SmartTranscript of House Transportation - 2025-04-30 - 2:15PM

[Chair Matt Walker]: We are live on, Wednesday afternoon and following floor here on Wednesday, April thirtieth twenty twenty five. We are back to looking at last year's act one thirty five, related to trying to do a pilot program with cameras in work zones in three pilot programs. It was hoped for this year's construction season, and we have run into some snags. And we are very fortunate to be joined today by commissioner Morrison and, I guess, Colonel Birmingham and executive director Mandy Wolfner is here too. So I know that representative Pouch has been sort of helping to lead the charge, and we're gonna start with okay. Thank you very much for coming in, and please join us in the in the hot seat, I guess. We're all looking for a a way forward to get the cameras in the work zone as much as we can with the resources that we have. So thank you very much for joining us and barring unless we need anybody in everybody else, that'll be anything we're not talking about and figuring out where we go from here, and thank you very much. [Mandy Wooster]: Great. Thank you for having me. My name is Mandy Wooster. I'm the executive director of policy development for the Department of Public Safety. I was hoping that I could focus my testimony on some of the things that I heard in the committee and try to, you know, talk through them a little bit. So that would be the focus of of my testimony. I wanted to start by saying the Department of Public Safety and the Vermont State Police care deeply about work zone safety. For us, this is simply a resource issue. I heard, over the past couple of committee meetings, yesterday, you had a potential vendor that came in and discussed, the review of an incident for this for this piece of legislation. And you said that it would take more no more than one minute to do the review of the vendor's database. And so I just wanted to just talk talk about that a little bit. So that review process, it consists, if if I understood correctly, of confirming the deployment log, viewing images to see workers present in the work zones, viewing the lab compliance document, reviewing images of the license plate or images, I think there's a couple of them, and the associated data that would show the speed, and then the officer would then make a decision on a violation. So all of that is estimated to take no more than a minute. It's important to note that this is not the end of the process. So I wanted to just bring us back to act one thirty five, and I just wanted to read just a small piece out, on page seven that says notice and complaint. And it says, an action to enforce this section shall be initiated by issuing a Vermont civil violation complaint, which I'll probably refer to as a VCVC going forward, to the owner of a motor vehicle bearing the rear registration number captured in a recorded image and mailing the Vermont civil violation complaint to the owner by US mail. It goes further to talk about the civil violation complaint shall be issued, sworn and affirmed by a law enforcement officer who inspected the recorded images and data. So I thought for the sake of my testimony, I might take a traffic stop as an example. So if a law enforcement officer conducted a motor vehicle stop, a traffic infraction, we'll say it's in a very mundane traffic and, stop. Everything goes great. All it is is a violation of speed, and the officer is going to issue a VCVC to that operator. I've been a police officer for sixteen years prior to this, so I had some experience doing traffic stops. And in my estimation, a traffic stop, a mundane one, takes no longer than ten minutes. If it roughly ten minutes for that start to finish. And the majority of the time during that traffic stop consists of actually issuing or entering in the information for the paperwork. So it's either for the written warning or for the VCVC. That's what the majority of the time is spent on a mundane traffic stop. And so for the sake of this conversation, we'll say that's seven minutes, seven minutes to do the paperwork for the traffic stop on a roughly ten minute stop if everything is is clear sailing. So I wanted to talk about what that process looks like on the traffic stop. So they the law enforcement officer needs to access the DMV for vehicle or registered owner information. They need to complete the entirety of the VCVC, which is a pretty extensive form. There's lots of fields. And they have to ask the operator if they're active duty military. Those are the requirements on the traffic stop. So now I wanted to go [Jennifer Morrison]: back to the pilot process. [Mandy Wooster]: So for the pilot process, there are a number of sites that the law enforcement officer must visit. So we talked about the first site being the vendor's database, that the vendor said it'd take no more than a minute per incident for the database. And then we did talk about the issuing of the VCVC. So they have to do the database for the vendor. That vendor database, as I understood, will likely include DMV information right in that database. The challenge then becomes when they get to the records management database that is not linked to the vendor's database. They'll have to enter