WA House PS - Committee Meeting
(February 12, 2021) - HB 1499 - Public Hearing

Continuum of Care
[ Event Details ]

Legislation representing the first effort in Washington state for broad decriminalization of personal possession of controlled substances including enhanced treatment and recovery services brought out the support of hundreds - and opposition from just ten people.

Here are some observations from the Friday February 15th Washington State House Public Safety Committee (WA House PS) meeting.

My top 3 takeaways:

  • The committee heard a briefing and introduction of HB 1499, legislation removing criminal penalties for possession of personal amounts of controlled substances while expanding substance abuse treatment options.
    • Like many jurisdictions, Washington state maintains a Uniform Controlled Substances Act which criminalizes possession, manufacturing, and distribution of certain drugs, drug counterfeits, and synthetics in an attempt to limit their availability and use. Along with federal policy, this is generally called the drug war.
    • However, beyond failing to eliminate supply or demand for most substances after significant commitment of government spending and authority, the policies have been found to take a punitive, stigmatizing, and disproportionately applied approach to the medical condition of substance use disorder (SUD). The legalization of cannabis, among the most commonly consumed but less frequently abused illicit drugs in the nation, was a step in the direction of changing drug policy to focus on treatment, reducing the harms of substance abuse, and lowering justice system costs along with suffering that occurs from criminalization of controlled substances.
    • WA House PS Committee Counsel Omeara Harrington briefed on the legislative analysis of the proposal, saying the bill “contains a series of changes relating to substance use disorder response” (audio - 5m, video).
      • Harrington said the legislation would require “the Washington State Health Care Authority (WA HCA) to establish a substance use recovery services plan to assist persons with SUD in accessing treatment and recovery services.”
        • The plan would be required to address “certain considerations outlined in the bill and must articulate the manner in which continual, rapid, and widespread access to a comprehensive continuum of care is provided to all persons with substance use disorder” including services such as “field-based outreach and engagement, peer recovery support services, intensive case management, substance use disorder treatment, and recovery support services including housing, job training, and placement services.”
        • Services must be “accessible to all jurisdictions, must be equitably distributed across urban and rural settings, and if possible, made available on-demand through 24/7 peer recovery coach response, behavioral health triage centers, and other...innovative rapid response models.”
      • Harrington reported that WA HCA would have to “assemble a substance use recovery services advisory committee of individuals with varying backgrounds” identified as “including, but not limited to: specified subject matter experts; persons who are currently using controlled substances without legal authority; adults and youth who are in recovery, and family members of persons with substance use disorder; substance use disorder professionals; representatives of city and county governments, law enforcement, and the legal system; a representative of fire chiefs; the Criminal Justice Training Commission; housing providers; representatives of racial justice organizations; a representative of a local health jurisdiction; and representatives of tribes.” The advisory committee would contribute to “the development and implementation of the [recovery services] plan,” she told lawmakers.
      • WA HCA “must submit the plan to the governor and the legislature by December 2021,” and “must adopt rules and enter into contracts with providers to implement the plan by December 2022.” After “consultation with” the advisory group, WA HCA “must also submit annual reports on the implementation of the plan.”
      • Payment for services under the plan would be “through applicable Medicaid managed care plans, the Medicaid fee-for-service program...the behavioral health administrative services organizations, and private insurance,” Harrington said. Services which were “not reimbursable through insurance must be funded through a combination of “appropriations from the Recovery Pathways Account, if that account is created through legislation, federal substance abuse block grants, funds recovered by the state through lawsuits against opioid manufacturers, and state appropriations based on calculation of the savings captured from reduced expenses for the Department of Corrections,” she explained.
      • Other effects of the bill “relate to the criminal justice system,” Harrington stated, including “eliminating criminal penalties for personal use amounts of controlled substances, counterfeit substances, and legend drugs.”
        • She said controlled substances were scheduled in law, counterfeit substances were “controlled substances that have been altered to look like substances produced by a drug manufacturer or dispenser,” and “legend drugs are prescription drugs.” Harrington indicated that current criminal sanctions for possession “ranged from a misdemeanor to a class B felony depending on the substance.”
        • Under HB 1499, Harrington said possession of a “personal use amount" would be “decriminalized, as is use of drug paraphernalia when used for a personal use amount.”
        • WA HCA “in consultation with the Department of Health and the Pharmacy Quality Assurance Commission as well as a work group” would create “rules establishing the maximum personal use amounts known to be used by people for recreational or nonmedical and non prescribed purposes.”
