A regular meeting of the Connecticut Law Revision Commission Domestic Violence Address Confidentiality Study Committee was held in Room 509A in the State Capitol Building in Hartford on October 11, 2001 at 3:30 p.m. Members present were: Gail Burns-Smith; Joe Ciotto; Anne M. Cournoyer; Judith Dixon; Maria M. Greenslade; Robin Hammeal-Urban; Lisa Holden; Richard Kehoe; Ted Lovegrove; Judge John Maloney; Patrice McCarthy; Robin Miller; Robert Mitchell; Marissa Morello; Colleen Murphy; Patrice Palombo; James F. Papillo; Donald Philips; Natasha M. Pierre; Jo A. Roberts; Sheila Salzarula; Carmen Sierra for Linda Cimino; Steven Spellman; and Susan Storey. Also present was David D. Biklen.

Ms Roberts opened the meeting.

Ms Holden reported that she had spoken with members of the Washington Domestic Violence Coalition who believe the Washington program generally works well. They are in favor of having domestic violence personnel assist the applicants in filling out the program application and providing counseling to the applicants.

The committee discussed the definition section, section 1, of the draft. The section will be redrafted as suggested.

Some of the matters discussed include:

1. The fact that a victim is in the address confidentiality program is disclosable information and may enable her perpetrator to verify that the victim is in a particular state. What should the policy be re disclosing a person’s participation in the program?

2. The time lag in delivering mail to the participant continues to be a concern. One context in which the issue was discussed was as to a participant’s receiving notification from the Department of Corrections that her perpetrator is being released from prison. The committee suggested adding a provision to the draft that would require the department to send notices to participants in the address confidentiality program by next-day mail to cut down on the time in which she receives the notice. A participant would have to inform the department that she is in the program.

3. A suggestion was made to add a provision to the draft specifying the secretary of the state’s duty to implement the requirements of the program, such as forwarding participants’ mail.

The committee set the following schedule for future meetings:

Thursday, October 25, 2001 @ 3:30 pm

Wednesday, November 7, 2001 @ 3:30 pm

Thursday, November 29, 2001 @ 3:30 pm

Thursday, December 6, 2001 @ 3:30 pm

Future meetings will be held in the Legislative Office Building in one of the Hearing Rooms. A notice will be sent before each meeting informing the committee of the hearing room designated for that meeting.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. The next meeting date is set for Thursday, October 25, 2001 at 3:30 p.m. in the Legislative Office Building in Hartford.

Respectfully submitted,

/S/

Jo A. Roberts, Senior Attorney
Reporter