the information from the Department of Motor Vehicles to populate the fields for the VCVC, And then they have to go to a separate site for the Soldiers and Sailors Relief Act, which is required for the VCVC. Now if you remember when I spoke about the traffic stop, that was simply a question. All you had to say is, are you active duty military? This requires going to another site to be able to look that up. So now we're looking at if we if I just break it down, so it's about seven minutes, we said, for the traffic stop paperwork process. And I think that's the bare minimum. Right? That completely bare minimum, plus the one minute for the review for the database. So now we're talking seven minutes per incident. I heard the vendor say that it would be no more than a thousand incidents per day, per eight hour period for, for these work zones. And we have to use the max when we're determining resources. So eight thousand, minutes per eight hour workday, which is what that equates to for eight minutes total for that process, and then the, the one thousand incidents. And then take that eight thousand minutes, and I divide that by sixty to get us hours. That is a hundred and thirty three hours or roughly a hundred and thirty three hours per one hour work one eight hour workday. This is no breaks, no union contract, nothing. This is straight, just eight hours day. If we take that ten hour or sorry, the, the one hundred and thirty three hours and say we say law enforcement officers work eight or ten hour shifts. For the sake of the math and to make this simple, we'll say they worked a ten hour shift. So for one hundred and thirty three hours, for a ten hour shift, that equates to thirteen law enforcement officers doing this work for ten hours for one day's worth of data. This is an a significant draw on resources. [Jennifer Morrison]: I want to just One question here, representative. [Representative Phil Pouch]: It sounds like you're thinking of the absolute worst possible case. And that thousand out thousand tickets, you know, I think was not said as this is what we think that that, you know, that could couldn't possibly be the amount. It'd be the absolute extreme. So I think that that number, you know, in my run my question is when they fill out a ticket, I I not that I've gotten a ticket, but I think it's hand it's hand handwritten. But, if you are doing it in the office, would it be online you know, would it be typed out, or would it be handwritten in the same way? [Mandy Wooster]: Thank you for that question. And you make an excellent point, and I was meant to make that point at the end, and I missed it. Even so I'll answer your question. But even if we cut that in half, we're talking about an extensive number of hours of resource per day. [Representative Phil Pouch]: But my question was, is it done on is it done with the computer, or do you still would you if it was in the office, would you do it by hand, or would you do it on [Chair Matt Walker]: the computer? [Mandy Wooster]: Sure. So I think that you can do for a traffic stop or or this, I would assume this would be done electronically in a database. But it's important to recognize that that database shows all the same fields that that Vermont violation complaint form would have, and you would have to fill out each field. So that traffic stop that I talked about could be either filling it out electronically or paper. It could be either for that traffic stop. You're welcome. That is all I have for for testimony. [Representative Phil Pouch]: So this thousand per day, I'm not sure where that number came up. That was the question that we asked, but it had been floating around. If we have a thousand per day of speeders in excess of ten miles an hour in an active work zone, what can the Department of Public Safety do to reduce that? Thank you. All will be done. [Mandy Wooster]: Thank you for that. I this was my part of the testimony, and then I'll defer to the commissioner for next steps if that's acceptable. Thanks. Thank you. [Ken Wells]: I'll ask my [Chair Matt Walker]: question on another time. [Matt Birmingham]: Thanks, Wendy. You're welcome. Good afternoon. [Chair Matt Walker]: Good afternoon. My name [Jennifer Morrison]: is Jennifer Morrison. I'm the commissioner of public safety. I'm joined by colonel Matthew burning Birmingham, director of the state police, as well as major David Peterson who oversees the field force division. There as you know, the Vermont Department of Public Safety can do many things to impact speeding both in work zones, but on interstate highways and regular town roads as well. Some of that is by, being visibly present on our on our roadways. Some of it is by making traffic stops in and around, problem areas, and work zones certainly would would qualify as one of those. The issue the the question is not one of our willingness to enforce traffic laws anywhere that they need to be enforced. The issue is a very practical one of resource allocation. If we have calls that are coming in through nine one one or through the ten digit lines that require police officers to respond, they leave the highway immediately and go to respond. So the the the issue of them sitting in a work zone or, you know, contiguous to a work zone