Transcript Highlights:

• It provides grants for day program and residential programs, adds language to grants providing training
• , as well as emergency treatments that may be needed.
• and supervision programs.
• Texas Music Incubator Program, to Finance.
• the Thriving Texas Families program, to Health and Human Services.

Bills: SJR12, SJR81, SCR39, SB22, SB32, SB241, SB393, SB414, SB458, SB464, SB568, SB583, SB609, SB660, SB693, SB731, SB732, SB746, SB783, SB785, SB897, SB993, SB996, SB1008, SB1029, SB1035, SB1036, SB1120, SB1122, SB1147, SB1163, SB1188, SB1197, SB1209, SB1227, SB1245, SB1267, SB1307, SB1321, SB1332, SB1386, SB1394, SB1396, SB1470, SB1494, SB1537, SB1596, SB1598, SB1610, SB1664, SB1814, SB1822, SB1841, SB1948, SB2065, SB2155, SB2406, SB2407

Keywords: parental rights, education, constitutional amendment, school choice, child education, tax exemption, ad valorem, tangible personal property, income production, border security, southern border, federal immigration policy, illegal immigration, cartels, transnational cartels, fentanyl, drug trafficking, human trafficking, Operation Lone Star, Texas border

Summary: The Senate opened with a quorum call, invocation, approval of routine motions, and the reading of gubernatorial nominations and several honorary resolutions. The chamber adopted resolutions recognizing Jack and Jill of America Day and DJ Daniel Day at the Capitol, with multiple senators offering remarks praising youth leadership, perseverance, and public service. The Senate also introduced the Doctor of the Day and then proceeded to a long series of floor actions on bills. A major focus was Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 568, which overhauls special education funding and services in public schools by moving from a placement-based model to an intensity-based system tied to student needs and IEPs. Senators Bettencourt, Creighton, and Menendez emphasized transparency, parent input, evaluation funding, dyslexia services, and better alignment of funding with actual services; Senator Hinojosa shared a personal story about dyslexia and the importance of early intervention. The bill was advanced on second and third reading and finally passed 30-0. The Senate also passed SB 1396 to prohibit national sex education standards in public schools, SB 2065 on the Texas Emergency Services Retirement System, SB 1664 requiring clearer public disclosure of transmission and distribution utility rate changes, SB 1029 on advertising certain used motor vehicles, SB 1120 expanding rights for family violence victims, SB 1036 regulating residential solar retail transactions, SB 464 creating school-proximity restrictions and penalties for tobacco and vaping sales, SB 1035 giving farmers and ranchers equitable relief from certain local agricultural regulations, SB 1610 addressing civil commitment facility safety and prosecution issues, SB 1197 extending drone restrictions to spaceports, and SB 1386 changing legislative witness immunity from transactional to testimonial immunity. Another major bill was Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 1188, which updates electronic health record requirements. Senator Kolkhorst said the bill builds on Texas medical privacy law by requiring U.S.-based storage of EMR data, prohibiting recording of voter registration status and credit score information, requiring provider verification and disclosure for AI-assisted diagnosis or treatment recommendations, preserving parental access to minors’ records until age 18, and ensuring EMRs can capture metabolic health and biological sex information. A floor amendment clarified the bill’s scope and enforcement, and the bill passed 23-7. Several measures drew debate, especially SB 414 on bond ballot transparency, where Senators Eckhardt and Menendez questioned whether requiring estimated interest and total debt cost on ballots could be misleading or difficult to implement because interest rates and financing terms can change before issuance or over time. The transcript ends during that discussion, with no final action shown on SB 414.

Transcript Highlights:

• in a treatment program approved by the court and the prosecutor as a way to get their case dismissed.
• The law does not specify any limits on how long treatment programs can last.
• The entire program, the entire justice system, just to resort back to, now I want treatment.
• , including programs that fund mental health and substance use. treatment.
• lot of these residential treatment programs are 90-day programs.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• program, get them to accept it, and make them successful in treatment.
• program, get them to accept it, and make them successful in treatment.
• To interrupt those treatment programs would be a disservice to the... ...to interrupt those treatment
• program, the same treatment needs arise.
• and a lot of these residential treatment programs are 90-day programs.