          • The work group would involve “at a minimum: persons who currently use controlled substances outside the legal authority of a prescription or valid practitioner order; persons in recovery from substance use disorder who previously used substances outside the legal authority of a prescription or valid practitioner order; representatives from law enforcement; a representative of public defenders; a representative of prosecutors; relevant experts.”
        • The bill “also makes an exception to the criminal offense of delivery, or possession or manufacture with intent to deliver drug paraphernalia for social services or healthcare agencies distributing the drug paraphernalia to others for personal use,” Harrington noted. 
      • HB 1499 “allows persons with a past conviction for possession of a controlled substance, counterfeit substance, or legend drug, or use of drug paraphernalia to vacate their record of conviction” regardless of whether the individual has completed their sentence, she stated. “Upon receipt of the application, the court must clear the record of conviction and the person must be released from all penalties and disabilities related to the offense.”
      • Harrington said that the last change from the legislation would be around “law enforcement training and response to persons with substance use disorders.”
        • Within existing law, “when a police officer has reasonable cause to believe that an individual has committed a crime and the individual is known to the officer to suffer from a mental disorder” the officer was “authorized and encouraged to take a certain action to facilitate the person receiving treatment services,” she relayed. The bill would expand “these provisions to expressly apply to persons with substance use disorder in addition to mental health disorders” and allow for consultation with local health providers “and those that may consult with an officer about the individual’s history” in order to provide response services or an approved provider “as appropriate.” Harrington explained that this could be done “in lieu of legal system involvement” or for “the purposes of supportive services in addition to treatment.”
        • Basic State law enforcement training would be updated to reflect these changes, she reported, and the criminal offense, conviction vacating, and enforcement changes had a delayed effective date under the bill of December 1st, 2022.
    • HB 1499 received an extensive fiscal note.
    • Assistant Ranking Minority Member Brad Klippert confirmed there wasn’t a substitute version of the bill (audio - <1m, video).
    • Representative Lauren Davis introduced her legislation in part by citing the “nearly universal agreement that our state’s response to addressing substance use disorder is woefully inadequate” which reminded her of Bob Dylan lyrics: “how many times can a man turn his head, and pretend that he just doesn't see?” She called the bill she’d sponsored “a paradigm shift in the State’s response to untreated addiction” and an “assertion that we must do more, not less.” Davis thanked committee members who had already been meeting with her about a substitute version of the bill “that Rep[resentative] Klippert alluded to” (audio - 7m, video).
      • Davis called the status quo “incredibly problematic” and wanted the State to be “proactive rather than reactive” in helping people with SUD before “they come crashing into the criminal/legal system.” She framed her remarks by describing a personal experience dealing with a “dear friend of mine from the recovery community [who] relapsed.”
        • Davis described spending “the next several weeks doing everything I could to keep him alive” while dealing with “motel rooms covered in blood, needles, baggies, heroin, meth, and lighters.” She’d seen him prepare to inject drugs in her car (“the blood splatter still remains on my passenger side visor”) and one time found him overdosed and had to “violently [shake] him awake.” Davis stayed with him as he abused substances until “his arms, face, and legs were covered in blood” before he broke down in tears. Their suffering, she said, “shouldn’t have been illegal...he needed help, not handcuffs.” Davis added that “the real question is not ‘why the drugs?’ but ‘why the pain?’” She believed substance abuse involved “not wanting to experience the present because it is too painful a place to be.”
      • Arresting and imprisoning people displaying substance abuse behaviors multiplied “the pain to be numbed,” Davis said before highlighting the diagnostic criteria for substance use disorder and calling it “implausible that imposing additional negative consequences through the criminal/legal system will lead to a cessation of use.” Davis quoted lecturer and researcher Brené Brown: “shame is the fear of disconnection. It’s the fear that something we’ve done makes us unworthy of connection. Shame is the intensely painful feeling or experience of believing that we’re flawed and therefore unworthy of love, belonging, and connection.”
      • Acknowledging that some people attributed their recovery to legal consequences stemming from the drug war, Davis found “that is the exception, not the rule” and that “legislating to the exception does not create good public policy.” She called imprisonment for possession alone rare and “more typically it’s due to pre-trial diversion programs or sentencing alternatives.” However, any incarceration “multiplies the feelings of shame, worthlessness, and hopelessness” that stigmatize individuals “with a conviction that will make it infinitely more difficult to ever attain housing and employment, both of which are highly correlated with long term recovery.” People needed conditions for hope, which Davis recounted as consisting of goals, pathways, and agency: “the belief in one’s own ability to get and stay on the path.”
      • Urging people to “forge relationships” with those experiencing SUD, Davis noted that “the opposite of addiction is not sobriety, it’s connection.” From her perspective, the top challenges limiting substance abusers from treatment “boils down to two reasons: One, they don’t think recovery is possible for them. And two, they don’t think they’re worthy of recovery.” Davis believed that “it’s imperative that the individuals employed and trained to do outreach and engagement with this population are people who have walked this road themselves and are thriving in recovery.”
      • She said the substance abuse “continuum of care has three parts” that made “recovery...not only possible, but probable”: outreach, treatment, recovery support services. The existing substance abuse policy for Washington funded “one leg of a three-legged stool. We pay for treatment over-and-over because insurance covers it but we fail to fund the outreach on the front-end and the recovery services on the backend,” Davis said. She continued, saying HB 1499 would create “a robust continuum of care for substance use disorder that is accessible to all communities” and provide a “behavioral health system response to a treatable brain disease.”
      • Davis is the Strategic Director of the Washington Recovery Alliance (WRA) and a long time advocate of substance abuse treatment by the State. Her legislative biography says she championed “‘Ricky’s Law’” which “created an involuntary crisis commitment system for youth and adults with life-threatening addiction...one of the largest single investments in addiction treatment in Washington state history.” The Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP) is evaluating the law’s ramifications, having released a preliminary report in December 2020.
    • Chair Roger Goodman was grateful to Davis for her “passionate advocacy for those suffering from substance use disorder. There’s no more articulate advocate in the entire legislature.”
  • Over a dozen speakers gave their insight on the need for a new approach to substance use and the overall ineffectiveness of criminalization with over 300 people signed on to support the bill.
    • Michelle Horn-Richberg, Former criminal legal system worker (audio - 3m, video). 
    • Mika Watson-Cheesman, Capital Recovery Center PATH Outreach Coordinator (audio - 1m, video).
      • Cheesman explained that her program worked with the “homeless community and ones who are at risk of becoming homeless” who routinely had mental health and substance use “challenges.” Her view was that “once you throw a criminal charge on that, now we’re talking major barriers with accessing services” something that “makes it harder for my clients. It also makes it harder for me as a case manager.” Cheesman asked that the committee’s members “consider these individuals and their families by providing appropriate services.”
    • Marc Stern, University of Washington (UW) Affiliate Assistant Professor and former DOC Assistant Secretary for Healthcare (audio - 2m, video).
      • Stern said that his specialization was “in jail and prison medicine” and that he had been the DOC’s lead doctor as well as advising and training law enforcement personnel on healthcare issues.
      • “A couple of years ago I gave a lecture to the medical staff at Providence Hospital,” he commented, where he’d noted that SUD and mental health were routinely treated “by incarcerating people” only to have a doctor sarcastically observe that “if incarceration is working that well for treating SUD and mental illness, we ought to think about locking people up for lung cancer.” Stern said incarceration “doesn’t work that well” despite “improvements in the care provided” and that “a penal institution is simply not the primary place to provide treatment for a disease.”
      • Stern argued this wasn’t about society “turning a blind eye to serious crime but when somebody exhibits an unwanted behavior that’s the manifestation of a disease, when the main victim is the patient themselves, then the primary tool we should be using is therapeutic, not punitive.”
      • Stern retired from DOC in 2009 following his objections to Washington’s execution policy.
    • Lucinda Grande, Capital Recovery Center Olympia Bupe Clinic Director (audio - 2m, video). 
      • Grande reported having seen “many of our patients respond with improved stability and quality of life after starting medication to treat their opioid use disorder.” She believed in the Hippocratic oath for doctors and considered HB 1499 an oath “for state government” to conduct ethical management of those with SUD. One way Grande proposed doing this was “to avoid harming people by trapping them within the criminal justice system for behavioral consequences of their illness.”
      • Grande testified that 70% of patients at her clinic “have a history of incarceration” but she was aware of “only two who actually benefited from incarceration” because they’d also been “dealing large quantities of heroin...but the vast majority have been harmed.”
      • Childhood trauma was another common theme Grande observed among her patients, including a woman whose mother added “alcohol in her bottle of baby milk to keep her quiet” while others “were introduced by their parents to drug use as a cherished family activity.” Substance use tended to compound existing traumas and incarceration was “the start of the next phase of trauma.”
      • Grande called for HB 1499’s passage to “begin the shift of resources to make treatment, not punishment, the primary strategy to reduce the impact” from SUDs.
    • Linda Robertson (audio - 3m, video). 
    • Monte Levine, Ostrich Bay Exchange (audio - 3m, video). 
    • Steve Eisler (audio - 3m, video). 
    • Meg Martin, Interfaith Works Executive Director (audio - 2m, video). 
      • Speaking for a “coalition of diverse faith-based organizations working towards justice and peace,” Martin said their members offered shelter and housing options and were a “known, trusted, and experienced leader in the community when it comes to addressing chronic homelessness” including SUD.
      • Martin’s experience with drugs began as a teenager when she started “binge drinking regularly,” followed by substance use and depression. Despite growing “up in a very supportive and secure home,” she’d still suffered juvenile trauma before being raped by an acquaintance while she was in high school. Martin said years later, while being treated for abusing heroin, she’d finally been able to verbalize the traumatic event.
      • Martin said she’d been able to develop into a “leader in my community who has made significant change in my field” by being able to access treatment “when I needed it most.” Having seen people blocked from SUD treatment by their criminal histories, Martin saw “hope” from HB 1499 to help “leaders in the rough” by making service options available to them to “fight another day.”
    • Meta Hogan, Capital Recovery Center Community Programs Director (audio - 3m, video). 
    • Adam Cornell, Snohomish County Prosecuting Attorney (audio - 2m, video). 
      • Cornell testified in support of the legislation because it was “time to treat the illness that is substance use disorder as the public health threat that it is so that we can better and more effectively address the public safety concerns that stem from the disease.” Beyond that, “it is time to recognize that what we have been doing as a state to criminally address simple possession of a controlled substance...cannot work,” he said. 
      • Cornell outlined why he’d come to find state law had “not worked”:
        • “We have not allocated sufficient resources and public good will towards those who are suffering.”
        • “The extraordinarily punitive and collateral consequences of a felony conviction for simple possession.”
        • The policy’s “disproportionate impact on people of color.”
        • “It has shamed many who are...ill and seeking treatment.”
        • “It has not made our communities any more safe and livable.”
      • He believed the bill provided “the promise of recovery by the allocation of resources” and called out “skeptics and opponents” by being clear HB 1499 would not:
        • “Decriminalize other crimes or take away the discretion to arrest or charge those with other crimes.”
        • “Get rid of our drug courts.”
        • “Take away the prerogative of employers to maintain a drug free workplace.”
        • “Take effect immediately.”
      • He expected there would be an amendment by “July of 2023 that gives us the time to do this right and put a readiness check in the next legislative session.” Cornell used the maxim “the wisdom of the times is not timeless,” encouraging a “new birth of wisdom” in state drug laws as it was supported “by communities all over the state and not a bunch of fuzzy-headed progressive-centric elites.”
      • Representative Jenny Graham inquired about the amount of a drug “sufficient to cause impairment,” with Cornell agreeing that personal use amounts of substances could “absolutely” (audio - 2m, video).
    • Dan Satterberg, King County Prosecuting Attorney (audio - 2m, video). 
    • Keith Blocker, City of Tacoma Deputy Mayor and Treatment First Washington Steering Committee Member (audio - 3m, video). 
      • Blocker testified as a citizen who’d had “many family members who struggled with addiction and I just know from my own personal experience the importance of providing the services and resources so that individuals can get on the pathway to recovery.” He said the purpose of recovery was to “help people become self-sufficient” by getting “access to resources that they might be denied of, if they were to have a felony criminal record.”
      • Blocker said the “guilt and shame” of SUD shouldn’t be compounded by the criminal justice system as it would “impede them in terms of their own self-growth and progress to achieve self-sufficiency.” For people to “be a better participant in their communities,” he found they needed to avoid convictions based on use or possession of controlled substances.
      • People who were “going through addiction need necessary support and the criminal justice system, in the current state...has not worked,” Blocker told lawmakers. Recovery by the justice system had occurred, he said, “but that is not the norm and that should not be the status quo.”
      • Blocker was the proponent of the City of Tacoma July 2020 resolution to reserve remaining cannabis retail licenses for “social equity applicants” and asking the state to grant the City additional retail licenses.
    • Ruth Dreifuss, Global Commission on Drug Policy (GCDP) Chair and Former President of the Swiss Federation (audio - 5m, video).
      • Dreifuss first praised the “quality of the proposed bill,” saying its description was “hoslistic of the problem that we are facing” as well as being “compassionate and evidence based regarding the solutions.”
      • While “some people are using illegal drugs for enjoyment” as was common with “legal psychoactive substances like alcohol or tobacco,” Dreifuss indicated that “others try to mitigate physical or mental pain in a kind of self medication” and that “most are able to control their consumption and stay well integrated in society and professional life.” She said that “a minority, estimated at around ten percent of illicit drug users, become dependent” and have a “high relapse risk.”
      • Dreifuss argued that the “free choice of those who control their consumption and don’t harm others should be respected” while governments focused “on a large spectrum of treatment” programs for “those who are ill with addiction.” Whether recovery was achieved with “abstinence” or “substitutions” of an abused substance, treatment helped “restore a life balance and end marginalization,” she stated.
      • She advised a “break with the predominant approach of criminalizing those who use and possess drugs” as it offered a “false hope” for people with SUD that the drug market itself “can be eliminated. This never, ever was successful” for Switzerland, Dreifuss remarked, and “moreover, such policies inevitably bring many negative consequences” like the U.S. incarceration rate, transmission of other diseases, and consequences of a criminal record which had targeted “the poor and the member[s] of marginalized communities.”
      • Dreifuss backed decriminalization policies for personal use at all levels of government and offered to speak to her country’s history changing their drug laws.
      • Dreifuss is also a member of the International Comission Against the Death Penalty (ICADP).
      • Learn more from the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA).
    • João Augusto Castel-Branco Goulão, Intervention on Addictive Behaviours and Dependencies (SICAD) General Directorate (audio - 7m, video).
      • Goulão mentioned the decriminalization of personal amounts of drugs in Portugal, which began in 1999 and “was the result of a multidisciplinary team...to address the dramatic situation we were living at the time” which was an epidemic of “heroin use” among one percent of the nation’s populace. He said the government team looking at the situation included law enforcement, judiciary, and public health officials.
      • The results were “a comprehensive document based in the principles of humanism, pragmatism, that addresses both the supply and demand areas, with proposals on prevention, treatment, harm reduction, and reintegration of people who use drugs,” he said. It was this strategy that had recommended drug decriminalization along with other changes, Goulão added. 
      • Goulão said the legal change around substance possession was relatively minor with the majority of the law “still in place”; the drugs were not legal, as Portugal continued to abide by international drug control conventions. However, possession itself did “not lead to criminal procedures or a trial,” he commented, comparing the government’s handling to how “our police authorities deal with traffic misdemeanors.”
      • Drug possession was handled administratively, Goulão explained, by “a committee under the Ministry of Health” empowered to levy “fines and other sanctions, but whose main goal is to identify the needs of...the citizen that we have in front of us.” If SUD applied, the person was offered treatment services, he testified, and “if he is not dependent, if someone playing with, with drugs...in a recreational way, even then, the commission tries to assess what kind of needs this person have” to offer other welfare or support services. The amount of a substance possessed in Portugal was evaluated based on a “ten day personal use. If you have more than that with you” then criminal sanctions could once more apply, Goulão said, including possible prison time. In all, Goulão said this system had the public “much more keen to approach the responses available” through the country’s “universal health system.”
      • Goodman asked about government officials’ experience after two decades of the policy and whether there’d been “reductions in addiction rates, reductions in death, reductions in transmissions of disease, reductions in youth initiation of these drugs?” Goulão answered that there’d been “clear improvements in all indicators available.”
    • Caitlin Hughes, Flinders University Associate Professor and International Society for the Study of Drug Policy (ISSDP) Vice President (audio - 5m, video).
      • Hughes told lawmakers that her field was criminology and drug policy research. She lauded the bill as “highly in line with the best practice evidence” she’d seen around “these types of reforms.”
      • Hughes acknowledged the wide array of governments looking at drug policy reforms supported by “a large and growing evidence base.” She pointed to a “review that I led recently for the Irish Department of Justice” which compared drug policies between Ireland “and a host of other nations.” The review showed “very clearly that decriminalization of drug possession can lead to significant public health, criminal justice system, social, and economic benefits,” Hughes commented, including “no evidence that decriminalization does lead to significant increases in drug use.”