is not possible to guarantee, absent that being an assignment, probably an overtime assignment for which we have no no budget. The the the other point I would like to make out and make before I turn this over to the the colonel for any additional thoughts is that the responsibility for highway safety is a shared responsibility. It is not the Vermont State Police's sole purview. There are many other law enforcement assets throughout the state at the state level and at the county level and at the local level that have an interest in highway safety, and they should be considered as part of the solution. If that if if if using a law enforcement officer to do this work is truly the solution that the committee has found to be the most beneficial, that should not be a burden that is shared by only the Vermont State Police. We already cover ninety percent of the geographic area of the state of Vermont and eighty percent of the population. So I would I would submit that there are other resources that should be called to participate if this is if this is a truly a a a priority. I do have some solutions for how we can get law enforcement officers out of this. But first, let me ask the colonel. Matt, do you have additional remarks? [Speaker 6 ]: Hi. Good afternoon. Can you hear me? [Matt Birmingham]: Yes. Yep. [Speaker 6 ]: Hi. Matt Birmingham, the director of the state police. Thank you. I'll just echo kind of what's been said a little bit. The state police is, first of all, highway safety is one of, our pillars of our strategic goals every year, and it is a high priority of ours to ensure the safety of the roadways in the state. But the state police has been, faced with significant staffing challenges on our sworn side for the last five years. We are currently at about fifty four vacancies on our sworn staff of three hundred and twenty three, which is about a seventeen percent vacancy rate. We are currently, filling shifts on overtime just to just to staff shifts. In addition to, highway safety, though, state police also is focused on through our criminal division, many other, high priority, events in the state to include domestic violence response, to include homicides, drugs, violent crime, firearms. And these these things consume a massive amount of time and resources and are high priorities for for our detectives and our troopers. Our call volume has grown significantly in the last ten years and our while our staffing has shrunk. So we we are we are really stretched thin with our sworn resources right now, trying to just manage our basic mission and our basic function. And and the reality is we don't have the sworn capacity, to absorb anything else at this point because we are we are already cutting out, calls for service that are low priority, just to handle the thing the cry crimes with victims, which we believe are high priority. And so, it it would be an an immense challenge for us right now to to divert sworn resources for what really is an administrative function. [Jennifer Morrison]: Thank you, colonel. So when we think about solutioning this, I have talked with secretary Flynn from AOT. We collectively believe that this kit committee could, consider an amendment to the Soldier and Sailor Relief Act that would, somehow, obviate the need for a sworn law enforcement officer to ask that question or make that inquiry of the database that heretofore I had not heard of. I mean, you know, I've been out of stopping cars for just a few years, but didn't know you could search on a database. And to allow for civilian staff or for a third party vendor to issue either a VCVC or another type of penalty. I mean, there are more ways to skin the cat than just a VCVC. There are certainly other fines and penalties that the state could enact that a third party vendor could levy and could have the same import in terms of if you fail to pay this ticket or at least respond to it and ask for a hearing, that would result in the suspension of someone's privilege to operate. So, there are ways that it could be structured, that take law enforcement out of it. And, in this time, it's, you know, the colonel just told you the rather bleak staffing landscape that currently exists. We're we're hopeful. You know, the applications are slowly starting to rise. Academy, enrollment numbers are slowly starting to rise. We think we're turning the corner. But we're not the only ones in the state that are having significant staffing shortage of of sworn officers. So I truly believe that there are ways we can do this that are creative, that particularly because it is a pilot project, we will know relatively quickly if it's going to change behavior. At the end of the day, what what you're trying to do is change behavior. Right? And there are more ways to change behavior than a police officer spending eight minutes per sit per incident or case, and then beginning a process which Mandy didn't even get to. Okay. And if the person can test, if the same police officer is issuing, I'm just gonna make it up, fifty tickets in a day, imagine if only ten percent contest those tickets. Now you have that same officer tied up in a civil, traffic court proceeding That's going to take them further away from that work, the issuing of tickets, but