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on Proposition 36 and its implementation, with judicial and budget officials describing it as a major shift from misdemeanor to felony processing for repeat drug possession and certain theft offenses. Witnesses explained that the law creates a treatment-mandated felony process that can lead to dismissal if a defendant completes treatment, but also requires evaluations, court monitoring, and potentially long, open-ended supervision. Judicial representatives said the new law is already generating large numbers of filings, creating workload, staffing, courtroom, and facility pressures, and that access to treatment beds, housing, and evaluation capacity is limiting participation. Several speakers emphasized that collaborative courts are effective but are not a perfect fit for Prop. 36 because those programs are typically probation-based and serve different risk/need populations. Court officials from San Bernardino and Orange counties said the impacts vary by county but are severe, with some counties seeing hundreds or more filings in a short period and others moving more slowly to build treatment infrastructure first. They argued that Prop. 36 is effectively an unfunded mandate unless the state provides more resources for judges, staff, facilities, treatment, housing, and supervision. The Legislative Analyst’s Office noted that Prop. 36 will reduce the Proposition 47 savings that fund mental health and substance use treatment grants, but said the near-term reduction is relatively modest and that the full effect will take time to appear because of the way those savings are calculated. Members of the committee repeatedly raised concerns that the state is underfunding the courts and counties needed to carry out the new law. The committee also reviewed the Governor’s proposed trial court operations budget, including a partial restoration of a prior $97 million cut and additional ongoing funding. Judicial branch officials said the restoration helped avoid furloughs, hiring freezes, and service reductions, and supported cybersecurity, technology, staffing, and records management. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more detail on how midyear restorations are handled and consider clarifying language for transferring unspent trial court trust fund monies to the General Fund. Finance said the flexibility in the ongoing funding was intentional and would be taken back for consideration. In a separate item, the committee heard testimony on a $6.3 million increase for Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal appointed counsel programs. Judicial officials and appellate project representatives said the system is facing a crisis because indigent appeals have risen sharply while the number of panel attorneys has fallen, leaving many cases waiting months for counsel. They argued the proposed increase would help but is still below what is needed to recruit and retain attorneys and prevent delays that affect criminal, juvenile, and child welfare cases. The committee also discussed the Tracy courthouse project in San Joaquin County, where local officials said reopening a courthouse closed since 2011 is necessary to serve a growing population and relieve overcrowding elsewhere. The LAO and Finance both noted the project is next in line under the facilities plan, though LAO suggested the Legislature could consider whether other facility priorities should come first.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so they do go to a residential treatment program.
• For psychiatric residential treatment services, each program has consideration and each program has..
• And in residential... ...treatment programs cannot support the holistic needs of youth.
• And residential treatment programs have primary care consultations, right?
• programs, their mental health treatment programs.

Keywords: 907, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I advise the province of Alberta, Canada, and their mandatory treatment program and support it because
• I advise the province of Alberta, Canada, and their mandatory treatment program and support it because
• My name is Melissa Hughes, and I'm the program director at the Stony Brook Stabilization and Treatment
• Our program allows people to remain in treatment for as long as it's clinically indicated.
• Our program allows people to remain in treatment for as long as it's clinically indicated.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held its fourth public hearing of the 2025-2026 session on bills dealing with involuntary commitment and access to addiction treatment, especially proposals to move Section 35 civil commitments away from jails and prisons and into facilities licensed or approved by DPH or DMH. Chairs Velis and Domb framed the hearing as a discussion of how to support people in crisis with compassion, while also warning against using involuntary commitment as a way to remove unhoused people from public view. The hearing also touched on related concerns about discharge practices, treatment capacity, and the need for a broader continuum of care. Testimony split largely along two themes. Addiction researcher Keith Humphreys argued that many people enter treatment under pressure, that involuntary treatment can be ethically justified in the face of overdose risk, but that it should not be mandated unless high-quality services exist first; he emphasized the need for inpatient care when someone is a grave danger, followed by case management and outpatient support. MAMH’s Kate Alicante supported the bill, saying Massachusetts is the only state that commits people with substance use conditions to jails or prisons and that carceral settings add trauma and stigma; she pointed to prior legislative steps, including the Section 35 commission and the planned closure of DOC’s MESAC facility, as evidence that the Commonwealth is moving toward health-based settings. A major portion of the hearing focused on Stony Brook, a sheriff-run stabilization and treatment center in Hampden County. Boston City Councilor John Fitzgerald, several committee members, and multiple people in recovery described the facility as humane, well-run, and effective, with longer stays, medical monitoring, medication-assisted treatment, counseling, and warm handoffs to aftercare. Several witnesses said Stony Brook saved their lives or helped family members recover, and they argued that the sheriff’s office model should be expanded rather than eliminated. Others, including family members and advocates, countered that even a well-run correctional setting remains stigmatizing and that people should not be treated in facilities run by sheriffs or corrections when they have committed no crime. No vote was taken. The hearing concluded with continued testimony, including Senator Friedman’s support for Section 35 as a civil commitment tool but not in a criminal justice setting, and her separate support for a bill to speed inpatient mental health treatment.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are treatment programs that claim they do recovery; I would argue with them.
• And recovery programs need to stay out of the treatment business.
• Our program is completely voluntary, and we get referrals from clinical treatment providers.
• inpatient treatment programs myself.
• Whereas in the substance use treatment programs, you have the bear. whereas in the substance use treatment

Summary: The task force heard extensive testimony on recovery support, harm reduction, and community-based care. Dan Haniken of Into Action described his own recovery from addiction and incarceration and argued that treatment alone is not enough; he said recovery housing, peer support, employment, accountability, and stable housing are what help people stay sober and avoid relapse. Members asked about funding, housing shortages, transportation, treatment courts, and support for medication-assisted treatment (MAT). Haniken said Into Action relies on a braided mix of federal, state, county, city, foundation, and private funding, and that recovery housing needs longer-term support than many current funding streams provide. He also said Missouri should expand recovery housing, peer recovery support, and recovery community centers, and improve awareness and access to MAT in recovery settings and after incarceration. Matt Cushman, a community paramedic with Raytown Fire Protection District, urged Missouri to expand harm reduction, including syringe service programs and broader access to clean needles and drug-checking tools. He argued that stigma and abstinence-only approaches keep many people from seeking help, and said harm reduction reduces disease transmission, overdose deaths, hospitalizations, and other harms while creating pathways to recovery. He cited naloxone distribution as a successful example and said similar strategies should be decriminalized and expanded. Members asked about naloxone access, community paramedicine funding, and whether safe consumption sites should be considered; Cushman said syringe exchange should be a near-term priority, while safe consumption sites are a longer-term policy question. Representatives from Ozarks Medical Center/COMC and Four Rivers Community Health Center focused on the need to reimburse peer support specialists and community health workers, especially in rural and underserved areas. COMC’s Monet Lehman shared her trauma and recovery story and described her jail reentry work, helping incarcerated people with housing, benefits, IDs, employment, MAT, and community supports before release. Four Rivers said its care coordinators and CHWs provide wraparound services such as transportation, housing help, Medicaid enrollment, clothing, and same-day MAT access. Members and staff discussed confusion over reimbursement rules, noting that CCBHCs can bill for peer services through Medicaid while FQHCs generally cannot, and that CHWs are often funded through grants rather than reimbursement. No votes were taken; the meeting consisted of testimony and member questions, with several requests for follow-up information on funding, transportation, and reimbursement rules.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are treatment programs that claim they do recovery, I would argue with them.
• And recovery programs need to stay out of the treatment business.
• inpatient treatment programs myself.
• inpatient treatment programs myself.
• Whereas in the substance use treatment programs, you have the bear. whereas in the substance use treatment

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ordered treatment program for is a court ordered treatment program for individuals<00:49:11.520><c> who
• programs, SUD treatment and detox programs, Home and Community-Based Services, child placing agencies
• , and some of the direct care and treatment programs.
• programs, SUD treatment and detox programs, Home and Community-Based Services, child placing agencies
• , and some direct care and treatment programs.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 35 and diversion programs save lives by guiding people into treatment when they're most open
• That's why we've tried to beef up treatment programs within them.
• On the day that he was discharged from a residential treatment program after six weeks, he showed up
• end up asking to connect to treatment in that program.
• But they're coming specifically for a bed in a treatment program that's not available in Massachusetts

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Mental Health, Substance Use, and Recovery held a public hearing on several harm reduction bills, including measures to decriminalize simple possession and paraphernalia, authorize overdose prevention centers, and expand access to naloxone for first responders. Chair Mindy Domb and Senator John Velis opened by describing harm reduction as an evidence-based public health strategy and noting Massachusetts’ recent decline in fatal overdoses. They emphasized that testimony would help shape whether and how the bills advance, and explained the hearing process, including time limits and written testimony. Testimony was sharply divided. Supporters, including Rep. Kate Donaghue, Sen. Cindy Friedman, Rep. Marjorie Decker, Rep. Manny Cruz, public health professionals, recovery advocates, and people with lived experience, argued that harm reduction saves lives, reduces stigma, and can connect people to treatment. They supported overdose prevention centers and decriminalization as tools to keep people alive long enough to enter recovery, and several speakers described personal losses to overdose or family experiences with addiction. Some supporters also framed the bills as racial justice measures, arguing that criminal penalties for possession have disproportionately harmed Black and brown communities. Opponents, including Sen. Nick Collins and several South End residents, argued that overdose prevention centers and decriminalization would worsen public drug use, crime, and neighborhood disorder, especially around Mass and Cass. They said current approaches such as Section 35, diversion, and police leverage into treatment are more effective, and they urged more treatment beds and recovery facilities instead of harm reduction sites. Committee members questioned witnesses about research, local siting, crime data, and the relationship between harm reduction and treatment, and several members said neighborhood impacts must be considered alongside overdose prevention. The committee did not take a vote during the hearing; it continued receiving testimony and announced a later break before resuming on H. 2196 and S. 1393.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the behavioral health article. treatment program within 48 Hours of treatment program within
• These allow a 10-week time frame for nonresidential opioid treatment programs' treatment plan review
• treatment treatment program<00:18:51.480><c> section</c><00:18:51.840><c> 18</c><00:18:52.480><c> from
• program documentation, or S treatment programs, to have a documentation system for schedules II to V
• <00:19:22.600><c> program</c><00:19:23.039><c> client</c> treatment program client treatment program

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> around</c><00:04:39.759><c> 103</c> Veterans Treatment Court has around 103 Veterans Treatment Court
• </c><00:05:31.680><c> courts</c> counties and veterans treatment courts counties and veterans treatment
• , treatment, recovery supervision, treatment, recovery supports,<00:06:15.520><c> employment</c><00:06
• to treatment court to treatment<00:06:26.880><c> plans</c><00:06:27.199><c> and</c><00:06:27.440><c>
• </c> Treatment plans and case plans.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee received an overview of Kentucky’s specialty courts from Audrey Collins of the Department of Specialty Courts and the Administrative Office of the Courts, along with testimony from Christian County District Judge Foster Cutoff. Collins described the mission and structure of drug, mental health, and veterans treatment courts, emphasizing therapeutic jurisprudence, individualized treatment, judicial oversight, and multidisciplinary teams. She said Kentucky currently has about 2,991 active participants across the three court types, with drug courts in all 120 counties, mental health courts in 17 counties, and veterans treatment courts in eight counties. She also highlighted reported outcomes such as 7,658 entrants and 4,384 successful completions from 2020 to 2024, a five-year average completion rate of 57%, and lower recidivism among graduates than the statewide average. Collins also reviewed funding and costs, saying the department’s fiscal year 2025 budget was $18.6 million, with most of it from general funds, plus restricted and federal funds. She noted spending on personnel, treatment services, and drug testing, and said specialty courts allow participants to remain employed and meet obligations such as child support and restitution. She said participants paid more than $5.4 million in child support, restitution, and other court-related obligations over five years, and that a statewide evaluation by Morehead State University is underway. In response to questions, she said a dip in 2024 collections may have been affected by a case management system overhaul, and that court costs can be waived in some indigent cases while restitution is still required. Judge Cutoff described veterans treatment court and mental health court in Christian County, saying the programs are especially important because of the nearby Fort Campbell military community and because they help veterans with PTSD, traumatic brain injury, substance use, and related issues. He said the courts rely heavily on staff, treatment providers, and the VA, which helps connect participants to benefits and therapy. He also said mental health court participants receive housing, benefits, and medication support, and that the programs can keep people out of jail and help them stabilize. Committee members asked about the legal basis and history of the courts, and Collins explained that Kentucky’s specialty courts began as pilot programs in the mid-1990s, shifted from federal support to state funding around 2008-2009, and are now largely state funded. No votes or formal actions were taken during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• The CONREP SVP program is an intensive community-based treatment and 24-hours-per-day supervision and
• It is the last step in DSH's sex offense treatment program, which is about applying the skills learned
• When you move into the conditional release program, this is how individuals will now receive treatment
• This is how individuals will now receive treatment in a supervised treatment program in the community
• They have completed their treatment program and the court has ordered them to outpatient treatment status

