Legislative History for Connecticut Act
PA 16-26 SB428 Senate 1004-1017 14 Judiciary 2595-2605, 2606-2611, 109 2621-2623, 2628-2631, 2643-2650, 2652-2657, 2663-2676, 2703-2706, 2714-2716, 2719, 2775- 2776, 2780-2783, 2795- 2796, 2833, 2834-2869, 2874-2875, 3737, 3975 House Transcripts have not been received. They are available 123 on CGA website, but are not the Official copy. Contact House Clerk for assistance (860) 240-0400
Transcripts from the Joint Standing Committee Public Hearing(s) and/or Senate and House of Representatives Proceedings
Connecticut State Library Compiled 2017 S - 693
CONNECTICUT GENERAL ASSEMBLY SENATE
PROCEEDINGS 2016
VOL. 59 PART 3 679 – 1032
001004 cf/mc 49 SENATE April 21, 2016
0 Will you remark further? Will you remark further? If not, Mr. Clerk, will you call for a roll call vote? The machine will be opened.
THE CLERK:
Immediate Roll Call has been ordered in the Senate. !mmediate Roll Call 1n the Senate.
THE CHAIR:
If all members have voted, all members have voted, the machine will be closed. Mr. Clerk, will you please call the tally.
THE CLERK:
On Senate Bill Number 426.
Total number voting 35 0 Necessary for passage 18 Those voting Yea 23 Those voting Nay 12 Those absent and not voting 1
THE CHAIR:
Th~_bill passes. Next bill, sir. Mr. Clerk.
THE CLERK:
On page 33, Calendar 357, Substitute for Senate Bill Number 428, AN ACT CONCERNING FUNDING OR LEGAL SERVICES FOR THE POOR. There are amendments.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Coleman. 0 001005 cf/mc so SENATE April 21, 2016 0 SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) :
Thank you again, Madam President. I move acceptance of the Joint Committee's favorable report and passage of the bill.
THE CHAIR:
Motions on acceptance and passage. Will you remark?
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) :
Madam President, would the clerk please call LCO 3866.
THE CHAIR:
Mr. Clerk.
0 THE CLERK:
LCO Number 3866, Senate "A" offered by Senators Looney, Duff, Coleman, et-al.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Coleman.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) :
I move adoption of the Amendment.
THE CHAIR:
Motions on adoption. Will you remark, sir?
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : 0 001006 cf/mc 51 SENATE April 21, 2016 Q Madam President, this Amendment would provide that any lawyer who earns les~ than $1000 would be exempt from paying into the Clients' Security Fund. I think it's a -- a good measure. I'd urge it's adoption. Thank you, Madam President.
THE CHAIR:
Will you remark on Senate "A"? Will you remark on '-senate "A"? This is the Amendment. If not, I'll try your minds. Those in favor of Senate "A", please say aye.
SENATORS:
Aye.
THE CHAIR: 0 Opposed. Sen~te "A" is adopted. Senator Coleman.
SENATOR COLEMAN {2ND) :
Thank you, Madam President. The bill is amended, makes provision for financial support to those legal organizations in the State of Connecticut which provide services to indigent people, among the things that the bill does, first it increases certain court filing fees. Those increases may be by $5, $10, I think the biggest increase in a filing fee may be by $20. And the second thing it does is, it expands the permissible uses of the money in the Clients' Security Fund. Again, to provide for financial assistance to those legal organizations in the State of Connecticut that provide services to the indigent in our state. I'd urge passage of the bill, Madam President. 0 001007 cf/mc 52 SENATE April 21, 2016 0 THE CHAIR:
Will you remark? Senator Kissel.
SENATOR KISSEL (7TH) :
Thank you very much, Madam President. Now for something completely different. I'm happy to stand up and support this bill. We've established a history of trying to help those who are poor in our state, with legal services and our legal services societies and individuals have taken on that challenge.
As I indicated in my previous statement, there's a lot of need out there and a lot of people struggling, and a lot of people facing difficult legal challenges. And legal aid services for the poor in our state are vital to help make sure at 0 least some level of justice is meted out in the system.
Do I agree that we should continue every few years raising fees? No, at some point, that avenue is going to be foreclosed because if we keep doing that, then we're going to make it too difficult or burdensome for middle class folks to get access to justice in our court system.
As far as the Clients' Security Fund goes, it;s my recollection that in the last few years, we've reduced the requirement or the amount annually asked of attorneys. I want to say it went from something like $130 to $75 or something like that, but because there was less attorney defalcation and less demands on the fund, the amount required of attorneys to pay 0 001008 cf/mc 53 SENATE April 21, 2016
into the fund has been reduced and this is a fund that can be utilized to help the legal services.
Will we be able to continue to do that into the future? No, it's almost in the nature of a sweep, but it's one where people will assess the fund, look at it, and determine how much can be taken out of there to help the needs of those individuals in our society that are benefited by legal aid, while at the same time, making sure that the fund has enough liquidity to meet its originally intended.needs.
I think this is a thoughtful approach to a difficult problem, but I am getting to the point where I think we need to be concerned if we're going to continue to nickel and dime and ra~se fees every few years, but again, this is indicia of the difficult straits that we're in a state, but I applaud those individuals who came and spoke to me about this bill. I think it's a laudable bill and I'm happy to 0 support it. Thank you, Madam President.
THE CHAIR:
Thank you. Will you remark further? Will you remark further? Senator Boucher.
SENATOR BOUCHER (26TH) :
Thank you very much, Madam President. Madam President, for many of the reasons that my colleague and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee mentioned, when this bill came up, I was very conflicted about it, and I had received a number of emails and calls from the lawyers in my district who really supported this and knew that being on the Finance Committee, I was very concerned about the rapid increase in fees throughout our municipalities 0 001009 cf/mc 54 SENATE April 21, 2016
0 in order to close some budget gaps and to, again, to support other programs that are beneficial.
And, in doing that, in being very upset about it, and talking against that, oftentimes, 200 percent increases in local fees at our town halls and at our · DMVs. This particular bill gave me some concern and originally the lawyers that approached me said, well it's only a couple of fees, and we're only gonna' raise them $5 or $10 apiece, maybe the largest as was just said, is $20, but for the very reasons that were explained that we may be nickel and diming our to where it affects those, particularly since when looking at the fees, it wasn't just a couple -- it was over 10, 11, 12 fees. It was quite a number of fees that even surprised some of the advocates and lawyers that were talking to me about it, and some of them were for small claims court fees, so as I said, that -- it just went against, you know -- the 0 -- the concerns that I had about making Connecticut more costly at almost every level of government.
But on the other side of that coin, I also thought about those that were receiving the services, and it is oftentimes a single mother, it's oftentimes abused children, and that pulled strongly at my heart strings. It was very difficult to come to terms with this and particularly since I voted against the previous bill that would even expand this type of service for civil lawsuits as well as - - where in this case, we're really talking about really needy, really deserving, very serious situations that do need support and do need legal services. So, for that reason, I guess, after weighing both sides, I finally came to the terms of the fact that it is a bill that I could vote in favor of. Thank you, Madam President. 0 001010 cf/mc 55 SENATE April 21, 2016
0 THE CHAIR:
Thank you. Will you remark? Senator Kane. Good afternoon, sir.
SENATOR KANE (32ND) :
Thank you, Madam President and good afternoon to you.
I rise for a couple questions to the proponent of the bill.
THE CHAIR:
Please proceed, sir.
SENATOR KANE (32ND) :
Thank you, Madam President. I know Senator Kissel 0 touched on it briefly, but could you explain to the circle what the Client Security Fund is? Through you, Madam President.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Coleman.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) :
Madam President, through you, t~e Clients' Security Fund is a fund that was established in order to compensate victims of attorney Mal Fees and so, defalcation -- in other words -- wrongdoing by attorneys and the representation of their clients. Through you, Madam President.
THE CHAIR: 0 001011 cf/mc 56 SENATE April 21, 2016 0 Senator Kane.
SENATOR KANE, (32ND) :
And it is funded through court fees? Through you, Madam President.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Coleman.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) :.
It is funded through fees assessed against practicing attorneys. Senator Kissel had mentioned that that fee has decreased in recent years. I believe it was as once as high as $110 a year, it's declined to $75 per year. Additionally, Madam 0 President, the Clients' Security Fund has also been used as an attorneys' assistance programs for those attorneys who may be found to have developed a substance abuse problem, alcohol or whatever. The fund is used in order to treat those kind of -- kind of ailments for particular attorneys.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Kane.
SENATOR KANE (32ND) :
Thank you, Madam President. And does the good Senator know how much is in this fund, through you.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Coleman. 0 001012 cf/mc 57 SENATE April 21, 2016 0 SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) :
At last report, there was a $16 million surplus in the fund.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Kane.
SENATOR KANE (32ND) :
I'm sorry, is that 1 6 or 6 0? Through you, I -- I
THE CHAIR:
Senator Coleman.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : 0 Thank you, Madam President. 1 6, through you.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Kane.
SENATOR KANE (32ND) :
Thank you, Madam President. Does the good Senator know if we -- during the deficit mitigation, rather -- either in December or most recently of this month, was it swept at all? Any funds swept throu~h there -- through the deficit mitigation process, through you?
THE CHAIR:
Senator Coleman. 0 001013 cf/mc 58 SENATE April 21, 2016 0 SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) :
I don't believe so, Madam President. Through you.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Kane.
SENATOR KANE (32ND) :
I don't -- I'm just -- do you -- do you have an official answer for that -- or just -- we don't know -- or --
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) :
There's a -- through you, Madam President, if I have the floor. 0 THE CHAIR:
Please, Senator -- Senator Coleman.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) :
Through you, there's a $16 million surplus in the fund, which leads me to believe that there was no money taken out through deficit mitigation.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Senator Kane.
SENATOR KANE (32ND) :
Okay. Thank you Madam President, and with this change in law, are we still comfortable that there 0 001014 cf/mc 59 SENATE April 21, 2016
0 will be enough in this fund to satisfy the needs of the individuals who seek this fund, through you Madam President.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Coleman.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) :
Through you, Madam President. I am comfortable and many others who've analyzed this bill and the fund are also comfortable. I would point out, in response to the question, that there is a mechanism for review of any proposals to allocate money to the IOLTA Fund and before the allocation can be made, approval is required from at least a couple of points in the process. 0 THE CHAIR: Senator Kane.
SENATOR KANE (32ND) :
Thank you, Madam President. I thank the good Senator for answering my questions.
THE CHAIR:
Thank you. Will you remark further on the bill? Will you remark further on the bill?
Senator Looney.
SENATOR LOONEY (11TH) :
0 001015 cf/mc 60 SENATE April 21, 2016
0 Thank you, Madam President. Speaking in support of the bill, wanted to commend Senator Coleman and the -- and Senator Kissel for bringing this bill forward from the Judiciary Committee, because it is -- it is very important, in terms of recognizing what has been happening regarding legal services in the state in recent years.
Prior to 2007, the Interest on Lawyers Trust Account was providing a substantial revenue stream for legal services but with the collapse of the real estate market in 2007, that amount, which had reached as much as $20 million a year, has declined by nearly 90 percent in the time since then. We've seen layoffs in legal services offices throughout the state and the capacity to meet deserving needs has been severely constrained. In fact, one report from Connecticut legal services in 2013 and 2014 was able to open only about 3400 cases out of 19,000 requests 0 that it received. So that is-- that points to a [inaudible 23:51]-- a glaring preble~ here and -- so this will -- again, as Senator Coleman said, deal with the -- the issue of the -- this particular account obviously was set up to establish a compensation fund for those who were victimized by attorney defalcations or thefts but we are assured by the Judicial Department that $16 million surplus and the balance are -- is -- is certainly adequate to meet any claims that are likely to be presented in the -- in the near future.
Again, there is the -- the proposal in the -- in the bill that would allow only funds coming into the account going -- going forward. Money departed in the fund on or after October 1, 2016 might be used to provide such grants to provide legal representations to the -- to the poor. 0 001016 cf/mc 61 SENATE April 21, 2016 0 There was an issue a few years ago, when there was an effort to use this fund for a different purpose that was broadly criticized and -- and opposed by the Bar Association and it -- that proposal did not go forward, but this one is one that everyone recognizes is -- I believe appropriate to meet what has become a -- a glaring problem and demand and will provide some additional significant revenue for that fund and it will be up to the Judicial Department in effect, to determine how much can be apportioned to this use that will now be an allowable use out of some of the new funds that will be coming -- some of the new money that will be coming into that fund, so -- I -- I think this is a -- a -- a very significant bill to meet a real practical and urgent need. Thank you, Madam President. 0 THE CHAIR: Thank you. Will you remark further on the bill? Will you remark further on the bill? Senator Coleman.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) :
Madam President, if there's no further remarks to be made and if there are no objections, I would move that this item be placed on our Consent Calendar.
THE CHAIR:
Seeing no -- oops, there is an objection. This time, Mr. Clerk, will you call for a roll call vote, and the machine will be opened.
THE CLERK: 0 001017 cf/mc 62 SENATE April 21, 2016 0 Immediate Roll Call has been ordered in the Senate. Immediate Roll Call has been ordered in the Senate.
' Immediate Roll Call has been ordered in the Senate. Immediate Roll Call in the Senate.
THE CHAIR:
Have all members have voted, all members have vot7d, the machine will be closed. Mr. Clerk, will you please call the tally.
THE CLERK:
Senate Bill Number 428.
Total number voting 36 Necessary for passage 19 0 Those voting Yea 36 Those voting Nay 0 Those absent and not voting 0
THE CHAIR:
The bill passes. Mr. Clerk. ·
THE CLERK:
On page 17, Calendar 408, Substitute for Senate Bill -----~==~==~~~~~~~--- -~~mber 454, AN ACT CONCERNING AUTOMATIC ERASURE OF CRIMINAL RECORDS AND BAIL FOR PE~SONS CHARGED WITH MISDEMEANOR DRUG OFFENSES, Favorable Report of the Committee on Judiciary. There are amendments.
THE CHAIR: 0 STANDING COMMITTEE HEARINGS
JUDICIARY PART 6 2347 – 2800
2016
002595 55 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING considered people with mental illness to be expendable. Forced medication, forced chemical restraints and (inaudible) is a failed idea.
We live in a nation where freedom is everything. Please leave us the choice to take or not to take medication. I know scores of people with psychosis who do not take medication and are for the most part happy people and pose no threat to anyone. I quote the great teacher, Martin Luther King, Jr., who said, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice." Vote no to H.B. No. 5531 and be free. Thank you.
REP. TONG (147TH): Thank you Matthew. Any questions for Matthew? Again, I want to thank you and your colleagues for being here today and for your courage in coming to share your experiences. c We appreciate it. It makes a real impact on how we do these bills. In fact as you and your friends have been testifying, I have been asking questions up here to get a better understanding of the legislation and where it is coming from and what the motivations are, so I appreciate your time.
MATTHEW ROWE: Thank you sir.
REP. TONG (147TH): I don't think Senator Looney is here, but when Senator Looney arrives, I think our staff will let us know. Bill Clendenen. Good afternoon. If you would please press the button.
BILL CLENDENEN: Good afternoon Representative Tong, members of the committee, thank you for listening to me here today. c 002596 56 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 I am here to express the support of the Connecticut Bar Association for RAISED BILL NUMBER 426 and 428. The Connecticut Bar Association, of which I am probably the president, strongly supports these two bills.
Bill 426 does two things; one, it allows the judicial branch, if there are excess funds in the client's security funds to use their funds on an annual basis to support the legal aid programs. The second portion of the bill makes very modest increases in the court filing fees to further support legal aid. The projected revenues will at best meet half of the deficits facing the legal aid providers in Connecticut. The crisis continues to grow.
One of the basic tenants of the Connecticut Bar Association is to make access to justice for 0 everyone in Connecticut one of its top priorities. Presently in Connecticut, we have two classes of justice; one for the well to do and then the rest for the poor and the economically disadvantaged.
Year in and year out, people are evicted, people don't have help with protective orders. There are serious consequences to them and that takes me to ~which is the proposed task force. This is to study this task force which is a blue ribbon task force, has all the stakeholders in Connecticut as proposed members. It will look hard at how do we provide access to justice. Sometimes, it is called Civil Gideon and sometimes, it is called the Civil Right to Counsel, but this will be the first time that Connecticut has looked at the overall problem of access to justice, but all of the citizens of 002597 57 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING Connecticut, not just the well to do. It is the first time and I have been practicing law almost 50 years in Connecticut that you had the legislature, the judiciary, the governor's office, the bar association, all of the stakeholders saying wait a minute, we have to look at it so that everyone has access to meaningful justice. There is no cost associated with 428 the way it is done. There is a short time line.
What I fear and what the bar association fears is unless we take the issue head-on, we are going to continue to have trying to fingers in the dice to stop the cutbacks. The cutbacks will continue. I know my time is up. I really thank you very much for listening to me and
I would appreciate any questions you would have and c I would respectively request that these two bills get your support and move on and I hope they pass.
Thank you so much.
REP. TONG (147TH): Thank you, Mr. Clendenen. Thank you for your leadership with the bar association. If you will give my regards to your son, Pat.
BILL CLENDENEN: I will.
REP. TONG (147TH): I want to ask you about Civil Gideon; well actually I just want to make a point.
I want to thank Senator Coleman and the bar association for its leadership on this initiative and the chief justice I know has been particularly focused on access to justice issues. c 002598 58 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0
I think it would be helpful, when we talk about Civil Gideon, we all know what we are talking about and it refers to the case of Gideon V Wainwright, which established the right to counsel in criminal cases.
I think it would be helpful if over the next several months or maybe before the end of session of the bar made an effort to educate people in this building about Gideon and about that case from which this initiative springs and why the holding of that case and the tradition that has developed around that case and our practice in our courts of the United States that the next logical step is to move to Civil Gideon or at least to embrace that conversation earnestly.
I think it would just be helpful to help everybody 0 understand that this is a bedrock constitutional principal and how we got to that place with Gideon and where we can go from here. If you can talk with folks about the bar and maybe put some focus into that. I don't know if there is time to put a little display down in the tunnel between here and the capitol or something like that, but often education campaigns like that are not just helpful but are important before we take a major step, so I commend that to you.
BILL CLENDENEN: I will do it sir.
REP. TONG (147TH): Great. Representative Gonzalez.
REP. GONZALEZ (3RD): Thank you Mr. Chair and thank you for coming and testifying on behalf of the floor 002599 59 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING and to be sure that access for justice is for all. Thank you very much for that.
BILL CLENDENEN: It has been 50 years I have been working. I want to succeed for the people who live in our communities who are unable to get meaningful access to the courts.
REP. GONZALEZ (3RD): Thank you very much for that.
REP. TONG (147TH): Representative Rebimbas.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): Thank you Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon. Thank you for your testimony here today. Just want some information and clarification. In the proposed legislation, it talked about grants and aid to nonprofit organization. How do you foresee that working and which nonprofit organization would c be benefitting?
BILL CLENDENEN: The legislature has already -- you mean in 426?
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): No, 428.
