender. And so I appreciate those kind words but this is what I told staff yesterday. I want to tell Secretary Smith that I'm here as long as he needs me and as long as my health holds up. I think every member of this committee would echo Senator Benning's remarks of our appreciation for the job you've done in probably the most difficult challenging times in the years. And dealing with a pandemic and what we've seen nationally in prisons particularly. And the results in Vermont prisons of the COVID. Unfortunately, we saw the national trend with our offenders that are out in Mississippi. But I also want to thank you Jim for all the work you've done and the professionalism that you approach this job. And I will tell you that you've been there longer than many commissioners. I don't know. I don't know that's good or bad or I'm just, I'm just, I don't know either right. I remember when, when I first started and you remember may remember this commissioner I think was when you first started in the state. He immediately announced a Dix knowing that he needed a helicopter to visit all the correctional facilities I think you got fired within a week of this. Well, I haven't asked for a helicopter center so I guess I'm okay. And I appreciate all your kind words. Yeah, you know, I just think public service is important and that's why I do what I do. And I appreciate these kind words. Have you had an opportunity, Senator ashes proposed. It's posted on our website. And it, it talks about working with the commissioner corrections working with the executive director racial equity, equity on a strategy and long term plan to address systematic racism bias and inclusion in the department correct. Yes, rather than having the department doing it. As I think and I don't know if that was the intent. Senator Ash went and redrafted the house version. So I don't know if you have any comments on Senator ashes version. I really don't. I think if I read it right and what I'm hearing you say is senator ashes and was to make sure that we were working in concert with director Davis. And we are. And I think she would, she I know she's on. I've had a couple conversations where I know other staff members talked to her. And our work. I see aligning with the work that she is tasked with doing and she's doing. So I don't. What I would not want is for us to get away from following the intent in the plan that's in the language that house corrections institution put forward, because I'll say the same thing again that that I said in response to the white's question. A bold statement helps me in a leadership role to carry on this work inside corrections. And we are, we are now really starting to get into the data collection to understand who we have system, and how we're nowhere near where we need to be. But, you know, I'll give an example of this the data showed in the month of July that two of the 13 individuals who are transgendered in our system were put in segregation. And without that kind of data you don't see that. And so when you have 13 individuals in a protected class in two of them end up in segregation. I have saying that's enough to put your coffee cup down and ask why. So what what I'm, what what I'm saying is I would not want us to move away from us focusing directly on corrections, but working in concert with with director Davis. Senator Sears. Yes. The reason I asked that question commissioner is because we have the legislation has permanently charged the executive director of the racial equity to, and that office to look at systemic racism across state government and the behind that is the force of the governor, and all of the governor staff which means all the commissioners and all the secretaries so it is a statement in itself saying this is really important and the legislature has said it's important and the governor has said it's important and what I fear is that every. We, if we go down this path, every agency or every office or every division or every department will come to the legislature and say, we need legislation in order to look at this in our agency because our agency is somehow special. So what I don't know how many agencies departments and offices and divisions we have, but I would hate to see us try to write legislation around each of those to try to put the, the force of legislation behind it when I think we already have done that through the, through creating the office and the panel and by, and the governor by implementing that office and hiring Miss Davis so that that's my fear is that I think that we could go down this path next year with every other agency and every other department and every division and every office. So that's my fear. I, I, I appreciate that and I hear what you're saying Senator. You know, I guess my only, my only comment on this is that, you know, I guess every commissioner thinks their agency is special I don't think that way. But I know that we have a very direct impact on the lives of individuals and their ability to live lives that, you know, and we have the ability and I just gave the example. We have the ability to interrupt people's lives in a way that a lot of other agencies don't. All I'm trying to do in part of my conversation was with Representative Emmons and Representative Shaw, and then with their committee was to make sure that people know that corrections has taken this seriously. We were working on it anyway, but this just gives us some clarity and guidance to us on what, what we need to do to report back to the legislature. So I appreciate you. Yeah, I, I want to just suggest that I do agree that it's helpful to have this in statute so it's a slight disagreement with Senator White. The reason being, this is the, if not the largest group of state employees. Next to largest group of state employees work for the Department of Corrections. And we also have a lot of contractors and volunteers who work for the Department of Corrections. I see this as somewhat different, but I thought what was lacking in the bill that came over and I agree with Senator Rash that we need to involve the director of racial equity into this process. And so I, you know, I do think I do applaud the house and Jim I don't know who went first, but for raising this issue and putting it on to