      • In her experience, “how you reform” drug policies was important to “maximize your benefits.” She listed several structural change options:
        • Depenalization, “keep the criminal penalties on the books but police turn a blind eye”
        • Police diversion
        • Decriminalization with “no sanctions whatsoever”
        • Decriminalization with civil or administrative sanctions
        • Decriminalization with targeted diversion to health/social services
      • “What we have seen,” Hughes said, “when you look across these different types of approaches the form that is most efficacious is that where you decriminalize and you combine it with a...targeted health/social response” system. She viewed HB 1499 as fitting that approach well and supported policies dealing with “all illicit drugs, not just one.” The Washington bill was poised to be “highly aligned with best practice approaches to decriminalization” with the potential for “significant economic, health, and social benefits.”
      • Find out more about Hughes’ research expertise.
    • Persons signed in to testify in support but who didn’t get the opportunity to speak due to time constraints (14):
    • Persons signing in support of the bill (358):
  • Two speakers opposed the bill, favoring increased prevention, treatment, and recovery spending while maintaining the right to arrest those possessing controlled substances; eight signed in against the legislation; one speaker was neutral on the bill and three individuals signed up as “other.”
    • Sara Davenport-Smith, Family Policy Institute of Washington (FPIW) Lobbyist and SDS Municipal Consulting Founder (audio - 2m, video).
    • James McMahan, Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs (WASPC) Policy Director (audio - 2m, video).
      • McMahan explained he was opposed to the bill, though WASPC members “would actively support this bill” if it continued to criminalize personal possession because the group had long supported “better community investments and system improvements to assist those” with SUD. However law enforcement representatives felt the bill wouldn’t improve public safety, he commented, urging the legislature to “focus these efforts on what we should do to address the problem, rather than what we should stop doing.” McMahan said WASPC had been “at the forefront of efforts to assist those whose criminal behavior is driven by substance use disorder.”
      • “We acknowledge that the criminal justice system is not an appropriate or effective strategy to broadly address” SUD or be “the most accessible path toward treatment,” he said. However, McMahan stated that the justice system “has proven to be the only effective mechanism to intervene and treat many with substance use disorder, our collective efforts should be focused on additional community resources for intervention and treatment rather than eliminating one of the few mechanisms that has shown to be effective in some cases.”
      • McMahan shared his understanding that HB 1499 didn’t just decriminalize substance possession “it legalizes such possession and that legalization applies to all persons including children.” He observed that WASPC members had “first hand” experience with the problems of substance abuse, believing “drug use is not a victimless crime.” McMahan articulated a “community based” strategy similar to existing policy, feeling it had the ability to “make moot any concerns about criminal sanctions for those who possess narcotics.”
      • Representative Tara Simmons said she’d suffered “with serious substance use disorder in my past and I just remember that because it was illegal that actually stopped me from telling my doctor and getting treatment because I was afraid.” She asked McMahan whether criminalization should “halt or impede health-based intervention.” McMahan replied that it was “a legitimate issue that the legislature should address. I haven’t been aware of that particular concern.” He said WASPC supported health professionals and was ready to work with legislators “to further strengthen those community supports and enable more paths to treatment and recovery.” McMahan offered WASPC members’ view that inadequate recovery opportunities, rather than continuing criminalization, was “where we think our system is failing the most” (audio - 1m, video).
    • Juliana Roe, Washington State Association of Counties (WSAC) Policy Director (audio - 2m, video, testifying “other”).
      • Roe said “counties definitely support the concept of continuing to divert individuals away from the criminal justice system and into treatment and services, however we need to really make sure that there’s clear coordination around the proposed expanded services” and “sufficient funding” for communities to provide whatever was proposed.
      • For vacating past convictions, Roe indicated that “there is a huge backup in the court system right now due to COVID and other things.” She said “4,500 cases of this type alone...were filed” in 2020 so she expected a similar number of cases would be brought “per year” and “funnelled into the court system.”
      • Roe noted that “several work groups and committees” either already existed or were proposed under the bill, and she wanted to ensure that they were “coordinating on their efforts...going forward.” 
    • Persons signed in to testify against the bill or as other but who didn’t get the opportunity to speak due to time constraints (4):
    • Persons signing as ‘other’ (2) or opposing the bill (5):

Information Set