BILL CLENDENEN: In 428, what would happen, based on studies, money could be funneled through the Connecticut Bar Foundation, which is the designated agency that the legislature has for taking the court fees and the like and if you have experiments as to how you can provide meaningful access on a cost effective basis, whether you could encourage pilot programs through the legal aid agencies that would happen, but the funding, particularly with the crisis, is not available now. 0 002600 60 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 The notion is how to study it, how to figure it out because there is a recent study out of Boston that shows significant savings that are generated by putting in $1 and you avoid all sorts of other costs for taxpayers, police services, educational services, homeless shelters. There is real savings to taxpayers but we have to bring that to the Connecticut perspective. One of the ways to do it is to have experiments, so you don't have to go whole hog into it, but to figure out how to do it. The mechanism is in place through the Connecticut Bar Foundation.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): So what you are saying, these funds wouldn't go for a study per se, it would be, when you are talking about study, you are talking about having the programs actually out there for these individuals, correct? 0 BILL CLENDENEN: Yes, but I think that is more down the road.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): Okay. I just want to make sure that if legislation were to pass that this goes immediately to the need. So, how would this compare with the program that the Connecticut Bar Association already has, the pro bono initiative which is free legal services for individuals who can't afford it?
BILL CLENDENEN: It is a complement. The problem we have is the need is so great that we can't meet it.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH)' For lack of attorneys?
0 002601 61 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING BILL CLENDENEN: No, for just the lack of time. There are so many people that need the aid and our members put in thousands of hours of pro bono activity to supplement the work of the legal aid agencies and still one in ten eligible people can get the services. There just aren't enough resources.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): So the intent is this collection of funds that would be going to the Connecticut Foundation, Bar Foundation, is that correct? What's the name of the foundation?
BILL CLENDENEN: Connecticut Bar Foundation.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): The Connecticut Bar Foundation is to then be filtered out to, for c example, Connecticut Legal Services? BILL CLENDENEN: Yes. That is how it works. In 426, that is how those funds work. That is how they work now and the modest increases would supplement that. Because IOLTA, the Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts, is very low right now because of the interest rates, because of court filings are down, they are in deep trouble.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): So why would we be going to the Connecticut Bar Foundation instead of going straight to legal services?
BILL CLENDENEN: Because that is the mechanism you already set up. The mechanism already set up is to have the Connecticut Bar Foundation administer those funds to the state so it is at no cost to the state. There is no administrative burden. No taxpayer cost 0 002602 62 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 associated with it. The money goes there and they have these formulas that go out and they are audited and looked at by the Judicial Department, so this is really a no cost way to put the funds to the most effective use.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): What is the estimated revenue from the, as we have indicated, the modest increases?
BILL CLENDENEN: It may make a difference of $1 million or $900,000. It is unclear. It would be dependent on how many cases are filed, but most of it, as you look at the bill, most of the increases are $5 or $10. There is one $20 increase, so very modest increases in the filing fees.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): And will the criteria for need base be the same as being currently utilized or 0 will that be different?
BILL CLENDENEN: No it is the same.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): Okay.
BILL CLENDENEN: I mean the problem is that there is not enough money to meet the needs of the poorest of the poor. Forget the working poor, they don't have a shot, but the poorest of the poor can't get the access, so that is why we are trying to do this. Just to go back for a minute, that is why the task force study is so important. What are we missing? How do we do this? How do we help these individuals? You get someone who was evicted from their house, they are working, they end up as homeless. Their kids go into foster care. You 002603 63 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING heard all about foster care this morning. The kids go into foster care. The kids have trouble in the educational system and you get all those costs.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): I don't think anyone is going to disagree with you on the situations.
BILL CLENDENEN: I'm sorry.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): The situations are very true and they exist, we understand that. I'm just trying to understand: A) How could we address these situations even quicker because we are dealing with two different bills.
BILL CLENDENEN: Yes.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): One asking for a task force c and then there is 428 and as we know what task force is, all well meaning, but many times reports come out and things don't get implemented and that is why I'm inquiring as you're here, because we do have the pro bono initiative that was my understanding that was providing free legal services to the most needy and again I just wanted to see whether or not there was a mechanism in to expand on the free services that we currently have.
I am trying to understand how all of the funds are going to then be filtered to the existing nonprofit that is serving the individuals that you are describing as well. It is just a matter of clarification and understanding, but I think the true intent here is just to make sure we all have the same intent, that this all gets to the most needy as quickly as possible. c 002604 64 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0
BILL CLENDENEN: And, I'm sorry.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): No, no, please.
BILL CLENDENEN: That mechanism is in place and has worked very effectively with the Connecticut Bar Foundation. The CBA will get none of this money. We have no financial stake in it.
We continue to recruit our members and other lawyers to provide these free legal services. As I said, there are thousands of hours being dedicated free of charge by Connecticut lawyers to do this.
The other money, as it is filtered through the state's system goes to the Connecticut Bar Foundation and they immediately get the money out to the providers. It is about as efficient as you can 0 get it, where you have no extra cost to the state. I think that is a key part is it is a very creative way to do it. You don't have a state mechanism. You don't have all of that cost built into it, so it goes to the private foundation and then the money goes out to the providers.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): Thank you.
BILL CLENDENEN: I hope that was
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): It does. You have been very responsive. Thank you for your testimony.
BILL CLENDENEN: Thanks.
REP. TONG (147TH): Representative O'Dea. 0 002605 65 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING
REP. O'DEA (125TH): Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you Attorney Clendenen. I graduated law school with your son at Catholic University, and so I wanted to thank you for your testimony, say hello and I appreciate all of your hard work.
BILL CLENDENEN: Thank you. I graduated in 1967 from Catholic and you know, it is interesting, if I just put this aside, I am very fortunate. I was a full scholarship student. I would not have been able to be here except for somebody helping me with the scholarship, so I am very appreciative.
REP. O'DEA (125TH): Thank you very much.
REP. TONG (147TH): Further questions? Thank you c very much. BILL CLENDENEN: Thank you.
REP. TONG (147TH): Beverly Comfort. Beverly, how are you? Nice to see you. ~6"53{ BEVERLY COMFORT: I am good, thank you. My name is Beverly Comfort. I am from Wallingford and I want to address the senators, representatives and Judiciary Committee.
If someone were to come and take me out of my home because I didn't act right, I would first feel like a criminal. I would feel frightened and non trusting. That is when -- if they forced medications on me, I would feel like a guinea pig. Some of these medications I may not need. My body can't handle some of them. Then, some of them make 0 002606 66 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 me feel lethargic. I know my body and I would rather have to go to the hospital of my choice.
When I first was diagnosed as bipolar, they put me on many, many medications and I could hardly walk and I could hardly move my arms, my muscles hurt and it did not feel right. They said that is how you are supposed to feel and it just wasn't right. If I wanted to cry, I couldn't cry. So, I would rather be able to go to the hospital of my choice if I knew I wasn't doing well.
REP. TONG (147TH): Thank you Beverly. Any questions for Beverly? Thank you for your patience and your testimony today.
BEVERLY COMFORT: Thank you.
REP. TONG (147TH): Senator President. Mr. 0 President. Welcome back to the Judiciary Committee.
SENATOR LOONEY (11TH) : Good morning Representative Tong and distinguished members of the Judiciary Committee.
My name is Martin Looney, State Senator for the 11th District representing New Haven, Hamden and North Haven, and I am here to speak on two bills on your public hearing agenda today; SENATE BILL 426; AN ACT CREATING A TASK FORCE TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO LEGAL COUNSELOR IN CIVIL MATTERS and SENATE BILL 428; AN ACT CONCERNING FUNDING OF LEGAL SERVICES FOR THE POOR.
Lack of access to legal representation has become a national issue and one that greatly affects the 0 002607 67 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING Connecticut residents. Despite the fact that the Connecticut Judicial Branch takes its obligation to provide access to justice profoundly and seriously, the state's legal assistance agencies provide representation to thousands of low income residents in Connecticut and attorneys also provide thousands of hours of pro bono legal services annually, many residents in Connecticut still do not have access to legal representation to their critical disadvantage and so many instances.
As things now stand, the unmet needs for Connecticut residents for legal representation have outstretched the dedicated efforts of the judicial branch and the bar to meet this demand and again, this is not just a state, but national problem. Indeed the statistics regarding self-representation in c Connecticut paint a stark picture. According to the Judicial Branch, in 85% of family law cases, at least one party is self-represented.
In housing matters, 75% of the time at least one party is self-represented. Overall, a quarter of all civil cases have at least one party self represented and this number goes up to 38% at the intermediate appellate level. These include cases of utmost importance where decisions are being made with regard to the rights of individuals that carry the utmost gravity.
Each and every day in housing court without a lawyer, Connecticut families face the prospect of eviction and potential homelessness.
0 002608 68 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 Each and every day in family court without a lawyer, restraining order applicants are striving to be made safe, yet are left to fill out the complicated legal applications by themselves and navigate the legal system without representation.
Other families are trying to get healthcare services or other potentially life-saving benefits all on their own and this list goes on day after day.
I would like to commend the leaders of the Judicial Branch and the bar, especially Chief Justice Chase Rogers and Connecticut Bar Association President Bill Clendenen and Dean Timothy Fisher of the University of Connecticut School of Law for their many recent powerful public statements on this issue and their efforts to combat crisis.
Chief Justice Rogers convened the Connecticut Access 0 to Justice Commission in 2011 to develop recommendations to help ensure equal access to all people. The legal aid and civil representation subcommittee released a 2013 report which included the following facts about the lack of civil legal representation in our state: First, self representation is especially prevalent and problematic in family housing foreclosure and small claims cases.
Secondly, because of the funding and resource shortfalls, Connecticut legal aid programs can only assist a fraction of low income people needing legal representation. For example, Connecticut legal services was able to only open about 3400 new cases out of the roughly 19,000 requests it received in 2013 and 2014. So even if the pro bono effort of 0 002609 69 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING Connecticut attorneys were to be doubled, it would not fill the large gap in the need for legal services.
This is to be sure a deeply complicated issue especially in light of all of the competing critically urgent needs of our state and calls upon the state to provide assistance in so many years. Moreover, other states, especially our neighbor New York, have taken recent steps towards beginning to address this crisis, specifically in housing matters that need to be examined for their efficacy.
Therefore, I believe the appropriate next step would be to establish a public task force with a wide variety of stakeholders that would help the state determine how to move forward in increasing access c to legal representation. SENATE BILL 426 will establish a task force with a wide array of leaders from the Judicial Branch, the bar, the General Assembly and elsewhere with the purpose of first studying the nature, extent and consequence of Connecticut's unmet needs for legal representation in civil matters, especially those involved in essential human needs and second, reporting on those findings and most critically, third, making detailed recommendations to the legislature on how we can best help secure access to the justice and legal representation in civil legal matters, especially those involving essential human needs.
As you know, this problem has been exacerbated in recent years because of the decline in IOLTA funds. It used to go a long way towards funding legal c 002610 70 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 service operations, but since the decline in the real estate market and collapse of IOLTA funding several years ago, that funding stream has been reduced to something very negligible.
The second bill I would like to support is SENATE BILL 428 which could immediately expand funding for legal services to the poor by increasing funding for Connecticut legal aid programs and while I believe the task force really is necessary to help us plan holistically to address access to the representation crisis, SENATE BILL 428 is an immediately achievable way to provide potentially up to an extra million dollars a year in support of our absolutely critically, yet financially struggling legal aid programs.
This proposal would amend Connecticut general statutes 51-81d which grants the Superior Court the 0 authority to establish a Client Security Fund and strictly limits the purposes for which such funds could be used to reimburse client losses, attorney misconduct and to fund the Lawyers Referral and Substance Abuse Program. This bill would amend the statute to add a third permissible use of the fund and that is to allow the Superior Court to utilize the funds in the Client Security Fund to provide for delivery of legal services to the poor or for the delivery of legal services provided by legal aid organizations within the state.
However, the proposal specifies that only funds deposited from attorneys on or after October 1, 2016, would be permitted to be used for this third purpose. Also, there is no proposed increase in the annual fee paid to the Client Security Fund by 0 002611 71 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING individual attorneys. This fee of course is set by the Judicial Branch.
The bill would also marginally increase certain court filing fees that can be used to further fund legal aid programs and I thank Bill Clendenen, President of the Bar Association, for his support in testifying today in favor of this potential additional funding mechanism for legal aid.
These proposals are part of the solution to immediately increase access to the courts for the state's poorest residents with no impact on the state budget. I would urge the committee to take action on these bills.
Senate Bill 426 particularly addresses this issue of Civil Gideon around the country which many states c are beginning to grapple with. Dean Fisher in a speech at UConn Law School pointed out that we have in fact a marked failure in that there are large numbers of underemployed young attorneys looking for active work and yet large numbers of unrepresented defendants or unrepresented litigants who need help and there ought to be a way to help bring them together in ways that would be supportive and helpful to both.
Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you members of the committee.
REP. TONG (147TH): Thank you Mr. President and thank you for your leadership on these issues broadly and these specific bills. c 002621 81 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING shouldn't do. If they don't believe what you believe, you cannot force them to adopt your belief. Please vote against BILL 5531. Thank you very much for listening.
REP. TONG (147TH): Thank you. Any questions for Janet. Thank you so much for being here.
JANET OSTER: This is one of my books.
REP. TONG (147TH): Great, thank you.
JANET OSTER: Thank you very much.
REP. TONG (147TH): Nour Alnajjar.
NOUR ALNAJJAR: Good afternoon. Dear committee members, I am Nour Alnajjar from New Britain and c former client of Connecticut legal services. I am in support of SENATE BILL 428 regarding legal services funding. The purpose of my testimony is to share my recent experience with Connecticut Legal Services.
I am a single mother of two children as well as a survivor of domestic violence. My story is about what it means to have a safe life. I lost my home safety, happiness and four years of my life because of my abuser, my ex-husband. I was weak emotionally and financially and I wasn't able to leave. When I left, as a result, I became homeless with two children. I stayed in a shelter for three weeks until I could find a safe place to live with my kids. c 002622 82 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 My dream since that was to get divorced and the idea of getting a lawyer was not an affordable option. I heard about Connecticut Legal Services. I started working on my dream. I went to the office and Connecticut Legal Services of New Britain contacted me regarding a referral from a domestic violence organization.
Mr. Martin Wheeler opened my case in May 2015. He submitted every single detail about my case and gave me a broad view of his legal length. Connecticut Legal Services prepared my divorce papers and contacted my ex-husband's lawyer to arrange an agreement and informed me of my court date. He represented me in court and supported my decision for sole custody of my children and helped me to transfer my ex-husband's personal items to his lawyer safely. This has allowed me to reach my goal and find that peace in my life. 0
Connecticut Legal Services helped me to honor my freedom in December 2015 when my divorce was granted. My new life wouldn't have been possible without the help of Connecticut Legal Services. Today, I am so grateful to be alive, to have two beautiful children who were not raised in a home filled with emotional, physical and mental violence and have an opportunity to hear my story so I can support legal services to continue helping the people who are in need. Thank you for your attention and consideration of my voice.
REP. TONG (147TH): Thank you Nour and thank you for your powerful testimony about the impact that legal services has had on you and your family and your children are obviously very lucky to have a strong 0 002623 83 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING and committed mother like you who is fighting hard for them and for yourself and by your example showing them the right way to live their lives and to stand up for themselves.
NOUR ALNAJJAR: You are welcome.
REP. TONG (147TH): Any questions? Thanks again. Caryl Lee Hall. Good afternoon.
CARYL LEE HALL: Good afternoon. Representative Tong and members of the Judiciary Committee. My name is Karyl Lee Hall and I am an attorney with the Connecticut Legal Rights Project.
We represent low income people with psychiatric disabilities in among other context, the right to treatment, the right to refuse treatment and cases c under the patient's bill of rights.
We are in opposition to HOUSE BILL 5531; WHICH IS AN ACT CONCERNING THE CARE AND TREATMENT OF PERSONS WITH MENTAL ILLNESS OR SUBSTANCE ABUSE DISORDER because first expanding involuntary medication of persons with psychiatric disabilities to nursing homes and the community at large is overbroad to the max because permitting involuntary medication without any due process protection is unconstitutional in our opinion.
You have my testimony and so I am not going to read every word of it to you, but I do want to make certain points quickly.
First of all, as you all know, the Supreme Court has recognized that an individual has the 0 002628 88 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 authority and I give it to you. Then, I go to you and say you have to take this because the probate court said you have to be medicated and you say no. Where do I go? Do I bring the police in? Do I take you to the hospital forcibly? In the end, you are probably going to be committed anyway because if you continue to refuse, where do we go and that is a cost of the bill.
Not only it complicated in terms of rights, but the bill doesn't address about what happens about the money that is necessary for the intervention not only as it has been pointed out here by the probate court, whose docket is going to be somewhat larger, and the police whose responsibility will be somewhat broader and for the emergency rooms who are already over-crowded. I am not addressing this as directly as you might like, but it's because it is a complicated issue. Thank you. 0
REP. BARAM(15TH): Thank you very much. It is a complicated issue and I hope we can find a way to provide the protection, but yet get somebody help when needed. Thank you.
REP. TONG (147TH): Thank you. Further questions? Thank you so much. Scott Murphy. Mr. Murphy, nice to see you.
SCOTT MURPHY: Members of the committee, I am Scott Murphy. Until recently, for 20 years, I was the managing partner of Shipman and Goodwin, one of the largest Connecticut law firms, and I am here to testify in favor of SENATE BILL 428 THAT WOULD ALLOW CLIENT SECURITY FUND FEES TO BE USED TO SUPPORT LEGAL AID SERVICE INDIGENT. 0 002629 89 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING
As you know, there is a crisis in legal aid funding. The funding gap probably now is $2 million dollars or more a year which is going to cause additional lay-offs in organizations that are already stretched very, very think. Firms like Shipman and Goodwin has kept up. We have increased our direct financial support of those legal service organizations. We increased the number or pro bono volunteer hours that our lawyers are putting in and we have partners who serve in leadership capacities in those organizations, but it is not nearly enough.
In Connecticut, there are literally hundreds of thousands of individuals living at, below or near the poverty level. They have important life problems as we all do that need the help and intervention of the courts, often in situations c where that access can turn their life around or avoid a disastrous situation and it seems to me that the eminently reasonable solution to allow some of the fees are being paid in by those that can afford access to the courts to help those that can't afford that access to get the help they need and quite often avoid greater costs to the state in terms of solving problems that become greater because that access is denied.
I will just end with a personal anecdote. My daughter-in-law for eight years worked with at-risk children at Connecticut Legal Services, so I have some firsthand appreciation how hard legal aid lawyers work, the miracles they perform and the very modest pay frankly that they receive. The state really would get no better bang for its buck than c 002630 90 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 the passage of SENATE BILL 428. Thank you and I would be happy to answer any questions.
REP. TONG (147TH): Thank you Mr. Murphy and thank you for your advocacy on these issues. Please give my regards to Alex Lloyd, your partner.
SCOTT MURPHY: I will.
REP. TONG (147TH): Also, I wanted to mention, to take the opportunity, received your letter and appreciate your advocacy on behalf of, I believe, the Center for Children's Advocacy and I did pass that along at my firm and hope that we can be helpful there. So, thank you for your work on that nonprofit as well.
SCOTT MURPHY: You're very welcome and thank you all. 0
REP. TONG (147TH): Any questions? Senator Coleman.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Thank you Mr. Chairman. Attorney Murphy, I wonder whether or not if there would be any concern that taking money from the Client Security Fund would mean that those clients, who might be in need of that money might go wanting?
SCOTT MURPHY: My understanding of the way the bill would work is first it would only be new money coming in that would be available for this purpose and two, that there is an opportunity for a judgment to be made as to the adequacy of the funds for the original purpose before additional funds are made available for legal services organizations, so I think that concern is covered. It simply broadens 0 002631 91 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING the purpose, but there will be some discretion in judgment as to the allocation, I assume.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Thank you. I wanted folks to be clear about that. Thank you.