the cap. So I'm a little bit at odds here on this one, but I do see corrections as somewhat of a unique office of state government in that they have so many employees and they have up to 6000 people under their supervision who have to do what they're, we hope they do what they're told to do and what they're being told to do is done without prejudice. I, so I think I find that unique to perhaps the agency and natural resources, which also could use help in making sure that they respond in a diverse way but I think about the number of people under corrections control. I hate to disagree with my good friend from when from the other side of the mountain. I think we've had many disagreements in the past and probably continue to but I and I just I just do want to acknowledge that corrections is in a slightly different situation but there are other agencies in the state that also have a huge impact on people's lives. All of the, the Department of Mental Health, the Department of Health, Diva, anybody that deals with any economic services issues. If that if we see systemic racism in those areas, it does have a huge impact on the lives of the people that they serve. So, while corrections does have people. A lot of people that are in their control. The other agencies also have make a huge impact on people's lives, but I'm not going to. If we want this in legislation, and I hope that this is in session law not in the green books. Good session, but Becky Wasserman can help us with that. Are there any, are there any other questions for Commissioner Baker before we ask to leave us. And I believe Heather Simmons is here and will be available. She is going to, she is here Senator and she'll be able to follow up. And Heather does have the point inside corrections on the discussion and the work around equity. So, I believe my agenda is on my iPad and I just, my iPad just shut itself down. For good reason probably. Oh, gosh. Back to the agenda. I'm sorry, folks. Rebecca Wasserman was scheduled next, but I think maybe given the conversation I'm going to jump the representative Emmons and if she wants representative Shaw, the vice chair of the House Committee on corrections and institutions. Great. Thank you Senator for the record my name is representative Alice Evans chair of the House corrections and institutions, and I have with me, as you stated the vice chair representative Shaw. And so I think together we can sort of give you our thoughts and maybe quickly walk you through the language. We starting last January, which was a long time ago. We spent quite a bit of time with DOC, particularly with Heather Simons as well as with Commissioner Baker, as a result of what was reported in the Chittenden Correctional Facility, and the issues there. It really came to light that there's some real culture issues within DOC that need to be addressed and the current commissioners is doing the work to do that. When we started talking over the summer on the whole wreck racial equity and social equity issue. A lot of folks do not look at Department of Corrections Department of Corrections, and people don't focus on it the public doesn't really focus on it until a big issue comes up, and then everybody's saying why did they do this. The thing in the, the concern was that, at any point in time we have anywhere from 8 to 10,000 Vermonters under the custody of the Department of Corrections, and of those it ranges anywhere from 1600 to 1800 folks who are physically incarcerated, and their movement movements are We also have folks out in the community who are supervised by our field service offices. And in testimony, we really want to make sure that that we really work with the commissioner and changing the culture within DOC the culture of employee to employee relationships. The employee to offender relationships offender to offender and offender to staff. And this is what the language attempts to address. It doesn't point fingers at anyone. And we start out with a finding section to be really clear what is in current statute is that the Department of Corrections is not a law enforcement entity it is structurally within the agency of human services for a reason. The Department of Corrections is within their Department of Public Safety, and we in Vermont years ago made the decision that DOC should be within the agency of human services, because it's part of people's lives. So the first part of the finding is that and we cited the statute 28 vs a section one which is for the rehabilitative correctional programming. And we stated as well that it's to render treatment to offenders with the goal of achieving their successful return and participation as citizens to the state, and to foster the human dignity. The second finding it to me, and I think to our committee was really important because director assignments actually said this. And we thought it was really important to put these words down in our findings that DOC does not serve as a law enforcement. That's what we put in, but she said, but does play an important role in implementing the duty of an individual sentence and ability for the successful return to and participation in the community. That is DOC's role. And we felt that was very important to highlight those words. And as part of that we feel that part of their role is to provide security and ensure racial and social justice to the employees and to the folks who are under the custody. And then the intent is that we would start addressing the systemic racism and bias to achieve racial and social equity with the employees, as well as with the offenders. And we're talking folks who are incarcerated and folks who are out in the field under supervision of our field service offices. And we're also looking at trying to look at the recruiting and training and retention of a diverse and highly quality workforce. And the commissioner is really working now to start working in the training and recruitment of correctional officers and staff. And we want to give support to that. And then we've asked for a plan to come back. And we've laid out what some of the scope of that plan is that it would address some of the department's employment practices and supervision of the folks under their custody. And they need to include a timeline and a process for that. And they need to evaluate the hiring practices the training the supervision and competency standards to inform the performance evaluations and promotions of employees, and identify the resources and funding that would be needed, and also to identify a list of stakeholders, because we want to make sure this is inclusive. It's inclusive of the stakeholders. And we had testimony from director Davis, we reached out to David the more we had the SCA and we had director Simons and we've been reaching out and we would have done more if we'd had the time but we want to make sure that the stakeholders are at the table. And then we're asking for report back to our committee and your committee by the 15th of January, because we need to do a lot more work on this. So this plan would be a work in progress so that we continue doing deeper work in the next session. So that's what the language before you does. And I don't know if Representative Shaw would like to speak in. He was the reporter of the bill. Representative Shaw, if you'd like to. Thank you, Senator and members of the committee for having us in today. I think chair I'm into the marvelous job of reporting out what is in the bill, like giving my personal observation just a little bit. Why I got excited about this bill s 338 was the start of a really good move into doing better within our corrections department in our corrections population. As we talked along s 338, we set up a series of reports in that bill to report back to the General Assembly. However, after s 338 went out and listening and I got really interested in Commissioner Baker's interest in doing a better job of hiring and training the people within the Department of Corrections and then he set up the office within DLC. And as we know and Heather is Heather Simons and is now the director of that. And to back up the chair's testimony we've had Heather in a lot but when she came in after she was appointed the director of the professional standards office. She really began to talk to us about the people recruiting training and retention of folks within corrections. And that is that is a big deal. We all know that corrections is short employees. So, training the right people to be members of their team is important. And not all involves into why we're why I'm here today is to talk about why we need this bill. I've heard from set from Heather about employee, not only employee versus in me. Incidences with not being racially equitable and so forth. We also heard about employee versus employee. We don't think about that very much in in our world. We think everybody's okay. And we also heard about prisoner versus prisoner and prisoner versus employee. So it's a systemic issue throughout corrections. And again to back up Germans, these folks that are incarcerated are certainly invulnerable because they're locked up. They're a little different animal than being on the street. However, we've also heard reports of the latest down in the battle for area of a employee taking advantage of a person under his control when they're under supervision and not locked up. So this is a serious issue for me, me personally and for the committee that we really take a kind of a dive into what's going on and it's important to understand that we may not have scooped in corrections and some of the work that we've done in other bills throughout this session, because they are not law enforcement. They're not classified as law enforcement their employees of the State Department of Human Services so that that is a little different. The language back to certainly go over the language with you but I think what this bill does is kicks off a concrete plan for corrections to take a deep look at themselves with the help of Susan Davis and her team in the administration and with the help of DLC working in concert with them to get back to us and tell us how they can do better or how they think they can do better, or if they can help us understand how we can help them do better and there is a section in the report that asked them to tell us what do you need for resources. We don't want to just pile more on the DLC and let them try to do this work within your existing resources and it's important for us to help them do this so I guess that's my excuse me. Okay, that's that that's my spiel and thank you for listening. Thank you much. Senator White. So I seem to be. It's a good thing the end of the session is coming up because I seem to be a little testy. Lately, as my committee members will tell you but what you both said and what I when I read this and when I listen to it, most of it is aimed at the, the people in the system, the staff, the prisoners, the, the relationships between them and how we do that I would hope that and I'm sure Susanna will do this but I would hope that we are not just looking at the the people and how we respond and how we train them because systemic racism comes from systems that are put in place that impact people and surely there are and I have to admit that I don't have any idea what those systems are that might be impacting but they might be systems of how we allow worship services or they might be systems of in the field how we do that. I don't know what those systems are, but what I'm saying is that this bill seems to be focused mainly on the personnel and on the interrelationships between people who are part of the system in any way, and I would, I am I know Susanna is on the call with us here and so I'm appealing to her to go in this study and in this work go way beyond just those personnel's but look at the, the potential systems that cause discrimination here both around social injustice and socioeconomic injustice and what our systems are and and come up with some solutions to that so thank you. Can I respond to that. In terms of the language just give me 20 seconds to Peggy. Would you send Senator Asher zoom link to this meeting. Thank you. Go ahead. And so I really appreciate was that we talked about that in the committee and we talked about that with with the folks who are testifying and particularly with do see their systems are in their directives and their policies. And we address this in the plan that they would develop a strategy and a long term plan to address