U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

41–958 PDF 2008

S. HRG. 110–357

THE RISE OF DRUG-RELATED VIOLENT CRIME

IN RURAL AMERICA: FINDING SOLUTIONS TO

A GROWING PROBLEM

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

MARCH 24, 2008

Rutland, Vermont

Serial No. J–110–81

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

(

(II)

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman 

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts 

JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware 

HERB KOHL, Wisconsin 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa 

JON KYL, Arizona 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

BRUCE A. COHEN, Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

STEPHANIE A. MIDDLETON, Republican Staff Director 

NICHOLAS A. ROSSI, Republican Chief Counsel 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS 

Page

Leahy, Hon. Patrick J., a U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont .................... 1

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 66

Specter, Hon. Arlen, a U.S. Senator from the State of Pennsylvania ................. 3

WITNESSES 

Bossi, Anthony L., Chief of Police, Rutland City Police Department, Rutland, 

Vermont ................................................................................................................ 11

Colston, Hal, Executive Director, NeighborKeepers, Burlington, Vermont ........ 18

Klavens, Bert, Coordinator of Outpatient Substance Abuse Treatment Program for Adolescents and Young Adults, Washington County Youth Service 

Bureau/Boys and Girls Clubs, Montpelier, Vermont ......................................... 21

Louras, Hon. Christopher C., Mayor, City of Rutland, Vermont ......................... 7

Moran, Mary E., Superintendent of Education, Rutland City Public Schools, 

Rutland, Vermont ................................................................................................. 13

Tremblay, Thomas R., Commissioner of Public Safety, State of Vermont Department of Public Safety, Waterbury, Vermont ............................................... 16

Welch, Hon. Peter, a Representative in Congress from the State of Vermont ... 5

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Bossi, Anthony L., Chief of Police, Rutland City Police Department, Rutland, 

Vermont, statement ............................................................................................. 33

Cimaglio, Barbara, Deputy Commissioner, Division of Alcohol and Drug 

Abuse Programs, Vermont Department of Health, Burlington, Vermont, 

statement .............................................................................................................. 36

Cohen, Sandy, Executive Director, The Mentor Connector, Rutland, Vermont, 

statement and letter ............................................................................................ 38

Colston, Hal, Executive Director, NeighborKeepers, Burlington, Vermont, 

statement .............................................................................................................. 40

Cutro, John, Restorative Community Practice Development, Winooski, 

Vermont, statement and attachments ................................................................ 42

Klavens, Bert, Coordinator of Outpatient Substance Abuse Treatment Program for Adolescents and Young Adults, Washington County Youth Service 

Bureau/Boys and Girls Clubs, Montpelier, Vermont, statement ..................... 59

Lancaster, Patricia M., Public Defender, Mendon, Vermont, letter .................... 63

Louras, Hon. Christopher C., Mayor, City of Rutland, Vermont, statement ...... 69

Moran, Mary E., Superintendent of Education, Rutland City Public Schools, 

Rutland, Vermont, statement .............................................................................. 72

Sand, Robert L., Windsor County State’s Attorney, Woodstock, Vermont, letter .......................................................................................................................... 75

Tremblay, Thomas R., Commissioner of Public Safety, State of Vermont Department of Public Safety, Waterbury, Vermont, statement ............................ 77

Welch, Hon. Peter, a Representative in Congress from the State of Vermont, 

statement .............................................................................................................. 94

Whitney, Patty, Foster Parents for the State of Vermont, letter ........................ 97

(1)

THE RISE OF DRUG-RELATED VIOLENT 

CRIME IN RURAL AMERICA: FINDING SOLUTIONS TO A GROWING PROBLEM 

MONDAY, MARCH 24, 2008

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, Pursuant to notice, at 9:14 a.m., in the 

Franklin Conference Center at the Howe Center, 92 Strongs Avenue, Rutland, Vermont, Hon. Patrick J. Leahy, Chairman of the 

Committee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Leahy and Specter. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. PATRICK J. LEAHY, A U.S. 

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF VERMONT 

Chairman LEAHY. Good morning. It is nice to see everybody here. 

I could not help but notice that we have a little bit less snow down 

here than we do up where my home is up in Middlesex. But it was 

a lovely ride down. 

It is interesting. I was talking with Senator Specter last night 

about being here. Back years ago when I was first Chairman of the 

Senate Agriculture Committee, I invited then Senator Henry 

Bellmon from Oklahoma to come here, and we held a hearing in 

Rutland because I had bragged so much about Rutland and what 

a wonderful city this is, and the area. And Senator Bellmon had 

been Governor of Oklahoma, now retired. I was talking with him 

just a few weeks ago, and he still remembered getting up early in 

the morning and just walking around Rutland, and he still has pictures at his home from when he was here. 

But the reason we are here in my home State of Vermont is to 

hear from the people of Rutland about the persistent problem of 

drug-related violent crime in rural communities. Now, that is a crisis that we have felt acutely here in Vermont, but it is also being 

felt throughout America. 

The myth is still alive that drug abuse and drug-related crime 

are only big-city problems. The fact is that rural America is also 

coping with these issues. We need a fresh look at drug crime 

through the lens of the experience of smaller cities and rural communities, and so bringing the Senate Judiciary Committee here I 

hope will give the Senate and the Congress a better perspective. 

Rutland is a public-spirited community with creative leadership. 

It is not satisfied with the status quo, and I think that makes RutVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:33 May 01, 2008 Jkt 041958 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\41958.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
2

land’s experience and ideas all the more valuable to other communities around the country that are confronting these same issues. 

I am glad that so many people who care about and work on these 

issues have joined us today to try to figure out how to fix the problem, including Federal and State officials, local law enforcement 

leaders, educators, experts in prevention and treatment, concerned 

parents and members of the community. 

I do want to thank my friend Senator Arlen Specter for making 

the trip to Vermont, and his wife, Joan, for coming here. Senator 

Specter and I first met when we were prosecutors. He was the district attorney of Philadelphia. I was State’s attorney of Chittenden 

County. We met at a prosecutors’ meeting in Philadelphia. We have 

cared deeply about fighting crime since our days as prosecutors. We 

understand that violent crime is a major issue for smaller cities 

and rural communities, whether in Vermont or rural Pennsylvania, 

or anywhere else, as well as it is in the big cities. 

The numbers alone are reason for concern. The Vermont Crime 

Information Center says that reported crimes in Vermont rose 5.7 

percent from 2005 to 2006, even though they had previously declined for several years. Violent crime in Vermont rose nearly 10 

times—let me emphasize that, 10 times—the national average. 

That is a stark increase, but it is consistent with what has been 

happening in rural areas all over the country. 

Recent events have brought the statistics of crime rates into 

stark relief. Here in Rutland, we have seen four drug-related shootings since November. On February 4, 2008, two men were shot, one 

fatally, on Grove Street in Rutland City in a drug deal gone bad. 

The mayor and I have had long discussions about that. 

The problems Rutland has encountered are like those seen in 

communities large and small all over this country. What is helpful 

here is that Rutland is showing leadership in addressing those 

problems, and Rutland is a community interested in solutions. The 

town has responded, as Vermonters always do, by working together 

and joining forces to tackle the problem. Local leaders have met to 

discuss new ways to improve safety, and individuals and companies 

have donated money to help provide overtime funding for Rutland 

police officers. I think the ideas and experiences can be useful to 

other communities elsewhere. We know there is no one-size-fits-all 

solution to this kind of a problem. 

Law enforcement is a vital piece of any plan to reduce violence. 

The Rutland Police Department—and I have known Chief Bossi for 

years—and law enforcement throughout Vermont have worked extremely hard to respond to and prevent violence. They have often 

been successful. But for years, in Vermont and elsewhere, State 

and local law enforcement have been stretched thin as they shoulder both traditional crime-fighting duties and new homeland security demands. They have faced continuous cuts in Federal funding 

under this administration, and time and time again, our State and 

local law enforcement officers, like the Vermont State Police and 

the Rutland Police Department and their counterparts in other 

States, have been unable to fill department vacancies. And the 

trend is unacceptable. 

We have made some progress. Since 2001, I have worked to secure Federal funding in the Justice Department budget, including 

3

$1 million this year for the Vermont Drug Task Force. They have 

played an essential role in cracking down on increased drug activity throughout our State. 

We have also had setbacks. At the height of its funding, the 

Community Oriented Policing Services, or COPS, increased our police presence on the streets, and by all accounts had aided in the 

steady decline in the national crime rate in the 1990’s. But beginning with the President’s first year in office, the administration has 

significantly cut the COPS program. I think that is a mistake, and 

I think it is one of the reasons we have seen violent crime increase. 

The Byrne-Justice Assistance Grants are unique in enabling and 

encouraging cross-jurisdictional solutions to preventing crime. 

Vermont’s own Drug Task Force is a prime example of the Byrne 

approach. But funding there has fallen dramatically since 2002, 

from $900 million to $170 million this year, and these cuts directly 

hit local police. 

We have also seen funding cuts hit the Crime-Free Rural States 

grant program, which was funded through the $10 million dollars 

I put in the appropriations bill in 2003. Since then, funding for this 

important program to help local communities prevent crime and violence and substance abuse has been eliminated. 

We are trying to reverse these trends, but we have to do more. 

We have to restore the COPS and the Byrne-JAG and the CrimeFree Rural States programs. These are things we need to help police officers. 

While I have always pushed for serious punishment for serious 

crimes, I think one of the things our law enforcement would be the 

first to tell you, law enforcement alone is not going to solve the 

problem of violence in our communities. We have to have an approach to crime with equal attention to law enforcement, prevention and education, and treatment; provide young people with opportunities and constructive things to do; and, of course, the most 

important component in this crucial problem is collaboration. We 

see what happens when we get State, local, and Federal working 

together. 

So I will put my whole statement in the record. I should indicate 

a number of people have statements that they want for this record, 

and we will keep the record open, and we will add their statements 

beyond those of the people who are going to testify. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Leahy appears as a submission for the record.] 

Chairman LEAHY. Senator Specter, welcome again to Vermont. It 

is a delight having you here. 

STATEMENT OF HON. ARLEN SPECTER, A U.S. SENATOR FROM 

THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA 

Senator SPECTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think much of 

America will appreciate this unique hearing today because much, 

really most of America exists outside of the large cities. And crime 

is a problem which knows no geographic boundaries and no side 

boundaries. So to see the Judiciary Committee focused on a hearing 

in Rutland, Vermont, I think will be appreciated all across America. It is a pleasant change from having the hearing in Washington 

4

or Philadelphia or Los Angeles to recognize that moderate-town 

and small-town America counts, too. 