SCOTT MURPHY: Thank you.
REP. TONG (147TH): Further questions? Thank you. Linda Lentini is next.
LINDA LENTINI: Good afternoon Senator Coleman and respective members of the judicial committee. My name is Linda Lentini and I am here to oppose H.B. No. 5531, AN ACT CONCERNING THE CARE AND TREATMENT OF PERSONS WITH MENTAL ILLNESS OR SUBSTANCE USE DISORDER. c I am a registered voter in Plainville, Connecticut, and I am a member of the Advocacy Unlimited Community.
In an article titled Involuntary Outpatient Commitment Myths and Facts by the National Coalition for Mental Health Recovery states that there is no evidence that using court orders to mandate outpatient commitment is effective. It also states that there is ample evidence that intensive services provided on an involuntary basis can bring tremendous improvement in outcomes such as reduced hospitalizations, reduced arrests, longer tenure in stable housing and reduced symptoms.
As we re-visit this law again, we are still talking about the same basic human rights violations. This bill violates a person's right to choose and it is c l 002643 103 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING I believe that we need to keep our right to decide if we want to be on medication and this should not be forced on a person. I also think that if a person refuses to take medication at home, then they are refusing for a reason and maybe you should be asking why people don't want medication and why people feel like the treatment offered is totally inhuman.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Thank you. Are there questions? I see none. Thank you Jamie.
JAMIE PEREZ: Thank you.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Peter Adorno. Good afternoon sir.
PETER ADORNO: Good afternoon. I want to first c start by saying God bless America. My name is Peter Adorno and I live in Waterbury, Connecticut, and I am here to support the SB-428 AN ACT CONCERNING FUNDING OF LEGAL SERVICES.
A couple of years ago, I applied for public housing in Waterbury. At this time, I was living in a private apartment. Unfortunately at that time, I was recovering from an operation for cancer of my left leg and I was going through a separation with my wife. This housing was very expensive and I was on a fixed income, so I wanted to move into public housing because it was much more affordable for me. When I finally moved on the waiting list, the management company did a background check and the management company told me that according to the report, I was convicted in 1999 for committing a c 002644 104 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 felony in Rhode Island for stealing goods. This was not true.
I was afraid because I was going to be denied admission to this housing, so I contacted Connecticut Legal Services in Waterbury. One of the attorneys, Mr. Brody, helped me and he contacted the Office of the Attorney General in Rhode Island, the Bureau of Criminal Identification. I provided them with copies of my driver's license and my social Security card. After the Office of the Attorney General researched it and confirmed that I had no criminal record and they sent me a notarized letter that stated I had no criminal record in Rhode Island.
After getting this letter, I was able to move into my new affordable elderly housing apartment, praise the Lordl Without Connecticut Legal Services' help, 0 I might not have been accepted. Also the waiting list for the elderly housing can be too long. When I was finally accepted, I was in the middle of my one-year lease and I was afraid if I moved into my new apartment, the old landlord might sue me for breaking my lease. My attorney at Connecticut Legal Services told me that there is a special law that protects the elderly, like myself, who are accepted into elderly socialized housing that if I give the landlord 30 days written notice before I move, I am allowed to terminate my lease before it ends. I notified my landlord that I would be moving into elderly housing. Knowing about this law was a big help in assistance and relieved me a lot of my anxieties at that time. Therefore, please support SB-428. 0 002645 105 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING Elderly people like myself need lawyers that can help them when they have legal problems. I thank you so very much for your help.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : And thank you sir for your testimony? Any questions for Mr. Adorno? Representative Rebimbas.
REP. REBIMBAS (70TH): Thank you Mr. Chairman. Not so much a question, just a thank you for obviously making the travel up to Waterbury. I know it is not easy especially with all of the traffic and construction. It is the same roads that I travel coming from Naugatuck, so I know. Thank you for taking the time to be here and sharing your story.
PETER ADORNO: Thank you for your time and I hope c that you will support this bill. SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Any other members with a question or comment? If not, thank you very much Mr. Adorno.
PETER ADORNO: God bless you.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Alexandra Ferguson. I am not seeing any response from Ms. Ferguson.
Wilnelira Bianci (cannot read name legibly on speaker sheet) .
WILNELIRA BIANCI: Good afternoon.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Good afternoon. c 002646 106 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 WILNELIRA BIANCI: My name is Wilnelira Bianci (sp) and I live in Hartford. I am raising my children by myself. I work part-time at night doing maintenance.
I am testifying support in SENATE BILL 428; AN ACT CONCERNING FUNDING OF LEGAL AID SERVICES FOR THE POOR.
I came for help for legal aid because my son has a serious learning disability and was struggling at school. He was frustrated by not being able to learn in his class. He hated to go to school. He would bang his head until he gave himself concussions and head injuries. He would cry outside of the building, anything to avoid going into his classroom. He has a disability (indiscernible 2:54:55.6) legal aid because they know the law. The school does not play around when a lawyer comes to a PTT meeting. 0
My GHLA attorney did help me by investigating my son's program and then getting him the service that he needed. The attorney discovered that my son was not given proper speech and language services for months and he was making no progress in reading and math. She helped me convince the school to send him to a more appropriate program where he is now happy and is actually learning.
We had to fight more than a few years to get this help. If I didn't have a legal aid lawyer, my son would still be struggling emotionally and physically, banging his head and still not learning. Please support legal aid funding because people like me need someone knowledgeable to fight for us. 0 002647 107 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Thank you. Any questions for the lady? None. We appreciate the information you provided us with.
WILNELIRA BIANCI: Thank you and have a nice day.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): You too. James T. Shearin.
JAMES SHEARIN: Good afternoon Senator Coleman and members of the committee. I am here as President of the Connecticut Bar Foundation and speaking in support of bills 426 and 428.
426 is the Civil Gideon legislation that you heard Mr. Clendenen talk eloquently about. I have submitted written testimony and I will expand on that as appropriate. c With respect to 428, if I can address some question the committee had asked the previous speaking, particularly Representative Rembimbas. The 428 has two components to the bill. The first is to increase the fees under the CFGA program which is the Court Fees, Grants and Aid Program. That program was started in 2009. The fees were last raised in 2012. The proposed increases are less than 1% a year since 2012. The reason that program was started was because our IOLTA funding, which is the Interest On Lawyers Trust Accounts took a nosedive. The interest rates the banks pay us right now on IOLTA accounts is less than 20 basis points which means that we are averaging receipts of about $1,950,000 a year, whereas in 2007, we were over $20,000,000 a year. c 002648 108 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 So the CFGA funding that came into existence in 2009 was a way to stem that collapse. In 2012 with the fee increases, we expected that the receipts would get us somewhere in the $13,000,000 to $14,000,000 range. Again, partly because of the economy and the consequential decrease in court filings, those receipts last year amounted to $11.2 million dollars and this year, we expect them to go under $11,000,000.
The result is in 2014 as opposed to 2007, we are down by 30% in our funding. We are down by 20% in the available legal staff to address the legal needs of the poverty population. Without any mechanism to address the $2,000,000 deficit that we anticipate this year, we will be down 35% in the available legal staff to address the critical needs of the poverty population. The fee increases are self explanatory, the Client Security Fund. 0
The question you asked Senator Coleman, the fund right now stands at about $17,000,000. The claims against that fund are at about $12,000,000, so there appears to be sufficient reserves right now, but as the previous speaker noted and as I believe you understand, the branch would consider any portion of the receipts each year to be given to legal service agencies only after it has made a determination that there are adequate reserves to address lawyer defalcations.
I want to close and address a comment that Representative Gonzalez noted and I thought it was very astute. If we deprive a segment of our society equal access to the law because they cannot afford our system of justice, then the shield the law 0 002649 109 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING affords them as citizens will fall to the sword of those that can afford the system. The divide between the 'haves and the have not's will grow even wider and perhaps irreparably. Thank you. I would be happy to answer any questions you might have.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Are there questions? Representative Stafstrom.
REP. STAFSTROM (129TH): Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you Attorney Shearin for being here. You practice frequently in the Connecticut courts, do you not, and as well as courts of other jurisdictions, do you have an understanding of how our court fee compare with those of other jurisdictions?
JAMES SHEARIN: The fees that we are charging c litigants in Connecticut are relatively less than in other states? We are running on the low side.
REP. STAFSTROM (129TH): We are on the low side. So if we were to enact these fee increases, would it bring us in line with other jurisdictions or would we still be lower?
JAMES SHEARIN: We are still on the low side and notably these increases are potentially $5 to $10 a piece.
REP. STAFSTROM (129TH): Thank you.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Other members have question? Representative Baram.
0 002650 110 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 REP. BARAM (15TH): Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you for your testimony. While I do support the bill and I agree with your concluding comments, I do have a concern that at some point, our entry fees will be at a certain level that would deter people from perusing the justice that they are striving for. I know that I come across clients all the time. When you get to the point of explaining what the entry fee is, they look at you. I have even had cases where in a domestic dispute where the two sides sort of wait to see who is going to file first because they have to pay the fee. I just worry that at some point these fees will be increased to such a level that the justice that you are talking about will become difficult to achieve because of the filing fees and it will deter a lot of people, but I do feel we have an obligation and we need to make sure that legal services are properly funded. 0 JAMES SHEARIN: I appreciate that sir and you are right, it is a difficult balance act. All we need is a relatively modest increase in the interest rates and part of this problem would go away.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Any other members with questions or comments? No. Thank you.
JAMES SHEARIN: Thank you sir.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Suzi Craig.
SUZI CRAIG: Senator Coleman, committee members of the Judiciary Committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak today.
0 002652 112 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 people who have lived with and personal experiences. You heard from the legal side. I would say that the thread running through all of us to quote one of .the testifiers was choice has made all the difference. It is really that we are focused on. Ensuring that we put our dollars and our time into our practices, our practices, programs and support that are really designed to encourage and help those that need it the most and not enforcement, which we know does not work. I will stop right here if you have any questions.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Are there any questions? There will be no questions. We appreciate your coming.
SUZI CRAIG: Thank you for your time.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Kim Smith is next. 0
KIM SMITH: Good afternoon and thank you very much senator Coleman and all other distinguished members of the Judiciary Committee.
To come before you to support BILL 428 for the continued and increased funding for Connecticut Legal Services and the vital role that they play in ensuring at-risk youth maintain their access to free and appropriate public education.
My name is Kimberly Smith and I am a retired juvenile probation officer with 20 years of state service helping and interviewing some of our most vulnerable court-involved youth. I have worked with hundreds of youth during my career and I have worked 0 002653 113 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING closely with Connecticut Legal Service attorneys on many cases during my time as a probation officer.
I would like to share my favorite success story regarding Connecticut Legal Services, but please understand that due to the confidential nature of juvenile court, there will be no names used. I worked with a ninth grader, who was referred to the court for truancy. After reviewing her case and interviewing her and her mother, we discovered she would regularly get up for school and get ready, but never make it pass the hallway of her apartment building where she was often found in tears.
The family shared that over the Thanksgiving holiday, the student's mother had been transported by ambulance to the hospital thus leaving her c teenage girls home alone to care for themselves for three days unaware of their mother's status. It was this traumatic event of not knowing if her mother was alive or not that appeared to trigger her school avoidance and the stress that she was experiencing leaving her mother every morning.
Although Connecticut Legal Services attorneys provided education and advocacy training to probation officer, I lacked the legal expertise to compel the school to conduct a special education evaluation required by state and federal law. I referred the family to Connecticut Legal Services, and their attorney worked with the family and school to hold a successful planning and placement team meeting and commenced the necessary evaluations. c le 002654 114 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 These evaluations indicated that the child required special education instruction within a smaller classroom setting to assist in supporting her emotionally while at the same time allowing her access to her academic instruction. When she was finally placed in this setting within her school, she thrived and sparkled, something that was missing for quite some time due to the overwhelming nature of a traditional school environment. She joined the track team that spring, graduated high school on time four years later, and began community college that fall.
Education is about more than academic instruction. It is about engaging children in developing skills and competency to help them successfully transition to adulthood. Without the support and representation of family by Connecticut Legal Services, this success story would likely have 0 not had happened and the reality would have been she would have dropped out at age 17 and had been catapulted into an adult world far too soon than she was prepared to handle. I would love to share some more success stories, but I appreciate your time.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Thank you. Are there questions for Ms. Smith? Apparently no questions. Oh we do have a question. Representative O'Dea.
REP. O'DEA (!25TH): Thank you Chairman. Just briefly. You said you were retired. Is there any chance you want to go back and help further?
KIM SMITH: I love the work I do, or I did. I am very passionate about the work that I did. I just at this point in time I feel as though there are 0 002655 115 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING more proactive ways to support my community and I have began volunteering in my own community to kind of help those at-risk youth. I want more of a grassroots kind of level with the experience and training that I have been so graciously provided by the Court Support Services Division during my tenure as a probation officer.
REP. O'DEA (125TH): Well thank you very much for your service. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Any other members with questions or comments? I guess not. Thank you Ms. Smith.
KIM SMITH: Thank you.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Is Jenny (3:10:21.1) in the c room? Okay. Daisy Pinto. Ms. Pinto, will you spell your first name for me to make sure I have it correct?
DAISY PINTO: Daisy.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Is it D-A-I-S-Y.
DAISY PINTO: S-Y, but it could be the wrong spelling.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : You may proceed. You may proceed.
DAISY PINTO: Good afternoon ladies and gentleman of the Judiciary Committee. My name is Daisy Pinto and I am the former for Connecticut Legal Services. I came to this hearing today to give you my testimony c 002656 116 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING
in support of H.B. 424, AN ACT CONCERNING FUNDING FOR LEGAL AID TO THE POOR.
I want to tell you about the help that I received from Connecticut Legal Services. In 2011, Connecticut Legal Services, Inc, had continued to help me, my family to try our lifelong dream to experience our new life in the United States. Unfortunately, I was in an abusive relationship with my husband at that time. Connecticut Legal Services helped me to begin the process to become a legal resident of the United States. It was not an easy process. First Connecticut Legal Services told me to fill out an I-360 form which is a petition for special immigrant status from the us Citizenship and Immigration Service. Next, they helped me to file a self-petition form of Abusive US Citizen (inaudible) Permanent Residence. 0 When all of the paperwork was approved, Connecticut Legal Services helped me file the I-485, the Application for Permanent Residence for Abusive Status. If this wasn't enough, the agency finally helped me to get my divorce. When I had to temporarily move to Waterbury because of flooding in my Watertown apartment, Connecticut Legal Services counseled me regarding the law which let me keep my son (inaudible name) and his going to school. It was going to be a temporary move for us to Waterbury and I knew that (inaudible name) needed to have a consistent school experience. In addition to this, I felt that (inaudible name) needed to focus on his school work. Connecticut Legal Services helped us to become residents and both of us have a huge opportunity to have a better life.
0 002657 117 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING In addition to this, Connecticut Legal Services intervened for me to Connecticut Valley Community College and assisted the need for financial aid. Connecticut Legal Services explained my situation to the college, so they would understand my issues. Because I had been an abused person, the law protected me and the college believed that I did not qualify for financial aid because of that law. At the college, I first sought an English class and then a business class. With my newly acquired skills, I was able to apply for more jobs. I found my job interviews were more suitable and I became more valuable in the job market. I am now working part-time for the city of Waterbury and hoping to get hired full-time soon. (inaudible name) attends Sacred Heart High School on a scholarship.
Ladies and gentleman, I lost my strength, self c esteem and the ability to make my own decisions. If it wasn't for Connecticut Legal Services, my son and I could be homeless in a dire situation. For this reason, it is extremely important for you to increase the funds for this agency so the Connecticut Legal Services, Inc, could continue to support people like me .. That organization took me from a place of darkness to a world of light. Are there any questions?
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Are there questions? You did a great job. There do not appear to be any questions.
DAISY PINTO: Thank you. Thank you for your time this afternoon.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Nancy Schiavone is next. 0 002663 123 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING might be more willing to take medication if it was also a part of treatment instead of just treatment.
REP. O'DEA (125TH): Thank you very much for your testimony.
DANIEL OLGUIN: Thank you.
REP. O'DEA (125TH): Thank you Mr. Chairman.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Thank you. Any others with questions or comments? None. Thank you Daniel.
DANIEL OLGUIN: Thank you.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Ben Solnit.
BEN SOLNIT: Good afternoon Senator Coleman, c Representative Tong, members of the Judiciary Committee. My name is Ben Solnit. I am President of the Board of New Haven Legal Assistance Association and with me today is LAA's Executive Director, Susan Garcia Nofi, and the Executive Directors of Greater Hartford Legal Assistance, Jamey Bell and CLS, Connecticut Legal Services, Steven Eppler-Epstein.
I am here to testify in support of SENATE BILL 428. I want to thank you for all you have done in the past to help fund legal services and I want to urge you to support this bill. As you have heard from the other much more eloquent witnesses today including Tim Shearin from the lawyer's side and from our wonderful clients, we desperately need more resources. c 002664 124 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 We are down about 20% in staffing since the crisis hit in 2008. The legislature has constantly been supportive of GHIA and the other programs, but it hasn't been enough. As Mr. Shearin pointed out, the proposed hikes in filing fees are relatively modest and leave us still to address, I know Representative Baram is not here anymore to address his concern about not pricing ourselves out of a court system that works for everybody and also we do support the part of the bill that would give the judicial branch the ability and its discretion of when there is enough reserves to draw in the Client Security Fund to fund legal services.
We are working hard to raise money from other venues. We do a lot with the private bar. They are very supportive. You heard from Mr. Murphy, just one shining example of that. We are constantly putting in applications to foundations, but it is 0 not enough, so we need your help again. But in addition to you know being a very vital resource to low income people in Connecticut, we could only serve a fraction of those who could use our services, it is actually a good deal of the state to provide more legal services.
Whenever we help a victim of domestic violence, whenever we help someone stay in their house, we actually save the state money. When we reduce the need for other safety net services by keeping them in their house or if we help them get services that let them keep their job, same deal. It saves the state money in the long run.
We bring federal dollars in whenever we help a client obtain federal disability payments, so it is 002665 125 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING not only the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do.
For all of those reasons, we strongly support SENTAE BILL 426, I mean I'm sorry, SENATE BILL 428. We also support to follow on Attorney Clendenen's testimony and Tim Shearin's testimony, of Civil Gideon task force because like I said, we can only represent a small fraction of lower income people who have legal issues that could be more efficiency and more effectively addressed if there were more legal services, so we also support SENATE BILL 426, and I would be glad to answer any questions you might have.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Are there questions? Representative Gonzalez. c REP. GONZALEZ (3RD): Thank you Mr. Chair and thank you for coming and testifying on behalf of.428. I got a question. How does people that they don't speak the language and yes they know there are services and legal aid, but how do you end up with so many poor people that they hardly speak the language, they come here to testify. I receive phone calls from people that are telling me that they were not provided with the testimony. I agree that we need something because I support this bill and I think that I always supported this legal aid funding, always do, but what I hate is to see people that hardly speak the language and they are provided with testimony to come here and testify. I would prefer not to have to hear about people that hardly speak the language. They are nervous. I don't think that they feel comfortable, but I would like to know if they are kind of forced to do this. c ______.. ______.______,... __ ~ 002666 126 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING
BEN SOLNIT: Not at all. They are not forced. We ask them if they would be willing and the only people you will see here are people who are so passionate about the help that they received from the legal aid lawyers that they want to take that journey as one of the other representatives talked about just physically getting here. You saw a gentleman here who had trouble walking and yes, people do have language barriers, but because they feel so strongly that they have been helped, they want you to understand. I mean Mr. Shearin and Mr. Clendenen and I were lawyers and I ge~ nervous too testifying here, but you know that is what I do. But for a client to come here, it is entirely of their own accord. I would turn that around to you and say what courage, what passion, what demonstration of need that someone who struggles with the language and sometimes has difficulty in 0 getting here physically, still want to come. They want to come. We don't force them. We ask them. We help prepare them because the system is intimidating, very intimidating. I respectfully, but emphatically reject the premise of your question.
