Unwavering opposition from top lawmakers in the waning days of the legislative session has left Hilary Carpenter with a difficult path to confirmation as the first independent watchdog over Connecticut’s jails and prisons, making it unclear what will happen after the General Assembly ends on Wednesday night. 

Earlier this year, Lamont nominated Carpenter, a veteran public defender and death penalty adversary, against the guidance of the Correction Advisory Committee, which recommended Ken Krayeske and Barbara Fair, two advocates often critical of the Lamont administration and its handling of criminal justice affairs, over Carpenter. 

People have since shown up to a legislative committee meeting to protest Carpenter’s approval. In committee, lawmakers have cast an unusual two votes on Carpenter’s nomination, the first against her and the second in her favor. And top officials have expressed displeasure about the process leading up to Carpenter’s selection, including Lamont’s requirement that the candidates meet with Department of Correction Commissioner Angel Qurios prior to announcing a decision. 

Carpenter needs approval from the legislature before she can become the correctional ombudsperson, a position with the authority to investigate complaints from incarcerated people, access agency records and draft a yearly report on confinement conditions in the DOC — an agency routinely criticized in investigations, court decisions and public testimony for practices deemed inhumane. 

With a fast-approaching May 8 adjournment deadline, officials are uncertain about whether the statute gives the governor the authority to appoint someone in an interim capacity. It makes clear that he can do so if he makes his nomination while out of session but not necessarily what he can do if his nominee fails to receive a vote during session. 

Several legislators say there have been discussions about the next steps, with at least one of the considerations being amending a 2022 law to provide Lamont with an opportunity to nominate someone other than Carpenter. But there has been no significant progress, and without any formal agreements by the legislature’s deadline, it is unclear how and when officials will resolve the situation, potentially resulting in a major setback. 

In a statement, Julia Bergman, a spokesperson for Lamont, said the governor believes Carpenter “will be a strong advocate for the safety and rights of inmates and correction staff” and urged the legislature to act swiftly on her nomination. 

“The governor followed the process spelled out in statute and selected Hilary Carpenter as corrections ombuds from the short list of recommended candidates provided by the Correction Advisory Committee following interviews with all three candidates by the governor’s senior staff,” Bergman said. 

But a vote on Carpenter, who was unavailable for comment, appears unlikely, considering her nomination has to pass the House and then the Senate, and neither has taken place with only a handful of session days left. 

“It’s not a personal thing for Hilary, and I think everyone, at least on my committee, will say the exact same thing,” said Democratic Rep. Julio Concepcion of Hartford, co-chair of the Executive and Legislative Nominations Committee. “What we’re trying to do is ensure that that position is filled, and filled with the right person that I think everyone could agree with.” 

The law establishing the Office of the Correction Ombuds, referred to as the PROTECT Act, required that the Correction Advisory Committee oversee the selection process. Giving the committee decision-making authority instilled hope among advocates that Lamont would nominate an individual who would champion the rights of incarcerated people, not a government bureaucrat who would maintain the status quo, as they had feared. 

The governor and high-ranking legislators appointed people to the committee, and the 11-member panel formulated the job posting, conducted interviews with candidates and chose three finalists to participate in a public hearing. The committee, whose membership includes justice-impacted people and correctional experts, was also responsible for ranking the finalists from one to three, the first being the group’s formal recommendation, and sending the list to Lamont for his approval. 

Krayeske, a civil rights attorney, was ranked first; Fair, a decadeslong prison reform activist, was placed second; and Carpenter, a veteran public defender who previously helped grow the Connecticut Network to Abolish the Death Penalty, was third. 

Following Lamont’s own vetting process, which included having each of the contenders meet with the DOC’s top brass, he chose Carpenter. The governor’s office cited her experience as the reason for his decision. But it did not provide an explanation for why he bypassed Krayeske and Fair, both of whom have criticized his administration for its handling of matters pertaining to criminal justice. 

Krayeske was the lead attorney in a major Hepatitis C class-action lawsuit, which prompted Connecticut to drastically change how it treats incarcerated people for the deadly liver disease. Fair introduced the PROTECT Act to the legislature, which increased the mandated hours of out-of-cell time for incarcerated people, limited the DOC’s use of solitary confinement and created the Office of the Correction Ombuds. 

