Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Racial Disparities Panel Operations topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Chair of Racial Disparities Panel says lack of staff and data hobbles equity review; announces resignation

3230167 · May 9, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Eitan Ness Redlongo, chair of the Racial Disparities Advisory Panel, told the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 8 that the panel cannot carry out its mandate without dedicated staff, reliable data access and more frequent, focused work during the legislative session, and said he will resign from the panel.

Eitan Ness Redlongo, chair of the Racial Disparities Advisory Panel, told the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 8 that the panel cannot carry out its mandate without dedicated staff, reliable data access and more frequent, focused work during the legislative session, and said he will resign from the panel.

Redlongo said the panel currently meets once a month for two hours on the second Tuesday from 6 to 8 p.m., which he called insufficient to track bills that often change rapidly. “There is a fundamental incompatibility between the way the RDAP is structured and the way the legislature was structured,” he said. “We need legislators to be there who are interested in this study.”

The panel’s duties include producing biennial reports on criminal and juvenile justice and reviewing proposed legislation for equity impacts. Redlongo and other witnesses told the committee that the Division of Racial Justice Statistics (DLJS), created after prior justice‑reinvestment work, is overextended and cannot reliably keep up with rapidly changing bill text or produce timely analyses without clearer data-sharing agreements and more staff time.

“By statute, you should have access to that data,” a senator on the committee told Redlongo; Redlongo responded that some departments do not keep the needed data or are reluctant to share it, and that memoranda of understanding between agencies are incomplete. He described problems with incompatible agency data systems and proprietary vendor platforms that impede cross‑agency analysis.

Redlongo and several committee members discussed institutional models to address the problem. Multiple speakers compared the need to the Joint Fiscal Office (JFO), which evaluates fiscal impacts of bills: “We actually already have a model to do this,” one committee member said, suggesting a staffed legislative office to perform equity impact assessments for bills that show movement.

Representatives of the Attorney General’s Office and the RDAP also said the panel should clarify and focus its legislatively defined charge (a committee member referenced the enabling statute) and consider subcommittees or more frequent meetings during session to triage the greatest‑impact bills. Redlongo proposed that the panel create subcommittees and rank bills by likely equity impact so limited time and personnel can be used efficiently.

Several participants warned against siloing equity work within a single named office, such as an Office of Racial Equity. Redlongo said placing all equity review in one office risks consigning responsibility rather than integrating equity review across agencies and the legislature.

Committee members pledged follow‑up. One senator offered to explore legislation that would authorize RDAP to form subcommittees and to “introduce the bill” if needed. No formal motion or vote occurred during the hearing.

Redlongo said he will remain available as a “shadow” adviser after his resignation and urged a group approach to fix systemic problems: “We have to get everybody in the room,” he said. The committee did not adopt a final plan at the hearing but scheduled further discussion and a possible joint hearing with the House on the topic.

Discussion points: lack of dedicated RDAP staff; DLJS capacity and data access problems; incompatible agency data systems; limited meeting schedule; danger of siloing equity work; proposal to use a JFO‑style model or authorized subcommittees.

Direction assigned (not a formal vote): committee members agreed to continue the discussion at future hearings, explore legislation to authorize subcommittees, and consider a staffed, institutionalized approach to equity assessments.

Decisions: none formalized at the May 8 meeting.

Ending: The committee set a follow‑up to discuss models and possible statutory changes; Redlongo said he will submit the panel’s required biennial report as appropriate but exchanged no final plan for staffing or statutory amendment during this meeting.