REP. GONZALEZ (3RD): Well I think that everybody is entitled to their own opinion. I see this year after year after year and people call me and they said that they gave me testimony and I'm nervous. I know that everybody gets nervous, I know that, but I think I would prepare people to come here and testify that really they are not struggling with language barriers. If they want to come on their own, like I see people here that they just have a little piece of paper and they are writing on their 0 002667 127 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING own, I think that's fine, but people who are provided a testimony for them to do this and they are really nervous and sometimes they don't want to do it, but because the help is there. Again, I am not against that bill. I am against people that are struggling, they feel nervous and sometimes they don't want to do it, but because they are getting that kind of service, they are here. That's my point.
BEN SOLNIT: All I can see, and I don't mean to argue with you, all I can say is I also in addition to being President of the Board of New Haven Legal Assistance, I volunteer part-time at CLS and a lot of our clients have trouble with English and we have to employ, we are lucky to have bilingual paraprofessional sometimes when sometimes we have this language line, but it is a big problem. But we c would never force any of them to come here, and yet we would absolutely make them as comfortable as possible by helping them prepare their testimony. I had this typed for me and I am a lawyer and English is my first language. I still ....
REP. GONZALEZ (3RD): I respect your opinion and I think you respect mine.
BEN SOLNIT: We can agree to disagree about it. Thank you.
REP. GONZALEZ (3RD): Thank you.
BEN SOLNIT: Any other questions?
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Senator Kissel. c 002668 128 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING
SENATOR KISSEL (7TH) : Thank you very much Chairman Coleman. I have been thinking about this as folks from legal aid and the foundation and Senator Looney have come up to speak about this Civil Gideon Bill and I know it is just a study, but I also serve on the Appropriations Committee, Judicial and Corrections Sub-Committee and I don't know if anything will happen this year when we finish up, but something is going to happen next year because the issue can only be postponed so long, so already the Judicial Branch is working out a plan for court closures and lay-offs. The governor proposed, whether it happens or not, but the governor proposed cuts in the neighborhood of $60 million. I was just across the hallway in Room 2C, Susan Storey, the chief public defender, was talking about how her agency was getting 80 new applications every month for habeas matters and it is just crippling her budget. The state's attorney's office is going to 0 have to make do with less and so, you just testified that you have had a 20% reduction in personnel and so we are facing a reality where yes, I understand people's aspirations. I don't see in the near term and when I say near term, I am saying 2 to 3 years, any stop to this and it is going to ramp up extraordinarily. The reality is here. The handwriting is on the wall and so I don't understand the purpose of putting together some task force to create expectations when we can't meet the obligations now that we have set out for ourselves. You're here before us on one bill saying increase fees and I agree with that and I have spoken to the leadership of legal aid and their advocates early on and I said I am okay with this, but then to have this other thing and have you folks come and say by the way, we would like this too where everywhere I 0 002669 129 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING look in the judicial process system is bleeding and it is only going to get worse. I don't understand the purpose of going down that path unless we can create some structure where all the lawyers work for free, we don't have the money to do the job that is before us now, so why do you advocate on behalf of this Civil Gideon task force when at the end of the day, if it would cost $1, we can't afford it?
BEN SOLNIT: I guess my best answer to that would be, we are preparing for the worst, but we still have to hope for the best and a task force does not commit funding for anything, but it is a big problem in this country. Even lower middle class people really don't have access to lawyers. As a proxy lawyers, those of us who were proxy lawyers know that you don't have a lawyer with you, it doesn't matter if you are poor or middle class, you are at a c huge, huge disadvantage and it is not a system of equal access to justice under the law. I wish I had a silver bullet or magic solution that all the great minds in the state hadn't thought of tell you about, but I don't, I don't.
SENATOR KISSEL (7TH) : Well I appreciate your optimism, but it seems to be to be a disconnect that on the one hand, you are crying poverty and you need us to raise funds so that you could be bolstered because your funding stream is being rapidly diminished and at the same time setting a course for something and there is no targeting of dollars there. I just think at some point and again I am sorry you're the guy that happens to be the one for this little vent and then I'll shut up because I'm through. c 002670 130 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 BEN SOLNIT: No that's fine.
SENATOR KISSEL (7TH): No I'm sure the co-chairs want me to shut up, but, but, but ...
BEN SOLNIT: I'm having a wonderful time.
SENATOR KISSEL (7TH) : But at some point, and I believe my colleagues on both sides of the aisle see the tsunami that is out there and whether it gets addressed in the next 2 months or not, it is not going away and so I appreciate your optimism, but in light of what is going on right now, I don't think I'm going to be able to support even a task force to study that issue when I know, I know what is coming down the road. I know there are lay-offs. I know there are court closures. I know that the things we have initiated to break the cycle of recidivism are at risk. Even right now, we all took a vow last 0 year for those of us who supported the Second Chance Society, and I am hearing from advocates that the funding stream to try and get people off of their addictions and the treatment isn't even there. So yeah we changed the whole mechanism to try to get people a second chance, but part of that commitment was the support services to allow people to break that cycle of recidivism and we yanked that rug out from right under those programs. This is just within the last year, so you know at some point, we have to determine what's our core mission as a government and fulfill those core duties before we start going off a field to look at other things and so sorry, that's it. That's my little soapbox statement for the day, but I appreciate your optimism. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
0 002671 131 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Sir I don't know what would give you the impression that we don't appreciate whatever comments you care to make. Other members with questions or comments? Representative O'Neill.
REP. O'NEILL (069th): This is a somewhat divergent thing. First, I served with Senator Kissel on both Judiciary and Judiciary Corrections Sub-Committee and there are a lot questions about how much money we have to pay for keeping courthouses open so that other people have an opportunity to go to court, whether they need a lawyer, or whether they are at an advantage or disadvantage of having a lawyer, there may not be some courthouses open to even go to at the rate we are going right now.
I don't know if you are aware of it, but I will say it for everyone else who is thinking about these c things, the current budget deficit for the fiscal year we are supposed to be working on right is over $900 million. That is up $400 million in about a month's time from an earlier estimate when the governor first delivered his speech.
I was with the comptroller a few days ago for a dinner and he was telling the business community people that his estimate is the budget deficit is going to get even bigger by maybe a $100 million or something. So, that is the current fiscal year that is part of the biennium that we already passed a budget for.
The next two fiscal years, the next biennium, we are looking at $2 billion projected plus deficits per year, so that is $4 billion or roughly 10% of cost of running government that we are not going to have c 002672 132 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 enough money to pay for based on the projections both of the cost of government and of the revenues coming in.
Each of them is going in the wrong direction, so that is the context you are working in. I remember when, and I have been here long enough to remember when the decision was made to fund legal services out of the IOLTA account and I remember asking if that was going to be enough and I remember then Chairman of the Banks Committee who brought the bill out on the floor, yeah we've got this all figured out. Well, that was 1988.
The real estate market has changed and that was really where most of the money came from to pay for it was in the funds being held by lawyers and of course the world changed in so many ways. Not only did the real estate market die for awhile, but 0 everything has gone electronically. You don't put money in a bank account anymore and hold it there a week or two waiting for the closing to happen, all of those kinds of things.
An earlier witness testified that our current court fees are on the low side. Now, is that your understanding as well? I've never done a 50-state survey which is maybe something we should order up to find out.
BEN SOLNIT: I have no expertise in that area. I am going to have to defer to Jim Shearin. Jim Shearin of the Bar Foundation was the one who testified. I have no reason to disbelieve him, but I have not looked at that. 0 002673 133 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING REP. O'NEILL (69th): Because something that has crossed my mind from time to time and I am reluctant to voice this thing, but one of the things I noticed was if you start a case, except for a claim for jury, pretty much that is it, you pay your entry fee and you go. So whether you file one motion or a hundred motions and whether you feel a thousand page, well maybe not a thousand page, but a hundred page long memorandum of law or a two-page long memorandum, there is a thing I got when the bar sent me a thing about doing one page memos. I saw some kind of little thing about how to keep it down in terms of the amount of reading and writing and reading the judges have to do. But in effect, no matter how much you use the system, your entry fee is the same. So I can sometimes see, you can look up the cases and you can see 100 motions have been filed in a case. Sometimes, it is domestic but c sometimes it is just regular civil cases and it is not like there are 15 defendants, so the thought that crosses my mind is if you use the system a lot more, maybe for the initial entry fee you get 10 motions than after that, you have to start paying something for each additional motion passed that kind of motion or something for those people because not all cases are the same. You begin with an entry fee and they get a little bit of litigation. They get resolved after a couple of months and then other cases drag on for years and years, hundreds of motions and all kinds of things seem to be going on in those kinds of cases. In the conversations in folks have had in thinking about this, have you ever thought about that aspect or possibility?
BEN SOLNIT: I never heard of that before, but it does remind me in the federal system many years ago, c 002674 134 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING
they had a presumption which could be rebutted, but you could file no more than a certain number of interrogatories to try to streamline things. In the state system in certain cases, you could only file standard interrogatories like seeking permission.
REP. O'NEILL (69th):
BEN SOLNIT: If you were to contemplate that, I think you at least have to have a way to get out of it for a case that deserved to get out of that. There would be a lot of issues, you know, dissuading people from bringing meritorious motions I suppose because it is a complicated case, but it is a very creative idea. I don't think the bar has thought about it. I, you know, we were very careful with working with them on this one to make sure the proposed fee raise was modest. You know $5 to $10 per fee generally speaking, but you know if you and 0 the private bar want to do that, we would certainly work with you on it.
REP. O'NEILL (69th): Well, I am not speaking on behalf of the private bar. That would be the last thing I would suggest I'm doing, but I was just sitting here thinking about our system that we got and you know listening to the medical examiner state that 48 out of 50 states using electronic death certificates. We along with West Virginia are the states that doesn't and we can't figure out why we are so far behind the times. Connecticut seems to have certain bad habits that are hard to get out of and now seem to be costing us a lot of money now that we are looking hard at the dollars we are spending.
0 002675 135 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. 0 PUBLIC HEARING BEN SOLNIT: I do know the Judicial Branch has been really really proactive at looking at ways to streamline things and to help folks, you know, in courthouses that don't have lawyers and in applying for ADR, early intervention to try to bring cases to a conclusion earlier. So they obviously would have to be part of any such conversations along with the private bar, but it is a very creative idea.
REP. O'NEILL (69th): Yeah because a couple .... was it last year or the year before, but one of these recent years, we said if a couple was married less than eight years that they can have a somewhat simplified form of divorce. So I mean maybe there are other things out there to reduce the demand for -- it would make it simplify the system for some categories of cases so they don't have to go through the same complexities. Because our system is kind c of designed for the maximum case in a lot of ways as opposed to the relatively simple case.
BEN SOLNIT: Right and just a riff on I think it was Representative Tong that gave me a law school flashback, where I was taking a course in comparative law and the professor was from Eastern Europe and said you know you folks in America you have this, and at the time the Cadillac, and that is how old I am, that was a really good car, so he said you have this Cadillac judicial system for everything and that is crazy. You ought to have ways of doing things that are less complex and I think that is an idea that might have some merit, but I strongly stress you would obviously have to have partnership not only with legal services, but the Judicial Department and the private bar to make c 002676 136 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 sure you did that correctly and you know not end up with something worse than a cure.
REP. O'NEILL (69th): Right, thank you.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Are there other members with any questions or comments? It doesn't appear so. Thank you Attorney Solnit.
BEN SOLNIT: Thank you.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Tracie Compositor.
TRACIE COMPOSITOR: I hope everybody got their venting out. Good afternoon, Senator Coleman, Representative Tong and distinguished members of the Judiciary Committee. My name is Tracie Compositor. I am here to testify in opposition of HB-5531. 0 I am person with lived experience and have utilized both mental health and addiction services. For years, I was in treatment with mental health issues and placed on dozens of medications. Throughout all the trials, titrating up and weaning off, nothing was working, so I self-medicated with drugs and alcohol.
I am telling you this because I know in my heart, I would have never have sought treatment if there was the possibility of being forced into treatment. I needed to be ready in my own time to accept what was being offered. As it turned out, many times what was being offered wasn't something I was interested in and had hardly participated and often ended up not following through. various types of group therapy was not effective for .me. Ultimately, I 0 163 March 18, 2016002703 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. 0 PUBLIC HEARING I am taking a look and thanks to Attorney (indiscernible 4:31:33.8) for passing on the decision from November 9, 2015, Judge Berger, no relation to Representative Berger, wrote that, if I may, that it is not the province of this court under the guise of statutory interpretation to legislate such a policy even if we were to agree with the defendants, it is better policy than one endorsed by the legislature as reflected in this statutory language.
You know, this is appalling in my opinion. I can't wait to hear from DEEP on this and their position. It can't possibly make any sense, so I appreciate your bringing this to our attention. Please let Steve Burkhart I send my regards and I promise I will look into this strongly as colleagues and see c if we can't fix this. RYAN SULLIVAN: Thank you Representative.
REP. O'DEA (125TH): Thank you Mr. Chairman.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Any other members with questions or comments? None. Thank you Mr. Sullivan.
RYAN SULLIVAN: Thank you sir.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Dennis Cahill is next.
DENNIS CAHILL: Okay, good afternoon Co-Chairs and members of the committee and thank you for hearing my testimony this afternoon. I am speaking in favor of SB 428. c 002704 164 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING
My name is Dennis Cahill and I have lived at 651 State Street, Bridgeport, for the past 15 years. My building is a supportive housing facility owned by Alpha Community Services Branch of Central Connecticut Coast YMCA and it is designed exclusively to provide affordable permanent rental housing for the homeless population in Bridgeport.
As you might surmise, residents coming out of homelessness require a· large amount of remedial service and this specifically especially includes legal services. Since the building opened in the year 2000, our social services department has referred residents with lease or eviction problems to the Connecticut Legal Services Incorporated.
CLS has also conducted legal education workshops at the building to inform residents of the rights under tenant/landlord law and represented individuals 0 residents where management has been negligent on some points of the lease that would be known as civil suits they represented. Most of our residents are at very low income, on disability or low fixed income. CLS has provided this service free of charge as most residents are below 110% of the poverty line.
In February 2014, Alpha Community Services was granted a $20 rent increase by Bridgeport Housing Authority to cover increased operating expenses. This increase was not approved or paid by HUD from washington and so the $20 was added entirely to resident's rents and this put most residents above the 30% of income guidelines for Section 8 participants. Some residents received increases of $100 or more. 0 7 165 March 18, 2016002 05 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING
As president of our tenant association, I was referred to Connecticut Legal Services through a personal contact and they agreed to take this case in July 2014. Again, this was offered and done free of charge to residents. The case settled without going to court.
This year in January 2016 with an average rent credit of $600 per resident. This was for the previous two years of over-charges. May the committee understand how satisfied us residents are not only with the outcome of this rent case, but with CLS's very high success rate in eviction prevention the previous 15 years. CLS is the only firm providing these free services in the Bridgeport area for this population. c Along with our satisfaction, I also express our gratitude that we have CLS to represent low income residents. Without CLS's assistance, no resident could have made this case to the Housing Authority from their own resources and I ask the committee to support SB-428 so that Connecticut Legal Services may continue their operations on behalf of all of our low income residents.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Thank you. Are there questions for Mr. Cahill? Representative Stafstrom.
REP. STAFSTROM (129th): Thank you Mr. Chair and not so much a question, but a comment. I want to publically thank Dennis for all of his advocacy over the years on so many issues involving homelessness and providing services to those most in need in our community of Bridgeport. c 002706 166 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0
For those who don't know, I actually had the pleasure of serving with Dennis on a non-profitable ward with Alpha for several years and he is a firm advocate and clearly as we see today an articulate spokesman for these issues. Dennis, I want to thank you for your support of this very important piece of legislation.
DENNIS CAHILL: I thank you for your compliment, Representative Stafstrom.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Others with questions or comments? If not, thank you very much Mr. Cahill. Mary Flicker is next.
MARY FLICKER: Good afternoon Chairman and committee members. 0 My name is Mary Flicker and I am from Fairfield, Connecticut. I am a volunteer child advocate with Child Advocates of Connecticut. I am here to support BILL NUMBER 347 to establish a program for volunteer court-appointed special advocates.
There is no downside to your support of this bill. There is no cost to the state. BILL 347 does not request any funding. Volunteer advocates are screened, extensively trained and closely supervised as they represent the best interest of children who have been abused or neglected. We do this because we want to help these children and give them hope for a better life.
As a court-appointed volunteer advocate, I unequivocally support BILL NUMBER 347. These 0 002714 174 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING
research piece by your own Office of Legislative Research on how the current statutes work.
So, while some of the provisions of this bill may seem desirable and I totally understand why some people continue to advocate for such a thing, implementing this, I think, would be costly and potentially very dangerous. Forcing people to take medication at a time when people are seeking medication and treatment in the community seems utterly counterproductive, so I ask you to please vote no on this bill.
I have a variety of resources with me if you have any questions.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Thank you Janine, I apologize for misreading your name. 0 JANINE SULLIVAN-WILEY: Not a problem.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): At the beginning. Any questions or comments? There don't appear to be any. Thank you for your testimony.
JANINE SULLIVAN-WILEY: Thank you.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Beverley Brakeman.
BEVERLEY BRAKEMAN: Good afternoon Senator Coleman, Representative Tong and members of the committee.
My name is Beverley Brakeman and I am the political director with the United Auto Workers, Region 9A. I am here along with some of attorneys and staff that we represent from the National Organization of Legal 0 002715 175 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING Services Workers. Don't worry, they all don't want to talk, they just all want to be here. So, I have with me today: (unidentifiable first name) Mahoney, Mark Moore, Martin Wheeler, Cathy Cushman and Natalia Planell.
I have submitted written testimony which you can read. You have heard a lot of testimony on SENATE BILL 428 which we do support very strongly. I am not going to read my testimony.
You've heard from a lot of clients who have received incredibly important services and I want to talk a little bit about the lawyers who we represent and who are UAW members that do this hard work and what they have had to give up to provide the services that they do to residents across the state, many of c whom are constituents of yours. These are attorneys and staff who are overworked, they are underpaid, they are incredibly dedicated. They wake up thinking about their clients. They go to bed sleeping thinking about their clients and they spend their days thinking about their clients. They struggle deeply with the number of clients that they have to turn away. They take time from their own families and made numerous concessions to continue to keep the doors open at the programs where they serve. I have the utmost respect for these folks. They do incredible work and I don't think that there is a person in this room that would disagree with me on that.
This bill won't fix the problem. It doesn't even come close to fixing the problem. This is something that in every state that we cover in Region 9A, I c 002716 176 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING
have to advocate on behalf of. It is just an ongoing problem because of the IOLTA issue and I wish there was a way this legislature could find a way to have enough money to fund these programs to provide these services so that these attorneys, their clients and the programs don't have to spend so much time coming here and advocating for funding every year.