also from the other portfolio of work that, as the colonel described, has to be our priority. Crimes against people have to be our priority. So I would encourage the committee, and I know that I am supported by Joe Flynn in saying this. I I'm encouraged to I'm encouraging you to find a way to take law enforcement out of it, particularly because it is a pilot project. And I think we will find out what we need to know about its efficacy and its impact on changing behavior in relatively short order. Four to six months, I think we will know if those speeds are dropping in the manner in which we'd like to see them drop. [Chair Matt Walker]: I I guess and I I share your concern. That's one [Ken Wells]: of the questions that I asked the the people from Connecticut that did testify of the amount of percentage of people that do contest their tickets, and he said it was extremely low. Then he said it was one or two percent. So it is low on that end. You know, obviously, a couple of people were here last year when we passed this legislation. And our and and we went back and forth whether it should be law enforcement or a third party. It's just our belief that we would probably see everything else law enforcement had to be the person or the people to implement this ticket. And, I mean, I guess my my just general thought is when people are pulled over nowadays, is everybody given a ticket for speeding? Not not everybody. That's what I'm saying. They are not. So it's not like and I do think a thousand is is is way high. Like you said, this is a pilot. We don't know. And theoretically, not saying that you would, but you could probably pick and choose a a ticket that you want to issue. You wouldn't have to go through a problem. You would have that discretion. You would continue to have that discretion. You might you might see a certain threshold to say, yes. This really warrants it, You know? That we need to move forward with it. And, if not, you can just let it stay on the pile. But I I think from the standpoint of this committee, we really need to get this off the ground. And, you know, if you come back to us next year and said we were flooded, we only had a our our means was only able to process, you know, two percent of the things that that came in. Then we would take a consider serious consideration as, alright. We need to scrap it. But until we have that, I think the way to move forward is with the state police. That's you know, we do patrol the industry, and that's, you know, one of your main focuses. It's not, you know, the the the sheriffs and, you know, the local police. I I know they can control anywhere, but that's not their main focus. And, you know, that's the theme of, of of one of the one of the themes of the state basis control that. But that's just sort of where our mindset is, and there's just sort of a frustration that we can't get this off the ground because we've heard, you know, over the years of, obviously, a need of a desk, in in work zones. And this is just one of the tools, to do that. And we heard testimony where it does change, the behavior. I don't have the exact number, but the the I think it went down ten miles an hour. Or I think, [Representative Phil Pouch]: in Connecticut, they said that, people who got the first warnings, the amount of the first, which was just a warning, no cost, the ninety percent, they they never showed up again. Only ten percent, you know, were were caught a second time. So and that they show just general behavior, not only at places with signage saying where there are active cameras, even at other areas which didn't have cameras. Once they rolled this out, general speed everywhere did go down, and I think in Pennsylvania too. So it seemed like a program that had merit and would reduce the danger in those work zones. And, you know, I I, you know, just question coming in here and saying this is the worst possible thing when when it it there there are ways sort of blended. It's just a pilot. So it certainly, you know, would talk to others. [Jennifer Morrison]: I I hope you've considered other law enforcement assets that are not responding to nine one one calls, that are not responding to in progress violent crime, that are not responsible for patrolling rural areas in other parts of the state. So I really hope that this is a I'm telling you that we can't staff it. It will be to the detriment of other parts of the mission that others aren't cut out to manage. But there are others in the law enforcement constellation who can manage this project that do not answer calls for service when the citizens call nine one one. So that's a that's a value decision you have to make. [Representative Phil Pouch]: Well, can I ask a question too? Sure. So, you know, the the bill's already passed. Is there has there been any discussion at the administration side since the administration now only has public the the state police, the, agency of transportation police? Has there been a discussion among those groups about how best you know, who might best take this on? [Jennifer Morrison]: I don't I have not been part of that discussion. If it's happened at another level, I'm not aware of it. My understanding was that coming out of this committee last year, that the DMV