[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6474920,"mediaKeyId","5738743-82bd4d90d417dfda5601db8226bc7234","parentId",5738743,"title","Votes at a glance: Board approves summary suspension, several consent orders and disciplinary decisions","audioSeconds",351,"startMs",3735000,"endMs",4086000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5738743-82bd4d90d417dfda5601db8226bc7234&start=3735&end=4086","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5738743-82bd4d90d417dfda5601db8226bc7234/thumbnail_3735000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6474920/Connecticut/Votes-at-a-glance-Board-approves-summary-suspension-several-consent-orders-and-disciplinary-decisions","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6474920-fd9285dbbc4ca57d8721f5be9ab03c40/orig.mp4?Expires=1772768953&Signature=PfZ-rOWbqFh9lioDXHow2BbscP6YieOns7bdGHE6j98xgAQSWh2~aWBa31gDMXrC-Dr5Mjs69zcYwxe3SOW~0pA4uuv~wy6UL4kTVhdBzOb2GTTcLHa7fPY1YPkbiEr-pgm~ZJfkEggLUe3w-NpQ9qEBJ93RXqKH3RlNiheHBxDZ5b4-BNcDAfh57kDImg57vrz8u9HlS8UHmzIiQPsxUxuIzoZq4Z4zjk9TbiQqEpnJgAX9hZZ3AOog~IX3-XSjLOGNQVepKo9iC8wu1Ir7RcQe8s54My9L0oM77XmcZKJCFQUj3ext0WrVBZLch-DroO1xDmG5YrMXYQSaY1uFEw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Department of Public Health","date","2025-09-03T17:08:45Z","article","Here are the actions the Board of Nursing took during the meeting and the recorded outcomes. Each item lists the motion, mover/second (as recorded), and the roll‑call or voice vote outcome recorded in the meeting minutes.

1) Add agenda item — legal support of the board
Motion: Add legal support of the board under chair updates after legislative process related to regulation revisions.
Mover: Mary Dieteman; Second: Cindy Arpin.
Outcome: Approved by voice vote; board recorded unanimous “Yay.” Note: roll call not taken for this agenda addition.

2) Minutes — regular board meeting 08/20/2025
Motion: Accept minutes from the regular board meeting held on 08/20/2025.
Mover: Cindy Arpin; Second: Lisa Freeman.
Outcome: Approved. Roll call excerpt: Cindy Aye; Sal Aye; Mary Abstain; Camille Aye; Diane Aye; Gina Reiner Aye. (One member was inaudible.)

3) Summary suspension — Victoria Owusu, RN (petition 2025‑283)
Motion: Grant the department’s motion for summary suspension on the grounds the respondent represents a clear and immediate danger to public health and safety if allowed to continue to practice.
Mover: Cindy Arpin; Second: Elizabeth Rivera Rodriguez.
Outcome: Approved. Roll call: Cindy Aye; Sal Aye; Mary Aye; Camille Aye; Elizabeth Aye; Diane Aye; Gina Reiner Aye.

4) Consent order — Linda A. Gilchrist, RN (petition 2024‑363)
Motion: Accept terms of the consent order (proposed discipline included reprimand, $1,500 civil penalty, six‑month probation and approved coursework).
Mover: Cindy Arpin; Second: Elizabeth’s counsel (present noted).
Outcome: Motion failed (roll call: the board voted Nay; recorded as not passing). Several board members said the available record did not support discipline of the director of nursing for the medication error described.

5) Consent order — Chantal J. Perry, RN (petition 2024‑595)
Motion: Accept consent order requiring civil penalty and terms for failure to disclose prior investigation and discipline on application.
Mover: Mary Dieteman; Second: Sal.
Outcome: Approved. Roll call: Cindy Aye; Sal Aye; Mary Aye; Camille Aye; Elizabeth Aye; Diane Aye; Gina Reiner Aye.

6) Memorandum of Decision (MOD) — Aja Dodwell, RN (petition 2024‑1607)
Motion: Approve MOD (reprimand, RN refresher course and four years probation).
Mover: Mary Dieteman; Second: Cindy Arpin.
Outcome: Approved. Roll call: Cindy Aye; Sal Abstain; Mary Aye; Camille Aye; Elizabeth Aye; Diane Aye; Gina Reiner Aye.

7) MOD — Carla Davila, LPN (petition 2022‑566)
Motion: Approve MOD revoking LPN license.
Mover: Cindy Arpin; Second: Elizabeth Rivera Rodriguez.
Outcome: Approved. Roll call: unanimous ayes among present voting members.

8) Reinstatement recommendation — Patricia Fryer, RN (lapsed license)
Motion: Recommend reinstatement conditional on completion of a DPH‑approved RN refresher course and passing the NCLEX (applicant had been out of active clinical practice more than five years).
Mover: Cindy Arpin; Second: Mary Dieteman.
Outcome: Board recommended reinstatement with the refresher course and NCLEX requirement. Roll call: motion passed (ayes recorded from a majority of members present).

9) Adjournment
Motion: Adjourn the meeting.
Mover: Elizabeth Rivera Rodriguez; Second: Sal.
Outcome: Approved; meeting adjourned.

Ending: Several disciplinary matters and consent orders were considered; one consent order (Gilchrist) failed to obtain approval because the board found the record insufficient to discipline the director of nursing for an error committed by another nurse. The board instructed staff to follow up on procedural items and implementation details for the hearing‑officer and panel options.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Board of Examiners for Nursing 9.3.25","oneSentenceSummary","At the meeting the Board approved a summary suspension, accepted and rejected consent orders and decided several disciplinary memoranda and a reinstatement recommendation. Key motions and vote outcomes are listed.","taxTitle","Department of Public Health, Departments and Agencies, Organizations, Executive, Connecticut","taxId",15791,"location","Connecticut","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6474922,"Board adds ‘legal support of the board’ to agenda; DPH legal to resume day‑to‑day meeting representation",3505,298000,3803000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5738743-82bd4d90d417dfda5601db8226bc7234&start=298&end=3803","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5738743-82bd4d90d417dfda5601db8226bc7234/thumbnail_298000.jpg","/articles/6474922/Connecticut/Board-adds-legal-support-of-the-board-to-agenda-DPH-legal-to-resume-daytoday-meeting-representation","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6474922-9a7bbcb5268b32317e4e5792e0ee8965/orig.mp4?Expires=1772768953&Signature=guus7kGdyKD8Y3VahcRUrp-qgJiQwbfGoBJLP2KjN3Rd3lFKct1mM9El5hljyL9D10sSWrQns9XcQNzl0LQMRkU~FDjrM6pkPhkiPVCRLd94QpfHlcCh8zQCbyj7v8c9bCbNHt8VJTpASEsEmQOEXlWBHmSShIkX3rraU~rc~TTAn0yeUy0eC2Q7ntIFrw7Zoj7nfHB3alKf3IHxGr3AoXCt5nHa55ajp7Z3guiPdhc-t~U5uO6PipxbP792mmyIJNo-Ug29rCzzQplUsxjfqJdpQYCx-Y8PIN0VSo1xksItLN9IeuuY339QvKykPtW3VE4K7bQ7yn1mLc2ouaZAvg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Connecticut Board of Nursing voted to add “legal support of the board” to the chair‑update section of its agenda and discussed switching day‑to‑day meeting representation from the Attorney General’s Office to DPH legal staff.

Addition to agenda: Chair Gina Reiner proposed adding the item under chair updates to discuss legislative-process matters and legal support. Board member Mary Dieteman moved to add legal support of the board under chair updates after the item on regulation revisions; Cindy Arpin seconded the motion. The board recorded a voice vote of all yays and the item was added to the agenda.

Why it matters: Assistant Attorneys General Liz Bannon and Alina Brooklyn Goldstein had been providing legal support while DPH rebuilt its legal capacity. DPH told the board that its hearing office and DPH legal staff are now able to resume routine representation at board meetings, allowing AG attorneys to focus on other public‑health priorities.

Operational change described: Attorney Ryan Burns said the public‑health hearing office had historically provided meeting legal support and, after a period of staffing transitions, has regained that capacity. Burns said that Liz Bannon and Alina Goldstein remain the board’s AAGs and are available for legal questions, but day‑to‑day representation and hearing coverage at Wednesday meetings will generally be provided by the DPH hearing office (Burns, Stacy Shulman or other DPH designees).

Board reaction: Board members thanked the AAGs for their past support. Both AAGs confirmed they remain available for specialized legal questions. Attorney Bannon said she appreciated the opportunity to work with the board and encouraged members to reach out to the AG’s Office for legal advice as needed.

Ending: The board added the agenda item formally by voice vote, and DPH confirmed that Burns or a DPH hearing‑office attorney will typically provide routine meeting representation going forward; AAGs remain accessible for specific legal advice.","The Board voted to add a chair-update agenda item on legal support. DPH told members that the DPH hearing office and in‑house legal staff will provide day‑to‑day meeting representation going forward; Assistant Attorneys General remain available for specific legal advice.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6474926,"Board told statutory fix needed before nursing regulation updates; proposal would restore commissioner role in school approvals",626,1579000,2205000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5738743-82bd4d90d417dfda5601db8226bc7234&start=1579&end=2205","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5738743-82bd4d90d417dfda5601db8226bc7234/thumbnail_1579000.jpg","/articles/6474926/Connecticut/Board-told-statutory-fix-needed-before-nursing-regulation-updates-proposal-would-restore-commissioner-role-in-school-approvals","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6474926-ac6221b2e91e62005c60a946788a8b19/orig.mp4?Expires=1772768953&Signature=oswodNbPWnIRe2C3tJPGXZoc2ODXkN1IiNNW5JdLxlN5N7~-w~C00iHCCVwHBPXDAuVtEN7YDpWYkkCwsi4B~JGr-Ji30apqZxcmK8EowzMpVfT0TRhmv7hrR0L2GFuqTHFSsYSBtU5inP8VDVIjgH~W5tc6DmW-k2JE3uwvIxPvpimQdQMWF7ovsttX1N~ZJ17kIIZR~veZd8AjghrNbdxRrE5eduTJCNFKjPo~cZ7ltu7uZ0zeL38oRZ6yBIo~MTZl4JyToXaAHFAvGrScof5L6rCCi6Ow1hMElkHztOqBeCtYB2g7pQ2IUoebxDy8xJey1JB-3JXDrylQTuZaPg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Department of Public Health told the Connecticut Board of Nursing that a statutory revision is required before the board can submit a package of updated nursing regulations.

DPH attorney Ryan Burns said the department identified a gap created by a prior statutory change that removed commissioner involvement in school approvals. Burns said DPH staff believe some commissioner authority is still legally necessary and the department plans to seek a legislative fix before filing the regulations. “Back a few years ago, there was a change in the statutes that removed the commissioner from the school approval process…we identified an issue with the statutes that needs to be corrected,” Burns said.

Why it matters: Board members have spent months drafting modernizations to the nursing regulations. Burns told the board he is reluctant to submit a regulatory package that depends on a statute the department intends to revise, because the regulations refer to that statute and may need edits after the legislative result.

Timeline and process: Burns described the schedule the governor’s office uses to collect departmental legislative proposals: departments are collecting proposals through mid‑October, packages are reviewed by the governor’s policy office, then submitted to the legislature before the January session. Burns said if the item is uncontroversial it could proceed quickly, but he expected several months and likely an outcome toward the end of the legislative session. “This will go several months through the legislative process and most likely toward the end of the legislative session…you’ll see whatever’s gonna happen with that proposal,” he said.

Board concerns and scope: Board members asked for clarity on exactly what the commissioner’s restored role would include. Burns and chair Gina Reiner emphasized the proposed change would be limited to school‑approval authority and was meant to provide a non‑participant check on licensing decisions to strengthen decisions against legal challenge. “One is to make sure that there’s always two decision makers that are looking at something…so it gives more strength to those decisions,” Burns said. Several members expressed concern that involving the commissioner could introduce political influence into school approvals; Burns and others replied the intent is to provide procedural protection and legal defensibility, not to override the board’s authority.

Model rules and next steps: Board members asked staff to incorporate the latest National Council of State Boards of Nursing (NCSBN) model rules for regulating nursing programs into the regs-drafting process; board member Cindy Arpin volunteered to share recent NCSBN materials with DPH. DPH said it will continue to draft the proposed regulations but will not submit them to the regulatory review process until the statutory amendment is settled.

