Senate Standing Committee on Rules

All right, ladies and gentlemen, it's June 18th. We are grateful that folks are here to be able to testify and support. And of course, to our appointees, we're especially appreciative that you are with us. Let's establish a quorum. Madam Secretary, can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

Quorum has been established. Senator Laird is currently in two committees at once. We apologize. He will be here. It's a busy time in the Legislature. He will be here to be able to vote. Senator Laird has a long standing commitment on behalf of UC President Drake and he will need to be able to leave at 3:30.

So we're going to work to get through our business. First of all, we're going to have Mr. Wyckoff. Mr. Wyckoff, you could please come forward to the table. We're grateful, sir, to see you. As Mr. Wyckoff makes his way forward, let's talk about run a show to our appointees who are here. Thank you.

We have some administrative items that we're going to need to be able to work through. We're going to work through those now and then we're going to come right to Mr. Wyckoff. So first and foremost, we have Governor appointees not required to appear. This is items 2D through F. Do we have any discussion or debate?

We have a motion by Madam Vice Chair. Last call for discussion or debate hearing Seeing none. Madam Secretary, can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

Laird, that's a 4-0 vote. We're going to put that item on call. We're now going to be moving forward to bill referrals. This is item number three on today's agenda. Discussion or debate. We'll also take a motion. We have a motion by Madam Vice Chair. Last call for discussion or debate from Committee hearing. Seeing none.

Item Secretary, can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

Laird, that's a 4-0 vote. We're going to put that item on call, ladies and gentlemen. Now moving on to items four through six. This is floor. Acknowledgments, discussion, debate. We'll take a motion. We have a motion by Madam Vice Chair. Discussion and debate. Final request hearing. Seeing none. Madam Secretary, can we please call the roll?

[Roll Call]

Laird, 4 to 0. 4-0. That item is going to be put on call. All right. We're now going to be coming forward with those appointees who are required to appear. Got to say, Mr. Wyckoff, you have had a diverse career, my goodness, in so many parts of state service.

And we're really grateful for your commitment to the State of California. And candidly, we need that stability now more than ever. And we are so appreciative of you stepping up in this really critical new role.

I'd like to go through a little bit of a running show about how we'll run this first panel, provide you for three minutes to be able to offer any opening comments, any individual or individuals you'd like to be able to acknowledge in those three minutes who are here in the room or watching live on the TV.

We invite you to do so. What we'll do is after you wrap up and I'll give you a 30 second warning when you get close to three minutes, we're going to open it up to the Vice Chair and to the Committee to be able to ask questions or comments.

After that, we're going to open it up for public testimony again. Mr. Wykoff, it's great to see you. The floor is yours. You have three minutes. Thank you, Senator. And thank you, Members of the Committee.

First, I'd like to thank the Governor, Governor Newsom, for the appointment and the honor and privilege of serving as the Executive officer for the border parole hearings. I'd also like to recognize some people here today, both in person and virtually. My wife, Diane Stanton is here. Some long time friends.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure why I'm choking up, but very emotional going through this. Emotional. This is quite an honor to appear before you and to go through the appointment process. And so I want to recognize my parents who are watching virtually in Oregon and Florida, and I believe my in laws may even be watching in Washington.

So great support. I've had it throughout my career. Lastly, I want to thank and acknowledge the commissioners and the people at BPH. Change in leadership, especially replacing someone who has been in this role for more than a decade, can create uncertainty and anxiety. If they had it, I never saw it.

They have welcomed me and supported me from day one. It's a testament to the professionalism of and the dedication that they show. Senator Mcguire, as you noted, I've been in public service a long time. I started my career in public service 30 years ago as a staffer in the Oregon Legislature.

I started in government and I've stayed in government because I wanted to feel like my work was making a difference in the lives of people.

Throughout my time in the Attorney General's Office, as a litigator, as a colleague to, you know, hundreds of state employees, and as a counselor to executives at the highest level of state government, I have always tried to be fair, transparent, and respectful. And I believe those are BPH's values.

They have fairness in your hearings, in making sure that victims, their families, incarcerated people, have the opportunity to be heard, and fairness in the way that they make their decisions, using a structured decision making framework that promotes consistency. We have transparency in how we make our decisions, that they are public, and that we report on them annually.

And finally, respect comes in many forms. I have deep respect for the victims and their families when they participate in our parole hearing process. I understand and recognize how traumatizing that can be for them. I have respect for incarcerated individuals who are going on a journey of rehabilitation.

And I have deep respect for the decisions that our hearing officers have to make in deciding whether to release someone and balancing that against public safety interests and the interests of our communities. We have about 30 seconds, sir. As the Executive officer of the Board of Parole Hearings, I can't think of a better job to have.

I get to promote good government, protect the public, and work for an agency that makes whose decisions make a difference in the lives of individuals every day. I couldn't ask for anything more as a public servant, and I am grateful for the opportunity to hold this position. Senators, I look forward to your questions.

Mr. Executive Officer, thank you. What I was going to say is I get the same way when I talk about the job that we are privileged to do each and every day. It is very emotional and it is because it's so personal.

And you dedicate your life to a mission and you want to be able to follow through. So very grateful. Now you're going to have me start tearing up, but very, very grateful. And we truly appreciate that passion for service. Let's open it up, sir, for questions and comments. And we're going to start with Madam Vice.

Thank you. Mr. Chair. Good morning or good afternoon. How are you, sir?

I apologize for the confusion this morning that we didn't get a chance to meet, but I appreciate the work you do and I appreciate how you balance the respect and decency for incarcerated individuals and also the victims and the families and people that are struggling with what happened in their life.

What's your overall philosophy regarding the purpose of incarceration and again, just go into detail how you balance, you know, the need of making sure that individuals that you oversee, I don't want to say make good decisions, but there has to be a balance in order to make sure.

You said it in your comments that if somebody has been truly rehabilitated, they should have an opportunity to get out and be a second chancer in life and be a productive Member of society. But how do you balance that, again, with the possibility of them re offending and hurting someone else?

And I know that you don't actually do that with the commissioners, but you actually do meet with them. So what's your philosophy on that?

Sure. You know, as to the first question, my philosophy on the role of incarceration, you know, it's one, it's sort of satisfying our society's needs to hold people accountable for their actions.

But I think we balance that against the recognition that individuals will be released and we want to provide them with the tools necessary so that they can reintegrate successfully when that happens.

You know, Senator, as to your question about sort of the working with the commissioners to strike that balance, I think we do that in a couple of ways.

And I think also I want to sort of talk about this in terms of sort of making sure that we are following our policies and procedures to make sure that our hearings are fair and that our commissioners are conducting them appropriately. We do that in a couple of ways.

First, I have taken the opportunity since I've been in this role to personally observe hearings by over half our commissioners. And I intend to do that ongoing. I think it's important for me, one, it helps me learn about the process. But two, I get to see firsthand how that happens.

I also have regular meetings with the district attorneys associations and we use that really as a forum to get feedback on how our hearings are going and if they have specific concerns. You know, we have a process internally of reviewing transcripts and we have what they call a transcript analysis program.

And what we do is attorneys, especially with newer commissioners, they will watch and observe and report on the hearings.

And they have a series of criteria that they go through, how the hearing is conducted, decorum, and they are evaluating the attorneys and giving, or excuse me, the commissioners and giving real time feedback on how they're doing to make sure that they are following our own policies.

And I guess the last thing that we do is we really, you know, our attorneys can't be everywhere and I can't be everywhere, but it's really getting feedback. And that's why I really think it's important to have an ongoing dialogue with stakeholders.

They're the ones who are appearing before the board, and they're the ones who can give us some real, real, meaningful feedback on how our commissioners are doing. And we.

When we get that type of feedback, if we ever get concerns, we go back and review transcripts, we investigate, and we will sit down and talk to commissioners about how they're doing, what they can do better, and help them understand why somebody may have heard something in a way that maybe wasn't intended or that it may have offended somebody if it did.

We want them to be aware of that as well.

Thank you. You have an sop, Standard Operating Procedure. Obviously, the commissioners are appointed by the Governor as well, so you're not really their Boss. So is there anything that you can do?

And the reason why I reference this is because in 2023, we had a Commissioner Weiss before us, and I was adamantly opposed to Commissioner Weiss, not because of any recidivism issues or any release information. It was the demeanor that he had in the courtroom against women and the way he spoke to women.

And we had several examples and a couple of videos, and it was very disturbing. That was held off for a week, I think, or two weeks. I looked to my colleague, because he was the only one here with me, I think.

But it was held off for a couple of weeks until he could, you know, address the issues that we had brought up.

So what would be the standard operating procedure if you did find something, if there was feedback that was extremely negative and like, particularly in this case from the victims groups and the district attorneys groups, what would be the process to address that?

So I think in that situation, Senator, you know, both the attorneys, who, as I mentioned, are part of that program, but also me personally observing and, you know, being able to go and if there are specifically concerns about, say, treatment of women, or I can go and watch hearings and, you know, just confirm that that's happening.

And I think there's also the opportunity. It's sort of a. Sort of a feedback loop. You know, being in constant contact with the district attorneys who have raised the concerns in the past to see if they're still seeing those concerns.

You know, as far as a standard operating procedure, you know, I think the process that we have right now, while I haven't had to go through it, I think it would work.