police were were exempted from this pilot project, that through testimony, they have been unconsidered or not considered to be the enforcement arm of this pilot project. [Representative Phil Pouch]: Don't recall, but it's not in the bill of it says Department of Public Safety. [Jennifer Morrison]: Right. I think that's how you landed on the Department of Public Safety. Yes. Uh-huh. So I I mean, I I don't I don't know how to be more honest with you that we don't have the resources to add this mission to our portfolio. If if that is what is holding up the project from moving forward is solely that, then I'm happy to carry this message back and problem solve within state government for how to do a pilot project. And we'll we'll go from there. Go ahead, Matt. [Matt Birmingham]: What do you think about I'm sorry. You finished? [Chair Matt Walker]: No. No. Yeah. Go ahead. [Matt Birmingham]: What do you think about the idea of using of asking the police officers in the department of our vehicles to be in charge of this program? [Jennifer Morrison]: I think it's a reasonable consideration. I think that there's stuff that we should talk as a a executive branch team about if that's the direction that we're going. I'm not looking to pass a hot potato over to someone else, but I'm I'm very clearly signaling that we do not have the capacity to take this on as the sole [Matt Birmingham]: owner of this project. That they would be one consideration, perhaps? [Jennifer Morrison]: They would be one consideration. I think contracting with off duty law enforcement officers would be another. [Matt Birmingham]: And what does that entail? Contracting the law enforce [Jennifer Morrison]: Well, you've contracted them to do the the traffic safety when there's construction on the road. Right? You you contract with either the municipal police in the area that it's happening or with the sheriff's deputies, and they sit there with blue lights running. And and when you see it all over the state, that would be an option is to extend the portion of a contract like that to include review of the vendor's camera footage and issuance of warnings or VCVCs as appropriate. [Representative Phil Pouch]: Representative Wells, did you Yeah. [Speaker 7 ]: That was you answered part of that question there. I wondered if the sheriff's department was their capacity and their staffing so they couldn't take over this pilot program themselves. [Jennifer Morrison]: I can't speak for the there's fourteen sheriffs. I can't speak to their staffing right now. [Chair Matt Walker]: Sir? Mister, I'd like to just throw a few different pieces at it. But first of all, I really appreciate you and your whole team coming in today and and talking about it because judiciary law enforcement is only tangentially part of what we do. We're not involved in that. There's other committees in this room that are much more familiar with the challenges facing law and state police and facing your position and whatnot. So we don't have a ton of that a ton of your, testimony or expertise in this. We're also it's a fifty percent turnover of the committee from last year to this year. So the makeup of the committee and the views may or may not be the same reflecting of of what drove the bill out. So I I I I do appreciate that you guys that you're all here. I appreciate that we get a chance to hear some of this because this is not part of what we spend a lot of time in. We are very much a it is a pilot that we are just trying to find a way to help workplace safety, and I know that you're totally supportive of that piece. And I also understand that you have a huge responsibility every day to manage. So I wanna make sure that is very much understood by the committee, or we appreciate that. Also, you know, facing fifty plus openings and seventeen percent, I'm really curious on how long that historically has been the case. What we would do or wanna do is just find a way somewhere. And I I we don't spend any time on the idea of discretion and and we're learning a little bit about discretion at the piece. You know, if the pilot that we're even to generate, you know, who knows? We've set it ten miles an hour, but we we're only issuing tickets at the most extreme example that the discretion spent one hour a day on this, that there were five tickets going out. The word would, you know, spread it incredibly fast, and that behavior changed by the camera and the activity. I don't know. It doesn't my understanding limited understanding of discretion, this thousand number is I'm not sure where that comes from. But some level of minimum support, perhaps, is another way to look at it in terms of what's the minimum amount of time or what your maximum amount of time is. It would be the minimum least amount that it could be put in to find some way to help move forward. Reopening the bill up, to my understanding, is could create a whole new level of judicial review and and whatnot. And I think that would lose our entire another construction season, which we didn't want didn't wanna do. We really wanted to find a way to get cameras out there. So if there is any concern that we're not being respectful to the amount of challenge and work that you have, I'm certainly not saying that that is not our