[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                 LOOKING AHEAD SERIES: HOUSE SERGEANT AT 
                  ARMS' STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE 118TH CONGRESS

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                           COMMITTEE ON HOUSE
                             ADMINISTRATION

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                             APRIL 18, 2023

                               __________

      Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration
      
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]      


                             www.govinfo.gov
                           www.cha.house.gov
                           
                               __________

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
54-501                       WASHINGTON : 2024                    
            
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------                                
                          
                   Committee on House Administration                                   

                    BRYAN STEIL, WISCONSIN, Chairman

BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia            JOSEPH MORELLE, New York,
H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia              Ranking Member
GREG MURPHY, North Carolina          TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama
STEPHANIE BICE, Oklahoma             DEREK KILMER, Washington
MIKE CAREY, Ohio                     NORMA TORRES, California
ANTHONY D'ESPOSITO, New York
LAUREL LEE, Florida

                      Tim Monahan,  Staff Director 
                 Jamie Fleet,  Minority Staff Director 
                        
                        C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

                           Opening Statements

The Honorable Bryan Steil, Representative from the state of 
  Wisconsin, Chairman............................................     1
The Honorable Joseph Morelle, Representative from the state of 
  New York, Ranking Member.......................................     2
The Honorable Barry Loudermilk, Representative from the state of 
  Georgia........................................................    16
The Honorable Terri A. Sewell, Representative from the state of 
  Alabama........................................................    18
The Honorable Anthony D'Esposito, Representative from the state 
  of New York....................................................    22
The Honorable Laurel Lee, Representative from the state of 
  Florida........................................................    23
The Honorable Norma Torres, Representative from the state of 
  California.....................................................    25
The Honorable Derek Kilmer, Representative from the state of 
  Washington.....................................................    26

                           Witness Statement

William P. McFarland.............................................     7

                        Questions for the Record

William P. McFarland.............................................    29
Mr. Murphy.......................................................    20

                       Submissions for the Record

2023 Sergeant at Arms Strategic Plan.............................    73

 
 LOOKING AHEAD SERIES: HOUSE SERGEANT AT ARMS' STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE 
                             118TH CONGRESS

                              ----------                              


                        TUESDAY, APRIL 18, 2023

         Committee on House Administration,
                          House of Representatives,
                                                    Washington, DC.

