Victim S Compensation Assistance Advisory Council Minutes

Victim’s Compensation Assistance Advisory Council Minutes

February 2, 2010 Dover police Department 400 South Queen Street Turner Building Dover, Delaware

The Victim’s Compensation Assistance Advisory Council held their meeting in the Dover Police Department on February 2, 2010. Present at the meeting were:

Mona Bayard Tom Ellis Stephanie Hamilton Adrian Wilson LeVerta Bradford Brian Hartman Barbara Brown Dirk Durstein Patty D’Angelo Valerie Marek Debbie Puzzo Debbie Reed Ann DelNegro Gail Riblett Dirk Durstein

Welcome

Barbara Brown called the meeting to order at approximately 2:00 p.m. Introductions were held by members of the Council and an introduction was given and members were greeted by Debbie Puzzo, Joint Sunset Committee Executive Director. Stephanie Hamilton agreed to act as Chair for this meeting since the Council has not yet elected a Chair.

November 17, 2009 minutes were approved by the Council

Old Business

Dirk Durstein explained to the Council that the VCAP interim regulations will be submitted to Jeff Hague once the VCAP Council members sign the signature sheet which was circulated at the meeting. Future changes to the regulations will be addressed by the VCAP Advisory Council. These interim regs are designed to address the major changes in HB 253. Future discussion on regulations would be new business.

New Business – Joint Sunset Committee recommendations

Debbie Puzzo gave the VCAP Advisory Council background on the 2009 review of the Violent Crimes Compensation Board, now VCAP. She reviewed the process and the

| P a g e 1 2009 Final Recommendations for VCCB. Debbie directed the Advisory Council to focus on the recommendations in section E.”Action by the Advisory Council.” . Debbie Puzzo suggested the Council work on statutory changes first and then regulatory changes. Debbie explained the Joint Sunset Committee is available to assist the VCAP Advisory Council with statutory amendments which are included in the Joint Sunset Committee report. The JSC Committee is following the VCAP for the second year. If the Advisory Council agrees with the recommendations included in the JSC report that require statutory changes, the JSC would like to receive draft legislation this spring in order to consider submitting proposed legislation this session. Debbie explained if the JSC recommendations require regulatory changes or policy changes the JSC does not need to be involved. But if there is statutory changes which come from this report that is where the JSC wants to assist. The Committee agreed to discuss the recommendations and decide which ones might require draft amendments. Considerable discussion followed with a focus on “2009 Final Recommendations for the VCCB, E.1 through E.25.

Stephanie Hamilton said that Section E. was a collection of many comments submitted to the JSC during the public comment period. Debbie Puzzo agreed that Advisory Council needs to determine which recommendations are necessary and appropriate.

Barbara Brown noted that if you are looking at E. references to HB 253 citations do not match. The sections noted in the report are from the old law before it was amended by HB 253.

Dirk Durstein suggested that he and Tom Ellis the DAGs can give guidance on which changes would require a Statutory change by the General Assembly and which recommendations can be changed by regulations through action by the Council. There are also internal procedures which can be changed by the executive director. The Functions of the Council are defined as: to adopt, promulgate, amend and rescind such rules and regulations as are required to carry out this chapter and to serve in an advisory capacity to the Agency and Appeals Board.”

Gail Riblett agreed 1st priority should be the statutory changes. We should have drafts out there by April and May because we’re not going to getting anything passed that is not introduced by early June. Gail recommended that we need drafts to be circulated before next meeting. (April or May) and get changes approved and sponsored by the end of the legislative session.

Debbie Puzzo described how JSC would need any proposed draft bills by the spring in order for JSC to sponsor and get them introduced.

Dirk Durstein reviewed the item numbers under E. that he thinks would require statutory changes. (1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7(definition of disability), 9 and 11)

| P a g e 2 Barbara Brown suggested that 8 and 24 can be merged. It may require statutory changes and also input from the SANE nurses.

The Council spent time discussing the recommendations and agreed to ask DAG Durstein and Ellis to work on draft amendments before the next meeting to address several of the recommendations. There was also some discussion about the recommendations which were not needed at this time to be addressed with statutory changes.

GR made a motion to have the committee ask attorneys or staff to draft proposed legislation such that 9010 a) 4 more likely conforms to 9010 a) 5 d as a statutory amendment to look at for the next meeting including anything else that comes up. And also to reflect discussion such as adding “or Domestic Violence” to 9010 a) 5 c.

Discussion was made and then the motion was seconded by Patti after discussion and changes made to motion.

GR made a motion to have the committee ask attorneys or staff to consider changes to:

9002 section 5) f. to further specify what title 21 motor vehicle offenses should be included.

9010 section a) 1. To consider substituting the word “applicant” for “claimant” might be appropriate.

DD. suggested section 9010 a) 1 also to take “a” crime and make it “the” crime.

Also to define claimant and applicant under 9002.

Motion was discussed and seconded.

Council agreed that these proposed legislative changes would be the agenda for the next meeting. Dirk and Tom agreed to draft proposed legislation.

New Business SB 14

Stephanie Hamilton wanted to discuss SB 14 and informed the Council that the Victims Rights Task Force has major concerns about this bill and have already sent a letter and met with Senator McBride to discuss their concerns. Brian Hartman also stated that the State Council for Persons with Disabilities also has major concerns about SB 14 and will be communicating that information as well. The Council discussed SB 14 and reviewed for the other members what SB 14 would create if passed.

There was considerable discussion about SB 14 by the Council and staff.

Barbara passed out information on claim volume and trends comparing FY 09 to FY 10.

| P a g e 3 Stephanie Hamilton explained if SB 14 passed the claims would have to be paid with state funds only and no federal VOCA money would be used to cover property crimes. It would only be paid from State funds and would have a yearly cap of $500,000 for pilot program. (This comes out to a total of 200 additional claims) It would drastically change the volume of claims investigators would have to handle, and types of decisions similar to claims adjusters would have to be made. Windshields get shot out all the time in the city and we’re going to have this flood of claims coming in and violent crime claims will be slowed down because we can only process so many claims a week. Those were our big concerns when we met with Senator McBride last week. He sees this as a 9 year fight and has been pushing for this since 2002. Senator McBride has asked the (VRTF) us to come up with some recommended changes to the senate bill. The VRTF wants to provide him with changes and I also want to bring this to the (VCAP) advisory council because I think this can be a two way approach. It would be helpful if the Advisory Council could also offer some recommended changes.

Barbara explained the state money paid for property crimes cannot be used towards the federal grant which is based on 60% of the state paid claims. There was also discussion about having a pilot project included in epilogue language instead of major legislative amendments.

The Advisory Council agreed to send communication to the Attorney General expressing concerns about SB 14 and urging the Attorney General to share concerns with the legislators. General concerns were - not enough staff, VCAP transition period and period of increasing claims volume, recent events taking place in lower Delaware increasing work volume, no federal match, pilot project will take staff from work serving crime victims; no other compensation program in the country considers property crimes as compensable except for small benefits in three states for elderly and disabled and stolen cash.

Motion was discussed and seconded and unanimously passed.

Next meeting date

Discussion of next proposed meeting is to be scheduled March 16 from 1 – 3:30 at the VCAP office in Wilmington.

The meeting adjourned at 4:10 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Barbara Brown

| P a g e 4