intent and that we very much appreciate how hard it is for you to be here to do this that seems out of your normal area. I do still feel like through this bill that I feel a responsibility to find some level of solution. If amending it is the only way to do that, we'll have to go down that path. But the idea, at least my understanding, was that there was enough flexibility between the bill and discretion to find a way to get something out the door. Maybe it wasn't crafted in the best possible way, but I know there was significant consideration for it. So I wanna make sure that I'm clear about if there's frustration, it's only about trying to get safety to the spot, and it's not about what we [Jennifer Morrison]: I I think we all share the same goals. No. [Chair Matt Walker]: About it's not our frustration with them. We're on state police do every day. But we feel stuck, and we don't know how to express that. [Jennifer Morrison]: I appreciate that, and I think it's probably my job to go talk to my colleagues in the executive branch about how to get this unstuck. Appreciate what you're trying to do. I I sincerely believe there is a non sworn path that could be walked. Obviously, that would take some lawyers and some other stuff, and it might not necessarily require reopening the bill. I believe the sticking point may Mandy, you might have to jump in and correct me on this. The sticking point might have been when any, RFP or a contract came along that, we were supposed to sign as the lead on this. And it's like, wait wait a minute. What? Like, we're contracting for this and taking on this responsibility? So there's there's probably ways we can help it get unstuck, but I'm I'm not sure that the technology would have to stop the how it gets issued. But you may need to take legislative action to allow someone other than a law enforcement officer, and it could even be done under this period of time for a pilot project so that maybe if we find out that that's not the way to go, that it reverts back to only a sworn officer being able to issue, the ticket. But I I really need to, again, foot stomp that against the landscape that all agencies are in right now, just barely starting to emerge from the large uptake uptick in violent crime that our communities experienced in twenty twenty one and twenty twenty two. We are all having staffing crises, and this we we have to find new ways to deliver the same service that changes behaviors. And it's not just about traffic safety. It's about chaos and disorder in our downtown at downtowns. It's about people not being able to comport themselves to the law or social norms and creating chaos all over the place. We have to find new ways to do it with fewer sworn resources, and I think this is a great opportunity to try that. So let me go back to AOT. Let me go back to my team and see what we can come up with to find a path forward. I appreciate that you're trying to make something better, and we share your goal. It it's very difficult to imagine that we could satisfy the goal and do the job you give us given our current resource restraints. [Representative Phil Pouch]: Yeah. And and and I thank you thoughts coming in, and I do respect the, load of work that, you know, is must deal and seems insurmountable. I just wonder if another possible way since there's discretion And, you know, based on driving the highway, I see regularly if there's state troopers out there trolling the highway. If you didn't take whatever the number of resources, do that each week and say, hey. Four hours a week, we're gonna apply to this. And then we'll see how many tickets come in, how many requests come in from the vendor, and how many you're able to process. That's gonna give us the same amount of data. And then if we know the percentage that get processed, we'll then see how many repeat offenders we get based on that data even if a hundred percent unprocessed. But if you took, you know, x amount of resources and said, hey. We're gonna try to do this every week, x amount. And and, in the same way, you might, you know, for, drunk driving projects and things like that. So that's just suggestions. Kirk? [Speaker 6 ]: Thank you. First of all, I'll reiterate too. I appreciate the committee's desire to want to improve workplace safety on the interstate. We we're with you on that. To to the representative's point on on, shifting resources, the problem is that, troopers are on the roads when they can be. And because traffic safety is a a priority mission of ours, However, that's the first thing that goes when you have to respond to a nine one one call, a domestic, a shooting, a homicide, is that they won't be on the roads. If you we couldn't. We don't divert resources, away from patrol to an administrative function because we're also enforcing other laws on the roads, including and you mentioned it, DUI, which is which kills people. So if we're not out there, if we're taking that four hours of patrol and we're putting it in an office and the trooper's not on the road, they're they're not going to be able to identify DUIs. And that's that is unacceptable to me as the director. DUIs is a an incredibly important function of the state police, not just DUI, but drug trafficking, human