systemic racism bias diversity and inclusion and do see in the scope of that plan would address employment practices and supervision of persons under the custody of the commissioner and state facilities and in the community supervision of persons. And so the committee does that through their directives and policies. And that's where you need to do that really deep dive in terms of the equity issue and the systemic issues of racism is in their directives and policies, and that is in that is going to be a year or two to really work through that because a lot of those directives are really outdated. Number one, and a lot of them. You do not look at them through the lens of racial equity. And that's what we're asking them to do. That's where your systems that's where you change your systemic racism within do see is through their directives and policies. And what I would like to do is if possible is here from was on a Davis. And then Senator Ash was joined us. Thank you, Senator. All right, yes, everyone. Good morning. I've been listening to this conversation with deep appreciation for all the fault that you all are putting into this. And just wanted to very briefly address a few of the remarks that I've heard so far. The point that Senator white made that this work is already rolled into my, my mandate as dictated in act nine of 2018 that is correct. And certainly us passing this law would be saying Susanna do your job. But it would be saying do it a little bit faster because this particular bill does put a deadline for the presentation of this plan that deadline would be January 15 of 2021. So, being that this is already part of my work for all the agencies effectively what this bill does is tells me to prioritize doc and do that one first so that it's ready in time for January. So, I just want to draw a point about our mention of my team. I just have to say there is no team you're looking at it. So, which is exactly the reason that this plan doesn't already exist for this agency and for a number of other agencies because it is slow work when it is one person doing the work. So, I do just want to acknowledge that yes, this is going to happen. This is part of my work and it's something that would be done, whether or not this legislation were to come into play. This particular bill does put that time limit on it so it accelerates the process for doc as opposed to other agencies. But I hope that there's some comfort to you all in knowing that whether this bill moves or not that work is going to happen. It's happening slower than we all would have liked just due to staffing limitations. But it's absolutely a big focus and I appreciate Senator White's point about looking at systems, not just the individuals in systems. Oftentimes, I think we we tend to say, well, what are you going to do is inequity but it's in the system and the system is invisible and amorphous so and, and I think she's absolutely right we are we are those systems and so being able to pinpoint where the inequities arise, whether it's due to the actions of individual actors, or due to the policies that we may have that are antiquated I think rep Emmons mentioned that a lot of these policies and directives are quite old and so modernizing is going to require us to add that racial equity lens into our analysis. So all of that said, I suppose the real summary of my remarks is. I'm comfortable with this bill. If it doesn't pass that's okay to because it's going to happen one way or another. This sort of just fast track doc ahead of other agencies in this work. I have enjoyed working with Heather I've enjoyed working with the acting commissioner and will continue to do so. Moving forward. Thank you all for for the time. Thank you very much. Thank you for all you're doing and by the way, we're hopeful that as a result of our appropriations work, you will have at least one other member of your team. So that you can actually call it a team. You do need help. I am, I always, you know, scratch my head when I see all the duties were giving to you and then I say to myself, but she's only one person. Senator Ash has joined us and I appreciate that he's been embroiled in puff negotiations with the other body over the budget. Did you want a few, a few remarks about your amendment, Senator Ash. Thank you. My amendment, I feel like effectively mirrors what Susana just said, which is that we established very clearly the position of executive director of racial equity within the executive branch to be the overseer and manager and coordinator of all efforts, whether it be on data collection training systems. And obviously that requires working in tandem with all the other departments of state government including HR. And it is important to me that if we if we created that position with that intent, which partially was because we wanted expertise, and not to have departments policing themselves if you will, around these kinds of policies because they will have their own inherent organizational biases about how they do business we wanted someone else with a more dispassionate new overseeing and managing all that. If we truly want to honor the intent of act nine when we passed it, then the executive director position must ultimately be either in a position of doing the work solely with her team, or approving proposals that come from the departments themselves. And I feel like the amendment I propose is consistent with what the house was trying to achieve, but does it in a way that doesn't actually undermine the spirit in which act nine was passed. And so, I, and I also I will also add I took out one paragraph in the findings about human services element to some of the positions. Because that's not an important consideration and in fact the Urban Institute grant down itself east is focused largely on such a concept, but it didn't really relate to the rest of the proposal that came over from the house. And so I felt like that might actually confuse matters and so I did want to mention that the language I present takes that finding paragraph out about human services component of the job. Thank you for joining us on short notice is there any questions for Senator Asher was on Davis about this proposal. Just like to suggest that Senator as get back to getting to the house and clean up that budget so we can get out of town tomorrow. You can count on me for trying to reduce the number of things going in the budget. I have some things for you do you want to put them in. I want to get them to me quickly. It's been very hard, you know, I'll tell you this has been very hard because emails are flying. Unlike a normal proposal with a series of, you know, discrete elements but all on one page. We spent 50% of the time trying to figure out if we're all looking at the same thing. And it's been hard. So, our, our three of the committee members just had the experience of doing a remote conference committee on us 54 we we share your pain we sympathize with you. I also will know a difficult experience. I'll also note that although this is my first conference committee on the budget. It's the legislative ability to create a sense of equal proportion to differences. You know compared to normal years. There's actually so much agreement between House and Senate and the budget proposal. And yet, we're able to create more sense of difference just whatever. But anyways, it's been very rich experience. Great. Well, thank you. Thanks. Appreciate it. I'm just curious if, if obviously, you don't have time to have a conference committee on this 24. Is there a path forward for us to pass Senator ashes amendment are the things that maybe highlighting the differences. Senator, are you ready for any kind of a. I would personally concur with further proposal of concur by adopting Senator ashes amendment. I'm not sure that that was concur with further amendment. Well, Rebecca Wasserman. Oh, here's here. I think there's a couple of problems with Senator ashes amendment that need to be corrected if we're going to pass it. One being the dates. One date is December 20 something 2021 and another date is for it. So I think you want to comment on that. Sure. So Becky Wasserman legislative council. That was just, I was just noting that when I was sent the proposal from Senator ash the draft said December 15 21 and then the final version was January 15 21 so I took my best guess that the intent was the draft was December 15 2020 and final was January 15 21 and that you weren't waiting out a whole year for that. So, right. I just wanted to confirm that that was the committee's intent. Could we see the draft online or someplace. We got it on email last night. We got an email last night it's on our web. House proposal amendment. If you look at our judiciary website. Have that. Okay, well it's it's the it's draft 1.1 s 24 rdw 222 p.m. yesterday. And that's the other amendment, Senator judiciary amendment. Is that what you're talking about that's on the website as well. No, this one is I just mentioned that. Yeah. I have have that one looking for Senator ashes amendment. Well that is Senator ashes it's committee on judiciary. To the honorable Senate. Strike all amendment. On your committee page it's right underneath the house is strike all to s 24. Okay, thank you. I don't know if I have screen sharing ability, but I can bring it up if that would be helpful. Would you like it on screen. I think I'll have it here in a minute. Okay. Okay, I have it now. Thank you. Okay. So it contains findings contains. I think it's absolutely crucial that the director of racial equity be the, the final. I don't know if the word is arbiter or. That approve any plans because I think. Senator ashes was right. I don't know. I think it's absolutely crucial that the director of racial equity be the. The final. I don't know if the word is arbiter or. No, I don't know if it's appropriate to use any of the plans because I think Senator ashes was right when he said that. Department's themselves when they look at their. Their policies and procedures are looking at them with. Non-objective eyes. And so I think that. That it is up to the executive director to. objective view and adoption of any policies and changes okay I I don't know how this all gets done by tomorrow by the way I don't see how it does I guess we could suspend the rules today and take it up I don't know if we do it right a matter I dick yes bill couldn't you also tomorrow if if people were in agreement on it couldn't you do everything tomorrow bring it off the notice calendar bring it up and take it off through all stages of passage yeah except that a house would have to concur as we're changing the house bill but if we messaged immediately I'm when do you guys meet tomorrow or you don't meet tomorrow a house are you talking about that we're meeting the house meets at 10 tomorrow all day and we don't meet no three this afternoon one path forward might be if I could get my committee together quickly today to see the language because they have not seen this I don't this is a total rewrite this is basically a strike all yeah bill and if they may want to weigh in on this and have some suggestions and I could get our committee together today well we go on the floor at one o'clock so we'd probably be voting on it if I can get it taken off the I don't know yeah I don't know I mean my committee may not agree to it or they may have some suggest well but here's the problem right um if your committee doesn't agree to it that dies problem unless we agree with your right or we could suggest some other language you know language working in both our version and and the strike all I think the main content if I might change and was on or or Becky is that we put this version puts the director of racial executive director of racial equity where the report goes to rather than the department doing its own that's right it it changes the sort of flow of the commissioner of corrections has to submit the plan for approval to the executive director of racial equity and then she submits it to the legislature and it also changes the findings substantially to sort of recognize the role of the executive director of racial equity that was created a few years ago Heather or Zana do you have any comments on this morning Heather signs from corrections for the record I I do have a few comments if they're welcome I appreciate this work I certainly appreciate all the effort that's gone into the spirit of it I was comfortable with the original language I still am we've taken a considerable amount of