I am very much impressed to walk into this hearing room. We 

get pretty good size crowds in Washington, but it takes the confirmation hearing of Chief Justice Roberts to do it. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator SPECTER. We do not often see this many people coming 

into even the hearing rooms in Washington, D.C. And we have television cameras, too. Not this many. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator SPECTER. When I go back to Washington and tell my colleagues how many television cameras there were here, Senator 

Hatch is going to be very angry he did not show up. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator SPECTER. This is a spectacular kind of an event. And 

when Patrick and Marcelle invited Joan and me to come today, we 

looked forward to a trip to the beautiful Vermont countryside, 

which we saw yesterday driving from Burlington, and again this 

morning. And if you have not stayed at the Lilac Inn, I recommend 

it. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator SPECTER. Joan and I have been to Vermont on many occasions in the past. Years ago we came here cross-country skiing, 

and our son, Steve, is a graduate of the University of Vermont 

Medical School, so during his 4 years here we were frequent flyers, 

frequent visitors. 

The subject that we are on today is one of really gigantic importance. Senator Leahy has outlined the statistics. I have been reviewing them. I have noted the increases in crime. I have noted the 

drug-related murder in your area not too long ago, and the drug 

problem creates a special concern as a motivating factor on people 

murdering, stealing, and assaulting in order to feed their habit. 

And Senator Leahy has outlined the problem with respect to Federal funding. We have a very tight Federal budget, and I am looking forward to the day when either Senator Leahy is Chairman of 

Appropriations or I am Chairman of Appropriations. I am looking—

[Laughter.] 

Senator SPECTER. I am looking forward to one of those days a little more with interest than the other. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator SPECTER. But Senator Leahy and I, as you may have noticed, have passed the gavel what I would call seamlessly. We work 

on a bipartisan basis. And that is not easy to do in Washington, 

D.C. 

But I mention the chairmanship of the Appropriations Committee because we really need a re-evaluation of priorities. We 

have not had a top-to-bottom analysis, and as Pat or I become 

Chairman, I think you will see that. And the Federal Government 

has a significant role to play, more so than it is playing now. 

We have at the Federal level the armed career criminal bill, 

which proposes to give life sentences to career criminals, and I 

think that is necessary. Career criminals commit 70 percent of the 

offenses. But beyond the career criminals, if you are a juvenile or 

a first offender, or even a second offender, you are going to be reVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:33 May 01, 2008 Jkt 041958 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\41958.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
5

leased to the community. And we have never really attacked realistic rehabilitation with enough intensity to have drug treatment, 

to release people who are not dependent on drugs or alcohol. We 

release functional illiterates without a trade or a skill. There is no 

surprise that they go back to a life of crime. 

Senator Leahy and I took the lead in a bill we just passed 10 

days ago in the Senate, the Second Chance Act. People are going 

to have a second chance, and we want them to be released into the 

community with a chance not to be recidivists in their interest and 

in the interest of law-abiding citizens. 

So there is much to be done, and I am delighted to join my distinguished colleague, the Chairman, and I commend him for scheduling this hearing. 

The red light went on. I conclude. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairman LEAHY. Well, Senator Specter and I have passed the 

gavel back and forth several times, and one of the nice things 

about—when I first came to the Senate, I was the junior-most 

Member there, and they told me so much is based on seniority. And 

I said it was a terrible idea. Having studied it for several decades 

now, I think it is a great idea, and it has worked—

[Laughter.] 

Chairman LEAHY. It has worked well both for Senator Specter 

and me—and this gavel, incidentally, is one my oldest son, Kevin, 

made for me in grade school, I believe it was, in shop. And I have 

used it—it gets retired periodically, but I have used it ever since. 

Our first witness this morning is going to be Peter Welch, our 

Congressman. When he was State Senator Welch and the President 

pro tem of our Senate, he also had to work to put together our 

State legislation on criminal matters and how we coordinate. Now 

in a key role, especially on the Rules Committee in the House of 

Representatives, all of these bills have to be reviewed by him. 

Congressman, it is great to have you here. Please go ahead. 

STATEMENT OF HON. PETER WELCH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VERMONT 

Representative WELCH. Thank you very much, Chairman Leahy, 

for the invitation to testify, and thanks for bringing the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, with your former Chairman and present 

very good close colleague, Senator Specter, to focus on this issue of 

drug crime. And, Patrick, Vermont is a much better place because 

of the work you have done on criminal justice issues, starting with 

your days as the Chittenden County prosecutor. 

Chairman LEAHY. Thank you. 

Representative WELCH. And, Senator Specter, we are very grateful for you to come here as well and provide your leadership and 

the close working relationship you have with Senator Leahy. 

You know, you made an observation, Senator Specter, about the 

turnout here, and it really reflects, I think, something that is quite 

important. Folks in Rutland had to make a decision whether they 

were going to ignore the problem or confront the problem, because 

what folks here are doing in this community, as much as any other 

in Vermont, is trying to build their community. They want to revitalize it. They want to make it safe for families. They want busiVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:33 May 01, 2008 Jkt 041958 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\41958.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
6

nesses to come here. They want to have a good reputation, and 

they are working hard, and I believe being quite successful. But 

bringing up the problem of drug crime was a tense decision because 

you almost do not want to acknowledge it. But the people here and 

this turnout I think this reflects that they are going to challenge 

that problem, and they very much appreciate, Senator Leahy and 

Senator Specter, you bringing with it the attention of the U.S. Congress. 

I came down here a while ago and met with Mayor Louras and 

Chief Bossi—that was on January 19th—and they were extremely 

concerned about the emerging drug problem and the efforts that 

Rutland was taking to cope with this increase in illegal drug activity. And it was only weeks after my visit with the mayor and with 

the chief that there was a drug-related murder that took place only 

blocks away, and very, very close to a middle school. And one of 

the things that the mayor and the chief impressed upon me: that 

Rutland is not at all alone in this struggle with drugs and the violence and the crime that is associated with it. It really does extend 

to all corners of the State. Chief Tim Bombardier of Barre and 

Tony Facos, the chief in Montpelier, who is here, Captain Tom Nelson of the Vermont Drug Task Force—all have talked about the 

rise in violent crime and property crime that is related, as you both 

know very well, to drug activity. 

Rutland is a safe city, despite some of these crimes. Relative to 

other places, our violent crime rate is pretty low. But recent events 

prove, as, again, both of you have mentioned, that even in safe 

rural States like Vermont, we are not at all immune to national 

trends. 

In 2006, we saw a 12-percent jump in violent crime, and while 

the overall numbers may seem low, any crime that affects the safety and the security of our people is crime that has to be challenged 

and has to be stopped. And it is not just about the impact of the 

crime directly on the individuals. It really has an impact on the 

community. And if we are going to maintain the reputation that 

Vermont has as a safe place, something that is important day to 

day to our families, to our kids going to school, to the efforts of economic revitalization, we have to work hard to address this problem. 

On the topic of solutions—and that is what I think all of us are 

interested in—the first thing that is essential—and I believe we 

have it here in the State of Vermont—is collaboration among our 

various law enforcement units. And today we have many representatives from the various law enforcement communities, not just Rutland but the State Police and from police departments around 

Vermont. And what I have learned is something I think both of you 

know: The police recognize that there are no boundaries on drugrelated crime or other crime. And, consequently, they cannot stop 

cooperation at the jurisdictional boundary of their entity. So Rutland folks have to work with others. Montpelier folks have to work 

with others as well. 

Senator Leahy, the other two things are what you mentioned: 

There has to be resources—the COPS program, Byrne grants. 

These are essential tools so that the police have the resources that 

they need. And what I found I think is what you described, and 

that is that in Congress there really is a bipartisan recognition that 

7

we have got to give our local law enforcement agencies the tools 

they need. 

So I thank you for coming and bringing attention to this problem. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Welch appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman LEAHY. Well, thank you very much, Congressman, and 

I know you have been traveling all over the State and this, as you 

know, is not unique to Rutland. 

Mayor Christopher Louras—one, I want to thank you for hosting 

us here in Rutland today. I have said publicly that I commend the 

mayor for his commitment to finding some innovative solutions to 

the problems of drugs that afflict not only here but all our small 

cities and towns around America. I hope that Rutland, under your 

leadership, Mayor, might prove as a model elsewhere. That is why 

we are having the hearing here today. You and I have had discussions by phone about this, and I know my staff has worked with 

you, and I want to thank you for making the Howe Center and 

making this available. Please go ahead, sir. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER C. LOURAS, MAYOR, CITY 

OF RUTLAND, VERMONT 

Mayor LOURAS. Well, gentlemen, good morning. 

Though courtesy necessitates that I graciously welcome you to 

the city of Rutland today, and I sincerely do extend our community’s warmest regards, it would be disingenuous to say that I am 

glad that you are here. The reality is that I wish that you did not 

have to be. 

I wish that our community were not plagued with the scourge of 

illicit drug abuse and addiction that has been creeping across rural 

America. I wish that our community had not fallen prey to the 

crime that so often accompanies interstate drug activity. And I 

wish that we could blissfully say, ‘‘Drug related violence? Not 

here.’’ and simply have that be true. But the cold reality is that 

this community, like so many others throughout our Nation, has a 

drug problem, and we need not only local but nationwide solutions 

in order to be successful in combating this curse. 

When your Committee visit was announced, there were local officials who were somewhat distraught over the prospect of hosting 

a U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on drug-related crime. 

They were concerned about public perception and the prospect of 

negative press at a time when Rutland needs to highlight its assets 

in order to compete during a time of economic downturn. But I contend that it is infinitely wiser to admit that our city is, like many 

other cities throughout the State, the Northeast, the Nation, in a 

fierce struggle for its community identity and the public’s safety. 

The first step to reversing any destructive behavior is to admit 

that there is a problem. Self-denial is by far our greatest threat. 

The city of Rutland and the State of Vermont already have the necessary building blocks to battle this scourge. We have a very aggressive law enforcement community. We have progressive prevention and intervention programs. And we have a realistic and engaged population that is not sticking its collective head in the sand 

and pretending that no problem exists. 

8

But what we do need are tools and resources. We are dealing 

with a true interstate problem and national problem that requires 

Federal support. The Senate Judiciary Committee, however, need 

not reinvent the wheel because you have already proved that you 

know what to do and how to address the problem. 