trafficking. There's many other crimes that go into a traffic stop that you cannot get with an automated, speed device. So every every minute that has been that's diverted away from that are are some very serious and dangerous crimes that that are go undetected. I will reiterate this again just so the committee hears that I I hope we can find a solution that does not involve sworn law enforcement. The state police is in the process and has been for the last four years since since our staffing really plummeted. And to the to the chair's point, prior to twenty twenty, prior to the pandemic and, the murder of George Floyd and and police reform, which had significant impacts on law enforcement around the country, we were we were in the range of about fifteen to twenty vacancies, a year, fluctuated up and down. It was low as five at one point. So fifty to sixty is is really problematic for us and unheard of. And we have been we have been pulling mandatory overtime shifts for the last three years. Our detectives have had to work it. The state police is under incredible stress right now, and I cannot be more clear about that workload stress because the workload is increasing while our staffing is diminishing. We have had to cut out a tremendous amount of of responses that we used to do. So I have to reiterate what the commission says, we do not in any way have the capacity to absorb this. There will be something that that will have to be given up. And at this point, I don't know what that is because everything we're handling is violent crime and crimes against people and potentially dangerous crimes like DUI and aggravated aggressive driving. So I don't know where we would find the bandwidth to to reduce our hours on things of that nature to to work on on this. It just it would not make any sense to me as a director. [Matt Birmingham]: Thank you. [Mandy Wooster]: The the only the only way [Jennifer Morrison]: I could see this working, and this is, not something you can guarantee because who knows when it's gonna happen, is that if we have a an injured an injured trooper who could be assigned to an office to do this while they recuperate, that that but then you don't know. I mean, you don't want anyone to get hurt. You hope they don't get hurt. That that's literally the only resource that I can think of that we could, in good conscience, stick in an office to review this footage. [Speaker 6 ]: I mean, that that is possible. However, that's not a guarantee. I mean and, certainly, you don't want people on workers' comp or hurt, and and and that that's not a guarantee. You that may not be we may not have that available. [Jennifer Morrison]: And and and it also presumes that the person is injured in a way where they want to come and work on light duty as opposed to being out on workers' comp, and we have no control of that. So, trying to be creative, but I but I don't think that in the on the fly in this room is is the time or space. So you have our commitment that we want to be part of the solution. I have some work to do to go back and try to problem solve this. And, I appreciate you letting us tell you that it it's not for lack of wanting. [Ken Wells]: We we wanna join in [Mandy Wooster]: this work. We just [Jennifer Morrison]: we don't have it. I've got there's no juice left in the squeeze. [Chair Matt Walker]: And there's always value to having met and heard Yeah. Directly and personally to the testimony of representative Burton. So [Mandy Wooster]: Yeah. I was [Jennifer Morrison]: just gonna say, you know, the reading about this will typically hear you speak about this. It's like a crisis. We're [Matt Birmingham]: trying to turn it around. Sorry. Sorry to hear. Okay. [Ken Wells]: If you have any academy, You were saying that sworn officers are not sworn officers yet. Is there any way to like, if they're at the five yard line, become a sworn, sort of maybe have them do it as hard as No. [Jennifer Morrison]: They go directly from the police academy to post basic training, which gives them specific certifications like DUI processing, fingerprinting, etcetera. And from that, they go directly into field training where they are attached to the hip. An outside there was an avenue No. There's not an avenue there. I I mean, there's just not and they would not I would not give a brand new officer that level of discretion without getting them on the road and having some [Matt Birmingham]: mentoring and training first. I I appreciate your testimony, and I I'm not I can't speak on behalf of the whole committee, but, personally, I welcome your kind of creative thinking about how we can come to a solution and look at other resources that we have. And as has been stated, like, it would be great to not have to go back and revisit the act. I I don't know, because that would be the simplest path, but, I suppose that's not that is a possibility too. But, you know, I just would welcome your your thoughts. Spend a bit [Representative Phil Pouch]: time and [Chair Matt Walker]: pass our time with you. Yeah. That's quite the best. [Jennifer Morrison]: I'm in himself on his lap. We're headed. Walking laps. I'm good. [Representative Phil Pouch]: You're good? Yeah. [Jennifer Morrison]: Representative representative? [Representative