I Having that being able to provide the feedback to the Commissioner and really just sort of highlighting what our expectations are and what the expectations of the public are in the way that we conduct hearings is critical.

Thank you. Thank you, sir. I look forward to your confirmation.

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. Let's look to see if there's any additional discussion or debate, please. Senator Laird. And we had said that you were in two committees at once as you.

Were coming since 1:30. Yes.

So we welcome you to Committee.

So thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the fact that you took the time to meet with me and I thought it was really helpful.

I'm not totally sure what's been asked, but the one that I don't think is and let me ask is you're in the process of redesigning or altering the clemency process with regard to how your agency fits in. If you could comment on how that's going and what you expect from then.

Sure. So you know, the Governor has given the board direction to create a commutation and resentencing regulation process. The. These, the, the board has had the authority under statute to make recommendations to the court to resent or to make recommendations to the Governor to commute a sentence. But we don't have a process in place to do that.

So we are setting up a systematic process to evaluate candidates who we would consider recommending within that process.

What the Governor has asked us to do is to identify or create a do a risk assessment of people before they actually have a hearing, before a panel of hearing officers who would then make the decide to make a recommendation to the court or to the Governor.

Where we're at in that process right now, we are still finalizing the rulemaking process, but we do hope to have something on file with the Office of Administrative Law sometime later this summer.

Thank you very much. I really appreciate that. And then maybe the last question, I don't know. We talked also about how you do training for commissioners and how you work to get them up to speed because it's a volume and it's very specialized. So could you speak to the training for the commissioners?

Sure. I was very fortunate that when I started in this role in January, the training for April. So we have Board Meetings every month, and in April and October, we actually extend the Board Meetings by two days to have training for the commissioners.

By time I joined, we had already set the set the agenda for the for the training in April, and we're working on the training for October. Now we really look to feedback from the commissioners on areas that they're interested in receiving training on.

For example, the commissioners have told me that they're very interested in getting more training on assessing risk of sex offenders and understanding what types of issues they should be looking at how to question incarcerated people in a way to sort of flesh out the risk that they pose.

We are also looking at training for understanding people who may come to the board who have. It's not necessarily a cognitive impairment, but really just an inability to communicate clearly with the board so they have a harder time showing the board how they've changed since they were incarcerated.

So talking to people who have specialties in these areas, we look to not only state government officials. We've had the Department of State hospitals come and do training for us, but also outside, whether it's UCF or other groups who can come and do that to give maybe a perspective that's maybe outside the state.

So I don't know, Senator, if that answers your question about how we go about training.

It does. And I think it's such a complex thing and so many people's future on all sides of involvement in this rests in it, that it's just important that that happen at be effective and it be continuous when you look at the board Members being appointed. But I appreciate your response and.

And we talked about a lot more that satisfied me in the meeting. I appreciate your willingness to serve. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you so much, Senator Laird. Very grateful. We're going to go to Senator Caballero. Floor is yours, ma' am.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and welcome. Really appreciated your opening statement. And I think the reason it becomes real emotional is because your family comes with you when you take on a new job. And I appreciated your sensitivity to that. I have a couple of questions.

One of them is it's my understanding that there have been issues with. And let me just tell you that it's been many years, but I did lifer hearings back in the day because I thought it was important to have private counsel that's willing to show up, do the work required, and then to give legal advice.

So I'm really well aware of the challenges that the board Members have in having a hearing and being able to suss out some of the issues that you're talking about in regards to safety of the community and has there been change. One of the issues I'm concerned about is the.

It appears as if there is an inability to get enough certified translators. And I was wondering if you could talk about that because the difference. And I practiced in on a regular basis in court and certified translators are really critically important, especially when you're getting testimony from someone as to exactly what happened.

If you don't Have a good interpreter, then you're likely to get misinformation. And that becomes the subject of dispute. In, especially in a criminal case, it looks like somebody's lying. And so I'm wondering if you've got an idea of how often this happens and if there's a challenge in getting certified interpreters.

So, Senator, all of the hearings that we conduct, the incarcerated person, if they require an interpreter, they do have an interpreter. So we do have contracts with agencies to provide interpretive services.

And I would add that we also have interpretive services for victims and families who also need to have that are of part opportunity to have translation done so the commissioners can hear their statements as well. I do have, and I am looking into the, I guess, the quality of the interpretive services that we're getting.

I know that I have heard from our group that manages our panel attorneys. One of the concerns that they've raised is finding attorneys who speak Spanish, for example, to represent at the hearing and actually through the hearing process, because it's not just the hearing, right. It's preparing that person for hearing and to make sure that.

And try and identify people who speak that language. And what they have shared with me, and it makes common sense, is that you can have a better connection with someone who speaks your language than if you're working through a translator.

Now, I know that the board does not currently have enough panel attorneys to satisfy the demand for interpretive services for incarcerated people. And so we're going to look at ways to increase the numbers.

But certainly what we can do in the short term is identify and make sure that where somebody has a need for interpretive services and we have an attorney who can provide that, not as an interpreter, but to represent that person, that we do the assignment so that there is that opportunity, I think that provides a better representation at the hearing for that individual.

Well, I do agree with that. I found that I'm bilingual, and so I can communicate with a monolingual Spanish speaker. But if I didn't, if the interpreter was not a certified interpreter, I had concerns and questions about whether the interpretation was correct.

And the problem is, as an attorney is you don't want to be interrupting the interpreter and trying to talk to the trier. Factor that the Commissioner that's wrong, that use of the word is wrong, or that interpretation is wrong. So the more that the interpreters are certified becomes critically important.

So I just want to make that point because I've been in the situation before where the testimony of an individual was. The interpretation was subject to interpretation. If you will. And I don't feel like I'm qualified as a certified interpreter. And yet it was used against them in ways that I felt were unfair.

But because I didn't challenge it and I didn't have, I didn't make that decision that it could have affected the outcome of what we were doing. And so I emphasize the importance of having a certified interpreter as an issue. That's important to me. So I thank you for your answer.

And then the other issue that I'm concerned about, and really it's an equity issue, is that it appears as if drug screen results may have been used punitively in a parole setting.

And it appears, and it's not clear to me, maybe you can articulate a little bit better how they were used or what they were taken for is that tests were taken, they resulted in false positives, and that information may have been used in hearings.

And my concern is that it's really outside of the control of either the attorney or the incarcerated person. And when that happens, what's the protocol for fixing the situation or for not using those results in any way that could prejudice an individual?

Sure. So a couple things, Senator.

I guess the first is, you know, putting aside the issue that you've identified with the presumptive false positives for the opiates, you know, just as a General matter, there is a process that we have for decision review so that if somebody feels that they want to challenge the decision because of factual inaccuracy, they can do that.

But let me speak more specifically to the situation that you raised, which was these drug tests. In May, we started a systematic review of people who were in a program called the. It's Medication Assisted Assistance Program. Medication.

I was told not to speak in acronyms, so I won't call it the MAP program, but that's what we refer to it as, because people who were participating in this program due to a change in some agent that Quest Diagnostics used, they saw a spike in the number of positive tests suggesting that maybe there were false positives.

So what we have done, that program.

Is a rehabilitative program.

It is by. Through CDCR. So what we are doing is we have gone back and this spike started in May. Excuse me, March 29, 2024.

So for people who were involved in the MAP program and had either a parole denial, a denial of a petition to advance their hearing date, or a denial of their administrative view review, or a denial of their reconsideration hearing, we're going back and reviewing decisions and what we're trying to do is identify where the.

If the positive test result was a substantial factor in the decision to deny the parole or deny the petition, and where that is a factor, a substantial factor, we're going back and either providing new hearings or having a new hearing date for those individuals.

My understanding is that this was a temporary situation and that the positive rate now for people who are in the MAP program has gone back to what the sort of the historic levels have been.

And so in your review of the information, are you checking with the commissioners or how do you. How do you make the determination that it was a substantial. What are, what are the. I mean, it seems to me, having done these kind of hearings, anything that's a.

A 115 and again in acronyms, I can't remember what that 115 is. But a disciplinary issue that those weigh heavy because they indicate a reluctance to accept responsibility or to do follow the rules, that kind of thing. And pretty big to not follow the rule as it relates to opiate opioids.

Sure. So, you know, to the first part of your question, it's the attorneys who are doing the transcript review when we get to that stage, so they are going through that and looking to identify if there was an issue.

The other thing that we have done is really sort of train and talk to the commissioners about how to use these test results.

So, for example, if you are an incarcerated person and you've been in the MAP program and you've had clean tests throughout the time you have a positive test, then you have clean tests after, you know, you could ask the incarcerated person questions, but it's really asking them to use their discretion in terms of how to weigh that factor.

Right. As one of many in deciding whether someone is suitable. So I think the two pieces have been helpful. One, in training the commissioners and making them aware of the situation.

So they know to ask if they see that there was a positive test sometime between, you know, March 29, 2024 and May 2024, which is sort of the timeframe where we're talking about training them to go back and ask and look further into the record to see if this was an anomaly or if this was a situation of a possible relapse.

And they have certainly received training through people at the California Correctional Healthcare System just about recognizing that MAT is part of sort of rehabilitation. Right. It's not necessarily. And a relapse is just part of the journey. It's not necessarily that, you know, again, that the positive test may be nothing more than just A brief relapse.

Okay, I appreciate that. I guess I was also concerned about individuals that may have been denied, given a test for, test positive, where they were. What they'll say is, I didn't, I didn't take any opioids. And everybody goes, yeah, right. You know, you're, you're here, you're going through the program. We don't believe you.

And I want to make sure again, in equity that those individuals that may, that, that believe that they may have, that that information may have been a factor in denial, either on a short term basis or a longer term basis, that they have an opportunity to do something that says, can you take a look at my, at my file again?

Even if it's administratively? I just think equity demands it. There's no choice in those programs as to whether you take the test or not. It's just part of the program. And I respect that. It's important. But when things are, I think that we want people to feel that the system's fair.

I guess that's the best way to put it. So thank you for your answers. I appreciate that. And I also appreciate you started in January, so a lot of this predates you being in charge. And I do appreciate you answering it. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Senator Caballero. Leader Jones.

Thank you. President Pro Tem. Just wanted to say thanks for coming in last week. Appreciate the meeting that we were able to have as we've been doing our background on vetting you.

We've gotten very good positive comments from the stakeholders that are interested in this position and appreciate your professionalism and obviously everything that's going on here today as well.

And then also just want to say that I appreciate the discussion that we were able to have about coming up with a plan to reinstitute photos in the parole hearing process. We'll keep working on that and hopefully come up with something that everybody can support and make sense.

And so I'll be looking forward to supporting your confirmation today. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Leader Jones, what we're going to do now is we're going to open it up for public comment. We welcome you to be able to come forward to the microphone.

A couple things we're going to ask folks respectfully, better give us your first and last name, the organization you're with, and each individual will be given 30 seconds for public comment. If you could please step forward. We're looking for those in support. If those who would like to be able to speak in support can come forward now.

Margaret, what's going on. Nice to see you.

See you. Mr. Chair and Members, Margaret Gladstein. I'm here as my own person, not here on behalf of a client. I hope that doesn't harm Mr. Wyckoff's chances of approval today. I've had the good fortune of knowing Mr. Wyckoff since before either of us were Californians. So we go back a long way.

I actually knew his wife before he knew his wife. So we do go back a long way. I have always known him to be a man of the highest level of integrity and ethics and empathy. So I couldn't support him more for this position or any other position in state government in California.

Margaret, thank you so much. Welcome. Nice to see you.

Danica Rodarmel of Hull Consulting. Also speaking in my personal capacity, not on behalf of any client, but do work alongside a lot of criminal justice reform organizations in the state. Proud to support the confirmation of Mr. Wyckoff. I've found him to be incredibly open, kind and very generous with his time.

So look forward to working alongside him for years to come and particularly on the really tough issues. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Appreciate your words today. We're going to see if anyone else would like to better come forward. We're taking those who may be in support. If you could please come forward to the microphone hearing. Seeing no one rise, we're now going to look for those who may be in opposition.

If you could please state your first and last name organization, you have 30 seconds. If you could please come forward now. Seeing no one rise, we're now going to bring it back to Committee to see if there is any additional comments from Committee. We'll also welcome a motion.

I'd like to move the Comfrey to the fulcinate floor for a vote.

Sir, we have a motion by Madam Vice Chair. Last call for discussion or debate from Committee. Last call hearing C9. Madam Secretary, can you please call the roll?

Mcguire I. Mcguire I. Grove. Grove I. Caballero A. Caballero A. Jones I. Jones I. Laird. Laird I. 5 to 0.

It's a 50 vote. We're going to close the roll. That is the final vote. Next stop is the Senate 4. If we could please give a round of applause. Mr. Weinstein, thank you so much. Very grateful. What we're going to do is we're going to call Ms. Jones and Mr. Phillips if they could please come forward.

We're going to take a 30 second break as they come forward. When we come back, we're going to add Senator Laird onto our administrative items then we're going to go to our next panel. Be right back with you.

All right, before we go to Madam Director and Mr. Associate Director, we're going to open up the roll on a few items. Thank you for your patience. To each of you, we're going to first start with Governor appointees not required to appear. The current vote is 4-0. If we could please call the absent Members.

Laird? Laird, aye.

5-0 vote. Final vote. We're closing the roll. Thank you so much. We're now going to be moving on to Bill referrals. Current vote is 4-0. Can we please call the absent Members?

Laird? Laird, aye.

5-0 vote. Final vote. We're closing the roll. We're now moving on to floor acknowledgments. Current vote is 4-0. Can we please call the absent Members.

Laird? Laird. Aye.

5-0 vote. Closing the vote. And that vote is final. Thank you so much. We do appreciate it. We're now going to be moving on to our second and final public panel for the day. I want to say thank you. Madam Director. Mr. Associate Director, it's wonderful to see you.

Thank you so much, each of you for being here today. Let's talk about the run of show for the panel. First and foremost, we're going to give each of you three minutes to be able to present. I'll give you a 30 second heads up as you get close to that three minutes.

Then we're going to open it up to to the Committee to be able to ask questions, share any concerns and have a conversation. We'll then open it up for public comment. I want to take a moment to say thank you, both of you, for your work.

Again, I think some of the toughest jobs in state service and we appreciate your work on behalf of the people of California. Madam Director, we're going to start with you, then we're going to go to the Associate Director. The floor is yours. You have three minutes. Ms. Jones, welcome.

Thank you. Senator Mcguire. Good afternoon. Committee Members. Thank you for the opportunity to speak before you today. 28 years ago, if you would have told me I'd be sitting here before you, I would have never believed it.

And it's truly an honor and a blessing to be here representing the Director for the Department of Corrections Division of Adult Institutions. There are so many family Members and friends and staff that I'd like to acknowledge, but I can't acknowledge them all. So they're listening and I appreciate them all and they're here supporting me as well.

I'd first like to thank my parents. Boy like Scott, I might get a little Choked up. So I apologize. They have stood by my side through all of my crazy endeavors, dreams and challenges. I appreciate them and all the sacrifices they have made in order for me to be who I am today.

They have given me the foundation on how to be a good person, a hard working and committed, dedicated and loving mother, daughter, wife and friend. And I'm so thankful for them and I. I love them. The other individual I want to show my appreciation to is my husband, Kendall.

The last 18 years have been an incredible journey and I'm so incredibly fortunate that he understands the Department. He retired from the Department with nearly 30 years of experience as a correctional officer. When this man said he would love me through thick and thin, through good times and bad, through sickness and in health,

He has truly demonstrated that and continues to show me his unconditional love and commitment to our marriage. He has supported me through promotions, battling breast cancer, long hours, crazy DIY projects and ideas, anything that I wanted to do or explore. He never questioned me or second guessed me.

He tells me every day how much he loves me and how much he believes in me. He is my rock and I'm honored to be able to stand through with him throughout our life. The other beautiful individual that I want to show my appreciation to is my daughter, Jordan.

22 years ago was the happiest time of my life, but one of the scariest times because I was now responsible for a human being. I was responsible for making sure that she was raised with good morals and values. To be a good person, to know right from wrong, to be honest,

To be loving, to be true to herself, but most importantly, to love God. She not only exemplifies that, but she makes me want to be a better person. And for that I'm so proud of her. And again, thank you to all the staff that I've worked with over the years. They have supported me as well.

My success is because of them. We have achieved this together. The other individual I'd like to thank is Governor Newsom for placing his trust in me to lead this division. And to all the volunteers, the various community groups, our incarcerated family advisory committees and our incarcerated population, thank you for supporting and believing in me.

And in closing, I am deeply committed to the mission of CDCR. Ensuring to provide a safe environment for all while giving opportunities for rehabilitation and self growth. Thank you. And I look forward to your questions.

Thank you so much, Madam Director. Very grateful. And Jordan must be so proud. Thank you. Mr. Phillips, the floor is yours. You have three minutes. I'll give you a 30 second prompt. Thank you.

That's gonna be tough to follow, but here I go. Good afternoon, Chair and esteemed Committee Members. My name's Bryan Phillips and I'm the Associate Director for Region 3 for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. I'm honored and humbled to be sitting here in front of you today seeking your confirmation.

I would like to thank Governor Newsom for his appointing me to this position and his staff for having the confidence in me to carry out the responsibilities associated with it.

I would also like to thank Secretary Jeff McCumber and his executive leadership team for their continued support, as well as my past mentors and current team members and all the staff from my past who treated me well and not so well.

I have learned from all of them and I would not be here if it weren't for them today. Most importantly to me and my family, who is on the line watching and listening. My supportive wife, Shelly, and my two daughters, Lauren and Abbey. Most importantly. Okay.

When I came in the Department over 28 and a half years ago, I never imagined I'd be sitting here today as an Associate Director, I think important.

It's very important for me to mention my journey before I came into CDCR. I worked in the oil fields on production workover rigs and drilling rigs for nine and a half years. This was extremely hard work with no benefits, little pay, out in the heat, cold rain, working in elevated positions, 65ft in the air. I had a lot of physical injuries from the dangerous job.

Fast forward to my current position. I'm very appreciative of this career. I have. Let's see where I was at. And I have dedicated myself to doing the best job I can every day.

I always tell everyone who will listen to me, the sky's the limit on all the opportunities this department has to offer and it's up to you to reach and exceed your limits. My goal is for staff and incarcerated persons to be safe and to get a positive experience out of their journeys as employees and incarcerated people.

I'm committed to this role and I want to see positive changes throughout this department. I'm excited and look forward to being able to answer your questions posed to me today. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Very grateful. Mr. Phillips, what we're going to do for both of you, we're going to open up questions, comments and conversation from the Committee, and each Committee Member will direct their specific questions to. And we'll name you by name and how it's directed. We're Going to start with Madam Vice Chair.

Madam Vice Chair, let's kick off.

Thank you, Mr. President. I do have questions for a couple of you, for- a couple questions for both of you. And you can both take a minute to just briefly answer this question. You know, the Governor is proposing to close the fifth prison in the State of California since taking office.

How do you address the impact of those closures? Whether it's staff, keeping incarcerated individuals safe, the outside community and the impact on the outside community? Sometimes these prisons are the only employer in that area. What do you do to transition staff to different areas?

And obviously when you close down the prison, you have to move the incarcerated folks as well. So how do you maintain that and make that work?

Thank you, Senator Grove. First of all, there is no right answer to this. It's extremely difficult, the lives that are impacted. It's not just the staff, it's not just the incarcerated population. It's our volunteers, everyone involved in the institution. There are a lot of things that we consider most importantly the needs of the population. They differ.

And so we have to take a look at that. We have to look at our staffing levels, our staff and, you know, the infrastructure of the institutions.

When that news, when the news broke that we were going to be closing a fifth institution, I was very unsure in the fact that, oh my goodness, how do I go in and explain this to our staff? But I explain it to the population.

I owe that to the staff and I owe it to the population as well. I'm very invested in the rehabilitation programs for our staff for, excuse me, the incarcerated population and the well being of our staff. And that's a huge uplift.

Some of these individuals have worked at the institutions for 20-30 years and they're going to have to face, is there a nearby institution? Where will I go? Am I going to be without a job? So our goal is to make sure we find positions for the staff.

We don't want anyone to, I don't want to say be laid off, but we don't want anyone not to have a job. So we look for placements for the staff. We work with them, we bring in peer support, we bring in the EAP. They said no acronyms, but it's, I'm losing that right now. But that's okay.

Thank you. Thanks, Brian. So, you know, there is that piece as well. And although a decision hasn't been made, we will wait for a decision to be made and then we will go out and we will communicate with our staff. First and foremost, we'll have conversations. Thank you.

Associate Director Phillips, do you have that? And would you like to comment on just one additional thing to either of you?

Is there participation within CDCR, whether it's, you know, Secretary McCumber, whether it's you, Madam Director, is it, is there participation on the impacts with the Administration when these things happen or are you just caught off guard as much as we are?

You want me to take.

I don't think I can answer.

The pressure's on me. Okay, so there are, you know, we look at all the institutions and knowing that each, each of you have institutions in your districts and being mindful of the impacts again. And so we're evaluating everything. And is it my recommendation? Absolutely not. We're, you know, evaluating everything, so.

Thank you.

Thank you. Did you have anything you would like to add sir?

I really don't. I would just be speculating.

I have a specific Bakersfield question for you later.

Okay. On March 8, CDCR revoked phone visiting privileges on incarcerated individuals, 11 high security institutions statewide and employees and imposed movement restrictions as well. Then on June 12th of level three men's prisons and level fours were placed on a modified program in response to troubling rise of violence targeting both staff and other incarcerated individuals.

Okay.

Along with increases of overdoses, contraband discoveries. And then on June 16, local news also covered additional Salinas Valley State Prison who has experienced a hunger strike. Can you help us understand the underlying challenges and what's contributing to these increases in violence, drug activity, contraband and CDCR at CDCR institutions?

So that's a great question. And I know it's the visitors. The public is really concerned about us locking down the prisons. But what has to happen is we have to go through and search and we have to make sure that the staff and incarcerated people are safe.

And if we don't have these program statuses, then we can't take the time to go through and do thorough searches to remove the weapons, the dangerous contraband. The- the violence has been out of, it's just been out of control lately. And with the murders of incarcerated people and we have to do something.

And as a result of these searches, we're coming up with a lot of contraband that's out there. And we're also getting the incarcerated people down to 6 cubic feet and removing window coverings. And so staff and incarcerated people will be safe. And so staff can see inside those cells as they walk by or if they're in dorms.

It also helps the for the Prison Rape Elimination Act. It's security, it's safety because our number one concern is safety for our staff and the incarcerated. If we don't act and do these things. You talk about the narcotics in the prisons, these overdoses. Spice is a huge one. It's undetected.

The dogs can't pick it up, it's not traceable. And there's so many strains out there, it's incredibly difficult to stop. And when incarcerated people are on this spice, they're just out of control. Later on we'll show them a video of themselves and they're like, I can't even believe that's me.

And for instance, one of the incarcerated persons was trying to jump off the second tier and. And the other incarcerated people stopped, helped stop. The staff control him. They worked together and got him in restraint. So it's very serious. And a lot of the drugs come in through visiting.

And we have to put a stop to it some way, somehow. And by giving a cleanse to the institutions, getting those weapons out, checking windows, doing all of our safety and security precautions, it's necessary for this to happen.

So I understand. I mean, obviously prison is an inherently dangerous place, right? I don't know if that's the proper word to use. But what's causing the escalation? Because this isn't, this just happened last month, it's not- what's causing the escalation?

So there's- this has been escalating for more than just a month. It's been over time and a couple years back when all the Security Housing unit inmates were released into General population, they're the leaders of the Mexican Mafia, the Black Guerrilla Family, they're the Nazi Lowriders, the Aryan Brotherhoods, they're all out in the population now.

And so they run the prisons, they run their security threat groups, and it's very hard to catch them because they have so many soldiers that do their work for them. And this has been going on for quite some time now.

What's the- Was that a piece of legislation that came out of this building that allowed that to happen? Was it a regulatory? How'd that happen?

So that was the.

How do you put the most dangerous of dangerous in a regular population where you have a guy or whoever just serving their four year, five year sentence, whatever it is, to go back home and not be able to keep them safe? Like they, you have to be able to keep people safe in the incarcerated city.

Correct.

So what happened?

There was a lawsuit that the incarcerated people won. And so that's why we were required to release them back into general population because they had indeterminate SHU terms. They were in the security housing units for years and years and years with no end. And so the incarcerated won the lawsuit and that's what caused it.

So, okay, I get that that there was a lawsuit and that they won, but you still have an obligation to keep people safe. And I know it probably makes your job a lot harder and especially the staff's job harder. And I don't think there's any incarcerated people that don't want to be safe when they're serving their time.

What's the solution?

Can I step in?

Yeah,

Sorry, go ahead. Ma' am, No, absolutely. To both of you.

So first March, we went on a modified program. And when we- Before going on a modified program, we take everything into consideration. Right. The last thing I want to do is restrict our rehabilitative programs for the incarcerated population to include phone calls, visits. Right.

Having family connectivity or being connected with your loved ones is critical and is important. It's part of the rehabilitative efforts. But my number one goal, our number one goal as an agency is the safety and security of our staff and the incarcerated person and anyone coming inside of the institutions. That is number one.

And we saw an influx in violence, whether it's these horrific murders that we're experiencing, the batteries on staff, the attempted murders on our staff. And we did, we had to hit pause on that. We can't afford another death. We can't. We just had a pretty horrific homicide at High Desert State Prison.

And it was probably the most horrific murder that I've seen in my short 28 years and almost 28 years in the department. So we had to do something. The incarcerated population are- we have to recognize that they experience trauma and it's not normal to see this that impacts their rehabilitation.

It's not normal for our staff, although it is normal. It's not normal to see that on a day to day basis. The violence that the staff are experiencing and the impact of the violence it has on our staff is it creates stressors. And when our staff are stressed, they don't come to work.

And when they don't come to work, we have significant impact on our vacancies, which is an influx in the programs, not consistent programming. I'm a creature of habit. I'm very consistent on what I do. Our population likes consistency.

They want to know that programs are going to run and when their programs aren't run because we have staff shortages, because our staff are out, whether it's work, workers comp related, it's sick. That's an impact. We can't run programs. That's an impact to them. It's an impact to everyone.

So with those modified programs, both in March and now, like I said, we had to hit pause. It's important. We have to get Back to Corrections 101. Staff safety and the safety of our incarceration of our incarcerated population are number one. And so that's really why, you know, we are where we're at.

And I'm not proud to say this is what we have to do, but I also have to be able to look at the families of our staff and the incarcerated population, know that I'm providing a safe environment for them. So this is what we're doing to make the environment safer.

I appreciate that very much. Obviously, I think I would speak for the dais. The main concern that we have is to make sure that there is consistency and safety for the incarcerated personnel and the staff in the prison. That's- That's, I would think, our number one priorities as well. I have some concerns about women's prisons.

I know there's major challenges that the Department is facing regarding women's prisons, specifically Chowchilla, where is just north of my district. And I know there's huge concerns about addressing those challenges. What are you doing to ensure that women are safe in prison?

We, I ran a human trafficking Bill a few years ago, and it made me this, like this statewide women rescue person or something.

And then I started getting letters from individuals from Chowchilla, letters with condoms mailed to me, letters of stuff that was going on with not only the staff, but with other incarcerated individuals. And some of these women, and I just had one get out in April, come and talk to me, and she was served 22 years there.

They're terrified. Like, it's a terrifying situation when they talk about some of the things that happen. They're shaking, visibly shaking. It's not fake. They're shaking. Trying to describe this. They've got tears streaming down their face trying to describe what happened to them. What's the solution to make sure that.

I mean, all incarcerated people deserve to serve their time in prison safely. But what's, what's the solution? And no offense against the men thing, I'm not focusing on men right now, I'm focusing on women's prisons. Men deserve to be safe, too. But how do we make sure that incarcerated women are safe?

Because they are a vulnerable population that we have in this state, especially with things that are going on in these women prisons? And I'll start with.

With you, Mr. Phillips.

So, we.

Director Phillips, sorry.

It's okay. In the—specifically at that prison, it's not in my region, so I'm not over them.

But however, we do have AVSS and Body Worn Camera—Audio Visual Surveillance System and Body Worn Cameras—in those prisons which help protect staff and the incarcerated. With those AVSS systems, they're always running, and they capture those day room areas, those areas that are hidden.

And so, a lot of times, it deters bad behavior because we can always rewind and go back and find out what's going on and what happened. And so, that's one of the positives to the AVSS and Body Worn Camera in that specific institution. And as far as the rest of it, I really can't speak on it.

I know there's extra training going on there, but otherwise, it's not my, it's not in my wheelhouse.

Thank you, Senator Grove. You know, the, the priority is the safety of the women and making sure they feel they have a safe place to report staff misconduct.

Or inmate misconduct.

Yes, or inmate misconduct. Yes. Incarcerated person. Yes, you are absolutely correct. And there has been a lot of negative attention, unfortunately, on the women's prisons. And you know, just coming into the seat at the end of December, one of the first institutions that I toured was the women's facility.

And I had an opportunity to talk to some of the women and the staff as well. And that was the women's concern is they don't feel safe. They don't feel they have the ability to report, confidentially, what's going on. They fear retaliation.

And so, one of my commitments is making it safe for them, making sure they have an avenue where they feel that they can report it confidentially and not feel that they will be retaliated against. It's not easy. And I'm not saying it's been easy these last several months. It's very challenging.

But, you know, we have a number of avenues for the women that report violence against them, whether it's with an incarcerated person or a staff member.

And we really want to advocate for them and using that so they feel safe, whether it's through the Office of Inspector General, where they can report anonymously and confidentially, whether it's through Office of Internal Affairs, the Rape Crisis Center, the Ombudsman's office.

Well, there was a series of rapes. Not to interrupt you, but there was a series of rapes. There were babies produced. They moved actually one pregnant inmate down to Los Angeles area, I believe. I may have the city wrong, but I thought it was down south.

And the solution, which just you can't call it a solution, was to provide the female inmates with condoms and teach them how to carry them to the day center. That's completely unacceptable and should not even have passed anybody's muster test, I guess you would call it.

You don't provide people who are terrified in an 8 by 8 cell, or whatever it is, that are being raped with a condom and show them how to use it. You address the issue that's happening on the attacks of women.

So, I know you just got there, but know that until November of 2026, I will be following that issue extraordinarily close.

And I actually look forward to working with you so we can make the women's prison safer. Thank you. That is my commitment to you.

Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you so much. Please. Senator Jones, thank you.

Looking at your resumes, both your resumes, I just want to say thank you for your long and consistent service to our state. It's very impressive when somebody starts at the very entry level of an institution or organization and then works their way up. It's impressive, especially in this profession and in these institutions. So, thank you.

I do have maybe a little bit of a tough question, following up on Senator Groves comments, specifically Senator Alvarado-Gil, and you may be familiar with this, has expressed some concerns over two females that were murdered recently during conjugal visits with their inmate partners at Mill Creek State Prison, which is in her district.

She was asking if the Department has identified where the breakdown was in that safety protocol process approving those two men for the visits and what policy changes have come out of that situation that are going to help fix this problem moving forward.

I'll leave it up to either or both, whoever thinks that they should—however you want to address that question, but I would like to get some comments on the record on that particular issue.

Thank you, Senator Jones. I'll start. It is very tragic that the death of the two women, the two women that were in our prisons visiting their loved one, and it's not acceptable, and I don't accept that.

There was a Senate Bill, and offhand, I can't recall exactly where it approved, that incarcerated persons serving life, a life sentence or life without parole, would have access to family visiting. There is a criteria, and I believe in my follow up questions, we provided what that criteria is. And offhand, I can't speak to all of that.

But these two individuals, they met that criteria for an approved family visit. And it, you know, we did, I apologize, we, you know, we did do a review of the file of the staff, the casework, and we did not see any policy violations on the staff. We did a thorough review.

It was approved by the hiring authority as well.

So, in that, unfortunately, and I'm not trying to mitigate the death of anyone that—I'm not trying to mitigate—but there are, you know, the penal codes that we have to adhere to, and when an incarcerated person presents that they would like to be eligible or to be reviewed for a family visit, we will take a look at and do a file review.

And that's what we do. If there are rules violations, reports that would exclude them or preclude them, those are taken into consideration as well.

Do you think that there's, in this particular case, for lack of a better line of questioning, something nefarious going on with the incarcerated persons that—I mean, this seems not like one would be coincidental and odd, but to have two within a short period of time to me would indicate that there's something going on.

It would appear that way. One is too many. Two is unacceptable. We're working with the District Attorney's Office and they're under an investigation. But I, as far as knowing the why behind it, other than we're going to blame the individual and we're going to hold them accountable.

Okay, the—and this, and this is more out of curiosity than anything when, when something like this happens, I mean, the evidence is pretty overwhelming on what happened, right? I guess that would be a question. Is the evidence fairly overwhelming to prove guilt in this type of situation?

I don't want to—I don't want to answer that without having reviewed the.

Let me ask you a different way. If these two people are convicted of these crimes, what is—they're already in prison, they're already in prison for life or life without parole—what additional consequences do they face of committing this kind of crime in prison?

So, when we suspect or have evidence, or there's a pending investigation for murder inside the prisons, the first thing we did is we removed those individuals from what we call, I'll say, the General Population, and we place them in restricted housing for a period of time.

And that is how we administratively correct or address the, the, the misconduct. Now, what happens in a court of law, that is up to the courts to find him or her guilty, so.

And they go through another sentencing process and they're?

They would, yes.

Is this additionally?

They could be. They could be, but that would also be—excuse me, I didn't mean to interrupt—they would also be excluded from ever having a family visiting again, too. I want to make that very clear.

Appreciate that. No second chance on that. The, you know, this is just kind of, again, off the top of my head. This wasn't in my notes to think about, but. And you can get back to me on this as well.

Are there—you know, these are some pretty extreme human situations that both, well, all of us are concerned about, I'm sure, but that Senator Grove and myself specifically are bringing up to these, to these specific cases, again, and if you need to, this isn't dependent upon my support of you or not.

Do you have an opinion on, you know, what can this Legislature do better or differently to support you and help maybe prevent these kind of things from happening?

Wow. That's a good question. I'd like to get back to you.

I would—I would love you to get back to me. And I'm going to close where I opened. Again, thank you for your service to our state. I appreciate it. You have a hard job and I'm looking forward to supporting you.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, leader Jones. We're going to turn it over to Senator Caballero, Senator Laird.

Thank you very much, Senator Laird. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Appreciate the difference. I don't know why, but let me just—thank you very much.

I want to second what my colleague said about your careers and how much I appreciate the longevity and the consistency of doing a job that's really very tough, as you can see by the questions and some of the issues that have been raised. Let me just say that—well, I noticed you were color coordinated, and so I was wondering if that was part of working.

Absolutely.

Absolutely. There's a story behind it, if you'd like to hear the story.

Absolutely.

So, every Wednesday we wear pink. And there's a—you know, there's a lot of stories to it, but it started for me at SADF, at the prison I was at, and we started doing that, but when it came into headquarters, we also continued it. And, you know, part of it is cancer awareness.

And also, it's just a team collaboration. We try to coordinate when we go out in public and do things, I think it shows leadership, and I think it shows teamwork. And what is your saying? I'll let you say it, Boss.

One team, one mission.

That's.

Great. One team, one mission.

I appreciate it. And by happenstance, I wore pink today, too, so.

Yeah, we noticed that.

See. Way to be on board, Senator.

Senator Caballero's letting me, and I just wanted to recognize, I'm also a cancer survivor. So, thank you for fighting through that and sticking with us. Appreciate it.

Thank you.

So, I just want to say that there are some changes and I've seen changes over time that I really appreciate. And had an opportunity to visit the men's facility. I always get them mixed up, the names, because they're very similar.

But the prison in Chowchilla, I think it's Valley Prison and was very impressed with the California model and what they're doing there. And I want to make sure to say that because there's a different feeling as you're walking around the facility. And I get it. You know, it's always when we're taken in, there's—you can clean up stuff, and then it looks better.

But I had an opportunity to speak with the officers that were on duty that day, as well as the incarcerated individuals. I have to learn that terminology. And there's—I was impressed because there was a different attitude.

It was much more relaxed and much more of a camaraderie between the people that were interacting. And so, I was really impressed. I wanted to make sure to say that. And in addition, I, I share some of the issues that were raised by Senator Grove.

And I was glad to hear that you're attempting to set up—and speaking of Chowchilla Women's Facility—a process where they can report instances or incidents and do so without fear of retaliation and their—the—system has to include outside individuals and assistants, whether that's attorneys or nonprofits that are—that can be independent monitors, lack of a better word.

I don't mean monitors, but advocates, to make sure that the situation is taken care of. I want everybody to be safe. I don't have any questions.

I think you both have done an excellent job here and appreciate your service to the state of California and your service to people who have to change their behavior in order to be able to be released. And we want them released. We want them to come out as strong individuals.

And I think that the programs are going to allow them to do that. So, I appreciate what you're doing.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you so much, Senator Caballero. Senator Laird, good afternoon.

Thank you very much. And somebody finally beat me to the question of your colors. When Senator Grove comes back, she was commenting on it, she'll want to know. Two of the things I wanted to ask about Senator Grove really went into, but let me follow up briefly on each.

And on the issue of—I know there was an investigation opened on, on just civil rights and the allegations of sexual harassment and sexual assault last year. The one thing I didn't hear, and maybe I missed it is, is the starting of the implementation of body cameras in women's facilities starting to affect that?

Are you feeling that there are results from that or has that not fully been done yet?

So, what I can tell—excuse me, got a little loud there, everybody can hear me on TV—so, what I can tell you is the body worn cameras are accountability for the staff actions and also the actions of the incarcerated population.

And, as far as are they assisting, I would like to tell you, yes, they are, but I don't have that evidence to be able to provide you right now, but I'd be happy to get back to you and, and give you some more concrete information.

That would be great. Do you think it's in part because it's relatively new, it has not been compiled as information? And I assume there's still places that you're implementing it, because in reading the background, it sounded like it had only been partially done in some institutions.

So, currently we have 10 institutions that have body worn cameras. Six of them were under the court mandate under the Armstrong Lawsuit. And then there was four additional institutions that we included the body worn cameras for transparency purposes and for accountability purposes as well.

So, there is no plans on implementing body worn cameras at any additional institutions that I'm aware of right now. But it doesn't say it won't happen in the future.

It's just like that would be significant in regard to the sexual assault.

Yes

That's.

Yes.

So, is it—I think in the information that comes back that would be really helpful to know, is, is where some of those allegations are made if they're not the 10 institutions in a way that maybe we should be thinking about, about where it's done in a different.

If I can just speak, Senator Laird, the body worn cameras do assist us in allegations or in incidents happening between the incarcerated population. So, they do help substantiate allegations and to not sustain those allegations that aren't true at all. So, they are helping us, but we'll look at getting the information for you.

Thank you very much. And I noted you said that you thought you were being really loud because of people walking on—watching on TV. And when I visited the Men's Colony in San Luis Obispo a couple of years ago on a Friday, we'd had a hearing like this on a Wednesday.

And I was stunned to find out everybody there had been watching it.

Oh, they're all watching it now.

Oh, they are. I should say hi to everyone.

And get back to work.

Yeah.

Yes. And I, I was there this weekend and, and I should have been smarter than to do 10 events on a weekend that's Cal Poly Graduation. Yes, I will plan that better in the future.

The other thing I wanted to follow up with, with regard to Senator Grove is, is the way the question was asked on the closure of facilities was, you've been given a fifth, and how do you respond? And it seems to me to back up from that.

As the population appears, over time, to drop, how are the decisions made about it? And there was a backstory to her question, and that is, I think, Susanville, it was announced it was going to be closed the day before we had a confirmation hearing of a prison official, and it dominated our whole hearing.

And, you know, some of us talked to the Administration that said better coordination in the future. So, because the people in your chairs had a rough day. How do you make the decision? Because I don't think it's going to be the last. And obviously in San Luis Obispo, one wing has been closed and others.

It's a question I get all over the place is, what's next? How's it going to—how will it be decided, other than what process do you put it through when you realize the population has dropped and you might have to collect?

Facilities.

So I think to answer the first piece of that, when our, you know, our population has declined significantly. And what we've done over the course of the last couple years is we've closed facilities down rather than entire institutions. So that way we can keep our staff at, you know, at their location.

And the incarcerated population, we would consolidate them. When it comes to making the decision on which institution is going to be closed, really the guidance is with that penal code and how it impacts the staff, the incarcerated population, the community, the infrastructure. And I know I'm probably dancing around your question a little bit if I'm not understanding.

Well, I think that it's trying to figure out how you get to those decisions. But we had a hearing, and it was right around the time that the flood waters were nearing the Corcoran facility. And it might have even, I can't remember which confirmation hearing, but the question was is, geez, how long would it take from the minute you did an evacuation order to get people out. And it was stunning how long it was because it was weeks.

And then, you know, the explanation was, well, we have a certain number of incarcerated people that are disabled or in wheelchairs. There's only certain places that will take them and there's certain ways that you have to move them out and then certain that might have some other dual diagnosis and this is how you do it.

There are certain that might be lesser security, they could go there. And so when you were faced with the enormity of that, all those situations transfer directly to the closure of a facility and trying to figure out how to move and accommodate the people in that facility.

It's not just as easy as Legos and one goes down and people go. And so it has always intrigued me what the decision making process is because it could be the two much smaller facilities that have less impacted incarcerated people are easier to close than one bigger one that has that level of diversity.

And so I am always very quizzical about the decision making process in how the system decides to do that. And you were very comfortable mentioning that you were told that one would be closed, but it was like there had to be some process up to that.

Yes, it's a new process for me, and I'm learning. I was comfortable saying we were going to close an institution. Everything else outside of that is very uncomfortable. You know, like I said earlier, it's the lives that it's impacted. And it's not staff, it's not the incarcerated, it's everybody, it's the community.

And how do you reach a decision, you know. And I don't know how we reach a decision yet because the decision has not been made. We're still working on that. I am thankful that the decision has not been made prior to us sitting before you. I know Secretary Allison, I believe it was her confirmation hearing. And it was difficult to watch because, you know, nobody wants to hear that they're closing a prison in their, in their district, in their community. Some people might be for that, but all in all.

None of those watching in San Luis Obispo, right?

No, they're not. They're not. You know, but it's not anything that I take lightly at all.

Okay, well, thank you. I really appreciate the response.

Thank you so much, Senator Laird. Madam Director, I'm going to just give some comments, and you are more than welcome to be able to respond on this. We had Associate Director Kent in front of this body here, I don't know, a few months ago. And we were having a conversation about the Prison Rape Elimination Act, and I'll just refer to as PREA from here on out.

And what the Associate Director had presented us is the new database and the numbers in which CDCR is tracking on number of complaints, where those complaints are at, how many have gone to the district attorney. I can keep going, but we were able to see the graph.

And I think that there is growing concern about the ongoing safety, especially within Chowchilla. And taking a look at some of the definitions even that CDCR has in regards to what sexual misconduct is versus what sexual violence are, I think in modern day standards, I think some of what is described as non-consensual would actually be abusive sexual contact.

And I also know that the Department is not prepared to be able to comment. This is something that the Senate is very focused in on is modernizing those definitions and obviously looking at enhanced security of those who are incarcerated within women's facilities.

You had said that this is a... I'm paraphrasing here, ma'am, but that is a top priority for you, top priority for the Department. And I wanted to make sure that we had a conversation about that because, candidly, there is growing concern about the ongoing safety of those who are incarcerated in Chowchilla. And I just don't know if you want to comment on that. And I know that we will have some solutions that we'll need to continue working with the Department on as the legislation moves forward. But please, your comments.

Thank you, Senator. So I believe It's Senate Bill 337, and although currently we don't have a position on the bill. But I just want to assure the Committee Members that, you know, we do fall under the federal guidelines of the PREA Act, and we are evaluating and making sure that, again, like I said, the population is safe and they have an avenue to report misconduct, sexual misconduct, whether it's incarcerated person, unincarcerated person, or the sexual misconduct against of a staff member, sexual harassment, retaliation.

There's a zero tolerance. And I understand there's concerns about the definitions and where we are at and modernizing the definitions to make sure that all acts are captured. And I would be more than willing to work with you and your team and to come up with some suggestions, some ideas, and see where we can go from there.

Look, I think that, one, I think there are several steps to this. Right. With the Department now tracking in regards to the type of offenses that we're seeing within a facility where though that offense is within the process that has been established I think is the first line of defense. Right. If there's no accountability, then.

And that's what data shows us. And we need to have the numbers to be able to react to and candidly change policy. I think the issue that we have here is, and I'm not at all trying to be pointing fingers, but I think the vast majority of what we see, especially within women's facilities, is sexual misconduct or violence with staff on those women who are incarcerated. That's what the numbers show.

Yes.

So again, we're acknowledging it. It's not something that you want, not something that any of us wants, but I think we have to be able to focus in on that. And while the federal wouldn't dispute in regards to where the Department is in regards to the federal standards, what we also know is California in many cases, not just within the issue of the space of corrections, but we go above and beyond where federal standard may be. Especially since federal standards typically don't change at times for decades.

And we need to be able to change with the times much more quicker, especially if we're looking at challenges within the system. And I bring all this up is no matter the space of one's political belief, Democrat or Republican, I think we have to focus on the problem at hand. Know that this is a priority for you. I know this is a priority for the Secretary. And I also think that we need to move quicker.

Understood.

Yeah. Your thoughts on that? I'm not asking for your comment on the legislation. I know the Department is very prickly and wanting to be able to go into the legislation and that's not where I want to go. But I think time is of the essence, especially for those when we see the staff on incarcerated sexual violence.

And I agree it's unacceptable. And I will do everything I can to ensure that those that are committing acts against the women, that we will hold them accountable to include assisting the district attorney and prosecuting them. You know, we...

I talked about the women feeling safe and having a confidential place to be able to report the sexual misconduct and harassment and retaliation that they feel that they are subject to on the staff members, because we're really focused on the acts from the staff.

And, you know, we work with a number of advocacy groups, and one right now that I can tell you is Sister Warriors and their ambassador program and making sure they're going out to the population. So we're working closely with them to, you know, give those women a safe place, again, like I had said.

So there's a lot of work to be done. I'm willing and ready to roll my sleeves up and get in there and do whatever we can and work with our associate directors and the warden and everyone involved. I think that's probably where I'm going to stand right now. I apologize.

You're good. Look, I'll just end it right here and say this. The vast majority of those who go into this line of work are there to do the right thing in a very difficult circumstance. Vast majority. And in any profession, there are always going to be a small minority that give the profession a black eye.

And that's what we need to be focusing on. And we have to do it quicker than what we have traditionally done in the past. And candidly, I think all eyes are on us, and want to be able to work in partnership. And when being honest about it, if not moving quick enough, then that's why I think you're seeing Legislature moving on this and how we can work collaboratively as we advance this legislation and other investments.

But again, I want to be very clear, the vast majority of those who are on the line every day doing the job are doing the job for the right reasons and for the people of California. And candidly, because they believe in the mission of rehabilitation. And we're just focused on those who are working outside that line. So, Madam Director, I'll give you any closing remarks, and then we'll move on. And I think Madam Director is like, thank you.

No, no, no.

Yes, please. Any closing remarks on that?

Thank you. And I agree we have to move quicker, and we've identified some areas on how we can capture those that have allegations against them and with body worn cameras that we have. And I think that's helping us. But I agree with you. We have to take swifter action. We have to be more quick, act more quickly on these allegations.

And what we've been doing is when an allegation comes in, we immediately pull those video footage, pull the body worn camera to see if that can be substantiated. And if it is and if there is any indication of any type of misconduct on the staff member against the females, we have the ability to remove them from their post. Whether we redirect them to another post that doesn't have contact with the women or we put them on administrative time off, those are the swift actions that we are taking.

I appreciate that. Thank you. And I know there's much more to come and this is a continued focus internally, obviously, for all of us in the Legislature and appreciate the conversation here today. Madam Vice Chair, I think you would like to chime in on this, please.

I would like to do that too. You've said it three times and, and maybe when I was gone into Health Committee that you're focused on the staff. I want you focused on everybody who's raping women inside that prison, including transgender transfers, where we have individuals that are part of a group that are fully post op that advocated for SB 132 and those transfers for fairness, but that was not what they got themselves into.

And I think that's becoming more evident. I know that, I know that you said you were focused strictly on staff, and you should be. Again, I think that the majority of the staff there is there for the mission and making sure that, you know, people can serve their sentences in a safe way and not participating in this.

And there is an outlining, you know, like the outlier group we always have in any profession, like the pro tem said. But there also needs to be a focus on individuals that are in that population. Now, I'm not saying every person is in that population. Just like the staff. There are genuine transfers that need to take place, but there are also transfers that are taking place that should have never gone to a women's prison. And you need to focus on every single rape, not just the ones coming from the staff.

Thank you, Senator Grove. If I can clarify, I by no means ever wanted you to ever thank or any of the Committee Members that I was only focused on the staff misconduct on the women on the incarcerated population. It's any type of violence against the women against our incarcerated population. So I apologize if that came across.

It's okay. Thank you for clarifying that.

You were very clear. And I think what I was saying is when we take a look at the data, and Madam Director, you can throw your chair at me if you think I'm incorrect. Is that when you take a look at the data, when Associate Director.

Yeah, see cameras. Accountability.

When Associate Director came in front of this body here several months ago, and we asked for the data to be able to take a look at sexual violence within state prisons in particular and within women's facilities. The vast majority...

And this is not a political statement, this is based off of the data. Is the sexual violence that's advanced within women's facilities are staff on women who are incarcerated. That's what the data shows within CDCR and that's what Madam Director was responding to. Do we need to be focused on all sexual violence? Absolutely.

But that was the line of question that I was asking her based off of the data that we saw from the internal tracking and database that's been set up by CDCR. So that was just the context. Yeah. No, absolutely. Would like to be able to see if there's any additional comments, questions, discussion from the Committee.

All right, let's do this. What we're going to do, we want to say thank you, each of you, for your patience. Very, very grateful. We're going to ask folks to be able to come forward. First, last name. If you're with an organization, if you don't mind just stating that.

And we're going to just, since we have so many folks that would like to be able to speak, we're going to ask you a first last name, organization, and that you are in support or opposed to the appointees. Let's kick it off and say good afternoon. Hi. How are you doing?

I'm great. How are you?

Doing well. Thank you so much for hanging with us.

I'm April Grayson, the political director for Sister Warriors Freedom Coalition, and we look forward... And a part of sexual assault working group. We look forward to continuing our work with Gena Jones and this administration. We anticipate continuing our vital work together to ensure greater safety for our loved ones at the women's institutions.

Thank you. Really appreciate you. Thank you so much. Welcome. If we can have the next speaker. How you doing? Nice to see you.

How you doing? My name is Kanan Wilkins.

I'm Antoine Cox.

And we were individuals who were directly incarcerated while incoming Director Gena Jones was warden at a California Health Care Facility. We're here in support on behalf of all of the inmates that came across Gena Jones that we know, which is over 2000 of them, that is in support of this confirmation. We heard some of the things being said here.

We know we can't take up your time saying much, but we encountered Director Gena Jones during COVID when she came to our place as acting warden before she was confirmed there. So we worked directly with her. I was the secretary on her council, this was the Chairman.

And we just want to let you know the things that you guys were talking about here, she took very seriously there as far as violence, staff, incarcerated persons. She was very serious about those things and she wanted everyone to be safe. Perhaps more than that, I don't want to say more, but just equal to that, she wanted everyone to know that they were humans and she treated everyone with kindness and...

Thank you. And please, Mr. Chair, would you like to say...

Yes. I was IAC Chairman, Inmate Advisory Council. Worked closely up under her. Hard working. I mean you can't find a better candidate. I was incarcerated in and out maybe 40 years, right. And so I've been home now eight months.

But she was the most hands on warden I've ever seen. When she get out there, she walked with us, she talked with us, she listened to our issues. She was concerned about, you know, the inmate population. So, you know, as far as I'm concerned, great choice.

Very grateful. Thank you to our Chair, to the Secretary. We're very grateful that you're here today. Thank you so much. Thank you for your words and thank you for your support. In what we're going to ask folks, first last name, organization, and your stance on the appointee. Support or oppose, please.

Good afternoon. Steve Durham, Rank and File Vice President for CCPOA. Thank you for the opportunity. We are there, they're our employer so it's difficult for us to come up and talk. But we have an open door policy with both of them. Unfortunately, I got to work with Bryan as an officer back in day, so he's an old partner and sergeant. But it is, we are here to offer our support.

Thank you so much, Mr. Durham. Very grateful for your time here today. Hi, good afternoon. Welcome, nice to see you.

Good afternoon. How everybody doing today? My name is Wajuba McDuffy. I am the Northern Regional Manager of the Inside Program for the Anti-Recidivism Coalition, and I fully support Mrs. Jones, Mr. Phillips, and Mr. Wyckoff confirmation.

Thank you so much, Mr. McDuffy. Very grateful you're here. Come on up. Thank you so much. Welcome. We're gonna just bring the line up a little further. Folks can just come on up a little bit. Thank you so much. The floor is yours, sir. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. My name is Willie Woods. I'm a life coach, HART Life Coach at ARC. Currently I'm at CSP Solano, and I'm truly in support of Mr. Wyckoff, Ms. Jones, and and Mr. Phillips.

Mr. Woods, thank you so much. Grateful for your words today. Good afternoon. Welcome, sir.

Hey. Thank you. I'm James Sulamo. I'm a ARC Life Coach. I'm currently serving at High Desert State Prison. And we are in support of Ms. Jones and Mr. Phillips and Mr. Wyckoff.

Thank you so much. Appreciate you. Thank you. Hi, Good afternoon. Welcome.

Hello. My name is Benny Tapia. I'm with the Anti Recidivism Coalition, and I'm here to strongly support Mrs. Jones and Mr. Phillips and also Mr. Wyckoff. Thank you.

Very grateful. Thank you. Hi, good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Thank you for having me here. My name is Steven Batres. I'm from ARC. I am assigned to Centinela and Calipatria, and I support Mrs. Jones and Mr. Phillips and Mr. Wyckoff.

Thank you so much. Appreciate you. Thank you. Hi. Good afternoon. Welcome.

Hi. My name is Joseph Herrera. I'm with the Anti Recidivism Coalition, and I'm here to support Ms. Jones and Mr. Phillips. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Very grateful for your words today. Good afternoon, sir.