Through the Senate passage of S. 456, The Gang Abatement and 

Prevention Act of 2007, you and your fellow Committee members 

have created a blueprint for effective interdiction efforts through 

enforcement, prevention, and intervention programs. Federal initiatives like S. 456, statewide initiatives like Pennsylvania’s ‘‘Weed 

and Seed’’ Program, and local initiatives like ‘‘Rutland United 

Neighborhoods’’ are key to any community’s success in its struggle 

against drug abuse and the crimes that it brings. But law enforcement and prevention programs are only as successful as the funding that is made available to pay for them, and, unfortunately, the 

funding burden is falling more and more on the local municipalities. 

Over the past few short years, as all three of you are well aware 

and have discussed today, direct Federal funding to municipalities 

has been subject to significant reductions. The Byrne-Justice Assistance Grant Program, which local municipalities throughout the 

State and region have relied upon to keep control of our streets, is 

but a fraction of what is needed and a fraction of what should be 

allocated as we continue to cope with both local and interstate drug 

activities. In short, we need your help so we can help ourselves. 

Rutland is blessed with a beautiful downtown core, a dedicated 

professional work force, and one of the finest educational systems 

in the State, but all of its combined assets are worthless if our 

neighborhoods are, or simply feel, unsafe. 

In closing, I just want to thank you for allowing us the privilege 

of being part of finding the solution to a national crisis, and I am 

very confident that you will find the ensuing boots-on-the-ground 

testimony to be enlightening, constructive and valuable. And we all 

understand the gravity of this widespread problem. I wish you Godspeed in your efforts to help us find a way out. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mayor Louras appears as a submission for the record.] 

Chairman LEAHY. Thank you, Mayor, and I agree with what you 

say about Rutland being such a beautiful city. I still have memories of when I was a little child coming down here with my parents, 

and my parents’ printing business, and coming down here and 

working with others and many, many friends and relatives here in 

this area. 

Senator Specter, any questions? 

Senator SPECTER. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Time for 

cross-examination? 

Chairman LEAHY. Sure. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator SPECTER. I will start with you, Mayor, on the local level. 

Senator Leahy and I have been in law enforcement for decades, 

and, regrettably, we have not made any progress on the underlying 

causes of crime; that is, the issues of education or housing or job 

training, we still are at sea. And I would be interested to know 

9

your experience in Rutland compared, say, to Philadelphia, where 

there is an enormous homicide rate and drug usage. And a core 

part of the problem comes from what we call at-risk youth, young 

people who grow up in a one-parent household, no father, a working mother, and they are adrift. And we have started a program 

with some funding for mentors, because mentors rely on volunteers, and volunteers contribute their time. And our country has a 

great record for volunteers—the Peace Corps and AmeriCorps. And 

I would be interested to know in your city if you have similar problems to at-risk youth and to what extent you use mentoring now, 

because it is used, and what you think about the application of getting volunteers to be surrogate parents to give some guidance to 

these at-risk youth. 

Mayor LOURAS. Yes, sir. Well, that is a very fair question. As far 

as any of the specifics of the program that is in place, I would have 

to defer to individuals who are involved. I know that last week 

Sandy Cohen, who runs a mentoring program in the city, was wondering about what the process was to be a witness, and I believe 

she is submitting written testimony. 

Chairman LEAHY. She is. 

Mayor LOURAS. Yes. And, you know, Rutland is engaged, again, 

in all aspects of volunteerism with our great community networking that we have. And that is a piece of the solution for sure. 

We also take very seriously the program of the school resource 

officers to help target the at-risk youth in the community, and the 

school superintendent of the city of Rutland, Mary Moran, will address that as well. But we certainly understand that I think the 

crux of the entire problem is, as you said, it starts with the family. 

And it is very difficult for any community, whether it is the size 

of Philadelphia, the size of Rutland, or the size of a Belmont in 

Vermont, to try to address the issues that happen behind closed 

doors, that happen within a family. You have to have the other resources available within the schools, within mentoring programs, 

or other nonprofits to address those problems. 

Rutland has identified that as an area where we need to work. 

Frankly, I have got to tell you, I have been in office a year, and 

before I got into this office, I really felt that law enforcement was 

simply the sole way to go. But my police chief, Anthony Bossi, has 

beaten me over the head for month upon month that it is only a 

piece of that three-legged stool. And I have become a believer in 

that and understand the importance of prevention, treatment, education, as well as law enforcement. 

Senator SPECTER. Congressman Welch, you have had experience 

to some extent in the House. I know you are a relative newcomer, 

but you have experience in your State legislature. What do you 

think our chances are for having a really fundamental realignment 

of the allocation of resources so that we do not automatically give 

$500 billion to defense and $50 billion to homeland security and 

take a look at prioritizing with some funding going to some of the 

issues we are discussing here today? 

Representative WELCH. Well, I kind of like what you said earlier 

on. ‘‘Leahy’’ sounds pretty good as Chair of another Committee. 

[Laughter.] 

Representative WELCH. Or you. 

10

Chairman LEAHY. Either one of us could do that. 

Representative WELCH. You know, I think your question reflects 

what is a common-sense awareness that we do have money; it is 

a matter of how we spend it. As you know, the cost of the war now 

is going to be pushing $1 trillion, and it really puts an immense 

amount of budget pressure on other priorities. 

What I am having a sense of—and this is on both sides of the 

aisle—is that there is a recognition that we have got to start investing in our communities and in our middle class. So if the folks 

in this country across the country vote for that kind of change and 

we get Republicans and Democrats who share that view that you 

expressed, that we should have different priorities, I think we have 

got a very good chance. 

Senator SPECTER. Thank you. 

Chairman LEAHY. One question, and I was thinking about this, 

Mayor, when you were speaking. I have spent some time on different occasions with your Boys and Girls Club here in Rutland. Is 

that working pretty well? 

Mayor LOURAS. Yes, sir. 

Chairman LEAHY. The reason I mention this—and I have talked 

to Peter Welch about this before, too. I recall one time in getting 

some grants in one small town, and the police chief told me, ‘‘You 

know, instead of another police officer, can you help us get a youth 

center or get something where kids can go?’’ I was a strong supporter of that when I was a State’s attorney, and I think what you 

said and what Senator Specter said, the emphasis on the family 

and all, it has to be so important. Unfortunately, a lot of these kids 

really do not have a functioning family. Tony Bossi is right. It is 

not just the law enforcement matter. You have to have—and law 

enforcement is certainly essential, but you have to have the schools 

and the community organizations and mentoring programs. 

And I think, frankly, it comes down to one other thing. Too often, 

it is awfully easy to say, well, that is the police department’s problem or the school’s problem or the mayor’s problem or somebody 

else. It is not. It is all of ours. And we as Vermonters have to take 

part of it, and Senator Specter and I feel strongly that we have got 

to have a reawakening of that throughout the country. Otherwise, 

you can move the problem around, but it is just going to keep hitting in other communities, and it hurts all of us as Americans. 

I thank you both very much for being here. Peter, you and I talk 

about this all the time, and thank you for taking the time. And, 

Mayor, as I have told you before, you can call me at the office, you 

can call me at home, you can call me anytime you want. 

Mayor LOURAS. Thank you, sir. 

Chairman LEAHY. I am going to do the same to you. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairman LEAHY. Thank you very much, both of you, for being 

here. 

Representative WELCH. Thank you. 

Mayor LOURAS. Thank you. 

Chairman LEAHY. I should note, too, that all the statements, full 

statements of any of the witnesses, will be made part of the record 

in full. And we are going to keep the record open—this will be a 

11

formal Senate record—for a number of other people who are here 

who are going to submit testimony for the record. 

Normally what we do in Washington in the more formal testimony, we swear the witnesses in. I am not going to do that here. 

I do not think it is necessary, if that is OK with you. 

Senator SPECTER. That is fine. 

Chairman LEAHY. The first witness will be Chief Anthony Bossi, 

although everybody calls him ‘‘Tony.’’ He is the Chief of Police for 

the city of Rutland. He joined the force in 1976, a year after I 

joined the Senate. He has gone through the ranks, became chief in 

1998. Prior to joining the Rutland Police Department, Chief Bossi 

served in the United States Marine Corps from 1970 to 1972. 

Marcelle’s and my youngest son, Lance Corporal Mark Patrick 

Leahy, served in the Marine Corps. 

He attended the FBI National Academy in Quantico, Virginia; 

was a member of the FBI Law Enforcement Executive Development Association; received his associate’s degree from Champlain 

College, his bachelor’s degree from Castleton State College. Chief 

Bossi, go ahead, please. 

STATEMENT OF ANTHONY L. BOSSI, CHIEF OF POLICE, 

RUTLAND CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, RUTLAND, VERMONT 

Chief BOSSI. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Leahy and Senator 

Specter, for coming to Rutland. We really appreciate it. It is a good 

opportunity for you to see the city and to hear from those of us that 

work on the streets every day. 

Chairman LEAHY. Can everybody hear all right? OK. Pull the 

microphone a little bit closer to you. 

Chief BOSSI. How is that? Is that better? 

Chairman LEAHY. Better. Especially in the back of the room, if 

anybody cannot hear, just put your hands up and we will try to adjust the microphones. 

Go ahead, Chief. 

Chief BOSSI. The threat of drugs and violence has to be addressed on all three fronts: education/prevention, enforcement, and 

treatment. All three are equally important. 

Rutland City Police have a proactive Community Policing approach to Law Enforcement. Our school resource officers, our community policing partnership with Rutland United Neighborhoods, 

Rutland Community Justice Center, the Rutland City Public 

Schools, and the Rutland Boys and Girls Club help with education 

and prevention, and the Rutland Drug Court helps with the treatment. 

Over the last 5 years, the Rutland City Police Department has 

made over 175 drug-related arrests. Local Law Enforcement block 

grants, Byrne-Justice Assistance grants and COPS grants have allowed us to: provide an effective means of identifying people and 

places frequently involved in drug transactions; share intelligence 

information with appropriate agencies and entities to facilitate appropriate followup investigations to further drug enforcement efforts at the statewide and Federal levels; engage in both proactive 

and reactive enforcement activities to deter criminal activity; and 

disrupt the local drug supply by identifying and arresting violators. 

12

Law enforcement agencies depend on Byrne-Justice Assistance 

grants and COPS grants to help them in cooperative efforts against 

drugs and violence. These grants are also important for prevention 

and treatment programs and offender rehabilitation and re-entry 

programs. 

Rural States like Vermont need funding for law enforcement on 

three parts: to fund salaries and benefits of officers assigned to 

statewide drug task forces; to support local law enforcement efforts; 

and to support overtime funding for drug investigations. 