Phil Pouch]: Yeah. We certainly would, you know, like to hear if you you you do come up with some possibilities, maybe two or three options. Can we expect that you'll come back with that? Or [Jennifer Morrison]: Yes. When would you like us to come back with that? Please don't say tomorrow. No. [Chair Matt Walker]: Yeah. Well, the rumors have it that we'll be here somewhere between the twenty third of May and the thirtieth of May, but we will [Jennifer Morrison]: How about next week? [Chair Matt Walker]: Show that out. If we can follow-up with that. [Jennifer Morrison]: Okay. On this Mandy can be your point of contact, but I will carry this back and discuss circle up and talk amongst ourselves. And do you do you have a designated time for the pilot project? Is it six months? [Chair Matt Walker]: There's not a timeline that well, construction season, we're gonna probably miss this year. [Jennifer Morrison]: Oh, six weeks. [Chair Matt Walker]: We're gonna be yeah. So we're gonna miss this construction season most likely at this point. Yeah. And so the idea of by the time there is an executed agreement and equipment and my understanding is we're likely to miss this so that the urgency that we felt trying to get it out for the April for you know, to get it in this construction season is not likely to be met. We really wanna make sure that we are ready to go with the next construction since the next April then. [Representative Phil Pouch]: There was an education piece But there ahead of [Matt Birmingham]: it. Too. Right. [Mandy Wooster]: So I agree. [Representative Phil Pouch]: Like, when it starts an education piece, and then, you know, come summer, maybe, I don't know, June, you know, they you'd have the three pilot sets. I'm sorry. Three. Yeah. [Ken Wells]: And the rest of the day, there's three. This isn't like There's [Chair Matt Walker]: only three of is that what you're saying? That's what you're [Ken Wells]: trying to I just wanted to make sure that It's not [Chair Matt Walker]: a long term at this point, it's not a long term thing. It's three pilot projects. [Jennifer Morrison]: So that's three thousand a day. What's that? So that's three thousand a day. No. No. [Chair Matt Walker]: They're not gonna be at the same time, but the same time. Yeah. [Ken Wells]: Just trying to make this the worst thing. [Jennifer Morrison]: If there are if there [Chair Matt Walker]: are three thousand people Hey. [Jennifer Morrison]: I didn't say a thousand. [Chair Matt Walker]: Miles an hour, then we've got an even bigger problem. Right. Right. If you have three thousand represent Casey real quick. Someone someone sold that soldiers act. I'm not sure if that's [Ken Wells]: Soldier [Jennifer Morrison]: and Sailor Relief Act. [Chair Matt Walker]: Yep. That's is that the reason is that the sole reason why we have to have a sworn in a sworn officer? Is that is that [Jennifer Morrison]: by the way? Lawyer question, but I I know that is a huge hurdle and has historically been a huge hurdle, is that the law currently requires that a law enforcement officer determine if the person is is eligible for that. And and it's rather actually, a rather arcane provision anyway. So if you did away with it altogether, I think it would be fine. But it it was intended back in the day that if a person did not, contest their ticket or show up to a hearing within twenty days, that it was presumed that they were on active duty and might have been deployed. They wouldn't automatically get that license suspended for noncompliance. So I believe that now being able to respond electronically to all of these things over Internet may not even make it relevant, but that that would again be a lawyer question. [Representative Phil Pouch]: We we had testimony that it's a federal law, which I think Right. Yeah. And so it's not anything we could change Mhmm. To that requirement. You're in our phone a friend's spot. The only [Mandy Wooster]: thing I wanted to say is the reason I use an extreme example is to say, even if you cut that in half, the resources are still even if we said it was one thousand hours only, right, because it was one hour for or one minute to check the vendor database, that's still sixteen hours or an eight hour period of video footage to watch. So I use an extreme example just to illuminate how much of a resource drone this actually is. [Jennifer Morrison]: It could be. And we could say, okay. We're only gonna watch this much here and this much there. There's ways that it could be done. It might not be the best way, but it might give us a snapshot into what full throttle would look like on this initiative. But we'll we'll be creative, and we'll put our heads together. And we will get you a response before the end of next week. [Chair Matt Walker]: That's [Matt Birmingham]: Thank you. [Jennifer Morrison]: That's good. Thank you. [Chair Matt Walker]: Much appreciated. Thanks for all the time. Thank you. We gotta get out of here. Thank [Matt Birmingham]: you. We [Chair Matt Walker]: are This is not a work. For the next ten minutes.

Play Clip Play Full Video Pause

SmartTranscript of House Transportation - 2025-04-30 - 2:15PM

This is useful for seeing what happened at the meeting without wading through the whole transcript: