Working group to recommend reinstating vetoed Justice Services items, highlights peer specialist pilot and automated staffing system

The combined working group reviewing vetoed Justice Services budget items agreed to send a list of recommendations to the Speaker for possible reinstatement, and members emphasized two items for consideration: a certified peer specialist gateway pilot program and an automated staffing time-management and scheduling system, the meeting manager said.

The meeting manager (staff) opened by summarizing the group's charge: “we were assigned to this combined working group to review Justice Services budget issues that were vetoed in the fiscal year 2024-2025 budget,” and to provide “a list of recommendations” that the Speaker may choose to advance. The manager said the list produced by the group would be only a recommendation and that any item approved to move forward by the Speaker would be considered individually in the House and Senate rather than as a package.

A working group member noted that Representative Hart had raised the certified peer specialist gateway pilot program at a previous meeting. “Representative Hart did bring up the certified peer specialist gateway pilot program. That's part of the department operation funding, row number 3,” the member said, adding the pilot would have statewide impact because it involves the Department of Corrections.

The manager identified the automated staffing time-management and scheduling system as another item likely to meet the Speaker's criteria. The manager said the system is “throughout the entire correctional facility, all 67 correction institutes,” and described it as recurring base funding drawn from general revenue. The manager characterized the system as a biometric time-and-attendance system rather than a punch-card setup and said the project has been ongoing for about 10 years.

Discussion in the short meeting focused on whether those items met the criteria outlined by the Speaker for potential reinstatement. The manager said they had reviewed the Speaker's criteria and the working group’s prior input and that this would likely be the last meeting of the group: “I wanna be able to, I I believe this will probably be the last time we need to meet,” the manager said.

No formal votes or motions were recorded during the meeting. Instead, members concluded the session by confirming the next step: the working group will transmit its recommended list to the Speaker, who will decide which items—if any—to send forward for individual consideration in the Legislature. The manager reminded listeners that approval by the Speaker does not equate to final legislative enactment and that each item would face separate votes in both chambers.

The meeting closed after a brief recap; no dollar amounts, vendor contract details, or formal commitments to fund reinstatement were made on the record during this meeting.