Rutland City Police partners with Rutland United Neighborhoods 

and the Rutland Community Justice Center. The Justice Center is 

a partnership with the Rutland City Police, the Rutland County 

State’s Attorneys, Rutland City Schools, District and Family Court, 

Department of Children and Families, and the Department of Corrections. The grant funding issued to Rutland Community Justice 

Center for offender re-entry programs pre and post adjudication 

services dispute resolution is critical to these programs. RUN also 

has a pre-charge program in place to address first-time offenders 

and quality-of-life issues. This prevents the courts and corrections 

from being involved in these matters. 

Three Rutland City police officers are assigned to the Rutland 

City Schools covering grades K–12. This program was started with 

COPS grant funds and continues to be funded by the Rutland City 

Police and the Rutland City Schools. These officers are involved in 

the design and delivery of various prevention-based and educational programs for faculty, students, parents, and interested 

community members. 

Rutland City Police are also partners with the Rutland Boys and 

Girls club, in a Bureau of Justice Assistance grant for youth partnership for crime prevention. The BJA grant will allow the Rutland 

Boys and Girls club to have a peer-based leadership program and 

provide training for the programs at the Vermont Police Academy. 

The after-school programs at the Rutland Boys and Girls Club 

make it less likely for young people to begin illegal drug use or be 

involved in youth crime and violence. 

The Rutland Drug Court is designed to help in lowering substance abuse among nonviolent offenders to help increase the offender’s success in remaining drug free. The Rutland City Police 

have been involved with the Rutland Drug court since the planning 

grant. This is another successful use of grant funds. 

Currently the drug that poses the greatest threat to Rutland City 

is crack cocaine. The availability of powder cocaine, heroin, diverted pharmaceuticals, and marijuana is also high in this area. 

These drugs primarily come to Vermont from New York and Massachusetts. We anticipate seeing ‘‘meth’’—methamphetamine—moving into our area since we have seen this development in other 

rural areas across the Nation. 

The availability of drugs in Vermont has not changed that much 

over the past years. What has changed is the violence that has increased over the last few years. 

Vermont is still one of the safest States in the country, in part 

because of the cooperation you have between the Federal, State, 

and local departments. 

13

Federal support is very important to a small rural State like 

Vermont in keeping the violent crime down. The Federal Government support helps to prevent, control, and reduce violent crime, 

drug abuse, and gang activity. 

The police cannot do it on their own. The education/prevention, 

enforcement, treatment must be funded equally; they are all important. Funding from the Federal Government is important to help 

keeping the violent crime down. The Federal funding helps to reduce violence through the use of Community Policing, prevention 

education, treatment, and neighborhood restoration. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Chief Bossi appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman LEAHY. Thank you very much, Chief. 

Our next witness is Superintendent Mary Moran. She is the Superintendent of Education for the Rutland City Schools and has 

served Rutland City Schools—and correct me if I am wrong—since 

1996 as assistant superintendent, became the district superintendent in 2000; prior to joining the Vermont Public School System, served as teacher and principal in Massachusetts, served on 

various education and community boards, including the New England Association of Schools and Colleges, Vermont High School 

Task Force; currently is the president of the Vermont Superintendents Association; bachelor’s and master’s from Boston College, certificate of advanced graduate study in school administration from 

Northeastern. 

And this is probably a little bit different than your normal day, 

Superintendent, but it is good to see you again and good to have 

you here. 

STATEMENT OF MARY E. MORAN, SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, RUTLAND CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, RUTLAND, 

VERMONT 

Ms. MORAN. Thank you, Senator, and we are very, very pleased 

that you have made the effort to bring the Judiciary Committee 

hearing here to us in Rutland, representing all of Vermont, and 

thank you, too, to Senator Specter. 

We serve over 2,800 children in the Rutland City Schools grades 

K–12, 55 percent of whom are living in poverty. And one of the 

first things that I would like to say as the joys of working here in 

Rutland City is the relationship we have between and among the 

agencies—certainly Chief Bossi and police department, but the Fire 

Service, the courts, the diversion program, the regional medical 

center, Rutland Mental Health, the Department of Children and 

Families, RAP Coalition, Mentor Connector, all of these things that 

you have heard somewhat about today and you will hear more 

about in the written testimony. The hallmark of this community, 

I believe—and it is true of Vermont—is that we all work together 

to take care of our children and families. 

I would like to start by mentioning a particular group that we 

are concerned about, and that is our EEE children, our children 

who are 3- and 4-year-olds who come to us with significant disabilities. Sometimes they are cognitive, sometimes they are medical. So 

you might ask why are we talking about EEE children in a drug 

14

and violence hearing, and, quite frankly, we think that many of the 

children who present to us at this tender age are children who are 

suffering from drug use. We have crack babies in Vermont. We 

have children who suffer from fetal alcohol syndrome in Vermont. 

And the schools and all of the community agencies that serve these 

children need to help the children and their families so that the 

children can become successful learners and citizens in the community. 

I might note that you will hear a great deal about funding from 

us this morning, and much of the funding debate is: Should it be 

the Agency of Human Services? Should it be the Department of 

Education? The reality is that children need care, and our society 

needs to figure out a way to care for them. We are heavily reliant 

on Medicaid funding for some of the services in our schools, and so 

we hope that you bring that back to the Federal legislature in 

terms of our needs. 

But the reason I begin with EEE children is the second group of 

children I am very concerned about, and that is youngsters from 

14 to 18. This group of youth are difficult to serve, and our agencies are struggling to serve them. But if you take a look at some 

of the youngsters who are becoming involved with the folks from 

‘‘away,’’ as Tony Bossi talks to us, who come looking to prey on disaffected youth, it is this age group that we are particularly concerned about, which is why the comments made earlier about mentoring and Boys and Girls Clubs are so important. 

I am particularly concerned about the young women in this age 

group, related back to who are becoming the very young mothers 

of these very challenged children. And, again, we need more funding and support for the Department of Children and Families to 

provide respite, to provide more foster care for these kids. And 

there is no criticism implied here. I am very well aware that the 

Department of Children and Families is working hard. 

But let’s talk a little bit about solutions, what is working here 

in Rutland. Certainly, the schools play a large role. We have an 

outstanding educational system, but we also provide significant 

amounts of medical and counseling help for our children, health 

care. Medicaid supports a significant number of our nursing staff 

as well as our counseling staff, and these professionals are working 

with children and families who have struggles to face, who come 

from homes that might not have been as happy and safe as the one 

in which Senator Leahy and I grew up. So those services that the 

school provides, in addition to health education and all of the other 

activities, are very, very important. 

I have another hat in this city. I serve as Chair of the Board of 

Directors of Rutland Regional Medical Center, and I know that if 

we reduce our health services in the school where some of the 

triage is provided to children and families, those youngsters and 

families will present at the emergency department of Rutland Regional. They will be well served, but the costs will be high. 

Another great success story are the 21st Century Learning Center grants. We have a program here in the city called the Tapestry 

Program, which serves Rutland City, Rutland Town, Proctor, and 

West Rutland in collaboration. We know that the most dangerous 

time for children and youth is 3 to 6 o’clock in the afternoon. We 

15

provide services for children, education, recreation, enrichment, 

counseling, nursing, library, technology to over 600 children 

throughout the year in the afternoon, as well as in the summer 

programs. I also might mention that in Brandon, the district that 

is served by the Rutland Northeast Supervisory Union, also their 

program, known as SOAR, provides similar opportunities. 

It is sad for me to note that the funds for the 21st Century 

Learning Center grants at the Federal level have essentially been 

zeroed out. We will figure out a way to continue it, but it is to important to let go. 

I would also commend the city schools because that same research indicates the time of the day when children are in most danger is the 3 to 6 period time. We have a vigorous co-curricular program in the arts, activities, and athletics to keep those youngsters 

busy, and I commend the taxpayers and the city board for supporting that. 

And, finally, the SRO program that Tony spoke about, we are in 

our 9th or 10th year. We train together, police officers and school 

leaders. We have three officers; they provide counseling, teaching, 

mentoring. They are visible in the schools to provide that protection and that visibility. They visit homes. They work with kids. 

And when they are not in school during school term, they are on 

the streets as beat cops and resources in the communities. The kids 

know these fellows—all guys right now, but they know these people, and they go to them for help and counsel. And that is very, 

very important. 

Now, I might sound like a broken record here, but those found, 

too, are in danger. The schools, the Boys and Girls Club, the RAP 

Coalition, and the Mentor Connector are all working together to 

help out children and families. So your continued support by being 

here and helping us as we go forward is greatly appreciated. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Moran appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman LEAHY. Thank you very much. 

I might say that you are fortunate to have Senator Specter here. 

All Senators wear various hats because we serve on more than one 

Committee. Senator Specter and I both serve on Appropriations, 

but he has been both Chairman and Ranking Member of the Appropriations Subcommittee that does more to provide money in 

these areas for children and others’ health needs than any other 

Committee in our Appropriations Committee. He has also forged 

more bipartisan coalitions to get that money than practically anybody else in the Senate. So you are speaking to the—he is the guy 

with the checkbook on that one. 

[Laughter.] 

Ms. MORAN. Good. 

Chairman LEAHY. Commander Tom Tremblay is the Vermont 

Commissioner of Public Safety, a position he has held since January following an exemplary Commissioner before with Kerry Sleeper. He spent 24 years serving the city of Burlington as a police officer, the final 4 years as chief of the department. Both Marcelle and 

I know the Tremblay family well and spent time with them. He has 

many professional certifications, including graduating from execuVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:33 May 01, 2008 Jkt 041958 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\41958.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
16

tive training at the FBI National Academy in Quantico, a bachelor’s degree from Champlain College. 

Commissioner, you and I have talked about a number of things 

in your former role, and it is good to welcome you personally in 

your new role as Commissioner of Public Safety. Please go ahead. 

STATEMENT OF THOMAS R. TREMBLAY, COMMISSIONER OF 

PUBLIC SAFETY, STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, WATERBURY, VERMONT 

Mr. TREMBLAY. Thank you, Chairman Leahy. We appreciate you 

coming to Vermont and bringing this Committee to hear these very 

important issues. We also thank you for your longstanding commitment to law enforcement and public safety in Vermont. 

Senator Specter, welcome to springtime in Vermont. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. TREMBLAY. We are pleased to have you with us here today. 

Senator SPECTER. Thank you. 

Mr. TREMBLAY. I have with me also Colonel Jim Baker of the 

Vermont State Police, as well as Major Tom L’Esperance and Captain Tom Nelson, all who have been actively involved with Vermont 

law enforcement for many, many years. 