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit Committee held an oversight hearing on the state auditor’s October 2024 report on California’s Forensic Conditional Release Program (CONREP) for sexually violent predators. Members and witnesses discussed public safety, the long delays in finding community housing, the role of local housing committees, and the Department of State Hospitals’ oversight of Liberty Healthcare, which operates much of the program. Several legislators from rural and high-desert districts said their communities have been disproportionately affected by placements and questioned why many placements end up in remote areas. State Auditor Grant Parks said the audit found that CONREP participants were convicted of new offenses less often than sexually violent predators who were unconditionally released, but that 18 of 56 participants had been revoked and returned to state hospitals for noncompliance. He said it took an average of 17 months to place current participants in the community, with 20 additional people awaiting placement for an average of 20 months, and that the program incurred significant pre-placement costs. Parks also said local officials were often unclear about their role, DSH had not given clear guidance at the time of the audit, and California lacks a transitional housing option used in some other states. He reported that DSH had implemented four of the five audit recommendations, while declining the recommendation to explore state-owned transitional housing. DSH Director Stephanie Clendendon and Liberty representative Ken Carabello defended the program as a court-ordered, highly supervised treatment model intended to reduce reoffending and support reintegration. They said DSH is actively involved in placement review, that Liberty searches countywide under statutory restrictions, and that community feedback and court approval are part of the process. DSH said it has now implemented guidance for housing committee designees, formal program reviews, an outcome tracker, and an analysis of whether to separate some Liberty services into different contracts. DSH continued to oppose transitional housing, arguing it would not solve the core siting and statutory problems and would add cost. Several members remained critical, arguing the program is broken, costly, and unfairly concentrated in certain communities, and some called for major statutory changes or suspension of the program.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we have had advanced treatment systems for more than 20 years, and the Chesapeake Bay program shows
• the success of that program.
• of soil treatment after these systems.
• The next program you had was the Hernando County Septic Tank Program, and in that program, they've actually
• So they have a separate program, and then they also use state programs to move forward with their folks

Summary: The committee began with a presentation from the Florida On-Site Wastewater Association on advanced onsite wastewater treatment systems. Roxanne Groover described several technologies used in Florida, including NSF-245 systems, performance-based treatment systems, in-ground nitrogen-reducing biofilters, membrane/media filters, and sequencing batch reactors. She emphasized that these systems can substantially reduce nitrogen compared with conventional septic systems, discussed permitting and maintenance requirements, and noted that some grant programs help fund upgrades in springs and other impaired-water areas. Members asked about phosphorus and PFAS treatment, funding for non-springs watersheds, incentives for new construction, and whether more data should be collected on system performance. The committee then took up CS for SB 164 on vessel ownership, derelict vessels, and anchoring/mooring rules. The bill was explained as clarifying who is responsible for derelict vessels and using vessel title as prima facie evidence of ownership. Two amendments were adopted: one requiring FWC to offer an electronic long-term anchoring permit system and clarifying that the permit does not override other anchoring limits, and a technical amendment correcting a drafting error. Public testimony included opposition from a cruiser advocacy representative who argued the bill would unfairly restrict responsible boaters and harm the marine economy, and support from another boating coalition representative who said the bill was a proactive step to address derelict vessels. The committee then passed CS/SB 164 favorably by roll call. Finally, the committee considered SB 38, which makes clarifying changes to FWC trust funds. The bill would allow investment and carryover of the administrative trust fund balance, expand use of the Florida Panther Research and Management Trust Fund for feline disease research, monitoring, and habitat acquisition, and allow use of the Non-Game Wildlife Trust Fund for law enforcement and related coordination agreements. With no debate or opposition, the committee passed SB 38 favorably by roll call and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• It addresses the types of treatment facilities where covered mental health treatment can be provided.
• I'm the program manager with the Massachusetts Psychosis Network for Early Treatment, or MAPNet.
• After my son completed the program, the PREP program closed due to lack of funding and other reasons.
• That's why this evidence-based program needs this state law to ensure that this treatment will be provided
• Coordinated specialty care is a treatment program for people with first-episode psychosis.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on a large group of behavioral health and insurance-related bills. Topics included expanding access to mental health services by allowing physician assistants to authorize Section 12 emergency holds and be recognized as licensed mental health professionals (H. 1131/S. 773); improving coverage for community behavioral health centers so commercial insurance matches MassHealth’s bundled outpatient and crisis services (H. 1276/S. 703); eliminating cost sharing for certain behavioral health services (S. 718); extending detox and clinical stabilization coverage from 14 to 30 days and adding transitional support services (H. 1319/S. 772); requiring coverage for dual-diagnosis treatment in psychiatric facilities (H. 1277/S. 771); and preserving access to treatment for serious mental illness through coverage of coordinated specialty care and assertive community treatment (H. 1135/S. 709). The committee also heard bills on preventive behavioral health services for children (H. 1228/S. 802) and post-pregnancy mental health care, including postpartum depression and pregnancy loss-related care (H. 1314/S. 823).