It is really just crumbs at the end of the day, but they are crumbs that are very important and we do thank members of this committee and legislature for their incredible support of these programs.
I guess I would end, when I think about this issue and a lot of the issues before us today, I think of a quote by former Congressman Paul Wellstone, who once said, "We all do better when we all do better." I think that this is a group of workers, attorneys 0 and staff here who really live that every day. So, thank you for your time today.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Thank you. Are there questions? I see no questions. It is good to see you. I appreciate your testimony.
BEVERLEY BRAKEMAN: Thanks. Okay. Thank you.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Dr. Ken Black.
DR. KEN BLACK: Good afternoon Senator Coleman and \\~55'31 respective members of the Judiciary Committee.
I am Ken Black. I am a psychiatrist practicing for 40 years. I work on young adults (inaudible). I also serve on the Board of Directors of Advocacy 0 002719 179 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING testimony. Bill Anderson. No response. Bill Anderson. Kathy Flaherty.
KATHY FLAHERTY: Good afternoon Senator Coleman and members of the committee.
My written testimony which I encourage you to read focuses on 5531 and I will come back to that in just a second, but I am, my name is Kathy Flaherty. I am the Executive Director of Connecticut Legal Rights Project and in my capacity as executive director of a legal services agency, I strongly urge you to support _SENATE BILL 428 and 426.
Our clients need us. The services that legal services provides gives people access to justice and access to the courts. It is so incredibly important and all of the programs are experiencing funding c cuts. We have the mechanism of the Bar Foundation that distributes the grant money that gets received and our clients need us.
So moving on from what I support, I am here to tell you what I am against. I am in opposition to~ 5531 because the bottom line is coercion doesn't work. I can tell you why it doesn't work because I have had it happen to me.
I was correctly diagnosed with bipolar disorder my first year at Harvard Law School. I was civilly committed to a psychiatric hospital for up to six months. I was discharged after 60 days when my insurance expired. I went into the hospital because I went to law school not knowing that I had bipolar disorder. c 002775 235 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING like advanced directives. So in conclusion, Connecticut through both the legislative process as well as work group and task force processes, has rightfully rejected involuntary outpatient commitment numerous times over the past 20 years. It is time to do so again and continue to support. individuals who have access to proven, effective, cost-effective solutions. Thank you for listening to another advocate once again.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Are there questions or comments? I see none. We appreciate your testimony.
DANIELA GIORDANO: Thank you.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Janice Wieduwilt, and I know I'm butchering the last name, W-I-E-D-U-W-I-L-T. Anybody named Janice? If not, (Unidentifiable c name).
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: Good evening members of the Judiciary Committee. I'm in support of SB 428 for legal aid funding.
My name is (unidentifiable name) . I work part-time at Payless Shoe Stores and I am raising two children with my husband in New Haven.
In 2014, my husband and I invested all of our entire life savings in an apartment. At the time we had to move, but the apartment never got ready for us to move in. Without the money lost, we fell behind in rent and paying utilities like electricity got harder to pay. I became very afraid of not being able to provide a roof over my kids. We didn't have enough money to move or we could not go back to Puerto Rico. We literally were stuck. Then at an c 002776 236 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 orientation meeting at my daughter's school, I found Legal Aid Services and they said that they could help me with my housing situation.
My first thought, my first thought was I have to give this a try because it is a sign from above. The next day, I met with a lawyer to review the case and from there, the lawyer wrote a letter to my former landlord and within about a week, we received a check and got all of our money back, about $5000. It may not seem like a lot of money, but it was all the money that we had at the time. If it weren't for legal aid, I will still be in that situation not knowing what to do. I wonder how many other people they might be able to help who were in the same situation I was or much worse. Please make sure that Legal Aid has funding for all the people who need it, like I needed it. Thank you.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Thank you. Any questions? 0 Representative Gonzalez.
REP. GONZALEZ (3RD): Thank you for coming in to testify and for sharing your story to do that. Most of us, I think that we care for the poor people. There is a perception that the legislators pass bills and sometimes they don't think about, but we do think about people. I will say that one of the bills that I really like is 428 and I plan to support. Well, thank you for coming in today and share the story with us.
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: Thank you and have a good evening.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Joe Williams. No response. Martha Mendez. Nancy Urgell. 0 002780 240 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 REP. TONG (147TH): Thank you very much.
NANCY URGELL: Thank you for having me.
REP. TONG (147TH): Yep. Stephanie Alicea. Good afternoon.
STEPHANIE ALICEA: Good afternoon. My name is Stephanie (inaudible). I am in favor of SB-428
I work part-time at Hercules Helping Hands as a companion. I go to school part-time and raising a child. I was in a situation, custody, with my daughter's father and he wanted to take custody away from me.
The reason I found Legal Aid is because there was substance abuse with that and I didn't know where to turn to. I have called lawyers and I didn't have the money to afford a lawyer. So I came up on 0 Greater Hartford Legal Aid to discuss my custody case. Before I called Legal Aid, I had sole custody of my daughter and her dad had limited visitation. He got arrested and got a criminal attorney involved in the custody case. I called everyone for help, but I didn't have the money for an attorney, like I said. So, I called Legal Aid and an attorney took my case.
Since court, now things have been really calm. I've been going to court not scared and not afraid and with more confidence. My GHLA attorney helped me by explaining what I needed to do to keep my daughter safe. Since I got a GHLA attorney, I have less anxiety. She always contacts me on different options we have on approaching a situation in court. I have not been any happier with the results. I went from not having hope to having justice and 0 002781 241 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING being able to really explain to the judge what was going on. If I didn't have legal aid, I would be lost and scared because of the fact that I thought I would lose my daughter. I would keep coming to court afraid and with more confidence. She really helped me understand that I am not alone and we have the court system and legal ways to do things.
Please support an increase in legal aid funding because I believe this is a great, great opportunity. This is a great low income-based program to help people get advice and representation by a GHLA lawyer. It's also important for people to have lawyers to help understand the process and documentation needed to be filed in court. I would recommend this program to people with all different problems and they will definitely get the help they need. c REP. TONG (147TH): Thank you Stephanie and thank you for speaking up and for your patience all day. Questions? Have a great weekend.
STEPHANIE ALICEA: Thanks, you too.
REP. TONG (147th): Cori Mackey.
CORI MACKEY: Good evening Representative Tong.
REP. TONG (147th): Good evening.
CORI MACKEY: And members of the committee. My name is Cori Mackey and I am the Executive Director of the Christian Activities Council here in Hartford. We are a nonprofit organization dedicated to developing leaders who act collectively for social justice. c 002782 242 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING
I am testifying in support of SENATE BILL 428, AN ACT CONCERNING FUNDING OF LEGAL SERVICES FOR THE POOR.
My team of community organizers and I became involved with residents of a multi-family Hun subsidized apartment complex in the north end in late July 2015 when all residents were displaced by a fire. Many of these residents were all very low income including families with children who lost every they owned. Many lost legal documents and personal identification as they were forced to evacuate quickly.
The residents initially encountered problem with the city of Hartford's Relocation Assistance Program and were told that they would get two weeks in a motel. After that, they were expected to stay with friends or family or call 211 to find space at a shelter. 0 With Greater Hartford Legal Aid's help, we successfully organized the residents. The residents were able to bring attention to the problem in the city's relocation assistance program and get the real day-to-day help they all needed. Greater Hartford Legal Aid was critically important because they taught residents about their legal rights under the law and helped our organizers understand the law and benefits these residents were entitled to receive. This action saved some 40 residents from 18 units from being forced from stable housing to homelessness.
We also became aware that Greater Hartford Legal Aid has a case in court which is trying to improve the city's relocation program overall. We helped them fight that case as members of the affected 0 002783 243 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING communities so that tenants can get the relocation help they need and are entitled to when their homes are lost due to fire or code enforcement issues causing them to be vacated.
Legal aid provides critical services to our poorest most vulnerable residents. Providing adequate funding is not simply the right and just thing to do, but it is also a smart financial investment. The clients that Legal Aid represent live within the margins and are easy targets for predatory actions. A number of their clients found themselves at the mercy of predatory landlords, unscrupulous employers or violent spouses.
The work of Legal Aid is often the difference between a family remaining housed, employed and self-sufficient versus entering homelessness or joblessness needing to rely more fully on safe aid. c Someone will pay for the resulting consequences of these landlords and employers' actions and by supporting Greater Hartford Legal Aid, we are providing more opportunities for justice to be served and for their clients, our poorest residents, to have their rights protected.
I am asking you today to please support this bill for increased legal aid funding because right to legal representation, particularly that provided by the competent, passionate and dedicated staff of Hartford Legal Aid, is a critical lifeline to so many of our residents. We can't afford to lose these services. Thank you.
REP. TONG (14 7TH) : Thank you. Questions? Thank you very much. Chris McCormack. c 002795 255 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING REP. FOX (148th): Any further questions? Thank you so much. Steve Eppler-Epstein.
STEVE EPPLER-EPSTEIN: I can't believe I have to follow Makayla, it is impossible. Representative Fox, Representative Rebimbas and members of the committee.
My name is Steve Eppler-Epstein and I am the Executive Director of Connecticut Legal Services, one of the major legal services program in the state.
I want to thank you for your attention today to SENATE BILL 428 about funding of legal services. Really at time in lieu of any further testimony, I would just ask if you have questions you would like me to answer. c REP. FOX (148th): Any questions? Senator Kissel. SENATOR KISSEL (7TH) : Attorney Eppler-Epstein, I just want to say thank you for your advocacy. I think clearly there is strong support for the bill before us. We want to do, I think most of us or at least the vast majority, want to do what we can to keep that good work going. My only disagreement over the day was just sort of veering into the Civil Gideon discussion. I am concerned because are going to face difficulties in just achieving our core mission on the judicial side and when I am looking at potential lay-offs, court closures and things like that, I mean, I don't have a magic wand or a pot of gold, so I think that you guys are filling an important need and to me the priority is to make sure we keep the lights on and keep the good works going, so thank you for your advocacy. c 4-----l+--...-- . 002796 256 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0 STEVE EPPLER-EPSTEIN: We deeply appreciate that, thank you.
REP. FOX (148th): Anything further? Thank you very much.
STEVE EPPLER-EPSTEIN: Thank you.
REP. FOX (148th): Mark Dost. Good evening.
MARK DOST: Good evening members of the committee. My name is Mark Dost.
I am an attorney and reside and work in Waterbury in Representative Berger's and Senator Hartley's districts. I am a member of the Executive Committee of the Estates and Probates Section and Elder Law section of the Connecticut Bar Association.
For the past year, the Elder Law Section and a fellow of the American College of Trust and Estate 0 council have come to support HB-5606, the connecticut Revised Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act. I work with hundreds of clients each year to plan for the management of their finances and healthcare during incapacity and plan for the disposition of their assets following death.
The legal tools that we use for financial management including powers of attorneys of wills are generally very effective in granting authority to fiduciaries to carry out their duties. When an individual dies, their executors or administrators are required to marshal up his assets and identify debts and other financial obligations so they may pay his creditors, taxes that might be due and distribute what's left over to a spouse, children or other beneficiaries. 0 STANDING COMMITTEE HEARINGS
JUDICIARY PART 7 2801 – 3244
2016
002833
0 3 0 Bank Street New Britain, CT 06051 T. (860) 223-4400 6::ecticut F. (860) 223-4488 Bar Association www.ctbar.org
Testimony of Bill Clendenen, President Connecticut Bar Association
in SUPPORT of
SB426, An Act Creating A Task Force to Improve Access to Legal Counsel in Civil Matters and SB428, An Act Concerning Funding of Legal Services for the Poor
Judiciary Committee March 18,2016
The Connecticut Bar Association strongly supports the passage of both SB426 and SB428. c SB426 This bill proposes to establish a Task Force to study the lack of access to counsel in civil matters in Connecticut. There has developed a growing recognition that our civil justice system has two classes ofjustice. The well to do and parties of means have access to a first class system ofjustice with full access to counsel. Low income and other economically disadvantaged individuals have little, if any, access to counsel resulting in second class justice.
Recent social service studies have shown that the financial benefits of providing counsel to the economically disadvantaged far outweigh the costs of providing legal representation. A recent Boston, Massachusetts study showed that for $1 spent on counsel for poor tenants, the taxpayers would save almost $2 in tax supported social service, education and police service costs.1
The proposed blue ribbon Task Force would be comprised of all the necessary stakeholders in solving Connecticut's justice gap. The Task Force is our best chance to provide cost effective equal access to justice for Connecticut's neediest. We cannot lose sight of the fact that basic human rights such as food, shelter, education and healthcare are routinely denied to Connecticut citizens because of their poverty. These basic human rights are not denied because they are unavailable, but rather because our legal system is not available to those in Connecticut too poor to hire a lawyer to protect them. For these reasons, the Connecticut Bar Association requests favorable action on this bill.
1 Samuelson, Piankov, Ellman and Bensimon, Economic Impact of Legal Aid in Eviction and 0 Foreclosure Cases. October 7, 2014. 002834
0 30 Bank Street New Britain, CT 06051 T. (860) 223-4400 'cticut F. (860) 223-4488 Bar Association ww\y.ctbar.org
SB428
The Connecticut Bar Association also strongly supports SB428. 1bis bill is essential in two parts.
The first part of the bill would amend Section 51-81c of the general statutes to authorize the judges of the Superior Court to make grants-in-aid in any particular year to the Connecticut Bar Foundation2 from the client security fund when funds are available. Under the proposed legislation, only moneys deposited in the Client Security Fund on or after October 1, 2016 would be available. There is to be no increase in the annual fee paid to the Client Security Fund by individual attorneys under this legislation.
1bis proposed amendment is an effective way to make funds available to provide attorney's to Connecticut's economically disadvantaged without additional cost to Connecticut's taxpayers or attorney's in the private sector. For these sound reasons, the amendment to Section 51-81c of the general statutes should be approved.
The second part of SB428 ~roposes to amend a series of statutes governing court filing fees by making slight increases in ose fees. There is little dispute that Connecticut legal aid providers and c their low income clients are facing severe economic crises due to a lack of adequate funding. Currently, legal aid represents economically challenged families in civil matters, usually involving a life crisis, such as domestic violence, homelessness, eviction, illness or disability. At best, legal aid can help less than one in ten eligible folks.
When considering this legislation, the CBA asks that you consider the following:
In 2007, IOLTA (Interest on Lawyers' Trust Accounts) brought in over $20 million in revenue to fund legal services. Since then, IOLTA revenue has dropped to $2 million per year- a decrease of 90%.
In 2009, the CBA actively supported increases in certain court fees, revenue from which was dedicated to legal aid funding. These court fee revenues, which were last increased in 2012 with the CBA's support, have not been adequate to fill the funding gap.
As a result of the funding crisis, legal aid programs have imposed or used furloughs, attrition, and layoffs. Current staffing and services are about 20% below 2008 levels.
Because of steadily declining court filings, legal aid programs are projecting a deficit of around $2 million in the current calendar year.
2 The Connecticut Bar Foundation is the designated administrator of the program for the use of c interest earned on lawyers' clients' funds accounts pursuant to Section 51-Blc 002835
0 30 Bank Street New Britain, CT 06051 T. (860) 223-4400 ~onnecticut F. (860) 223-4488 Bar Association .. www.ctbar.org
Moreover, the Judicial Branch is grappling with proposed cuts to its budget that likely will have a significant impact on civil court operations. A reduction in court staffing levels probably means further delays for clients and attorneys having civil legal matters that need adjudication. Fewer legal aid lawyers will likely result in more self-represented, low-income parties adding further stress to the civil court system.
If passed, SB428 is projected to generate approximately $950,000 to $1 million for legal aid. These funds would only, at best, meet half of the current year's projected deficit for the legal aid program. If SB428 is not enacted, legal aid programs project another wave oflayoffs and reduction in services to the most vulnerable and poor residents in Connecticut. For these reasons, the CBA urges favorable action on SB428. c
c 002836 c CRAWFOJtD George W. Crawford Black Bar Association
2015-2016 By Electronic MaU to [email protected] EXECUTIVE BOARD MEMBERS March 17,2016 Pnsident Genea o. Bell Joint Committl"' on Judiciary Community Health Services, Inc. Room 2500, Legislative Office Building Hartford, CT 06106 President-Elect Anthony Shannon & Shipman & Goodwin Re: Letter in Support of Governor's Proposed Bills S.B. 426 S.B. 428 LLP
Vice-President Dear Members of the Judiciary Committee of the Connecticut General Assembly: Noell. Bishop Georgetown Univ: School ofLaw On behalf of the George W. Crawford Black Bar Association (Crawford), I write to express strong support for proposed bills S.B. 426 and S.B. 428. Crawford Treasurc:r Thamar Esperance was proud to support the original2012 legal services funding initiative, which c S~th saved Connecticut's legal services programs from the devastating collapse of Greater Hartford Legal IOLTA funding in 2008, as well as S.B 31, which sought to support the Aid stabilization and recovery of legal services programs by removing the sunset Secretary provision from 2012 court filing fees increase. Garlinck Dumont Dumont Law, LLC Our organizations represent the interests of many of Connecticut's Black Board of Directors lawyers, judges, legal professionals and law stodents. We share a common interest in the goals of ensuring access to justice by the communities of color that Tina 0. Beamon Boehringer lngelheim we represent, and every lawyer's ethical responsibility to support and participate PhannaceuJic"a·ls in the provision oflegal services to the poor. We personally recognize the need for vibrant legal services programs in Connecticut, as more and more individuals Courtney Chaplin· Office ofthe Chief appear prose before Connecticut courts. We are also familiar with the hard work State's Attorney of Connecticut's legal services organizations, and their attorneys, and cannot
Stephanie A. Jolmson emphasize enough the importance of maintaining such a vital service. The Hartford Connecticut Legal Services, Greater Hartford Legal Aid and New Haven Legal Erick Russell Pullman & Comley Assistance help over I 0,000 low-income people every year. These organizations LLP provide much-needed free legal assistance to low-income families facing imminent homelessness, victims of domestic violence, disabled adults and Kimberly K. Kirkland children seeking state and federal benefits, elderly individuals facing problems Morgan, Lewis'& with nursing homes and collection actions, among countless other civil legal BockiusLLr c 002837 c
difficulties. The need for such legal services continues to grow, and S.B. 426 and 428 would ensure a steady and reliable source of funding for legal services in the future.
These bills would ensure the continued provision of quality legal services to Connecticut's most vulnerable populations. Legal aid programs reduce the number of unrepresented people flooding the courts, and help marshal pro bono legal help for the poor from the private bar. Reductions in legal services will increase costs in other safety net programs and delay access tojustice to everyone who needs access to our courts.
Thank you for your consideration of this letter of support. We sincerely hope that you will support these initiatives to maintain and increase a stable and reliable source of funding for legal services to the disadvantaged.