It is no surprise to any of us in Vermont law enforcement the 

challenges that we face today. You can speak to anybody who has 

worked the front lines, either as a beat officer or as a drug investigator in the State of Vermont, the challenges that we face. I break 

these challenges at this time down into three specific categories: 

first of all, in-State drug distribution rings that we have seen, perhaps best evidenced by a recent press conference that we did titles 

‘‘Operation Byrne Blitz.’’ In that particular press conference just a 

short time ago, we announced the arrest of 22 individuals, 97 

criminal charges, and the seizure of multiple pounds of both marijuana and cocaine. 

One of the interesting trends to note for you here today is that 

5 years ago, perhaps 10 years ago, in Vermont, ordering a kilo of 

cocaine could occur, but it would oftentimes take days or even a 

week or more to obtain that quantity. Today, it is immediately 

available by distribution networks within Vermont, which to me is 

a substantial change in drug enforcement in Vermont. 

The second category I break out is out-of-State drug sources. 

Many of us in our communities throughout Vermont are seeing outof-State drug sources coming to Vermont to monopolize drug traffic 

trade, to sell their wares and peddle their poison on our streets at 

a much higher level than they can in some of the larger urban 

areas that they come from, bringing with this an associated crime 

and violence. These two groups, whether it be in State or out of 

State, we have to understand that the profit margins, the amount 

of drugs that are involved become a target for drug rip-offs, which 

causes this kind of increased level of violence that is ongoing in 

Vermont with drug traffickers. 

The third point that I want to make today is the problem that 

we are facing in Vermont with prescription drug abuse and addiction. The majority of our drug overdose deaths that occurred in 

Vermont occurred as a result of illegally possessed prescription 

narcotics. It has caused a significant concern in our communities 

17

and significant resources in the law enforcement community to investigate these deaths and the associated problems that come with 

them. 

Many of us here who have testified today talk about the cooperative law enforcement here in Vermont that we enjoy. I would have 

to mention U.S. Attorney Tom Anderson’s commitment to that, as 

well as the Vermont Attorney General, Bill Sorrell, and the county 

prosecutors who all work very closely together to examine the best 

way to prosecute these kinds of cases. The local, State, and Federal 

law enforcement cooperation in Vermont is outstanding. 

The Vermont Drug Task Force is perhaps the best example of 

that. The Vermont Drug Task Force is a multi-agency group of investigators comprised of State, county, and local officers that is 

funded largely through Federal dollars. There are 23 members assigned to the task force; 15 of those members, or over 60 percent, 

are either funded 100 percent with Federal dollars or their positions are back-filled with Federal dollars. Three local positions are 

funded with a State grant known as the Community Drug Interdiction program, and the remaining five are funded directly from 

State Police budget. 

The Federal funding, which also accounts for 90 percent of the 

task force operating and equipment costs, is also considered volatile 

and usually allows for the task force to forecast only an 18-months 

spending plan. This Vermont multi-investigative approach is and 

continues to be the most effective means of addressing the drug importation and distribution in our State. Federal funding and State 

resources must continue for this multi-agency task force to ensure 

the continued success and to ensure the protection and safety of all 

Vermonters from drug-related crime and violence. 

I would like to point out a couple of—this hearing is titled ‘‘solutions’’ and talk a little bit about that. Aggressive enforcement must 

remain part of this solution. Chief Bossi talked about that. It is not 

the only way, but because we are law enforcement officers, I have 

to address aggressive enforcement strategies. Aggressive enforcement strategies in Vermont must remain in effect. They must be 

professional, and they must be done without bias. We must ensure 

that training of our local and State and Federal law enforcement 

officers remains in existence. 

One of the problems recently in Vermont has been that the Drug 

Enforcement Administration approximately 10 years ago stopped 

bringing training here that was vital to Vermont law enforcement. 

We must remain above the curve here to deal with the changing 

trends in criminal behavior. 

Some of the out-of-State problems that we are experiencing: We 

have to take a look at a new way of doing business. We have to 

get creative with our problem-solving and take a look at not just 

working with the out-of-State law enforcement agencies where 

these out-of-State sources come from, but perhaps considering 

media or messaging campaigns to those larger cities and areas so 

that Vermont does not become a safe haven for drug dealers. 

Crime analysis and problem-solving is a key component of what 

we are doing to try to stay ahead of the problems before they become invested in our neighborhoods, like examples we have seen in 

Barre and now in Rutland. By analyzing our crime stats and whatVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:33 May 01, 2008 Jkt 041958 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\41958.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
18

not and having the resources and funding necessary to be able to 

analyze that, perhaps Vermont law enforcement can extend itself 

and stay ahead of the problem. 

As I said, drug education, treatment, enforcement, and rehabilitation are all part of the solution. Governor Douglas’s DETER program has been helpful, but there is much more work to be done. 

You have heard it all today from all of the witnesses talk about 

the importance of Byrne and JAG grant funding to continue these 

important programs. It is going to help keep Vermont and other 

rural States that are facing the changing criminal trends in drugassociated crime and violence to help keep all of Vermonters and 

people who live in the rural State in our country safe. 

Thank you for your time. I appreciate it and will welcome questions when they come. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Tremblay appears as a submission for the record.] 

Chairman LEAHY. Thank you. 

Our next witness is Hal Colston, who is the founder and Executive Director of NeighborKeepers, a nonprofit anti-poverty organization based in Burlington. He also founded the Good News Garage, a nonprofit that provides repaired, donated vehicles to people 

in need. Marcelle and I first met him when we brought in a vehicle 

and donated it there a number of years ago. He has been widely 

recognized for his community service. He received the Peter 

Drucker Nonprofit Management Innovation Award in 1999, the 

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Best of the 

Best Practice Award in 2000; appointed to the Governor’s Workforce Equity and Diversity Council in 2001, serves there today; 

and, Senator Specter, he received a bachelor’s degree from the University of Pennsylvania. To balance this, he then received an honorary degree from my alma mater, St. Michael’s College. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairman LEAHY. Go ahead, please. 

STATEMENT OF HAL COLSTON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

NEIGHBORKEEPERS, BURLINGTON, VERMONT 

Mr. COLSTON. Thank you, Senator Leahy, and thank you, Senator Specter. It is my pleasure and privilege to be before this Committee to discuss the rise of drug-related violent crime in rural 

America and how to find solutions to this growing problem. My testimony will focus on prevention with an understanding of the importance of treatment and law enforcement. 

I have lived in Essex Junction, Vermont, since 1989 after moving 

here from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, with my wife and three children, who are now grown. The human scale and quality of life in 

Vermont has been very important to me as a parent and as a citizen. But the proliferation of drug use and the related violent crime 

has given me pause as of late. I have witnessed how drug abuse 

violently tears apart families. 

I believe it is important to go upstream to understand why the 

demand for drugs continues to increase, and especially among the 

young people in our community. As long as the demand for drugs 

is brisk, there will be drug dealers lined up ten deep to meet this 

demand. In my view, drug dealers are people who have lost hope. 

19

Some of them may come from out of State to capitalize on this opportunity, but dealers would not be in business unless there is a 

demand. Our recent Youth Risk Behavior report prepared by our 

Department of Health has shown that marijuana use has shown a 

slight decline, yet the report did not measure the abuse of prescription drugs, which can lead to hard, addictive drugs such as heroin, 

cocaine, and oxycontin. How do we deal with the consumption side 

of the problem? 

I feel we do a disservice to our teenagers by creating a cliff effect 

for the 14- to 16-year-olds during the summer months. They are too 

old for summer recreational programs, and they are not old enough 

to work. So they tend to drop out of sight and are left to their own 

devices unless families have the resources to put them through 

endless summer camps, providing them with healthy activities. Yet 

the reality is that many families cannot afford this option. When 

our young people abuse drugs at such a young age, they risk their 

emotional development. Peer pressure becomes a powerful force 

that can keep our children trapped into abusing drugs. 

This is compounded when our young people who experiment with 

and abuse drugs go back to school in the fall. Studies have shown 

that the most dangerous time during the school day is from 3 p.m. 

to 6 p.m. Many parents are at work, and our children may be home 

alone if they are not involved with extracurricular activities at 

school or part-time work. Without structure for healthy activities 

and clear boundaries for behavior, it is no surprise to me how our 

kids get onto a path of abusing drugs. How do we deal with this 

side of the problem? 

Well, why not shift our school day to begin at 9 a.m. and end at 

5 p.m.? This would eliminate the vulnerable time of the day when 

we give adolescents the opportunity to exercise risky behavior. 

Studies have shown that under the typical school day students on 

average do not get sufficient sleep, losing rest for a vigorous day 

at school. The unintended consequence of a change such as this 

could improve school performance and decrease drug abuse. 

It really does take a village to support our children, and that village must include all of its parents. Living in an affluent community, I have seen how parents are stretched between career and 

family. And the outcome is that parents become isolated from one 

another as we try to keep pace with making a living and providing 

for our families. It becomes too difficult for parents to act together. 

A typical scenario is that a parent or parents plan to leave town 

for the weekend and have the child spend the weekend with a 

friend—an empty house that no other parents may know about. Before you know it, a get-together is planned without any of the parents speaking to one another. We get hoodwinked and our teenagers get a chance to have an out-of-control party fueled by drugs. 

How can our community deal with this side of the problem? 

What all of us parents have in common are our schools. Perhaps 

the schools can bring parents together at middle school to learn 

how to act together for the well-being of our children. Parents Acting Together could partner with the schools to learn how and why 

strategies for communicating with one another are important. This 

associational relationship could provide the opportunity for building meaningful relationships. 

20

There are families in our community with parents who are recovering from drug addiction lacking associational relationships. How 

can such a family get support so their children don’t repeat their 

experiences of self-destruction? I direct a new nonprofit in 

Chittenden County called NeighborKeepers with a vision to break 

the bonds of poverty one family at a time. In my view, poverty is 

surviving with a lack of resources such as financial, physical, mental, emotional, spiritual, and role models. We employ the Circles of 

Support model and practice radical hospitality, creating a community where families befriend allies who help them accomplish their 

dreams and goals. Typically, three allies comprise a Circle of Support and learn to ‘‘do with’’ as opposed to ‘‘do for’’ their new friends. 

Not only are the families transformed but the allies are also as 

they learn how barriers and policies keep people trapped with a 

lack of resources. Ultimately, our community benefits as 

marginalized families are able to increase their social capital. 

NeighborKeepers has two families in our Circles of Support community with parents who are recovering addicts. I have watched 

them come alive with their new friends and a new sense of purpose—understanding that they, too, have something to give back. 

At NeighborKeepers we teach reciprocity, which is critical for 

healthy relationships and critical for building healthy communities. 

In conclusion, I believe that we must think out of the box to find 

solutions to drug-related violent crime in rural America. We need 

to focus on the needs of our children and families, which are the 

building blocks of a healthy community. If we can replace their isolation with meaningful activities and relationships, we can make 

tomorrow brighter for all. For me Dr. James Comer of Yale University says it all: ‘‘No significant learning can take place without a 

significant relationship.’’ It is all about meaningful relationships. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Colston appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman LEAHY. Thank you. And our last—

[Applause.] 

Chairman LEAHY. Thank you. And our last witness is Bert 

Klavens, who is adolescent drug and alcohol counseling program coordinator for Washington County Youth Service Bureau. He has 

been there since 2003. He has been with the Washington County 

Youth Service since 2000, previously worked as drug and alcohol 

counselor, is a native of Washington County. I am delighted to see 

you here. He is an experienced and licensed drug and alcohol counselor. He has worked with many organizations in Vermont, including New Directions of Barre, where he worked as a coordinator for 

a community-based substance abuse prevention program, Central 

Vermont Community Action Council, and received his master’s of 

arts degree in counseling psychology from Norwich University in 

Northfield. 

What we are going to do, Mr. Klavens, when you finish your testimony, I am going to yield to Senator Specter for the first round 

of questions because he and Mrs. Specter have to catch a plane 

back home. When he finishes his questions, we will take a 5-

minute break. Then we will come back, and then I have a series 

of questions. 

21

Mr. Klavens, go ahead. 

STATEMENT OF BERT KLAVENS, COORDINATOR OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT PROGRAM FOR ADOLESCENTS 

AND YOUNG ADULTS, WASHINGTON COUNTY YOUTH SERVICE BUREAU/BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS, MONTPELIER, 

VERMONT 

Mr. KLAVENS. Thank you. I work with a lot of people who have 

drug abuse and dependency problems, and for each person, I ask 

myself: Why are they using these terrible drugs? And why have 

they grown to depend on them so? 

We do a comprehensive assessment, including a detailed drug 

use history, of every person who enters our program. In the Central Vermont communities that my program serves, increased cocaine use started showing up on the drug histories of our clients 

at almost the same time increased violent crime started appearing 

in our community. It is not hard to remember the 1980s when 

widespread cocaine use co-existed with an explosion of violent 

crime in communities all across America. 

Different substances tend to cycle through our communities, each 

with their own particular set of effects. It seems that cocaine, 

which is a stimulant, causes more aggressive and violent behavior. 

Five years ago, when heroin appeared in our communities seemingly overnight, the big concern was the frightening addictiveness 

of this drug and the ability to destroy lives. The crime issues are 

more about property crime to support what for addicts becomes a 

very expensive drug habit. These are not a series of separate problems. They are different expressions of the same basic problem. 

This country has worked heroically to keep drugs off our streets, 

but they are still all too available. Unfortunately, it is rare that I 

hear my clients tell me that they want to use drugs but they just 

cannot find them. 

We have to start doing a better job of addressing the demand 

side of the equation, which means treating the needs behind people’s use of substances. 

I have worked with many clients in the corrections system over 

the years, the population most likely to be involved with drugs and 

crime and violence. In almost every case, these clients have extensive histories of substance abuse and dependence; at least one if 

not more diagnosable illnesses, and past histories of abuse or neglect. They are struggling and wounded young people, often with 

undiagnosed or untreated psychological and physiological problems. 

Recent research about co-occurring disorders sheds some light on 

this. Substance abuse problems very often occur with mental 

health disorders. Estimates put the number of substance-abusing 

people with co-occurring mental health disorders at upwards of 60 

percent. In the corrections system, that number rises to between 75 

and 80 percent. 

Serious substance abuse problems usually occur along with mental health diagnoses such as major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, PTSD, different anxiety disorders, conduct disorders, and so 

on. 

I had this experience with one young woman I worked with who 

was a recovering—well, when I was working with her, she was an 

22

active heroin addict and recovering cocaine user. In her history was 

both sexual and physical abuse, major depressive disorder, anxiety 

disorder as well. Unfortunately, this combination is all too common, especially in the corrections system. 

People who abuse substances often feel terrible and are looking 

for relief. Substances are remarkably effective in the short term at 

accomplishing what is for the substance abuser their primary purpose. They change the way he or she feels. 

I want to say clearly that I do not think that any illnesses or 

past difficulties excuse violent or other law-breaking behavior. Our 

current practice of imprisoning substance abusers is not working 

for a variety of reasons. In Vermont, as has recently become clear, 

this is no longer an economically viable strategy. We cannot afford 

to keep building prisons. Additionally, jail does not cure the conditions driving these behaviors. People who enter jail with co-occurring disorders usually exit with the same conditions. 

Treatment works. It works as both intervention and prevention, 

interrupting dysfunctional patterns of thought and behavior and 

giving people the tools to live a substance-free life. Compared to 

other prevention programs, treatment has the added advantage of 

focusing attention and resources on the most hard-core drug users. 

Treatment works, and helping people with abuse and dependency 

issues move on from substance-abusing behavior directly reduces 

the prevalence of substance abuse and abuse-related violence in our 

communities. 

I would like to share with you some of the positive work that is 

happening in my agency. For the last year and a half, we have 

been running the Return House Program, which provides a structured, supervised, supportive environment for inmates re-entering 

the community. Working in concert with the bureau’s mental 

health and substance abuse programs as well as other community 

resources, we are able to address co-occurring issues of the residents in an effective way and help them stay out of jail and be safe. 

In the substance abuse treatment program that I run, we have 

found teaching our clients tools for emotional regulation to be very 

useful. Difficulty in dealing with challenging emotions and 

thoughts lies at the core of the day-to-day struggle that substance 

abusers have in trying to eliminate drugs from their lives. 

We had an example recently of a young man who came to us, a 

chronic marijuana user. We were able to teach him some mindfulness-based practices for dealing with that, and he was so enthusiastic about it that he actually opted to continue treatment past 

when his mandate was over. He actually went back to his probation officer and told her how useful this was. 

Successful therapeutic intervention begins with strong relationships. This is something we try to really focus on in our programs. 

We try to stay with kids and work with them as long as possible. 

One of the things that gives us the opportunity to do is sort of see 

what happens when some of the other agencies leave the room. A 

lot of services are designed around crisis. They are in these kids’ 

lives for a little while, and then they leave. So I guess I would really like to support what—just reaffirm what some of the other people have said about the importance of establishing strong relationships with these young people. 

23

In conclusion, my hope in giving this testimony is to raise awareness of the key role that treatment programs can play in reducing 

substance abuse and substance-related violent crime in our communities. I also hope that I have been able to shed some light on the 

reality of substance abuse as a co-occurring disorder that requires 

a comprehensive approach to cure. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Klavens appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman LEAHY. Thank you. Thank you very much. 

As I said, we will go next to Senator Specter for questions because of his time schedule. 

Senator SPECTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I congratulate you 

on assembling such an outstanding group of experts. 

Chairman LEAHY. Thank you. 

Senator SPECTER. These seven witnesses have covered beyond 

the waterfront, covered very, very important subjects. 

There is a theme which runs through the testimony about prevention. Dr. Colston talks about the demand. Mr. Klavens talks 

about prevention and demand. And the chief started off his testimony with education and prevention. So we turn to you, Superintendent Moran. What are the specifics of the educational program in Rutland? At how early an age do you start to talk to children about the problem of drugs? 

Ms. MORAN. Well, I think we talk with them at all ages in a developmentally appropriate way. 

Senator SPECTER. OK, but what is the earliest age you start? 

Ms. MORAN. When they are in kindergarten and first grade. In 

terms of our—

Senator SPECTER. First grade? 

Ms. MORAN. Not so much in terms of drugs per se, but healthy 

living, healthy choices. 

Senator SPECTER. Well, when do you start on drugs? 

Ms. MORAN. We have a formal program on drugs in fifth grade, 

with the DARE program that Chief Bossi—

Senator SPECTER. Could you do it sooner? 

Ms. MORAN. We probably could. But I think that what we are 

doing—I guess in answering your question, Senator, is when you 

say when do we start on drugs, what we are trying to do is talk 

with children about healthy choices, what to avoid, how to seek 

help, how to go to adults, whether it is in the school or at home, 

so that they know and do not put themselves in situations where—

Senator SPECTER. Superintendent Moran, I can understand that, 

but with the pervasive problem of drugs, I come back and focus on 

drugs. I would like you to reconsider the earliest time. We seem to 

find that youngsters have a great capacity. 

Mr. Klavens, you talk about cocaine and violent crime. 

Mr. KLAVENS. Yes. 

Senator SPECTER. I would be interested in the law officials, the 

chief and the commissioner, as to their views on the current effort 

to reduce sentences on mandatories for crack cocaine use. What do 

you think about that, Chief? We are talking a lot about that with 

the U.S. Sentencing Commission. Should we reduce the penalties, 

the mandatory sentences on use of crack cocaine? 

24

Chief BOSSI. My feeling on sentencing is that I have a lot of confidence in judges. I think judges should have some flexibility on 

sentencing. I think that when it comes to violence and people with 

guns, you need to lock them away for as long a period of time as 

you can. 

Senator SPECTER. Are you satisfied with the severity, the toughness of sentencing that you get in your Rutland courts? 

Chief BOSSI. Yes, in the Federal—

Senator SPECTER. I had a lot of problems in Philadelphia. 

Chief BOSSI. In the Federal system, it is really good. In the State 

system, what we are lacking is, I think, additional penalties. 

Senator SPECTER. Well, the Federal system has mandatory sentences. 

Chief BOSSI. Yes, it does. 

Senator SPECTER. And the Sentencing Commission, there has 

been some change on that. 

Chief BOSSI. Right. 

Senator SPECTER. But crack cocaine, it is really uncertain now 

just exactly where the mandatories stand, but most of the Federal 

judges are still using the Sentencing Guidelines for tough sentences, mandatory minimums for crack cocaine. 

Commissioner Tremblay, what do you think about that? Should 

those mandatory minimums be maintained? 

Mr. TREMBLAY. Well, the chief talks about the State sentencing, 

and the mandatory sentencing that the Federal guidelines have 

make it much easier for Vermont law enforcement. We oftentimes 

seek Federal prosecution when we know we have a significant case. 

The Vermont Drug Task Force operators on the front lines will 

tell you that the mandatory sentencing that related to crack cocaine changed the way that cocaine dealers were doing business—

no longer importing crack cocaine but bringing powder cocaine. So 

we know that it plays a difference in the way that drug offenders 

operate. 

A recent example of our State court, something that was reported 

in the Rutland Herald on March 9th, a gentleman was found with 

145 bags of heroin selling on the streets of Montpelier. Come to 

find out he is also expected to face possession of heroin. His arrest 

came 5 months after he was convicted on a charge of selling heroin 

in just September. 

These are examples of ineffective sentences that do not have the 

supervision that people need. Mr. Colston and Mr. Klavens talked 

about the need to ensure that people have the support that they 

need to be successful when they get out. That is something we have 

to look at. I do not know a lot about that particular case, but offer 

it as an example for your question. 

Senator SPECTER. Dr. Colston, I am very much impressed with 

your resume. I see in your bio here the New England Culinary Institute. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator SPECTER. Chef at La Terrasse Restaurant in Philadelphia 1978 to 1981. We have had—

Chairman LEAHY. Is that a good restaurant? 

Senator SPECTER. We have had many good meals there. 

Mr. COLSTON. Thank you. 

25

[Laughter.] 

Senator SPECTER. Would you mind if I yielded on my questioning 

to my wife? 

[Laughter.] 

Senator SPECTER. She is a gourmet cook, attended Cordon Bleu, 

and had a pie-baking company. Joan, would you mind taking over 

at this point? 

[Laughter.] 

Senator SPECTER. I do not have a whole lot of time left. 

I am impressed with the substance of your testimony, Dr. 

Colston, as I am, candidly, with everybody. And you point your finger at a real problem. You talk about having school from 9 to 5, 

and you talk about those weekend parties. And you cannot follow 

them all the time. You cannot follow the children all the time. They 

are going to have some time on their own. And the theme that 

comes through with everybody’s testimony is values. Values. And 

what my wife and I have found on the values side is examples that 

parents set. You can do a lot of talking, but if you do not set an 

example, it does not sink in. 

And I also note through the testimony a lot of talk about the 

Boys and Girls Clubs. Dr. Colston, what do you think about the 

promise or potentiality for getting volunteer groups? We talk a lot 

about Federal funding, and I think we need it, and I am for a reappraisal. Senator Leahy accurately points out to my chairmanship 

and now ranking on the education and health programs for a lot 

of Federal funding. But we are in a spot where we are not going 

to get it very fast, and the volunteers that we have in the Boys and 

Girls Clubs, these are resources you have available, and some mentors. The parents are entitled to a weekend off to try to rehabilitate 

their relationship. 

What do you think about the potential for really having a massive program in America to get mentors to be surrogate parents? 

Mr. COLSTON. I think the potential is enormous. I believe that 

from my experience working with our allies in our program, this 

opportunity is really a meaningful experience for them. It gives 

them something to look forward to, to know that they are making 

a difference. And I do believe that we need to be mindful of the potential of the social capital that we can tap into. And I do believe 

that when you ask people to step up, they will do so. 

So I believe that we need to look at volunteerism, mentoring, 

coaching, models that bring people together in meaningful ways in 

order to plant those seeds of values that our kids are starving of. 

Senator SPECTER. Well, thank you all. Senator Leahy, I am very 

encouraged by what I see here in Rutland. 

Chairman LEAHY. Well, I cannot thank you enough for taking the 

time to come up here. 

Both Arlen and I handle these problems all the time on the Judiciary Committee in Washington, and I have always said in all the 

committees I have served on—Appropriations, Agriculture—when 

you get out in the field, you get the better answers. 

When we come back from the break, I am going to start off with 

a question to Commissioner Tremblay. He said something about 

don’t let Vermont become a drug haven for gangs, and my question, 

26

and think about it before taking the break: Has Vermont become 

such a haven in some parts of the State? 

Senator SPECTER. Pat, one final comment on how encouraged I 

am to see such a turnout here today. Nobody in the audience is 

under subpoena. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairman LEAHY. We have had some that were. 

Senator SPECTER. It is great to see so many people here. I see 

a lot of community activism in this room, which is a great tribute 

to Rutland. I do not know how many places you could come to a 

community of 17,000 people and find this kind of a turnout, and 

I think it is a tribute to your Senators—Senator Leahy of course, 

and Senator Sanders—and the Congressman and their local officials. But I like the T-shirt of the fellow out there, ‘‘Keep Rutland 

Beautiful. Keep Out the Drug Dealers.’’ And maybe we can make 

some T-shirts, ‘‘I Volunteer to be a Mentor.’’

Thank you for inviting me and congratulations. 

Chairman LEAHY. Thank you very much. 

[Applause.] 

[Recess 10:41 a.m. to 10:50 a.m.] 

Chairman LEAHY. During the break I spoke with Senator Specter 

as he was leaving about the advantage of getting on these field 

hearings. He does them on a somewhat regular basis in Pennsylvania. I have been encouraging members of the Judiciary Committee, both Republicans and Democrats alike, to go out and hold 

hearings outside of Washington. Obviously, Marcelle and I like it 

when we have one of those hearings in Vermont because we can 

be in our own home and we can be with family and relatives—

grandchildren. But we were talking on the way out that we have 

got to have more of these. I think we are going to start trying to 

institutionalize more such hearings. 

When I was Chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I 

actually, as we were preparing for a 5-year farm bill put members 

of the Committee in one of the Government airplanes, and we went 

to half a dozen States that were going to be heavily affected by it. 

And over a 3 day period we held hearings. Those times we stayed 

in farmers’ homes and as a result came out with a very good farm 

bill. 

I think we are going to have to do some similar things on some 

of these crime and judiciary hearings. Senator Specter was right. 

You get more attendance actually here than you do in Washington. 

Unfortunately, in Washington, with all due respect to many of the 

people who testify, we see some of the same faces all the time. 

They are very, very good, but the laws that we enact affect everybody. And just even the conversations in the hallway about mentoring and law enforcement and others are important. 

But, Commissioner, just before we broke, I mentioned to you I 

wanted to followup on something you said. You spoke—and we all 

agree with this, all of us as Vermonters agree with this. We do not 

want to let Vermont become a drug haven for gangs. Are there 

parts of Vermont where there is a haven for gangs? 

Mr. TREMBLAY. I would not say there is a haven. What I would 

say is that it has been my experience—

Chairman LEAHY. Pull the microphone closer. 

27

Mr. TREMBLAY. What I would say is it has been my experience 

that we know that there have been drug dealers arrested, there 

have been other offenders that Vermont law enforcement has come 

in contact with that have gang ties to other larger urban areas. 

They come here to test the waters, quite honestly, but this is to me 

what makes Vermont so special. This gathering here today of community members coming forward, we have not allowed ourselves to 

become communities or a State that just accepts that crime will 

occur in our communities. We will not stand for it. It is gatherings 

like this that help that. It is the cooperative law enforcement that 

I talked about. 

When a gang affiliation is determined during the course of a 

drug investigation, or any criminal investigation for that matter, 

there is immediate communication between local, State, and Federal partners, at which time we ramp up very significantly to ensure that while they are testing the waters, that the waters are not 

comfortable for them here. We make every effort to ensure that 

they will not become infested in our communities here. 

Chairman LEAHY. Commissioner, I am glad to hear that, because 

I would hate to think, whether in urban areas or anywhere else, 

that any gangs would think that they have safe haven in Vermont. 

I also am encouraged by your answer that we realize nobody is 

going to be able to handle it alone—the local police aren’t, State police aren’t, Federal. You have got to work together. 

I feel privileged to represent Vermont in the Senate. I feel very 

privileged to serve as Chairman, and I know that Senator Specter 

does in the time he has been Chairman. But I am first and foremost a Vermonter, and I will pledge to you and the others, if you 

need help, if you need support, I will help you get it. As a 

Vermonter, I do not want to see my State in any way tainted by 

these people. I want them stopped. I want them stopped at our borders. If they come inside our borders, then I want them stopped 

here. 

In the meantime, with especially the young people in Vermont, 

I want to make sure they have the help they need, because it is 

not easy—it is a lot different life than it was when I was growing 

up in Montpelier as a child. Things have changed, and these young 

people need help. That is why I have been very pleased to hear the 

comments about education and mentoring. 

Chief Bossi, I am going to ask you, just what do you think are 

some of the things that work the best here in Rutland? And I ask 

this question thinking that, remember, this transcript is going to 

be part of our record in Washington, and others will be looking at 

it from other parts of the country for ideas. 

Chief BOSSI. I think what has worked best for us is the community involvement. When did the Rutland United Neighborhoods, we 

got the neighborhood groups together. It is the school officers in the 

school system and the close relationship that we have with the 

school system. And it is working together, the Boys and Girls Club; 

it is taking care of the young people, finding things for the young 

people to do to keep them out of trouble, because that is the future. 

The other thing that works so well for us in Vermont, as what 

everyone has talked about, is the cooperation with law enforcement. We have a really small law enforcement presence in 

28

Vermont, so we have to work together. And we do work together, 

from the prosecutors at the Federal level and the State and county 

level, to the State law enforcement, local, and county law enforcement. We all work closely together, and that is why I think you see 

a lot of what happens in Vermont we are able to keep away. We 

are getting a lot more violence, but working together, we can address the violent issues. 

It is the funding that all of us need to keep it going that is most 

important to us right now. But I think it is working together and 

not forgetting that we have to work with young people. The mentoring programs, Boys and Girls Club, the schools—that is the future, and that is how we can keep less people from being involved 

in drugs and violence, is by taking care of them when they are 

young. 

Chairman LEAHY. Well, Superintendent Moran, you heard the 

chief talk about working with the schools. Give me some idea of 

how you feel about that, the cooperation. Again, things are different. When I was still in the little high school in Montpelier, a 

high school that is no longer there, we did not have police in the 

schools. We did have nuns with rulers, and I think—

[Laughter.] 

Chairman LEAHY. Frankly, I would take the police. They have to 

at least give you a Miranda warning. I shouldn’t probably let that 

one be part of the record, but—

[Laughter.] 

Chairman LEAHY. My knuckles still hurt. 

But tell me, how does this work? Is there a feeling of us-them 

kind of thing? Can you make it work? Tell me your experience. 

Ms. MORAN. Well, certainly, and I share the upbringing that you 

do, Senator Leahy, and I think I was more concerned about Sister 

Mary Superior than law enforcement. 

But I do not want anyone to leave today thinking that we are 

just talking about things that sound good. These are things that 

are on the ground and work. When Tony and I first worked on developing the School Resource Officer Program about 9 years ago, 

there was some resistance, and there still is, I understand, in some 

communities in Vermont. I do not want or they do not want cops 

in schools. But all of these officers are very well trained. We train 

together. And they are police officers, uniformed officers in schools, 

which is a good presence, a good visibility. But as I said earlier, 

they are teachers, they are mentors, they are friends. They are at 

athletic events; they are at social events; they are at concerts. They 

get to know the children, and they get to know the teachers. And 

as a result, the kids know that we know each other. Folks know 

that Tony and Scott Tucker and all of the other men and women 

in the department are working together. And that can lead to a 

common message so that the young people are hearing that, first 

of all—and sometimes it is hard for them to hear this—we care 

about them; and, second, we are going to try to figure out ways to 

work together to help them. It has never been us and them. I can 

call anyone in the department and get an answer within moments, 

and likewise, I think Tony feels the same way about the schools. 

So our SROs are from the little kindergartners all the way up 

to the kids at the high school and the tech center. They are people 

29

who have gained trust with the young people, so as I said earlier, 

information can come to the police department through the SROs 

because relationships—as Dr. Colston said, relationships are essential. The relationship between the Boys and Girls Club and the police department and developing this very exciting program Tony 

mentioned earlier is another example. 

So I think that it is a positive, proactive example that the young 

people can see and that the community can see as well. So I would 

encourage people who are not well versed with the SRO programs 

to become so. I also think we would both be remiss if we did not 

mention the sheriff’s department, because there are many schools 

in our region that are served by the sheriff’s department in their 

SRO programs. 

Chairman LEAHY. You said something about they are trained for 

it. That is a special training, I assume. 

Ms. MORAN. That is correct. They are trained to become, specifically to become school resource officers, and Tony probably could 

speak more to that. 

Chairman LEAHY. But doesn’t that also require some acknowledgment and training from those within the schools—the superintendents, the teachers, and all—how to respond to that? 

Ms. MORAN. Correct, and actually Tony and I trained together 9 

years ago in D.C., so that it is a partnership between school leadership and the police department. And if you were to visit the schools 

and watch these SROs with the teachers and the children, you 

would see that they really do build a relationship. They are like 

members of our faculty. 

Chairman LEAHY. Well, let me go into that a little bit more, if 

I might, with the chief. The SROs, school resource officers, how 

were yours originally funded? I think I know the answer, but go 

ahead. 

Chief BOSSI. They were originally funded with Federal dollars. 

Chairman LEAHY. COPS program? 

Chief BOSSI. It started with the COPS program. The first one we 

did with the hiring grants. The second ones we did with the 

schools, cops in schools, officers in schools program, the schools programs. And then we worked out a partnership with the school system so that we both share in the funding of those officers in schools 

now after the retention period. 

So without that starter money, it would have been awfully difficult for a city our size to start, you know, funding school officers 

with three schools’ officers. 

Chairman LEAHY. As you know, the COPS program is being—or 

at least in the President’s budget—there is going to be some discussion in the Congress whether it is going to work or not—to cut the 

money out. Among other things, we have been told we need the 

money for the Iraqi police forces. Frankly, this Senator feels we 

ought to worry a little bit more about our own police forces in the 

United States, first and foremost. 

[Applause.] 

Chairman LEAHY. My instruction as Chairman is at that point 

I am supposed to gavel you into order for—

[Laughter.] 

30

Chairman LEAHY. You notice how slowly the gavel came up. But 

how do you pay for it today, Chief? 

Chief BOSSI. It is funded with city dollars—some out of the school 

budget and then some out of the police department budget. 

Ms. MORAN. And as well, part of our funding for our portion of 

the program has come from Safe and Drug-Free Schools funding, 

which is also being significantly cut at the Federal level. 

Chairman LEAHY. And I must say, so nobody thinks we are being 

partisan on this, Senator Specter has worked—as a Republican, 

and a senior member of the Republican Party in the Senate, nobody has worked harder than he has in trying to get funding for 

these kind of social programs and educational programs. He has 

been a tremendous person on that, and aside from my obvious personal friendship with him, it is something where—again, we former 

prosecutors know there are a lot of other things in it besides just 

law enforcement. 

And I think you said, Superintendent Moran, that it is the 14- 

to 18-year-olds that are at the most risk. Did I understand your 

testimony correctly on that? 

Ms. MORAN. Yes, Senator, and I think if you spoke with folks in 

the Department of Children and Families, we would have that 

same conclusion. And, again, it is not for lack of interest or effort, 

but there are limited resources. And young people at the 14-,

15-, 16-year-old age sometimes are not screened in for the level of 

services one would hope because the younger children are demanding so much attention. 

So that is where programs such as our City Schools Health Center Campus, which serves potential dropouts, right upstairs here in 

this very building, Boys and Girls Club, Mentor Connector, vigorous co-curricular programs, we also have some programs where 

we try to get the older children to help younger kids. And sometimes teenagers at risk become great mentors for younger children 

because they make a connection and they see that they can make 

a difference. So while there are many formal programs, there are 

some informal offerings as well. 

Chairman LEAHY. And, Dr. Colston, is it your testimony, too, 

that you find that is the age category that is most at risk? 

Mr. COLSTON. Yes, and it is also where they go home. If you have 

families that have come out of generational poverty, they are struggling as well. So if you are going to really be holistic about the approach, you really want to include the family in terms of programming that supports them and gives them the space and the hope 

to be the parent that they ought to be. 

Chairman LEAHY. We spoke briefly during the break, Mr. 

Klavens and I, and as he knows, my father was born in Barre, and 

my sister runs an adult basic education program for Central 

Vermont. But what I find so surprising, in just talking to her—and 

I realize this is anecdotal—is that, one, the number of kids in that 

category who have problems because of the lack of adult family 

members or mentors, also the number of people becoming adults 

that are functionally illiterate. They have gone through our school 

system and all, but they are functionally illiterate, and the problems that brings about. 

31

Did you want to add anything to that or address that area, Mr. 

Klavens? Because I think you have found that people in this age 

group, again, 14 to 18 we are talking about, are particularly susceptible. Am I correct? 

Mr. KLAVENS. Absolutely, and you know, one of the things in our 

program when we have people in is our goal is not just for them 

to stop using drugs. Our goal is for them to be happy and healthy. 

So, you know, looking at all these things, as we say, you know, 

mental health diagnosis, you know, even things like literacy issues 

and things like that, is—you know, these all put kids at risk, and 

kids who have drug dependency issues and who are trying to move 

on from that, all these supports, all different ways that we can 

kind of, you know, surround them with health are really useful. So 

we try to do as much as we can, but absolutely, I mean, 14 to 18 

is usually where we see kids starting to use drugs regularly. That 

is pretty common. 

Chairman LEAHY. Well, you have given me a lot to think about. 

I must say I am wearing two hats—as a member of the Judiciary 

Committee and as a member of the Appropriations Committee. I 

have other concerns from the Agriculture Committee, but in the 

Appropriations and in the Judiciary. 

Also, a number of people have asked to submit testimony, and 

that will be submitted, will be made part of the record. 

I should also note to each of you, we will give you a copy of the 

transcript of what you had to say. If you see something in there 

where you gave a number wrong or a statistic wrong or something 

and want to correct it, of course, we will keep it open for that. But, 

also, when you look at something in there and it makes you think 

of something else you would have liked to have added, then send 

a letter and say you want to add this, and that will be part of the 

record. 

Commissioner, do you or does anybody else want to add anything 

else to the record here? 

Mr. TREMBLAY. I would just add that I think one of the things 

that has always been concerning to me in my 25-year law enforcement career here in Vermont, particularly as it relates to drugs, is 

to understand that the Vermont Drug Task Force as one example 

has anywhere between 40 and 50 open drug investigations right 

now. Any drug unit within the State, whether it be in a town or 

a small city, has active drug targets that are on waiting lists. And 

that compounds to the problem, that we see some great work going 

on here, as has been evidenced and testified to here in Rutland, yet 

we still are struggling with the problems of drug abuse, drug addiction, and the associated crime and now violence. 

We have to stay on top of these drugs cases. We cannot let a 

backlog of drug targets fester in our communities and in our neighborhoods. And the importance of ensuring that we have enough 

human resources to deal with it remains a critical concern of mines 

as public safety commissioner. 

Chairman LEAHY. Thank you. And we all agree that there is no 

one part of this that has all the answers. It cannot just be law enforcement; it cannot just be the schools; it cannot just be drug education and the counseling and the others, but you have all got to 

32

work together. That is somewhat of an oversimplification, but are 

we all agreed on that? 

Chief BOSSI. Yes. 

Ms. MORAN. Absolutely. 

Mr. TREMBLAY. Yes. 

Mr. COLSTON. Yes. 

Mr. KLAVENS. Yes. 

Chairman LEAHY. Because I remember back when I was State’s 

attorney, there was some at that time who thought, well, it has got 

to be totally a law enforcement matter, and I have always felt indebted to some very good law enforcement people I worked with at 

that time that said, no, no, you have got to start working with the 

schools, you have got to start working with the counselors, you 

have got to start working with others. 

I thank you very much for taking the time. I thank the city of 

Rutland for opening the doors. And, of course, I thank my colleague 

Senator Specter for coming down here. One of the things Marcelle 

and I look forward to all the time when we have one of these 

breaks in the Senate schedule is to be able to come home and have 

meetings around the State. I will have them all week long before 

I go back. I have never had one of these breaks where I have not 

gone back, one, feeling more invigorated; but, second, having 

learned a lot. 

So thank you all very much, and we stand in recess. 

[Applause.] 

[Whereupon, at 11:11 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

[Submissions for the record follow.]

33


41958.001
34


41958.002
35


41958.003
36


41958.004
37


41958.005
38


41958.006
39


41958.007
40


41958.008
41


41958.009
42


41958.010
43


41958.011
44


41958.012
45


41958.013
46


41958.014
47


41958.015
48


41958.016
49


41958.017
50


41958.018
51


41958.019
52


41958.020
53


41958.021
54


41958.022
55


41958.023
56


41958.024
57


41958.025
58


41958.026
59


41958.027
60


41958.028
61


41958.029
62


41958.030
63


41958.031
64


41958.032
65


41958.033
66


41958.034
67


41958.035
68


41958.036
69


41958.037
70


41958.038
71


41958.039
72


41958.040
73


41958.041
74


41958.042
75


41958.043
76


41958.044
77


41958.045
78


41958.046
79


41958.047
80


41958.048
81


41958.049
82


41958.050
83


41958.051
84


41958.052
85


41958.053
86


41958.054
87


41958.055
88


41958.056
89


41958.057
90


41958.058
91


41958.059
92


41958.060
93


41958.061
94


41958.062
95


41958.063
96


41958.064
97

Æ


41958.065