lead as we should from our community stakeholders as well as brown and black leaders it's not lost on us nothing about us without us and it's critical that this this work be done with the people that it affects that with the communities that are leading us I have some concerns around timelines but it certainly isn't going to get in the way with the with the pace of the work that we do or the commitment that we have the original language as well I think to to chair Evans point earlier with regards to where we are at and understanding that the opportunity we have to steer the quality of someone's sentence also includes our recognition of all of you know all of our constituents including our our constituents who we don't hear from which are the children of incarcerated parents and this is a commitment for to the future and the work in terms of training and building equity plans within the department really is a statement around how we're working we can't do one thing without the other we cannot address the workforce and not the population that we serve we can't serve the we can't do the work with the population we serve and the workforce without listening and partnership with the community members and the legislators so to direct the point earlier I appreciated them this work will get done regardless we're already we're already doing it it comes with that it comes with a lot of how do I say it there's a lot of language being used to describe where we're at what we're doing and what the issue is none of this will get done if we don't lean into some words like trust director Davis had said a press conference a few months ago that really and I hope I get it right but it was not lost on me guard down and eyes open so though I have deep appreciation for the complexities around the proposed bill the weight of it the accountability senator whites concerns as well this work move and it must work we must move and and faith and good faith I was comfortable with the language before and I really would like the committee's members to hear that it will get done regardless I hope that's not there's help thank you any questions for either is honor or other thank you senator white thank you I'm sorry to speak so much but if if timing here really is a problem and we run the risk of not doing anything because and understanding from both Heather and Susanna that and commissioner Baker that this is going to go forward anyway with or without this if if we can't go forward with a piece of legislation although having it in session law maybe gives it more in my committee and I know that you probably don't want to hear this but in my committee when we when there are issues that we think are important but that don't necessarily have to have legislative home behind them we've been known on a number of occasions to as a committee write a letter to the affected parties and tell them to do this and it has had great impact and things have gotten done because you have a legislative committee writing a letter to the commissioner to the executive director of racial equity to the administration and other people saying you have to do this and this is a priority so get it done and putting a lot of the language from whatever would have been the legislation in that letter so I'm just suggesting that if we can't figure out a way to move forward with a piece of legislation that there are alternatives I appreciate that but I think it would think it's important that we keep the three-legged stool alive of what we did with s 124 s 119 or what we're doing with 124 119 and including and then this one I think is important message to the community if we can ask s 24 and figure out a path forward. So anyway that's my view senator. So I just like to go back to some of the things that commissioner Baker said that he feels he needs the force of this bill clear impact for everybody to respect and I think that you don't get that with a letter and I think I think you know is there not a way forward to do the what's matter. You know I need to take a two minute break. I'm very sorry. Why. So is you know isn't there a way to go forward with just and in a much shorter version to put the office of racial equity at the top to have this plan go through them before you know rather than totally redoing the bill to just put that in there somehow and make this plan that the house came forward with work. I mean if there's a couple other statements that need to go in there good but seems to me that you know commissioner Baker has worked very hard on all of this stuff. I'd like to see him get what he needs. So any thoughts on that Rebecca do you see a way that something could be more sure. So I mean one one suggestion would be in subsection C and if it's helpful I can bring it up where the commissioner is developing a strategy and long term plan to have that done either in coordination or consultation with the executive director or done together shall develop together. So that's one area where they would be working together to to do the strategy and long term plan. Right. I think there is sort of another message that's in there that the office of racial equity should approve the plan which is a little bit different than just working together I mean working together and having that office be the ones to approve it and there are also some a couple of good things in the findings that speak to the importance of the office of racial equity and maybe maybe just some of that be put in and then it might be something that the House could accept more quickly than than this whole change. Philip. I just wanted to ask representative Evans if I could if if we pass a version of this that's different than what the House developed and assuming I see Senator Ashes amendment as very very similar to what you all did with a few important changes. So if we go back to Jeanette's earlier sort of early motion that she could support sending Senator Ashes amendment back to you if if you could concur with that. That's obviously the easiest path. Do you are there things there that you think would be deal breakers for. You know as I said I'm not sure because this is so different than what the committee had worked on. I think what Senator Nick is saying might be a path. I think it would be. I