Carpenter was more of an “unknown entity,” as she said in a public hearing, given that public defenders are not often in the public eye. She has said that she believes her nearly 20 years of experience serving poor and low-income residents make her a qualified candidate for the long-anticipated role.

But her resume did not resonate well with some advocates, who have voiced their belief that the state’s public defense system has played an outsized role in the negative experiences people have in the criminal legal system. 

“I will further raise the question as to how Miss Carpenter will be able to render impartial decisions with regards to our inmate population if your department has significantly contributed to our prison population,” Cody Richard, who was formerly incarcerated, testified earlier this year. “This dynamic will not ensure that our inmate population is being properly represented, nor do I feel any inmate would be in support of Miss Carpenter being appointed to this position given her role in the public defender’s office, which is something that should be taken into account.”

Several lawmakers said they did not anticipate the public’s opposition to Carpenter’s appointment, which led to their concerns. And the PROTECT Act does not clearly outline steps for when the governor’s designated nominee fails to gain the support of the General Assembly. 

“I think the problem was, it was a bad law. Bad statute. We should never do that again,” House Speaker Matthew Ritter, D-Hartford, said. “It puts everybody in a bad spot. It put the three people who got nominated in a bad spot. Put the governor in a tough spot, and put us in a tough spot. … Either the governor does it or the committee does it, but there should be no in-between because he didn’t violate the statute.”

But Sen. Gary Winfield, co-chair of the Judiciary Committee and one of the lawmakers opposing Carpenter’s nomination, sees it differently. 

Before the governor appointed Carpenter, Winfield said he issued a warning to the administration that he would not support the nomination if it reached the Senate floor. He said he had concerns that choosing Carpenter, who was third on the list, violated the spirit of the law. 

“We set up the committee to do its work for a reason. You skipped over the top two people through this deliberative process and went to the third person,” Winfield said. “To my mind, it seems that there needs to be a reason why that happened. It hasn’t been articulated to me.” 

The New Haven Democrat said he has made it clear that he would spend hours on the Senate floor delaying the confirmation of Carpenter’s appointment if she made it out of the House — not an idle threat during a short legislative session when time is limited and there are competing priorities. He also said he does not currently plan to change his stance. 

There’s also the fact that Carpenter has struggled to earn the trust of prison reform advocates, like Fair, which several top lawmakers said they consider a prerequisite before casting a vote in her favor. 

“I’m still at that point where I don’t think there’s been enough progress. We’re still having communications with the advocates to ensure that they’re comfortable with whomever is there,” Concepcion said. 

“They need to be reassured that she won’t take a bureaucratic approach to the job and really be an activist,” Senate President Pro Tem Martin Looney said. “And that’s, I think, the key question that people have.”

Earlier this year, advocates also questioned why members of the Executive and Legislative Nominations Committee, which had previously voted against advancing Carpenter’s nomination to the full legislative body, decided to change their votes weeks later. 

Rep. Dave Yaccarino, a ranking Republican on the committee, was one of the people who changed his mind. He first voted against Carpenter as a way to flag his concerns about the funding for the office — $800,000 over two fiscal years — and staffing. 

Still, Yaccarino said his goal was to debate her appointment on the House floor, which did not appear likely after the committee voted against her. He then had a conversation with Carpenter about his concerns, which allowed him to feel comfortable enough to change his vote and send her nomination out of committee. Most of the Republicans on the committee followed suit. 

“What I don’t understand is, why isn’t she getting called?” Yaccarino said, referencing the House’s inaction on her appointment thus far. “She should be getting called.”

Rep. James Sánchez, D-Hartford, was the only Democrat on the committee to change his official vote from the negative to the affirmative. He said he met with Carpenter after his initial no vote, which made him feel comfortable sending her to the full legislative body. 

More recently, Sánchez said he has engaged in discussions with colleagues and advocates, including Fair, and he now feels Fair’s decades of advocacy work would make her best suited for the job. 

But, like everyone else, he is waiting to see what happens. 

“I did have conversation with some of my colleagues here, and we’re basically in the same mindset. We’re looking to make sure that this process is fair,” Sánchez said. “And if it gets to the point where it’s not going to get called to the floor and we’re going to start the whole process over again, we’re fine with that.”