Good afternoon. My name is Jose Soto. I am a life coach with the HART team for the Anti Recidivism Coalition, and I'm also here to support Mrs. Jones and Mr. Phillips.

Thank you so much. Nice job. Thank you. Very grateful. Hi, Good afternoon. Welcome.

Hi. Good afternoon. My name is Candice Lewis. I am also a life coach for the Anti Recidivism Coalition, and I strongly support Ms. Jones, Mr. Phillips, Mr. Wyckoff.

Thank you so much. Appreciate you. Hi. Good afternoon. Welcome.

Good afternoon. My name is Lynne Acosta. I am a life coach with the Anti Recidivism Coalition. I am currently a life coach at an institution we've heard so much about today at the Central California Women's Facility. I am in support of Mr. Wyckoff, Ms. Jones, and Mr. Phillips. Thank you.

Thank you for your work. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. My name is Christopher Acosta. I am a life coach at VSP. Strong support for all three.

Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Hi. Good afternoon. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Senators. My name is Kenny Johnson. I'm a life coach with the Anti Recidivism Coalition, or you may hear ARC. I served almost 20 years in prison. I now have worked in CMC, Pleasant Valley State Prison, and now I work in the federal prison system.

I am here today because of the programs, the HART programs that these two individuals have supported throughout their career. I'm in strong, strong support of both of you. And I ask, I ask, I offer this invitation. Please come out to one of the ARC HART graduations and see the work that they're supporting. See how it transformed lives. See how it produces this final product. I was an inmate and now I'm standing in front of you. And I work inside of prisons. Please, I support you guys. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Much to be proud of. Appreciate you being here today. Hi, good afternoon. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Senators. I'd like to say I'm also in support of Ms. Gena and Mr. Phillips. So thank you very much.

Thank you so much. Appreciate your words today. Hi, good afternoon. Welcome.

My name is Tommy Traughber. I'm in support of Ms. Gena Jones and Mr. Bryan Phillips. I'm also a HART life coach serving at CTF, Soledad, and Salinas Valley State Prison. And without the ARC and my life coach, Katie Jones, I wouldn't be here today after serving almost 30 years.

Thank you. Thank you for your story. Appreciate you. Thank you. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. My name is Brandon Patterson. I'm a HART life coach with the Anti Recidivism Coalition, and I'm full support of Ms. Jones and Mr. Phillips.

Thank you so much. Appreciate you being here. Hi, good afternoon. Welcome.

Thank you. I'm Destiny Gray with ARC. I work at CIW Women's Prison, and I support both directors as well as Scott Wyckoff.

Thank you. Appreciate you hanging with us. Thank you. Hi. Good afternoon.

Hey. Good afternoon. My name is David Amaya. I'm the program manager for Anti Recidivism Inside Programming. We're servicing 27 of the 31 adult prisons right now. I'm hearing strong support for Gena Jones and Bryan Phillips. Got a little story with him and the Commissioner also...

Want to hear that story another day. Watch out. I like it. Thank you. Welcome back.

Danica Rodarmel, Whole Consulting. Grateful to be able to support the confirmation of Director Jones. And don't know the associate director well enough yet to be able comment, but look forward to getting to know you. Thank you.

Thank you. Appreciate you. Hi, good afternoon.

I'm Ken Hartman. I'm the Executive Director of Transformative Programming Works. I was in prison for 38 years. We represent 115 organizations that do rehabilitative programming in all the California prisons collectively. Here to support Ms. Jones and her nomination.

Thank you so much. Appreciate you hanging with us today. Hi. Good afternoon.

How you doing? Good afternoon, Senators. My name is Ike Valerie. I'm a member of the HART team at ARC, Anti Recidivism Coalition. I'm in full support of Ms. Jones, Mr. Phillips, and Mr. Wyckoff. Thank you.

Very grateful. Thank you. Hi. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Senators. My name is Aaliyah Hayes. I am the workforce coordinator for the Anti Recidivism Coalition. I am here in support for Ms. Jones and Mr. Phillips.

Nice job. Thank you so much. Good afternoon, sir. Welcome.

Good afternoon, Senators. My name is Cedric Pierce. I am a life coach with ARC, and I'm here in full support all three candidates.

Appreciate it. Thank you so much. Thank you for your words today. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Rudolph Castillo, HART life coach with ARC, and I support all three.

Thank you so much for your comment today. Grateful you're here. Good afternoon. Welcome.

Good afternoon. My name is Terrence Harris. I'm a HART life coach. I'm at CSP Sacramento, New Folsom, and I support all three.

Thank you so much, Mr. Harris. Grateful you're here. Hi, good afternoon. Welcome.

Good afternoon. My name is Frank Abella. I'm a HART life coach at CMF Vacaville and Mule Creek State Prison. I support all three.

Great. Thank you so much. Grateful. Hey. Good afternoon. How you doing?

Hi. How you doing? My name is Raymond Espinoza. I am a HART life coach for Anti Recidivism Coalition for Mule Creek State Prison, and I am in support with the, with the commissioners.

Thank you for being here today. Thank you. Hi. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. My name is Kevin Roberts. I'm the HART life coach for Pelican Bay State Prison, and I support all three.

Thank you so much. Hi. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. Peace, power, and positivity. My name is Sean Gage. I'm a Hope and Redemption Team life coach at California Health Care Facility. where Ms. Jones was just at. First and foremost, I support and confirm all directors. However, I must say that this is a great day for rehabilitation for us. As you see, we all are second chances. And this right here is my shero. Not a better choice.

Thank you so much. Really good. Thank you so much for those.

Hello, everyone. My name is DeShawn McDougal. I'm a life coach for the Anti Recidivism Coalition, and I'm in support of Gena Jones and Bryan Phillips.

Thank you so much. Grateful you're here. Hi. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. My name is Christopher Bryson. I'm the life coach for San Quentin Rehabilitation Center, and I support all three of the directors.

Appreciate you being here. Thank you so much. Good to see you. Hi. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. My name is Elizabeth Sanchez. I'm the Community Engagement Director at PREVAIL, one of the partners that provides HART and PREAs services at the California Health Care Facility as well as a Chowchilla right now. And it is with deep respect and honor that I'm here in support of Mrs. Jones confirmation. Thank you.

Appreciate you. Thank you so much. Hi. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon. My name is Marianne Prieto. I am the fundraising manager with PREVAIL. It is my honor to support Ms. Jones. We have the opportunity to work with her within the California Health Care Facility on many programs, awareness campaigns, and also fundraising opportunities with the incarcerated populations. Thank you.

Thank you for your words today. Appreciate it. Good afternoon.

My name is Gary Burt with Land Together Garden Programs. I have worked firsthand with Director Gena Jones, and she is one of the most forward thinking and innovative wardens I've ever had the privilege to serve under. And I've witnessed firsthand her show up at community driven meetings to bring rehabilitative services to the incarcerated populations at her facility. So I'm in strong support of Gena Jones' confirmation.

Great. Thank you so much. Appreciate you. We're going to do a final call for those who may want to speak in support. You're more than welcome to please come forward to the microphone. Anybody else? All right. We're now going to look for those who may be in opposition. If you could please come forward at this time. Anyone in opposition, if you could please step forward. Seeing no one rise, we're now going to bring it back to Committee. Final questions, comments, or we'll take a motion. Oh, yes, please. Senator.

I just want to say that this was very impressive. We should have done the presentations first because then I think that would have made us do it a little bit, all the questions. But I want to thank everybody that came here today. I really appreciate hearing from you. And this is the example of exactly what we want in our system, which is that a program that really works, that makes a difference in people's lives.

You should be proud of the fact that there are, and I know you are, that there are testimonials about your ability to work with them and to have a good working relationship so that they're here today. And they took the whole afternoon to stay here. So thank you very much to all of them. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just felt like I couldn't keep my mouth shut. This is what we want. So thank you very much for being here.

Thank you, Senator Caballero. Really great point. Please, Leader Jones. That's wonderful.

Senator Caballero took the words almost entirely out of my mouth, but I just in addition to the sentiment that she shared, I just want to say personally thank you to the public that came. I think sometimes we neglect to say that because we take it for granted that it's easy to get to the Capitol and easy to move around. And it's not, especially for people that aren't familiar with Sacramento and or how to get in and out of this building and then hang around all afternoon.

So to all of you that came in today to testify, thank you for making that commitment. I want you to hear from us, and I think Senator Caballero said it as well, that your testimony does make a difference when we are considering these nominations and confirmations. So thank you for being here.

Very grateful, Leader Jones. Senator, did you want to have any comments? We do have a motion on the floor by Senator Caballero.

So just to thank everybody as well, but make the motion. But Senator Caballero beat me to it, so.

Thank you so much. All right, we have a motion on the floor right now. A motion on the floor by Senator Caballero. Final discussion or debate? Hearing and seeing none. Madam Secretary, can you please call the roll?

[Roll Call] 5 to 0.

5-0 vote. We're going to close the roll. Final vote. Thank you so much. Next up is the Senate Floor. We appreciate both of you. And a round of applause, please. Ladies and gentlemen of Committee, we're going to take a two minute recess. Two minute recess. When we come back, we're going to go into executive closed session.

We'll be coming back into closed session in 60 seconds. Back into closed session in 60 seconds.