Ending: DPH will circulate the draft statutory language and continue to consult with board members. Burns invited board members to coordinate outside the meeting on legislative strategy and asked the board to await the department’s submission of final language before organized outreach.","DPH told the board that a statutory change is needed to restore the commissioner’s role in school‑approval decisions; the change must move through the governor’s package and the legislature, likely delaying regulatory updates until the statutory language is resolved.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6474932,"Legislation allows Connecticut nursing board to use DPH hearing officers and three-member panels for hearings",1024,549000,1573000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5738743-82bd4d90d417dfda5601db8226bc7234&start=549&end=1573","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5738743-82bd4d90d417dfda5601db8226bc7234/thumbnail_549000.jpg","/articles/6474932/Connecticut/Legislation-allows-Connecticut-nursing-board-to-use-DPH-hearing-officers-and-three-member-panels-for-hearings","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6474932-a03fdcac0c7d04bd33b763b4243829b0/orig.mp4?Expires=1772768953&Signature=gvGAtzbSIfKw-yKtl0QfV3OU8iRDRhZi66nPFVpiKP-Ipsz~pQnWX0tktEfPboMXli-JVoY51nbdjF4UGF6m8zFG3AnaTBBNoROHpQ3aYu8T21lH3B5LVhtR1LoMP~-zgropmEnMogatJHo58kQERsbqQ7~bvHZmJhtp4-i7b~e~Sp22rd5sPm2poHTUzsX63PVYLlDQwTLTXhYFM8zs3uCG3t3kMiagGTnNWnxs6C6ZvwkPfK3yMXmzzJbJ7u9cHJc5XE7MUZ5yrqs6jVpiq~QkUX8e6mIknRMbCSwpDAvczkdSisv1m3uDsR3m8TnKCkINmJjJUnpQc8AlKznTBw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A provision passed in the most recent legislative session lets the Connecticut Board of Nursing use Department of Public Health (DPH) hearing officers or three-member board panels to conduct disciplinary hearings, board legal staff told members.

The change adds two optional procedures to the existing process in which the entire board hears cases. Attorney Ryan Burns, deputy legal director for the DPH hearing office, told the board the new options are not mandatory but intended to reduce member time commitments and help preserve the quality of hearing records for potential appeals. “These are options for the board to use. They’re not mandates,” Burns said.

Why it matters: Board members have repeatedly said full-day hearing calendars make it hard to recruit and retain members. DPH and the AG’s office framed the change as a way to shift administrative burden to staff trained to conduct hearings while preserving the board’s final decision-making authority.

How each option would work: under the hearing-officer model, DPH hearing officers would run the hearing—handling notice, evidence, and drafting a proposed decision—then forward the full record and proposed decision to the board for final review and vote. Burns gave examples of case types he expects to route to hearing officers: drug diversion, substance-abuse matters and what the board referred to as “Nightingale” cases that primarily concern prelicensure education or remote-training deficiencies. “The procedure of the hearing, the notice, the accepting of evidence, and the drafting of a proposed decision would all happen through the hearing office. But then that proposed decision would then come to the board,” Burns said.

For cases that require nursing-specific expertise—Burns used standard-of-care matters as an example—the board could appoint a three-member panel of board members to hear the case, draft a proposed decision, and then present that proposed decision and record to the full board for review. The panel approach could reduce quorum problems in long hearings because only the panelists would be required to stay for the entire proceeding, Burns said.

Board members asked about safeguards. Several members—including Mary Dieteman and Lisa Freeman—expressed concern that the board’s expertise must continue to shape outcomes for nursing-specific issues, especially the Nightingale-type education cases. Burns and chair Gina Reiner repeatedly stressed that any hearing-officer or panel decision would be a proposed decision that the full board could accept, modify or reject. “Any decision that’s issued either by a hearing officer or a board panel is just a proposed decision. You ultimately, every decision is gonna come before the board for a vote,” Burns said. Reiner said she strongly supports the change while emphasizing the board retains final authority.

Process and next steps: DPH proposed identifying cases suitable for hearing officers at intake and including statements of charges in the board packet before meetings so members can request that a particular matter instead be heard by the full board. Burns said no regulatory change is required because the legislature already clarified the board’s authority. If the board approves the operational procedures, hearings could be scheduled more flexibly, potentially reducing delays caused by quorum problems.

What the board said: members generally welcomed the proposal if safeguards hold. Mary Dieteman and others asked that the board remain able to direct that any specific case be heard by the full board. Attorney Liz Bannon of the Attorney General’s Office thanked DPH and the board for pursuing an alternative that could speed case resolution while preserving board oversight.

Ending: DPH and board legal staff will continue to outline the intake and notice procedures; board members asked staff to present a more detailed operational plan and to include case lists in meeting packets so the board can begin using the options without losing visibility into pending matters.","A recent law gives the Board of Nursing two new options for disciplinary hearings: DPH hearing officers for cases that don’t require nursing expertise and three-member board panels for cases that do. The board would still review proposed decisions before final action.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Board approves summary suspension, several consent orders and disciplinary decisions

Board adds ‘legal support of the board’ to agenda; DPH legal to resume day‑to‑day meeting representation

Board told statutory fix needed before nursing regulation updates; proposal would restore commissioner role in school approvals

Legislation allows Connecticut nursing board to use DPH hearing officers and three-member panels for hearings