Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nominee Scrutiny Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nominees field questions on safety, recidivism and higher‑education oversight during rules committee hearing
Summary
Nominees for the Oregon Youth Authority and parole board answered senators’ questions about recidivism, evidence‑based programming and reentry supports; several senators also pressed nominees and discussed the broader nominations process.
Nominees appearing before the Senate Special Committee on Rules and Executive Appointments on Sept. 29 answered brief questions about priorities, public safety and governance.
Michael (Mike) Thiessen, the governor’s nominee for director of the Oregon Youth Authority, said his leadership priorities are culture, connection and data‑driven processes. Asked about outcomes from his time in Colorado, Thiessen acknowledged shortcomings in adult parole recidivism there while noting he did not oversee parole supervision directly. He emphasized risk‑need‑responsivity principles, the need to staff mental‑health services in facilities, use evidence‑based programming and strengthen metrics and investigations to improve safety: “When we think about risk, that’s about focusing our time and attention on the people who are the most likely to recidivate,” he said.
Don Reese and John Bailey, nominees to the State Board of Parole and Post‑Prison Supervision, described efforts to make parole decisions data‑driven. Bailey, who said he was selected by the governor as board chair in 2024, cited psychological evaluations shared with parole officers and a legislatively funded five‑year plan to classify remaining registrants under the board’s jurisdiction as examples of reforms intended to improve outcomes.
Higher‑education trustees and OHSU nominees also appeared. Former Sen. Betsy Johnson told the committee she would work to stabilize OHSU’s finances and help the institution pursue philanthropic and operational priorities.
Committee members used the hearing to press nominees on program access, reentry outcomes, and the limits of board authority. Several senators also raised concerns about the nominations process: Vice Chair Bonham said he intended to vote no on the en bloc motion because he remained unsure whether the committee had identified other potential candidates or achieved sufficient geographic and ideological balance among appointees.
The committee ultimately moved the nominations en bloc to the Senate floor with a recommendation for confirmation; senators said they will continue outreach to broaden the applicant pool going forward.
The committee adjourned after the hall call vote.