Very Truly Yours,
Genea 0. Bell, Esq, c President, George W. Crawford Black Bar Association
c 2 002838
0 cca!ov
Testimony supporting Member Organization:t SB 426, AA Creating a Task Force to Improve Access to Legal Counsel Th•~ U-'nbr<:t!"aC~nt>l:ll:'fo.r In Civil Matters l:it)'T!estk VblerK~< Servk-M SB 428, AAC Funding for Legal Services for the Poor Ansonia, CT Judiciary Committee Ti-,.:. Cl'rroer for ~ Won~;l'S C&frtlOi' Good morning Senator Coleman, Representative Tong and members of the Danbury, CT committee. CT Coalition Against DomesUc Violence (CCADV) is the state's leading v:oice for victims of domestic violence and our 18 member organizations that serve them. Our members provide essential services to over 40,000 victims of domestic violence each year. Services provided include 24-hour crisis response, emergency Dayville, CT shelter, safety planning, counseling, support groups and court advocacy. N. 7,r.t-tk. Ag;>\ll~t P.-:>:n~rtk We urge your support of SB.426 and SB 428. A: .;:o.~ Enfield, CT SB426 n '''•1"ii";.!\b<... ·:a s~j'o'ki"~ Gr~>,.;~n;sdti; '{INCA This bill creates a task force to examine and make recommendations on different Greenwich, CT mechanisms to Increase legal representation In civil proceedings. Legal representation is one of the most frequently requested services we receive from victims of domestic violence. Many victims experience a number of complex and c Hartford, CT difficult legal needs including divorce, custody and seeking restraining orders. Those who do not have representation are often further victimized by unfavorable outcomes. Meriden, CT National statistics demonstrate that 98% of abusive relationships include some form N-:-,.., Hmi;:cr·!> of financial abuse in that the abuser controls the victim's access to money. For some Middletown, CT victims, even if they work, they are forced to tum their paycheck over to their abuser who is "in charge" of the family's finances. The victim is made to be entirely P··"·:.%!K~ Ct:\i'!d~ll C<;;nt&r New Britain, CT dependent on their abuser with little or no ability to financially care for themselves or their children. They are often faced with the agonizing decision of staying and 1 \d :Jmb:ii \:", ., -~"~t'k V:O'-~.-v.::'.'. Crkh Cen'"i:fr needs as they seek to end their abusive relationship. f\:orwalk, cr Given the number of domestic violence victims that seek remedies through V•'t'l"'>.;>'r'~ Su;.pot-r S"'""l~i<'i Connecticut's civil/family court system, we are grateful to have a seat on this task Sharon, CT force and the opportunity to participate in this importsnt work. We urge your support. D Sc~""''·"~ a, Arrthony Prqect This bill seeks to increase funding for legal services for the poor. It calls for a 3.5% Torrington, CT increase to certain court fees (mosUy $5 or $10 increases) that haven't been raised since 2012 and it gives the Judicial Branch the authority to designate Client Security Saf..;: H~>Y":n Fund revenues, when available, to fund these services. Waterbury, CT (OVER) !;)-..>~1'1!ll1>"tk Vlo~nca Pro~r .'!m IJ•.,!tfi!'J S~f'\!itl!,t: 912 Silas Dearn:r Highway I Lower Lwei i WethGtrtfl91d, CT 06109 c Wl!limar~tic:, CT 860.282.7~ 1860.282.7892 Fax 1800.281.1481 (CT only) 002839 c Legal aid is a key partner in meeting the needs of domestic violence victims across the state. While our 18 member organizations can provide guidance on the court process, they are rarely able to provide legal advice due to funding restrictions. The network of legal aid attomeys, including New Haven Legal Assistance, Greater Hartford Legal Aid and Connecticut Legal Services, is critical to ensuring that victims have the representation they need when seeking remedies through the civil/family court. As we mentioned above, the state currently only provides funding for Family Violence Victim Advocates in 4 of the states 15 civil/family court locations. Considering just the restraining order application process, which is extremely complex and cumbersome, the services provided by legal aid to assist victims with securing court-ordered protection is invaluable. In addition to those life-saving services, the legal aid network does extensive work with many victims who also have needs related to divorce, custody, alimony, housing, and immigration. Legal aid is a pivotal piece of the system designed to keep victims of domestic violence safe. Unfortunately, funding for legal aid has been dropping. The Govemor and General Assembly, with support from Judicial Branch leadership, enacted court filing fees to stabilize legal aid after IOLTA plummeted from $20 million to $2 million. These court fees have helped significantly, but continuing declines in court fee revenue have forced legal aid programs to shrink by around 20%, causing a sharp reduction in urgently needed services. Despite staff layoffs, restructuring of advocacy efforts, unpaid furlough days, attrition and constant fundraising efforts, legal aid programs continue to face prOjected budget defic~s that could result in further cutbacks next year. Any such cutbacks would have a devastating effect on the legal services that victims rely on. We urge your support of remedies that will stabilize funding for legal services. Please do not hesitate to contact me with questions. Liza Andrews c Director of Public Policy & Communications [email protected] ' 0 Pagel2 002840 c CONNECI'ICUT BAR FOUNDATION Testimony of James T. Shesrlii President, Connecticut Bar Foundation In Support of Senate Bill426 and Senate Bi11428 · Judiciary COmmittee March 18,2016 Good afternoon Sen. Coleman, Rep. Tong, Senator Kissel, Representative Rebimbas, and esteemed members of the Judiciary Committee. My name is James T. Shesrlii and I offer this testimony as President of the Connecticnt Bar Foundation ("Foundation") to express the Foundation's support for two bills on today's public hesrliig agenda:· Senate Bill 426, An Act Creating A Task Force To Improve Access To Legal Counsel In. Civil Matters, and Senate Bill428, An Act Concerning Funding Of Legal Services For The Poor. The Foundation is a 50J(c)(3) charitable organization devoted to funding the delivery of legal services to the poor by providing grants-in-aid to nonprofit organizations providing civil legal representation to low income people. Pursuant to Connecticut General Statote §51-8lc, the c judges of the Superior Court have designated the Foundation to administer the interest on lawyers' trust accounts (IOLTA) program and, consequently, the Foundation also administers the fees imposed upon certain court filings under the Judicial Branch's Court Fees Grants-in-Aid (CFGIA) program. The Foundation presently supports ten civil legal service providers (LSPs) in Connecticut which address the legal needs of those who constitute Connecticut's poverty population, a group of people who, since 2007, has grown from 268,880 to 374,772. As the nwnber of people who qualifY as poor has grown, so have their legal needs. For many of these people, their ability to secure the most basic human needs depends entirely on the legal aid lawyers who are willing to advocate on their behalf. Without the zealous and passionate representation of these lawyers, those who face the loss of basic hwnan needs - including housing, safety from domestic violence, health care benefits, employment, and educational opportunities - are often ill-equipped to protect their legal rights. · Since 2008, IOL TA funding has dropped from $20.8 million to $2 million because of interest rate reductions. The average interest paid on IOLTA accounts is now .2064% so, while the total amount held in all Connecticut IOLTA accounts at any given time is approximately $900 million, the annual. retorn is only about $2 million. With the support of the Legislative, Judicial and Executive Branches, legislation was passed in 2009 that increased certain court fees and dedicated that revenue for funding civil legal aid. Those fees were last increased in 2012. It was estimated at that time that CFGIA wouid then generate about $13.5 to $14 million in revenue. But, comt filings decreased, resulting in CFGIA receipts of only $11,925,225 for the annual reporting period ending on September 30, 2013. In 2014, the Judicial Branch increased the percentage of revenue allocated to civil legal aid to 95% of the receipts, but that still did not stein c 31 Pratt Street, Hartford, CT 06103-1631 860-722-2494 Fax 860-722-2497 Email [email protected] 002841 • the tide ofthe fee reduction resulting from decreased filings. Our CFGIA revenue for the period ending September 30,2015 was $11,213,592. We project a further decrease this year. The LSPs bave done their best to desl with the challenges of reduced funding by trimming back on expenses where they can, imposing furlough days, and most unfortunately, terminating staff. Mind you, the LSPs have been forced to take these actions at the same time that the poverty population in Connecticut has grown sigrrlficantly over the same period of time and their legal needs have become even more voluminous and complex. We desperately need an additional $2.0 million in funding to prevent further terminations oflegal aid lawyers. It is for these reasons that the Foundation supports Senate Bill 428. First, the bill would increase the court filing fees by a modest 3.5% (mostly $5 to $10), less than 1% per year since the fees were last raised in 2012. I should note that access to our Court system is still relatively inexpensive when compared to other states. We are also pleased that we have garnered the support of the various bar associations, which we believe attests to the reasonableness of this proposal. The second half of the bill would allow the Client Security Fund Committee to allocate a portion of the client security fee it charges ·lawyers - currently $75 per person -- to support legal services funding but ouly if it believes it has adequate reserves to otherwise meet the demands of the Fund. The increase in court fees should result in an additional $950,000 on an annual basis; the secOnd measure will vary from year to year and in any event would not be available as a funding source until sometime next year at the earliest. The much needed revenue Senate Bill 428 is projected to raise will help avert a catastrophic Joss of legal aid services for low-income and vulnerable 0 Connecticut residents. The Foundation also supports Senate Bill 426, which would examine the impact that the Jack of access to counsel in civil matters is having on the ability of state residents to secure essential human needs. The findings and recommendations of the task force, which would be due before the end of this year, would be extremely helpful in identifying potential, long-range solutions to helping those who cannot afford an attorney to obtain legal representation· in civil cases. The Foundation is grateful for any opportunity to participate in such a task force and commends this committee for raising the bill for public discussion. On behalf of the Connecticut Bar Foundation, I urge the Judiciary Committee to favorably report Senate Bill 428 and Senate Bill 426. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. fbailk you. ACTIVFJ8.3/JTS/5675414v2 2 002842 c TESTIMONY OF KIM SMITH FOR THE JlJDICIARY COMMITTEE IN SUPPORT OF S.B. 428: AN ACT CONCERNING FONDING OF LEGAL SERVICES FOR THE POOR. MARCH 18, 2016 Thank you very much Senator Coleman, Representative Tong and all other distinguished committee members for the opportunity to come before you today to support t~e continued and increased funding for CT Legal Services and the vital role they play in ensuring atrisk youth maintain their access to their free and appropriate public education. My name is Kimberly Smith and I am a retired Juvenile Probation Officer with 20 years of state service helping and interviewing some of our most vulnerable court involVed youth. Our youth's vulnerability_ is a result of years of trauma, violence and housin(finstability, to name a few. These issues often manifest In school ~ith behaviors such as school avoidanc17, walking out of class, aggression, disrespect and peer conflicts, which educators and school systems are not always equipped to identify and manage properly. This lends itselfto ineffective disciplinary practices; such referrals to court, suspensions or expulsions; which exclude children rather than engage them in their educational programming. Without the support and collaboration of the attorneys at Connecticut Legal Services over the years, many of these children on my caseload would have fallen through the cracks due to the misguided perception they are 11 a cancer to our school", "incorrigible" or "don't care about their education." This is quite the contrary from my experience. l would like to share my favqrite success story regarding Connecticut L.egal Services, but please understand that c due to confidential nature of juvenile court, there will be no names used. I worked with a gth grader who was referred to the court for truancy. After reviewing her case and interviewing her and her mother, we discovered she would regularly get up and get ready foi school, but never made it past the hallway of her apartment building where she was often found in tears. The family shared that over the Thanksgiving holiday the student's mother had to be transported by ambulance to the hospital, thus leaving her te13nage girls home alone to care for themselves for three days, unware of their mother's-status. It was this traumatic event of not knowing if her mother was alive or not that appeared to trigger her school avoidance and the stress she was experiencing leaving her mother every morning. Although Connecticut Legal Services attorneys provided education advocacy training to Probation Officers, I lacked the legal expertise to compel the school to conduct the special education evaluations required by state and federal law (IDEA). I referred the family to Connecticut legal Services and their attorney worked with the family and school to hold a successful plannir~g and placement team (PPT) meeting and commence the necessary evaluations. These eValuations indicated the child required special education instruction within a smaller classroom setting to assist and support her emotionally, while at the same time allowing her access to academic instruction. When she was finally placed in this setting within her school, she thrived and sparkled, something that she was missing for quite some time due to the overwhelming nature of a traditional educational environment. She joined the track team that spring, graduated High School on time four years later, and began community college that fall. Education is about more than academic instruction. It is about engaging children in develop!ng skills and competencies to help them successfully transition into adulthood. Without the support and representation offamilies by ConnectiCut Legal services, this success story would likely not have happened. The reality would likely have been she dropped out of school when she reached 17 and was catapulted into an adult world far sooner than she was prepared for. c I would love to share more successes with you, but I thank you for your time. 002843 c Testimony ofNour Alnajjar of New Britain, CT A Former Client of Connecticut Legal Services In Support of Senate Bill 428 Regarding Legal Services Funding March 18, 2016 Dear Honorable Committee Members, The purpose of my testimony is to share my recent experience with Connecticut Legal Services. I am a single mother of two children as well as a survivor of domestic violence. My story is about what it means to have a safe life to live. I lost home, safety, happiness and four years of my life because of my abuser, my ex-husband. I was weak emotionally and financially when I took a decision to leave my abuser and as a result, I became homeless with two little children with a lot c of fear for the future. I stayed in a shelter for three weeks until I could find a safe place to live in. My big dream was to get a divorce, but the idea of getting a lawyer wasn't affordable until I heard about Connecticut Legal Services. I started my dream with them when the office of Connecticut Legal Services, New Britain, contacted me regarding a referral from a domestic violence organization. Mr. Martio Wheeler opened my case on May, 2015. He explained every single detail about my case and he gave me a broad view through his legal lens. Connecticut Legal Services prepared my divorce paper, contacted my ex-husband's lawyer to arrange an agreement, informed me of my court dates, presented me in the court, supported my decisions, fought for my right to custody of my children, helped me to transfer my ex-husband's personal items to his lawyer safely. He allowed me to reach my goal and to find the peaceful side of my life. Connecticut Legal Services helped me to honor my freedom on December, 2015. c 002844 My new life would not have been possible without the help of Connecticut Legal Services. Today I am grateful to be alive, to have two beautiful children who aren't raised in a home filled with emotional, physical and mental violence and to have the opportunity to share my story so I can support Legal services to continue helping those in need. Thank you for your attention and consideration of my voice. Sincerely, Nour Alnajjar 3/18/2016 002845 0 CoriMackey March 18,2016 Testimony before the Judiciary Committee . IN FAVOR OF SB 428 ReFunding for Legal Aid Senator Coleman, Representative Tong, Senator Kissel, Representative Rebimbas and members of the Appropriations Committee: My name is Cori Mackey, and I am the Executive Director of the Christian Activities Council in Hartford, CT. The Christian Activities Council (CAC) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting human equality and social justice in the metropolitan Hartford area. Our mission is to develop leaders who act collectively for social justice. Our 0 programs span vital areas of human life--including housing, youth education and health care, and empowerment through community organizing . . I am testifying in support of Senate Bill428, ANACT CONCERNING FUNDING OF LEGAL SERVICES FOR THE POOR. ·My team of community organizers and I became involved with the residents of a multifamily HUD subsidized apartment complex, in late July 2015 when all of the residents were displaced by a fire. Many of the residents--all very low-income families including families with children-lost everything they owned. Many also lost important legal documents and personal identification as they were forced to evacuate quickly. The residents initially encountered problems with the City of Hartford's relocation assistance program, and were told that they would get two weeks in a motel; after that they were expected to stay with friends or family, or call211 to find space at a homeless shelter. With Greater Hartford Legal Aid's help, we successfully organized the residents. Residents were able to bring attention to problems in the City's relocation assistance program, and to get the real, day-to-day help all of these displaced families needed. GHLA was critically important because they taught residents about their legal rights and helped our 002846 c organizers understand the law and the benefits each resident was entitled to receive under the law. We also became aware that Greater Hartford Legal Aid has a case in court which is trying.to improve the City's relocation program overall. We helped GHLA fight that case-as members of the affected communities-- so that tenants can get the relocation help they need and are entitled to when their homes are lost due to fire or other code enforcement issues causing them to be vacated from their home. ·Greater Hartford Legal Aid provides critical legal services to our poorest, most vulnerable residents. Providing adequate funding is simply the right and just thing to do, but it's also a smart fmancial investment. The clients GHLA represent live at the margins and are easy targets for predatory actions. A number of their clients fmd themselves at the mercy of predatory landlords, unscrupulous employers, or violent spouses. The work of GHLA is c often the difference between a family remaining housed, employed, and self sufficient versus entering homelessness or joblessness, needing to rely more fully on the state's aid. Someone will pay for the resulting consequences of these landlords and employers' actions and by supporting GHLA, we're providing more opportunities for justice to be served and for their clients, our poorest residents, to have their rights preserved. I am asking you today to please support increased legal aid funding because right to legal representation, particularly that provided by the competent, passionate, and dedicated staff of Greater Hartford Legal Aid, is a critical life line for so many of our low-income residents. We can't afford to lose these services. Thank you. c 002847 c Stephanie Alicea March 18, 2016 Testimony before the Judiciary Committee IN FAVOR OF SB 428 Re Funding for Legal Aid Senator Coleman, Representative Tong, Senator Kissel, Representative Rebimbas and members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Stephanie Alicea. I work part-time at Hercules Helping Hands and am raising my c daughter by myself. I came to Greater Hartford Legal Aid because I was having issues with my custody case regarding my daughter. I have sole Custody of daughter and father had limited visitation. He got arrested and got the criminal attorney involved in our custody case. After that I was lost and I thought I was going to lose my daughter. I called everyone to get help but I didn't have the money for an attorney. So I called legal aid and an Attorney took my case. My GHLA attorney helped me by explaining whatwe needed to do to keep my daughter safe. Since I got a GHLA I have less c 002848 c anxiety coming to court. She always contacts me on the different options we have on approaching the situation. I haven't been any happier with the results from not having hope but to have justice and really explain to the judge what was really going on. Ifl didn't have Legal Aid I would be lost and scared because of the fact that I thought I would lose my daughter. I would keep coming to court afraid and with no confidence. She really helped understand that in not alone that why we have to court system c and the legal ways to do things. Please support increased legal aid funding because I believe this is a great opportunity Thank you. c 002849 c Genoveva Arias Webster March 18, 2016 Testimony before the Judiciary Committee IN FAVOR OF SB 428 Re: Funding for Legal Aid Hello. I am Genoveva Arias-Webster. I have three children. I came to the United States with my daughter. In Connecticut I met a man who was wonderful to my daughter and me. He and I were very in love and decided to marry and have more children. We had two sons but my husband kept us isolated and poor. He was verbally abusive to me and I had no one to turn to. l had to leave my husband to protect myself and my children. I wanted to divorce him but I had no money. 0 Legal Aid helped me with my divorce. With the assistance of Legal Aid I obtained primary residence of our sons and child support. Legal Aid also got me one of the cars my husband owned. Now I am no longer isolated and poor. Without Legal Aid's help, my children and I would not have the freedom and happiness we now enjoy. I am here to ask you to please continue funding Legal Aid so that they can continue helping people like me. Thank you. 0 / 002850 0 g!'!t!r !ord LegaJAid [1 Clllltllotillt Legal SlrViJBILAA I~N. INC. Testimony of Ben Solnit, President, New Haven Legal Assistance Board of Directors Before the Judiciary Committee on March 1, 2016 1n Support of S.B. 428, An Act Concerning Funding of Legal Services for the Poor. Senator Coleman, Representative Tong, and Members of the Judiciary Committee, My name is Ben So !nit, and I am here in support of S.B. 428, which would address the legal aid funding crisis. I want thank you for all you have done to support vitally needed funding for civil legal services for poor people, and ask for your continued support in this session. I am the President of the New Haven Legal Assistance Board of Directors, and with me are Edward Heath, Vice Chair of the Greater Hartford Legal Aid Board of Directors; Susan Garcia Nofi, Executive Director of New Haven Legal Assistance; Jamey Bell, Executive Director of Greater Hartford Legal Aid; and Steve Eppler· Epstein, Executive Director of Connecticut Legal Services. Together our three organizations cover the entire state of Connecticut, and I am testifying on behalf of all of us. Legal aid staff provide services to thousands oflow-income Connecticut residents in c crisis every year: victims of domestic violence, renters facing evictions and bomelessness, disabled children seeking federal benefits and educational services, seniors with nursing home issues, and more. Due to ongoing reductions in two primary sources of funding for legal aid (Court filing fee revenues and IOL TA - Interest on Lawyers' Trust Accounts) legal aid staffing and services have shrunk by about 20% since 2008. Despite staff layoffs, restructuring of advocacy efforts, unpaid furlough days, attrition and constant fundraising efforts, legal aid programs continue to face severe projected budget deficits that create a need for improved funding to avoid further cuts in staffing and services. To address this funding crisis, we ask that you support S.B. 428, which would do two things: o Raise the court filing fees that currently produce revenue for legal aid by a modest 3.5%. These fees have not been raised since 2012 and, in most cases, would result in an increase of$5 or $10; o Give the Judicial Branch the ability to grant available funds held in the Client Security Fund to the Connecticut Bar Foundation to fund legal services for the poor. To address our funding shortfall, we are extremely active raising money from lawyers and other donors, and pursuing foundation funding. We have had some success with that but it is just nowhere near enough to meet the funding need. Without S.B. 428, we face a shared budget shortfall that would force us to lay off as many as twenty legSl aid staff; which is on top of the 20% reduction in staff and services we have already seen. As you know, in addition to being a source ofjustice for low-income people in Connecticut, we 0 002851 c also help save 1he state resources with our work. Wheo we help a victim of domestic violence to stay in her house, or when we help a person with their eviction case, we reduce 1he need for vital safety net services from oilier parts of our system. When we prove to federal authorities that an individual qualifies for federal disability benefits, we help bring federal dollars into 1he state of Connecticut (and often 1he State receives a portion of retroactive disability awards). And when we help low-income families receive WIC or food stamp beoefits, we help bring oilier federal dollars into 1he state which directly improve nutrition, health and development of1he geoeration 1hat is our state's future. For all of1hese reasons, we also strongly support S.B. 426, which would establish a task force to study 1he impact of 1he lack of access to counsel m clVll matters, and make recommendations to improve Connecticut residents' access to justice. Thank you for your past support of legal aid, and 1hank you for your time today. If you have any questions, we would be happy to answer 1hem. c c 002852 0 Testimony of Daixy Pinto in support of S.B. 428, AAC Funding for legal Aid to the Poor Good afternoon Ladies and Gentlemen of the Judiciary Committee. My name is Daixy Pinto, and I am a former client of CT legal Services. I came to this hearing today to give you my testimony in support of SB 428, an Act Concerning Funding for Legal Aid to the Poor. I want to tell you about the help that I received from CT Legal Services, Incorporated. Since 2011, CT Legal Services, Inc., has continued to help my son and me to achieve our lifelong dream to encounter and experience our new lives in the United States. Unfortunately, I was in an abusive relationship with my husband at that time, and CT Legal Services helped me to begin the process of becoming a legal resident ofthe United States. This was not an easy process. First, Ct Legal Services helped me fill out an I 360 0 form, which is a Petition for Special Immigrant status through the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Next, they helped me file as a Self-Petitioning Spouse of Abusive U.S. Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident. When all of that paperwork was approved, CT Legal Services helped me file the I 485, the Application to Register for Permanent Resident or Adjust Status. And if this wasn't enough, the Agency finally helped me to get my divorce. When I had to temporarily move to Waterbury because of flooding in my Watertown apartment, CT Legal Services counseled me regarding the laws which let me keep my son, Joel, in his current school. This was going to be a temporary move for us to Waterbury, and I knew that Joel needed to have a consistent school experience. In addition to this, I felt that Joel needed to focus on his schoolwork. Because CT Legal Services helped us to become residents, both of us had a huge opportunity to have a better life. In addition to this, CT Legal Services intervened for me to Naugatuck Valley Community College. I was in desperate need of financial aid. CT Legal Services explained my situation to the college so that they would understand my issue. Because I had been an abused person, the VAWA Law protected me, and the c 002853 0 college realized that I did qualify for financial aid because of that law. At the college, I first took Engiish classes and then business classes. With my newly acquired skills, I was able to apply for more jobs. I found that my job interviews were more successful, and I became more valuable in the job market. I am now working part time for the city of Waterbury and hoping to get hired full time soon. Joel attends Sacred Heart High School on scholarship. ·Ladies and gentlemen, I lost my strength, self-esteem, and the ability to make my own decisions. If it wasn't for CT Legal Services, my son and I could be homeless and in a dire situation. For these reasons it is extremely important for you to increase funds for this agency, so that CT Legal Services, Inc., can continue to support people like me. That organization took me from a place of darkness to a world of light. Are there any questions? Thank you for your time this afternoon. c c 002854 JULIE KUSHNEa DlllECJOil c REGION 9A UAW 111 SOUlH ROAD FARMINGTON, CONNECI101T 06032-2560 PHONE, (860)674'{)143 FAJO (860)674-1164 PRINJtD IN U.s.A.. INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA-UAW DENNIS WILLIAMS, President ·~ GARY CASTEEL, Secretary-Treasurer Public Hearing Testimony Judiciary Committee United Auto Workers Region 9A Julie Kushner, Director/Beverley Brakeman, Political Representative SB 428 AAC Funding for Legal Aid to the Poor Good afternoon. My name is Beverley Brakeman. I am the Political Director of the United Auto Workers (UAW) Region 9A.l am here today on behalf of our Director Julie Kushner and our members from UAW National Organization ofLegal Service Workers Local2320- a national amalgamated local union of! ega! services attorneys and staff. In Connecticut, we represent attorneys and staff at several programs, the largest of which is CT Legal . Services. Our members provide critical services to low income residents dealing with domestic violence, homelessness, and lack of access to disability benefits, Medicaid and other safety net services. We are here today to urge your support ofSB428. As you know, this bill increases court filing fees for 0 the first time since 2012 by 3.5% (about $5 to $10) and gives the Judicial Branch the authority to designate Client Security Fund revenues, when available, to fund legal services to the poor. In 2012, thanks to this committee and the General Assembly, a similar bill raising court filing fees to support legal aid programs and services and stabilize legal aid after JOLT A plummeted from $20 million to $2 million was passed. While these court fees have helped significantly, continued declines in revenue have forced legal aid programs to shrink even more- around 20% - causing a sharp reduction in urgently needed services. Despite staff layoffs, restructuring of advocacy efforts, unpaid furlough days, attrition and constant fundraising efforts, legal aid programs continue to face projected budget deficits that could result in further cutbacks next year. By 2017, without some improvement in revenue, these programs project over $2 million in deficit, which would force more layoffs of approximately 20 legal aid attorneys. In turn, it is estimated that almost 2,000 clients each year would go without legal aid services. This is a crisis that has not gone away despite all of our efforts and people are suffering and struggling. This bill will help stem the tide of diminished resources and funding. Please vote yes to pass this important bill. Thank you. BB/cg 0 opelu494 002855 0 JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SUPPORT FOR 58 428, ACT CONCERNING FUNDING OF LEGAL SERVICES MARCH 16, 2016 My name is Peter Adorno, and I live in Waterbury, CT. I am here in support of SB 428, Act Concerning Funding of Legal Services. A couple of years ago, I applied for elderly housing in Waterbury. At the time, I was living in a private apartment. Unfortunately, housing is very expensive, and I am on a fixed income. So, I wanted to move into elderly housing because it was going to be much more affordable for me. When I finally moved up the waiting list, the management company did a background check. However, the management company told me that, according to the report, I was convicted in 1999 for committing a felony in Rhode Island for stealing goods. But, it was not true. I was afraid I was going to be denied admission. So, I contacted CT Legal Services in Waterbury. One of their attorneys helped me. He contacted the Office of the Attorney General in Rhode Island, Bureau of Criminal Identification. I provided them with copies of my driver's license and my social security c card. After the Office of the Attorney General researched it and confirmed that I had no criminal record, they sent me a notarized letter. It stated that I had no criminal record in Rhode Island. After getting that letter, I was able to move into my new affordable elderly housing apartment. Without CT Legal Services' help, I might not have been accepted. Also, the waiting list for elderly housing can be too long. When I was finally accepted, I was· in the middle of my one year written lease. I was afraid that if I moved into my new apartment, the old landlord might sue me for breaking my lease. My attorney at CT Legal Services told me that there is a special law that protects elders, like myself, who are accepted into elderly subsidized housing. If I give my landlord 30 days written notice before I move, I am allowed to terminate my lease before it ends. So: I notified my · landlord that I would be moving .into elderly housing. Knowing about this law was a big help and relieved a lot of anxiety. Please support 58 428. Elderly people need lawyers who can help them when they have a legal problem. Thank you. c 002856 0 Wilnelia Bianchi March 18,2016 Testimony before the Judiciary Committee IN FAVOR OF SB 428 Re Funding for Legal Aid My name is Wilnelia Bianchi. I live in Hartford, and am raising four children by myself.. I work part-time at night doing building maintenance and cleaning. I am testifying in support of Senate Bill428, ANACT CONCERNING FUNDING OF LEGAL SERVICES FOR THE POOR. I came to Greater Hartford Legal Aid because my son has a serious learning disability and was struggling in school. He was so frustrated by not being able c to learn in his class, he hated to go to school. He would bang his head till he gave himself concussions. He would cry, or hide in the building- anything to avoid going into his classroom. I had a disabilities advocate at first, but she sent me to legal aid because they know the law. The school doesn't play around when a lawyer comes to a PPT meeting. My GHLA attorney helped me by investigating my son's program, and then getting him the services he needed. For example, the attorney discovered that my son was not given proper speech and language services for months, and that he was making no progress in reading or math. She helped convince the school to send him in a more appropriate program, where he is now happy and actually learning. We had to fight more than a few years to get this help. If I didn't have a legal aid lawyer, my son would still be suffering emotionally and physically, still banging his head, and still not learning. Please support increased legal aid funding because people like me need someone knowledgeable to fight for us. c 002857 0 OP AbVANCI'N"G OP'L'OaTUNm£1i POll CRJLD'l.EN AN'O 'PAMTUllS Testimony Supporting S.B. 428: An Act Concerning Funding of Legal Services for the Poor . Sharon D. Langer, M.Ed.,J.D. Judiciary Committee March 18,2016 Senator Coleman, Representative Tong and Members of the Judiciary Committee: I am the Acting Executive Director of Connecticut Voices for Children, a research-based public education and advocacy organization that works statewide to promote the well-being of Connecticut's children, youth, and families. I am submitting this testimony on behalf of Connecticut Voices for Children in support of S.B. 428, An Act Concerning Funding of Legal Services for the Poor. The proposed legislation would permit the Judicial Branch to allot a portion of the funds held in the Client Security Fund to Legal Services programs on an annual basis, and only after an evaluation as to whether the funds exceed those needed to pay client security fund claims. The proposal would c also increase very modestly certain court fees, a portion of which go to funding legal services. As you may know the network of legal services programs for the poor has seen its main source of funding through the Interest on Lawyers' Trust Accounts (IOLTA) plummet from $20 million in 2007 to only $2 million during the last several years. In addition, the monies collected from court fees have not been able to malre up this yawning gap in funding. The legal aid programs, which serve approximately 10,000 households per year, struggle to keep their doors open. To cut costs they have let go off staff, enacted furlough days, and shnmk their ranks through attrition. As a former attorney with Connecticut Legal Services, Inc. (CLS) for twenty years, I know firsthand the important work that Legal Services provides to communities throughout the state. My research and policy advocacy has been informed by my ~xperiences as a CI.S attorney helping low-income and marginalized children and families. We at Connecticut Voices for Children engage regularly with Legal Services programs to find systemic solutions to the many challenges faced by their clients. The legislature has worked hard in recent years to come up with creative solutions to help ease the . funding crisis faced by Legal Services. By supporting S.B. 428, you will take another step to ensuring that low-income families will have access to qualified representation in family court, in juvenile court, in special education hearinga, and in many other settinga. Thank you for this opportunity to submit testimony in support of S.B. 428. I can be reached at [email protected]; (203) 498-4240 (x121). c 33 Whitney Avenue • New Haven, CT 06510 • Phone: 203.498.4240 • Fax.: 203.498.4242 • [email protected] • www.ctvoices.org 002858 0 The South Asian Bar Association cif Connecticut Testimony before the Judiciary Committee IN FAVOR OF SB 428 ReFunding for Legal Aid March 18, 2016 Senator Coleman, Representative Tong, Senator Kissel, Representative Rebimbas and members of the Judiciary Committee: My name is Sheila Charmoy. I am the president of the South Asian Bar Association of Connecticut (SABAC). Our organization represents the interests of Connecticut's South Asian lawyers, judges, legal professionals and law students. We share a common interest in the goals of ensuring access to justice by the minority commuoities that we represent, and every lawyer's ethical responsibility to support and participate in the provision of!egal services to the poor. We personally recognize the need for vibrant legal services programs in c Connecticut, as more and more individuals appear pro se before Connecticut courts. We are also familiar with the hard work of Connecticut's legal services organizations, and their attorneys, and cannot emphasize enough the importance of maintaining such a vital service. Our members are on the boards and staff of many of Connecticut's legal aid organizations, and know first hand the importance of ensuring access to a lawyer to Connecticut's most vulnerable citizens. We were proud to support legal services funding efforts in 2012 and 2014. We now respectfully urge you to support S.B. 428 which would ensure the provision of additional funds to legal services programs to help them continue to stabilize and recover. Connecticut's legal aid organizations help thousands oflow-income families every year. These organizations provide much-needed free legal assistance to low-income families facing imminent homelessness, victims of domestic violence, disabled adults and children seeking state and federal benefits, elderly individuals facing nursing home problems and collection actions, among couotless other civil legal difficulties. The need for such legal services continues to grow, and S.B. 428 would ensure the continued availability of funds necessary to ensure that Connecticut's legal services programs do not suffer further reductions in stamng and resources. Legal aid programs reduce the number of unrepresented people flooding the courts, and help marshal pro bono legal help for the poor from the private bar. Reductions in legal services will increase costs in other ·safety net programs and delay access to justice to everyone who needs access to our courts. 0 002859 c Thank you for your consideration of this testimony .. We sincerely hope that you will support this initiative to maintain and increase a stable and reliable source of funding for legal services to the disadvantaged. Respectfully Submitted, Sheila Charmo§, President On behalf of the South Asian Bar Association of Connecticut c c 2 002860 c Testimony ofDennis M. Cahill, to the J11dici8ry Committee in Slljlport of S.B. 428 regarding · funding for Legal Services to the Poor; Good evening and thank yo11 to the Committee Chairs and members for hearing my testimony. My name is Dennis Cahill and I have lived at 651 State Street, Bridgeport the past fifteen years. My bllilding is a S11pportive ho11Sing facility owned by Alpha Comm.mrlty Services branch of Central Connectie11t Coast YMCA, and is designed excl11Sively to provide affordable, pen_nanent rental ho11sing for the homeless population in the Bridgeport area. · As yo11 might surmise, residents coming 011t ofhomelessness require a large amooot of remedial services, incl11ding legal assistance. Since the bllilding opened in year 2000, the social services department has referred residents with lease or eviction problems to ConoCctie11t Legal Services. Conoectic11t Legal Services has also concfucted legal ecfucation workshops at the. bllilding to inform residents of their rights, and represented individ1lal residents where ·management has. been negligent on some points in the lease. Most of om residents are at very low income or on cjisability or low fixed inC?me. Conoecticm Legal Services has provided this service free of charge as most residents are below .110% of poverty line. In 2014 Alpha Commooity Services was granted a $20 rent increase by Bridgeport Ho11Sing A11thority to cover increased operating expenses. This increase was not approved or paid by H.U.D. from Washington, so was added entirely to residents rent and p11t most residents - .. ------ahtwe the 3Q.o/o.-afUtcome guidelitie for Se-Ction 8.participants Some residents rec-eived increases c of$100 or more. As President of om Tenant Association, I was referred to Connectic11t Legal Services iliro11gh a perso1lal-contsct and they agreed to take this case in July .2014. Again, this was done free of charge to .residents. The case settled witho11t going to comt in Jan1larY 2016. With average rent credits of $600 each resident for the previo11S two years of over charges. May the committee ooderstand how satisfied the residents are not only with the o11tcome ofthis rent case, bllt with Connecticm Legal Services' very high S1lccess rate in eviction prevention the previo11S fifteen years. Connecticut Legal Services is the only firm providing free services in the Bridgeport area for this population. Along with om satisfaction, I also express gratitude that we have Connecticut Legal Seivices to represent low income residents. Withollt Conoecticllt Legal Services assistance, no resident could have made this case to Ho11Sing Authority from their own resources, I ask the committee to· Support S.B. 428 so that Connecticut Legal Services may continue their operations on behalf of om residents. c 002861 c I. Testimony before the Appropriations Committee Regarding Funding for Legal Aid in the State of Connecticut 2/19/16 My name is Alma Pollock. I am a 61 year old widow, and a Licensed Professional Counselor. Throughout my years of work as a therapist, especially when I worked in community mental health clinics, I helped my clients fill out applications for various kinds of social assistance: food stamps, cash assistance, fuel assistance, lower cost drugs from pharmaceutical companies and applications for Social Security Disability. At times I also tried to help them find secure housing. ltwas apparent to me, and continues to be apparent to me, that one of the most pressing needs of psychiatric patients is the need for secure housing. As Abraham Maslow pointed out, in his hierarchy of needs, if physiological and safety needs are not met, e.g., need for food and safe housing, it is difficult for an individual to try to address other problems as well. I have bipolar disorder. I have lived with it for decades, and have worked as a clinician with it for decades. For various reasons, related both to my physical health and my psychological health, I had to leave my last full time job as.~-- c clinician and go on disability: first short term disability, then long term disability, then social security disability. I went from working a full time and an additional part time job, to not working at all. Suddenly, finding . affordable housing becam.e a very important, in fact an emergent issue. With help from a wonderful social worker who was my therapist, I found affordable housing at a low income housing complex that serves both the elderly and the disabled. However, in January 2015, I became very ill, and was admitted on an emergency basis to Yale Psychiatric Hospital. I tried, before I went into the hospital, to speak with one of the managers of the apartment complex about paying rent, but by the time I got one ofthem on the phone, I was too sick to discuss it. The priority was to get me into the hospital. Mter I was discharged from the hospital, when I came home, I found a · "Notice to Quit" under my apartment door. One is allowed a certain amount of time to respond to such a document, but that time had already elapsed while I was in the hospital. As I recall, the documentation said ifl paid any money to the management at that point, it would not count towards towards my rent, only towards occupancy. I did not know what to do. The problem was beyond my capacity to solve, given the recent hospitalization. Therefore I 0 002862 c 2 applied for help, from New Haven Legal Assistance, 150 I could avoid eviction and keep my housing. Due to the efforts of my lawyer from New Haven Legal Assistance, the difficulty with the landlord was resolved, and I kept my housing. It is now a little over a year later. I feel much better, I am actually applying for jobs as a therapist, both full time and part time. I expect to go back to work, under the Ticket to Work program. I think it is fair to say that January 2015 was a pivotable point in my life, I have no family members who can offer me financial assistance. If I had lost my housing last winter (and my possessions (clothes, books, family photographs, and even more important, my pets), I seriously doubt I would be applying for jobs now. I think I would have ended up back in the psychiatric hospital (and housing in a psychiatric hospital is really expensive). I might not have been able to recover psychologically, as well as financially, from that disaster. I believe the State of Connecticut should continue to subsidize legal services, not only because it is the morally right thing to do (although it is). It is also __ ~~the cost effective tbing_to.do. The. workJawy:ersdo atlegaLservjcesJLelps_to_ c keep certain social/judicial problems from becoming catastrophic problems. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. For example, what good will it do the State of Connecticut to cut support for housing lawyers, and then have to face finding emergent solutions to what is already a huge crisis in Connecticut: insufficient affordable housing. It is hard for me to believe that dealing with MORE homeless people in Connecticut, is going to save the State of Connecticut money. May I remind you that this winter, the subzero temperatures in Connecticut made being homeless a life threatening situation. I urge you to reconsider the proposed funding cuts for legal services, which offers critical help to families in need, with all kinds of overwhelming problems. Sincerely, Alma H. Pollock, M.S., L.P.C. March 18,2016 c 002863 c Jesseri Estrada March 18, 2016 Testimony before the Judiciary Committee Re Legal Aid Funding Bill Members of the Judiciary Committee. My name is Jesseri Estrada. I work part-time at Payless Shoe Store, and! am raising 2 children with my husband in New Haven. c When I first found legal services, it was like a sign from above. I was having a big problem with a landlord. Then, I got a flyer from my child's school in New Haven about legal aid services in the school. It said they could help with housing. I thought, I have to give this a shot. I went to the school, and met with a lawyer. I told her about my problem. My husband and I had given our entire life savings to a landlord. It was all the money we had. At the time we had to move, so we gave the landlord our money. But in the end, my c 002864 0 family ended up not needing to move into the apartment. But the landlord wouldn't give us our money back. I felt like a fish out of water. We had invested everything in this apartment. We started to fall behind on the rent. It wa8 hard to pay the electricity and the bills. I was starting to become afraid I wouldn't be able to provide a roof over my kids. We didn't have money anymore to go back to Puerto Rico, or anywhere else. The lawyer wrote a letter to my landlord. And in about a week, I c got back all my money-almost $5,000 dollars. It may not seem like a lot of money, but it was everything to us. Ifi didn't have legal aid, I would still be in this situation. I didn't know what to do. Please don't cut funding for legal aid. I wonder how many other people might be in the same situation. Many other people must be in much worse situations. 0 002865 c Martha Mendez March 18, 2016 Testimony before the Judiciary Committee IN FAVOR OF SB 428 ReFunding for Legal Aid My name is Martha Mendez. I was a client at Greater Hartford Legal Aid for domestic violence. They helped me in both family and housing cases. Today, I am testifying in support of Legal Aid so that they can continue to receive the funding that they need to continue their great work. I met my ex-husband eight years ago and we fell in love. We decided to live together and everything seemed great in the beginning. Then the abuse started. He would often lose his temper and express his anger towards me. He would call me degrading names and made me feel like I was nobody. I started to have panic attacks and suffer from depression. One time, he even poured hot coffee on my face and my arms, and I was critically burned. I had to call the police, and he was arrested and was jailed for 16 days. After he was released, he convinced me that he c would change and I gave him a second chance. For about two years, I thought that he did change and we would go to church together. But the abuse started again, and this time it was worse. He was drunk everyday and tried to hit me if I was disobedient. He would tell me that he would kill me if I try to divorce him or meet another man. Finally, I couldn't take it anymore, and I called the police when he tried to hit me. I contacted Legal Aid to get myself out from this abusive relationship. The people at Legal Aid treated me with respect and dignity. They gave me hope and strength to move on with my life. The lawyers there helped me to obtain restraining order against my husband. With the assistance of Legal Aid, I also filed for divorce. Then my husband made a false report to the Housing Authority that I was living with my mother and daughter in order to terminate my Section 8 housing assistance. Again, Legal Aid was there to help me, and I was able to retain my Section 8 Voucher. Legal Aid was always there for me, and they always fought hard for me. Most of all, I . knew that I could trust them because they weren't doing it for the money. They always did what was best for me, and they were always there to help me with whatever I needed. I don't really know what I would have done without them. Tbat' s why I ask you to please support funding to 0 Legal Aid so that they can continue to represent domestic violence victims like me. Thank you. 002866 Written Testimony of Dawn Oduor Judiciary Committee Public Hearing- March 17 In Support of S.B. 428, An Act Concerning Funding of Legal Services for the Poor • Dear Senator Coleman, Representative Tong, and Members of the Judiciary Committee, I would have liked to be at the hearing in person today, but unfortunately I could not postpone an important meeting at the group home where my son now lives. New Haven Legal Assistance has helped me advocate for my son in several ways. The first time was when Attorney Sheldon Taubman who helped us get an adjustable hospital bed known as a "Volker Bed". This bed is necessary to position people with gastronomy tubes and vomit excessively, posing failure to thrive and many other medical outcomes. While Medicaid was familiar with my son's diagnoses they wouldn't approve the bed .... rather wanted us to accept their bed which did not meet my son's medical need at the time. The second time it was Attorney Erin Shaffer who attended PPTs with me and helped us hold East Haven Public Schools accountable for denying my son a full year of special education (2010-2011). Despite the PPT recommendation for an additional compensatory year of education, the Town did nothing to plan for this, hoped I'd forget about it. When I insisted that c the PPTruling be upheld, East Haven got amnesia and Erin stepped in at my request to convince them to honor the PPT and educate my son. The third time - during the EHPS settlement meetings - Medicaid refused to authorize and pay for my son's Pedialyte due to his turning 21. This electrolyte solution had been approved and paid for since he was approximately 8 years of age. I asked for a hearing, again sought help from New Haven Legal Assistance, and Attorneys ShelleyWhite and Erin Shaffer came to the rescue. We were denied Pedialyte for 6 months and the team was able to get an Administrative exception and we started receiving Pedialyte. Unfortunately, my son's gastrointestinal vulnerabilities and his inability to properly retain water overwhelmed him and a surgical procedure needed to be performed at the Connecticut Children's Medical Center on January 12, 2015. DDS services have been cut by 17 million plus and being a single parent of a multi-handicapped, intellectually impaired and medically fragile child has burdened our lives simply because this "protected class" underthe law is not protected by laws that are on the books but not enforced. I am poor at this stage of my life, not that I didn't ever work - quite the contrary. I was the Assistant Clerk of the House under Speaker Irving Stolberg, worked as the administrative assistant to the Chairman of the CT Black Caucus (before it became the Black & Hispanic Caucus). My father was the First African American elected to the CT General Assembly (the Honorable Wilfred X. Johnson) elected in 1957, his term was from 1958-1964). My mom (deceased 7/23/13), Trude Johnson Mero, was a political matriarch in Hartford ... the community became our siblings. c 002867 c You may ask how then did I get to this position financially ... my decision to adopt my son when he was 5 weeks of age. I took care of him at home for 22 years (spiritually, clinically, emotionally, physically- he is quadriplegic). He was admitted to a group home on October 15, 2015, and will be 23 years of age on 3/23/16 (next week). When I consider the fact that he was • given 72 hours to live when he came to me my heart and eyes fill with JOY. Do I not need and deserve legal assistance? Of course I do! If New Haven Legal Assistance's funding isn't there, many of the voices in the community that have been law abiding, faithful, determined, honest and in many cases, worthy of hearing, won't get heard at all. Distributive justice cannot be found in the school systems, medical facilities, nor state agencies and someone must set the pace, meet the mark, and pursue "justice for all." The men and women ofNH Legal Services honor the "one nation, under God, indivisible with justice for all." This is a standard that we must not ever compromise. c 0 002868 c Patricia Beeman, MSW March 18, 2016 Testimony before the Judiciary Committee IN FAVOR OF SB 428 Re Fnndiag for Legal Aid Senator Coleman, Representative Tong, Senator Kissel, Representative Rebimbas and members of the Appropriations Committee: My name is Pat Beeman. I am a Community Outreach Coordinator at the Emergency Aid Association in Suffield, CT. I have been a Social Worker in CT for over 35 years, working in my current position for I I years. I have connected some of my more impoverished and vulnerable clients to Greater Hartford Legal Aid for consultation, advocacy and legal representation. Always, when c clients were determined eligible for the services of GHLA they received exceUent legal guidance and support. I offer these Clients' cases as examples: Ms. M was a young woman in her 20's from Moldovia. She had overstayed her Agricultural Work Visa. She had had one child with a co-worker on the local farm, where she had been working for room and board. My client was being beaten by her child's father, had no relatives in this country and was afraid ofdeportation. She was reluctant to leave her situation due to fears ofbeing deported withaut her child Client was referred to GHLA. From .GHLA she received effective information from an immigration law specialist with whose guidance she was enabled to apply for citizenship. This empowered the mother and child to gain independence from their abusive living situation. She is an American citizen now and is working full time on a dairy farm in New York where she lives with her current family. 0 002869 0 Ms. P was a senior who hod been caregtvingfor her Mother who was 99 years old and suffered from dementia, frequent incontinence, diabetes and high blood pressure. Client was living in Mother's home and was caretaking for Mother on a 24 hour 7 day a week schedule for over a year. Client needed hip surgery in July due to a fall. Her mother was transferred to a Long Term Nursing Home and deemed incompetent. When client had recuperated herself, she was notified that her mother's Conservator (an attorney assigned by Enfield Probate Court) had determined thot her mother was to remain in the Nursing Home as her home environment was substandard. My client's siblings were accusatory ofclient as being abusive andfinoncially exploitive to her Mother. These accusations were unfounded, just hearsay. My client received a notice to quit her residence at her Mother's property, signed by the Conservator appointed for her Mother. Client was to be homeless, without income and unoble to utilize any fonds in bank accounts that she and her Mother had held jointly for years. GHLA attorneys have not only negotiated a c stay ofthe eviction from her Mother's home but have advocated for my client's rights to access to her Mother whom she visits daily at the Nursing Home. Client now has her Social Security income and is in the process ofapplying for affordable rents for herself. She may not be able to care for her Mother at home due to the poor condition ofthe house but oversees her needs at the Nursing home. GHLA is continuing to advocate for client to retain some ofthe fonds that she held jointly with her Mother pointing out that client would have received at least $14 per hour for her caregiving and household management services she had given to her Mother's. care. The representation ofthose withont resources, either financial or social is the mission of GHLA. That mission is carried out in a professional, efficient and empathetic manner. I ask that the funding for this embodiment ohocial justice in the state of CT retain its current funding as well as be considered for the minor increases it has proposed. Thank you. 0 002874 c Testimony of Dr. William T. Anderson In Support OfS.B. 428: (An Act Concerning Funding of Legal Services for the Poor) Senate Judiciary Committee March 18, 2016 Good morning honorable members of the committee, state officials and fellow citizens. My name is Bill Anderson. I am a former school principal (among other work I have done in the education gystem), and in my so called retirement I volunteer as a paralegal at the Willimantic office of Connecticut Legal Services The attorneys at Connecticut Legal Services represent folks without a voice. They also represent those with loud, angry, frustrated and emotionally laden voices, requesting assistance, often refused or ignored. My experience with agencies providing legal services for ·the disenfranchised spans over 40 years, but my time with CLS spans 8 years. For a fairly significant period of my professional career, I have been engaged with special populations in public and specialized school settings. I met CLS Attorney Bet Gailor at a student's special education meeting in my role as an educational consultant for DCF. I had been tasked to support the DCF worker in an attempt to have the student continue in school without suspension. This student had a complex dual diagnosis which required considerable knowledge and expertise to parse out the difference between his ability to make decisions and his responsibility for making poor choices. Attorney Gail or, because of her intimate knowledge of the student and family, offered extensive examples of how the district co.uld "treat" and support the student instead of separating him from his education. I was impressed at our ability to immediately connect with what was in the best interest of the student, much ta the disappointment to some of the parties in the room. Attorney Gailor and I persevered for the necessary program and placement, with others joining over time. Attorney Gail or also engaged the parent often, restated c the position of the district to the parent and shared additional information in a calm, professional manner. She knew this client, the family structure and what made sense for the student. Clearly, there was a potential for more conversations in the future about recognizing the importance of understanding the parent's perspective. Over the course of my professional career, I found a niche in services for students with profound mental illness, emotional disabilities and students identified as "on the spectrum." I worked with these populations and others as a special educator, adaptive physical educator, school psychologist, school principal, director of special education, coach, director of athletics and adjunct professor at RI College and Providence College. At the start of my second year in teaching, I also became a father of a profoundly physically and cognitively impaired young man who lived at home for I 5 years. Imagine, if you can, the challenges involved when you realize that you have become a parent of a child born with a disability; when it's fairly clear from all the staff around the baby and the obvious clarity from their expressions that your life as a family will be forever changed. Or, imagine what it is like for anather family that has lived for years with a child who they have understood to be just like everyone else, but is now being referred to "specialists" in school who will "assess" what seems to be wrong. In my experience, from both sides of the table, this just rattles the world for most parents. The school venue can become a terribly threatening environment for parents, particularly those with a less than positive history about "school." School staff and administrators must be diligent to mitigate their judgment of others. For most of them, it's difficult to empathize with a parent who brings their 6 year old child late to school. However, what if they knew his older brother sleeps only an hour at a time because of the pain ofwearing his braces at night, which cause abrasions? This same parent is called into a meeting to explain to the school nurse and DCF how and why the abrasions are so persistent. Yet, later on in the day, the classroom teacher ofihe six c 002875 c year old wants to know from his dad, a special education teacher in a local district, why his son falls asleep in school every day. This is the family that will call legal services. As a general rule, everyone attends school.. .we all have a history within a school. As parents, we have expectations; we can drink the water from the tap, the local high school football team will win this year, and our school district will provide "the best possible programming and services available to all students." · Unfortunately, the regulations, the "law" and reality are not quite that simple. This expectation can create the environment for intense conflict in schooVparent meetings. Thus, the traditional role of counsel is expanded and unique in this venue. Representing a parent in a child-focused meeting requires a knowledge of early childhood development, academic achievement, psychological assessments, behavioral terminology, school scheduling, required curricula, speech and language development, social and emotional development and transition programming for older students. Having spent some time in training with CLS staff, I know they understand these topics, far beyond their peers in the field. Vitally important to this process is the ability to de-escalate the anger, frustration and emotion many parents feel in this setting. My experience has been, with assistance of counsel; parents can share their emotions/frustration, affording school staff an opportunity to understand more of their story. Parents are less likely to access mediation or Due c Process when assisted by counsel, as most disputes are negotiated at the table. · In my 8 years as a Director of Student Services in a high performing district in RI, we had one Due Process Hearing. When asked how this was possible, my response was: "We hired a great attorney for the district, Adrienne James. She came from a background of working at legal services representing the folks who needed a voice. She understood why these folks had to be heard and helped me recognize the opportunity I had as a "unique" parent to teach our staff how to listen. In the end, perceived conflicts could be addressed early, hence, students and families were provided with the services they needed. Everyone learned." Without the support ofCLS, many of these parents will not be heard. Their children will not have the voice that penetrates the system. These attorneys provide a service to families, children and school districts by managing the process of conflict resolution. A CLS attorney has extensive experience with accessing community providers and the respective state agencies responsible for all aspects of social and emotional development. The ability to contact DCF, DMHAS, DSS, etc. and draw them into the conversation with the Department of Education in an effort to provide wrap-around services is critical to the progress for many families. Collaboration between agencies could provide a significant savings .to the State if CLS is successful in opening a venue for discussion. I urge passage of this Bill to support the vital services this agency provides to low-income parents and the community at large. 0 STANDING COMMITTEE HEARINGS JUDICIARY PART 9 3731 - 4039 2016 003737 c CONNECTICUT BAR FOUNDATION Testimony of James T. Shearin President, Connecticut Bar Foundation In Support of Section 27 of Governor's 811118, An Act Concerning a Second Chance Society Judiciary Committee March 23, 2016 Good afternoon Sen. Coleman, Rep. Tong, Senator Kissel, Representative Rebimbas, and honorable members of the Judiciary Committee. My name is James T. Shearin and I offer this testimony as President of the Connecticut Bar Foundation ("Foundation") to express the Foundation's support of Section 27 of Governor's Bill 18, An Act Concerning a Second Chance Society. The Foundation Is a 501(c)(3) charitable organization devoted to funding the delivery of legal services to the poor by providing grants-in-aid to ten, nonprofit civil legal service providers in ·--~QI!AeGtic-ut,all-af.whkh-arei:leclieated-te-lielplng.low-ineome-people-obtain-justic:e;-.------ last week, I testified before this committee in support of Senate 6111428, An Act Concerning Funding of legal Services for the Poor. I explained that we desperately need an additional $2 million in funding to address the legal needs of those who constitute Connecticut's poverty 0 population, a group of people who, since 2007, has grown from 268,880 to 374,772. In addition, I described how modest increases to certain court fees would raise an additional $950,000 on an annual basis and would help prevent the termination of more legal aid lawyer. While Se.nate 6ill428 would provide vitally needed help, we still must secure new and sustainable funding sources to fill the $2 million gap. It Is for these reasons that the Foundation supports Section 27 of Governor's Bill iS. Section 27 proposes that cash bail bonds posted by criminal defendants be deposited In Interest bearing accounts. The interest earned on such deposits and bonds forfeited by accused individuals who fail to appear for a court date would be used to fund civil legal assistance for low income residents. This revenue would supplement other funding sources and help in our efforts to reduce the unmet civil legal needs of Connecticut's low-Income population. The Foundation appreciates the historic support that all three branches of state government have given to the state's civil legal aid providers, and applauds the Governor's proposal for addition legal aid funding contained in Governor's 8ill18. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on Governor's 811118. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. 31 Pratt Street, Hartford, Cf 061 03-163i 860-722-2494 Fax 860-722-2497 Email [email protected] 0 003975 0 gh I a [jl . . . lAA.I NfWHAVfN . Greater Hanfor Before the Judiciary Committee March 23, 2016 Testimony of Steven Eppler-Epstein, Executive Director, Connecticut Legal Services ·Before the Judiciary Committee on March 1, 2016 Re: liB. 5639 AAC Connecticut's Leadership in Corporation and Business Law Representative Tong, Senator Coleman, and Menibers of the Committee, We submit this testimony in Support of Section ll3(c) ofH.B 5639, An Act Concerning Connecticut's Leadership in Corporation and Business Law. That section would provide additional funds to help address the crisis in funding for legal services to the poor in Connecticut.· Connecticut's legal aid programs, including Connecticut Legal Services, Greater Hartford Legal Aid, and New Haven Legal Assistance, help Connecticut residents who are very low income, and encounter life crises. Our clients have problems for which a lawyer's c help is particularly impactful- issues of domestic violence, risk to housing stability, the need for government benefits, issues regarding disability, and issues facing the elderly. We are overwhelmet:l with applications for assistance, because the need for legal help is so widespread and because our lawyers make such a great difference in their clients' lives. Unfortuoately, not only does the need far outstrip our capacity, but the problem has been · getting steadily worse, despite the very significant efforts of this Committee in recent years to address the legal services funding crisis. As a result of funding pressures, we have been forced to reduce staffmg and services by over 20%. There have been periods of significant staff furloughs. Even with those and other cost-saving measures, we are facing a funding deficit in the coming year of almost $2 million. The crisis would result in further cutbacks of staffmg and services, at a time when legal aid is desperately needed as this state's legal safety net. This committee's action 0n Monday to JF S.B. 428 is a huge step towards preventing that further crisis. We deeply appreciate the committee's·support and dedication to the cause ofjustice for all, no matter what their income. 0