don't see it as that different really. What strikes you as radically different from. I think the approval process would have to be vetted with the committee. That would be a different focus and I think we also have to look at employment practices because that's really the key in terms of how people are supervised and what the culture is. And DOC really needs a voice in that as well as the racial equity task force. You know it's just a very different angle and approach and the committee needs to come up to speed with this. I can't respond in terms of how I think they need some time to think it through. And as I said earlier I could get the committee together today for them to take a look at this draft. But I know we're in a time. Well if we and if I might Senator Sears I I I feel as though we we've been put into a situation where we have one it's it's like you volleyed the ball to us. We have one swing of the racket left. And so I think what Jeanette proposed strikes me as as a very equitable compromise with what you gave us one swing at then we're going to adjourn this committee. And if you came back with something different tomorrow we we would realistically have to say we can't do it this session. So I don't know it seems as though maybe you waited one step too long to get it to us for us to be able to have two swings. And that would allow your committee another version. But I could do what Jeanette proposed easily enough. Meaning a letter. Is that what you're speaking? No, no, I'm sorry. Meaning meaning just concurring with further proposal of amendment and having Senator Ashes be the further proposal of amendment. I see. Okay. Could I make a comment, Senator Sears? I think it's okay. So I will because I don't know what he said yes or no. So I think that the main difference if one of the main differences here that meet you that your committee needs to look at Representative Evans is the the approval process. I think that our committee probably feels very strongly about that. The other differences in there I don't see as being major. There are some tweaks. But I don't see them as being very different, except for that. God I muted myself while Walmart was on the phone from my wife's glasses. Those are the emergencies we deal with. I think the best course of action is understanding that for us, the position of executive director of racial equity needs to be the person who the report goes to think that's critical in the so called Asher amendment. Other parts of it were open. So perhaps we could if they're not major changes, we could vote this out today this morning. Have it ready for the calendar for tomorrow whenever it gets taken up. If your committee can meet this afternoon and you could send us changes that don't involve that seems to be the critical point. I'm trying to find it here because I'm not sure who's that is the critical point for us, I would say is that the the draft plan goes to the executive director of racial equity for review and approval. That's the critical point. If there are other tweaks that you'd like to see you could send them to us this afternoon. We could have them sent out to committee members. They can give a thumbs up, thumbs down. And if we need to meet, we could probably hold together a meeting tomorrow morning at some point. But hopefully we don't need to. So we would report on a bill tomorrow. Presumably, so called ash version 1.1 dated 222 dated 923 2222 p.m. And if you have changes to that version, I believe that's the version except with Becky's change of date. Yeah, except with Becky's changes. Yeah. So just be clear that would be the version. Right. So the most important piece of the ash amendment is at the top of page three, see the plan, where do you would submit for approval to the executive director of racial equity is strategy long term plan to address systemic racism, bias, and diversity. That's the most important piece. Yeah, I would say so. But I think we need to keep if we're going to make this happen before the end of the session, need to make any changes. Simple for us to understand. Okay, I don't mean that we're not smart. But no, I know what you're saying. So let me ask representative come out right, Senator, I'm in representative and no, I came I understood. So representative Shaw, do you think we could work through this with today? Well, I'm not sure. Representative Ammons, if how the committee will feel about this, this is a piece of work and to Senator Baruth, we put considerable energy into. And so I'm not sure how the committee is going to react, be honest with you. Well, I think I think it would be worth it to bring it before the committee. And really work with them to understand that there's other issues at play here and other viewpoints. I think that would be important to bring that back to our committee. And see if we can find a path forward so we don't lose the whole piece. Because we do need to really help the commissioner change the culture within DOC. And it's not going to happen overnight. And we need to take the first step to really do that. So I can get the committee. I mean, I think that's a good plan with Senator Sears put out. If you can put out the language. And then I can get the commit our committee to meet today and submit some language back. And then you've got it there for your calendar in the morning. Yeah, again, I would hate to see wholesale changes that make it difficult for us to agree to on the fly because that's the way it's going to have to be. Yeah. So it's is that amenable to the committee? To the Senate Judiciary Committee? There's really not much choice. So not at not at this late date. You know, Representative Emmons did share with me the initial drafts. I did share them with Senator Rash. He did. He and I talked about it. And he went over this and came up with this and but it didn't pass the House until yesterday. Normally, you know, was it was it yesterday or was it Tuesday? Wasn't it Tuesday? Tuesday. Well, Thursday. It was Tuesday. I didn't get referred to up till yesterday. Yeah. And we're we're also dealing with S 119 as well. So I think that's the best we can do. Hopefully we can get a bill through if we can't agree on it, then Senator White's original proposal would be working. Senator Senator White's