Transcript Highlights:

• Treatment needs are at an all-time high.
• I was much closer to treatment.
• So most of our pass-through grants are going to be for programming and treatment.
• So you would go to academic or vocational programming in the morning, or you would be with our treatment
• program.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , our Medicaid program does a pretty good job in funding treatment for people with these illnesses.
• So that, in addition to the substance use treatment programs, of course.
• completing a substance use treatment or recovery program?
• programs across the state, and written into their... ...directed towards their addiction treatment programs
• So sometimes I work in their opioid treatment programs. I go down and see patients there.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> there at the treatment program um he was there at the treatment program um he was uh<00:37:00.160
• program so that we didn't have to worry about anybody not getting to the treatment program.
• We got making it to treatment programs.
• </c><00:57:33.200><c> program</c> from the jail to the treatment program from the jail to the treatment
• Uh fast forward the treatment program.

Keywords: 0:00:04 Call to Order 0:00:50 Dept for Public Advocacy 0:51:31 Life Learning Center 1:21:06 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Justice and Judiciary heard testimony from the Department of Public Advocacy (DPA) on attorney compensation and alternatives to incarceration. Because the committee lacked a quorum, the chair skipped formal roll call and minutes approval, then invited DPA Public Advocate Damon Preston, Deputy Public Advocate Melanie Lowe, and alternative sentencing worker Cena/Tina Mills to present. Preston said DPA is fully state-funded, has 698 funded positions, and was near full staffing with 673 filled positions and 42 new law graduates expected to join in August. He argued that DPA’s resources lag behind those of prosecutors, noting that local prosecutorial offices receive substantially more total funding and have additional revenue sources beyond the state budget. Preston focused on salary disparities and turnover. He said DPA trial-office attorneys total about $26 million in salaries, compared with about $41.9 million for prosecutors on publicly listed state funding, and estimated that more than 100 additional prosecutors are paid through other sources, bringing total prosecutor compensation to a little over $50 million versus DPA’s $26 million. He said starting DPA attorney pay is $58,200, experienced attorney pay averages about $73,000, and that these levels are too low given law school debt and the state’s constitutional obligation to provide defense counsel. He also said DPA attorney turnover is about 20%, median service time before separation was 15 months in 2024, and exit interviews often cite salary as the main reason for leaving. He gave examples of former DPA attorneys moving to prosecutor offices for raises ranging from 12% to 50%. Committee members asked about how often defendants are represented by private counsel versus DPA and how that affects workload. Preston said a 2017 study found about 50% of misdemeanor cases and about 75% of circuit court cases were handled by DPA, with DPA handling most of the most labor-intensive cases. He said DPA will step aside when a defendant hires private counsel or is found ineligible, and he acknowledged the system historically erred by denying counsel in some cases, though he said the current concern is whether DPA is now appointed too broadly. Members requested updated trend data on appointments over the past decade. Preston also described DPA’s pay scale and said the agency’s compensation structure makes retention difficult. Mills then described DPA’s alternative sentencing worker program, which she said has operated for about 20 years and has received national recognition. She shared a case example involving a client named Patrick, who faced a prison sentence on a possession charge and was referred to a horse-based treatment and certification program in Shelbyville. She said the client wanted treatment and a fresh start, a bed became available, and she and the client’s attorney presented an alternative sentencing plan to the court. The presentation was interrupted briefly by a technical issue, but the testimony continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• to receive treatment.
• This is a pilot program.
• treatment options.
• treatment options.
• Psilocybin programs already exist.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The topic is assisted outpatient treatment.
• AOT orders also usually include both individual and/or group therapy treatments, other types of programming
• , and be aware of the availability of that treatment.
• Substance use is possible for treatment as well.
• To what program would best fit whom?

Transcript Highlights:

• In addition to our nursing and human services programs, our allied health programs are doing well.
• Do you do that for the other health care-related programs, behavioral health programs?
• So, your program here is a two-year program for the... The RN, is that correct?
• program.
• Health offices for treatment.