proposal. What? I just wanted the letter. Okay. Yeah, okay. I'm just that that we could send under the auspices of perhaps the Joint Justice Oversight Committee. Mm hmm. Mm hmm. Okay, that's it. But that's a I'm hoping we can find a path to work. I think we can. Senator Representative Schaath. Thank you, Senator. I was wondering if you go to make any changes to the the Ash amendment before you send it over to us. Only if you want them. Pardon me. I'm not I. Yeah, Becky's gonna make the dates correct. And it was one other right? I think it was just I just wanted the I had a question about the it's the same language that was in the house version about the plan addressing. Just bring it up. Systemic address systemic racism, bias and diversity and inclusion. As the editors were looking at it again, they just wanted to make sure that we weren't trying to say systemic racism, bias and promote diversity and inclusion. I don't know. I think I think the meaning is clear here, but I just I wanted to just run that by the committee to make sure that that was not a change that they wanted to make. Just just curious so we can figure out when the committee can meet. Right? You're not asking representative Shaw. Yes. Did you have other changes that you were because you asked Senator Sears if if we were going to make changes to the Ash amendment, did were there other issues in there that you saw? I can't I can't say so anything yet, Senator White, because I really haven't had chance to really sit down and run the Ash amendment through my brain yet. But I will. Okay. Okay. Did Becky get our answer? Yeah, I don't know. Can you explain that one again, please? Sure. So right now, where are you in the bill? So do you want me in you want me to go through Ash amendment? Okay, so then the Ash amendment. It is subsection C on page three. So it says the commissioner of correction shall submit for approval to the executive director of racial equity, a strategy and long term plan to address systemic racism, bias and diversity and inclusion in the Department of Corrections. Yeah, the editors think it should what is they just their their question was whether their systemic was meant to be modifying anything other than racism. And perhaps they had a suggestion of clarifying to address systemic racism, bias and promote diversity and inclusion. I you know, I think Actually, I think that does help because that is what you're trying to do. Any objection from anyone? Sounds fine. The representatives? No, it sounds fine. And I think that actually, I think that helping and promoting diversity and inclusion is much better. And then the last one I wanted to make is that I have to check with the Senate Secretary's office about whether just thinking about the census was already passed by the Senate and it was referred back to the Senate. I think it has to be a further proposal of amendment that comes from either one senator or it could be from each senator individually on the committee. But I just want to double check that if it's the case should I have it from every senator on the committee? Yes, unless there's a committee member who objects. I would report it, but Okay. So Becky, how many times have we amended this? So the bill came over to our house and it was not amended, I believe it was. No, it was it was a Senate bill that passed out of the Senate came to the house. Your committee amended it and it passed out of the house and then in the Senate it was referred to Senate Judiciary, which is I think that's the one thing that's confusing me a little is because it was referred back to a different committee than originally had jurisdiction over it. So I just want to double check with the Senate Secretary's office if it is a further proposal of amendment or committee amendment. I believe that you're correct that it is a concur with further proposal. So I just believe that's the way it would be. I think it's no different than because it's already passed the Senate in one manner and it's already passed the house in a different and now we're concurring further proposal. So if we submit some changes that we all agree to then you would change it tomorrow morning, I guess. Right, in the calendar. Okay. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Okay, just want to get it here. But can we check to make sure with Secretary Bloomer that we can do that? Because I don't want to. So that we can change it tomorrow morning if we need to. So you'll vote it out now. We'll vote it out right now. Then we will use that crazy process to send it to him. I believe it's a concur with further proposal amendment, but then can we change our amendment on the fly tomorrow morning? Don't people often you have a substitute amendment for the one that's in the calendar? Yeah, I think you can. I'll connect with him to get the process for how that could happen. If I can ask Becky a question, I'm trying to get my committee. Trying to get my committee to meet either around 1230 or one o'clock. None of the members know about this yet. Becky, when would you have the language ready to present to us? Available. I could have it by that time. Okay. Thank you. Right. Is there any. So I would, I believe it's. Senator, somebody moved that we report as amended draft 1.1. Which would now be 1.2 or 1. Or 2.1. I'll change it to 1.2. So draft 1.2. Of. That's 124 that we concur. I'm going to. That we concur with further proposal amendment. And that is seen in draft 1.2 of that's 24. Is there any further discussion and any of the witnesses who. Are with us on zoom are welcome to comment, including representative Edmunds representative Shaw, Heather Simmons or Zana Davis. Any committee. Thoughts. Peggy, would you please call the roll? I think this is our only vote. Senator White. Yes. Senator Baruch. Yes. Senator Benning. Yes. Senator Nica. Yes. Senator Sears. Yes. All of our names would go on it. If it is a, if it's not a concur with further proposed amendment, then it was the committee vote was 500. Right. Again, thank you all very much. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. And. If we could hang on as a committee, Peggy, after we bounce out of being live on the air. Sure. Let me know when to end the live. I think we're adjourning the meeting now. Thank you.