    The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:15 a.m., in 
room 1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Bryan Steil 
[Chairman of the committee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Steil, Loudermilk, Griffith, 
Murphy, Lee of Florida, Morelle, Sewell, Torres, and Kilmer.
    Staff present: Hillary Lassiter, Majority Chief Clerk; 
Jordan Wilson, Director of Member Services; Elliot Smith, 
Deputy Director of Oversight; Elliott Tomlinson, Deputy 
Parliamentarian; Khalil Abboud, Minority Deputy Staff Director, 
Chief Counsel; Enumale Agada, Minority Oversight Counsel; Eddie 
Flaherty, Minority Chief Clerk; Jamie Fleet, Minority Staff 
Director; Andrew Garcia, Minority Special Assistant; and 
Matthew Schlesinger, Minority Oversight Counsel.
    The Chairman. The Committee on House Administration will 
come to order.
    I note that a quorum is present. Without objection, the 
chair may declare a recess at any time.
    Thank you, Ranking Member Morelle, members of the 
committee, Acting Sergeant at Arms Bill McFarland, for 
participating in today's hearing.
    I look forward to hearing from you, Mr. McFarland, about 
how we can further restore trust in the House Sergeant at Arms 
office.
    Last congress, under previous leadership, the House 
Sergeant at Arms office developed misguided practices that 
damaged the office mission and capabilities. This led to severe 
morale and retention issues within the office.
    This is not unique to the Office of the House Sergeant at 
Arms. Capitol security at large has had issues with political 
interference, going back to 2020 and the start of the pandemic. 
Following the January 6 attack at the Capitol, these issues 
became even more pervasive.
    The House Sergeant at Arms is one of three voting members 
of the United States Capitol Police Board, which provides 
oversight of the United States Capitol Police.
    Following COVID and January 6, deeply politicized 
directives ultimately bred mistrust and eroded confidence among 
many of the Capitol Hill community in both the House Sergeant 
at Arms office and the Capitol Police Board.
    Let me share some examples of these directives.
    The inconsistent criteria when to put up fencing around the 
Capitol.
    The enforcement of different health policies on the House 
side and the Senate side.
    The different practices when dealing with threats against 
members of congress depending on party affiliation.
    The placement of metal detectors outside the House floor 
and then selectively enforcing who goes through those and 
inconsistently issuing fines.
    This politicization of Capitol security is, in part, why 
Speaker McCarthy named you, Mr. McFarland, the Acting House 
Sergeant at Arms at the start of the 118th Congress.
    With new leadership in the office and on the Capitol Police 
Board, you have an opportunity to restore trust in the House 
Sergeant at Arms office and return the Capitol Police Board to 
its original mission of oversight of Capitol Police, rather 
than direct management.
    I look forward to hearing how you plan to lead these much-
needed reforms and the actions you will take as a member of the 
Board to empower the United States Capitol Police to run its 
own department while still holding them accountable to their 
strategic goals.
    In the first quarter of this year, you've already worked 
hard to reinstate professionalism, bipartisanship, and regular 
order to the office of Capitol security more broadly. This 
includes implementing standard, nonpartisan operating 
procedures and establishing clear structure and internal 
operations that have led to improvements in morale and culture.
    I also look forward to hearing from you on what efforts are 
underway to plan for the long-term future of the institution's 
security.
    Today's hearing is another step we are taking to restore 
faith in the office and professionalize the House. Our goal 
today is to help provide accountability and transparency while 
further looking for ways we can work together to make the House 
Sergeant at Arms' 118th Strategic Plan a reality.
    I also want to thank the men and women who serve in the 
Sergeant at Arms office for the work they do every day to keep 
this institution--members, staff, and visitors--safe.
    I'll now recognize Ranking Member Mr. Morelle for 5 minutes 
for the purpose of providing an opening statement.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Chairman Steil, and thank you for 
convening this morning's hearing on the Office of the House 
Sergeant at Arms and its Strategic Plan for the 118th Congress.
    I want to thank our witness, Acting House Sergeant at Arms 
Bill McFarland, for being with us today and for the work of his 
staff on behalf of the House of Representatives.
    As we continue to improve security at the Capitol and deal 
with an unprecedented threat environment for members, it is 
safe to say that the House Sergeant at Arms has never been more 
important.
    It has now been a little over 2 years since the January 6, 
2021, attack, which included assaults on 140 police officers 
and resulted in more than 1,000 arrests, including nearly 100 
arrests on charges involving use of a deadly or dangerous 
weapon or causing serious bodily injury to an officer.
    Unfortunately, January 6 was not an isolated incident. 
Members of Congress have recently been subject to more threats 
than ever before. The Capitol Police Threat Assessment Section 
investigated more than 7,500 cases in 2022 alone.
    Last year, a man broke into the home of then Speaker of the 
House Nancy Pelosi and viciously assaulted her husband, Paul 
Pelosi, with a hammer. The assailant told police that he broke 
in to break the Speaker's kneecaps, hold her hostage, and, 
quote, ``show other Members of Congress there were consequences 
to actions,'' end quote.
    It is with this backdrop that I'm eager to learn more about 
the newly released Sergeant at Arms Strategic Plan and how 
implementation of the Strategic Plan will ensure members' 
security here in Washington, DC, at home in our districts, and 
traveling in between.
    I'm particularly interested in knowing how the Strategic 
Plan is tied to important initiatives like the Residential 
Security Program, the District Security Service Center, and 
implementation of the Emergency Supplemental Security 
appropriations bill.
    I'm also interested in hearing how you intend to ensure 
that you make decisions based on diverse viewpoints and how 
you'll replace the expertise lost from your dismissal of 
several senior leaders within the Office of the House Sergeant 
at Arms at the beginning of the 118th Congress.
    Again, I do want to thank you and your staff for your 
service to the House.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
    Without objection, all other members' opening statements 
will be made part of the hearing record if they are submitted 
to the Committee clerk by 5 p.m. today.
    Pursuant to paragraph b of Committee Rule 6, the witness 
will please stand and raise your right hand.
    [Witness sworn.]
    The Chairman. Let the record show the witness answered in 
the affirmative and may be seated.
    I'll now introduce our witness.
    Mr. McFarland began his career on Capitol Hill in 1991 as a 
security aide for the United States Capitol Police. He has 
since served in several capacities, spending over a decade as 
the director of security at the House Permanent Select 
Committee on Intelligence and as director of the Office of 
House Security, where he remained until 2021.
    After a brief stint in the private sector, Mr. William 
McFarland was sworn in as Acting Sergeant at Arms for the U.S. 
House of Representatives on January 7, 2023.
    Mr. McFarland, we appreciate you being here today and look 
forward to your testimony.
    As a reminder, we have read your written statement, and it 
will appear in full in the hearing record.
    Under Committee Rule 9, you are to limit your oral 
presentation to a brief summary of your written record unless I 
extend the time in consultation with Ranking Member Morelle.
    Please remember to press the button on the microphone in 
front of you so that it is on and Members can hear you. When 
you begin to speak, the light in front of you will turn green. 
After 4 minutes, the light will turn yellow. When the red light 
comes on, your 5 minutes will have expired, and we will ask you 
to please wrap up.
    I now recognize you, Mr. McFarland, for 5 minutes.

 STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM MCFARLAND, ACTING SERGEANT AT ARMS, 
                 U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

    Mr. McFarland. Good morning, Chair Steil, Ranking Member 
Morelle, and members of the committee. I appreciate the 
invitation to appear before you today and present the Office of 
the Sergeant at Arms' Strategic Plan for the 118th Congress, a 
topic I happen to be very passionate about. It's truly an honor 
to sit in front of you today.
    As this is my first time testifying before this committee, 
I feel compelled to share my journey to this seat and, at the 
same time, highlight how lessons from my journey are reflected 
in the Strategic Plan our office has put in front of you.
    I began my career on Capitol Hill 32 years ago, starting as 
a security aide for the U.S. Capitol Police. As many of us have 
experienced, my first days on the Hill were filled with 
excitement and apprehension. Throughout those 32 years, I 
worked my way up, gaining experience, learning new skills, and 
taking on increasingly challenging roles.
    Throughout that time, I met and learned from many great 
colleagues and mentors. I also learned some hard lessons along 
the way, but I was, ultimately, able to learn from my mistakes 
and grow from each of those experiences.
    Today I'm proud to be seated here representing our office, 
and I believe that my journey from being a staffer to sitting 
in this seat as the Acting House Sergeant at Arms is a 
testament to the values that we hold dear and are represented 
in our Strategic Plan.
    I also believe that my story is not unique and that there 
are many others within our organization who have similar 
journeys to share, all of which are ongoing. In fact, I know 
some of the members of this very committee have similar stories 
as well, having started their Capitol Hill journey as an intern 
for a member office and, ultimately, working their way up to 
become a member of congress.
    I say this not to compare myself to the members of this 
committee, but rather to show you how journeys that start in 
humble beginnings, with the right mentoring, training, and 
support, can grow into roles with greater responsibility. I am 
committed to providing my team with those same opportunities.
    In the development of our Strategic Plan, we recognized 
that our employees are the key to delivering exceptional patron 
experiences and achieving our organizational goals. As a mentor 
of mine once stated, I can fail on my own, but success requires 
the commitment and the skills of the full team working together 
to fulfill our mission. I remain available to my team to listen 
and assist in any way possible.
    As I have said before, the employees of the Sergeant at 
Arms are the most valuable resource, and they deserve the 
strategic direction, mission, goals, and shared values to help 
guide them.
    To shape the future of our organization and refocus our 
energies on the critical mission the Sergeant at Arms provides, 
I asked our team to initiate a strategic planning effort in 
February 2023 to help guide our long-term and short-term 
efforts to produce the best results for the House community.
    While the core planning team consisted of leaders from our 
immediate office and each of our divisions, we made it a 
priority to incorporate ideas and inputs from more than 170 
team members. Rather than producing a vision that is printed 
and sits on a shelf, this is a vision that has been created 
with an open door and input from across the team.
    Throughout the development process, we conducted 
brainstorming sessions, walked around and talked with staff, 
and conducted organization-wide surveys. As I noted, we 
recognize the people of the Sergeant at Arms are at the core of 
our ability to serve the congressional community and made sure 
that their voice was included.
    I am proud of the contributions our staff made to help 
develop the Strategic Plan, and I am pleased with the quality 
and thought-provoking contributions they brought to this table.
    Three of those contributors are Mr. Torey McNeil, Mr. Bob 
Sensenbrenner, and Ms. Davita Jones, who are sitting behind me 
today. I invited Torey, Bob, and Davita as recognition for 
their contributions and work. I appreciate the overwhelming 
support from staff on our team and thank them for their work.
    I would also like to especially thank the other members of 
my leadership team for their tireless efforts and highlight Mr. 
Torey McNeil, Mr. Bob Sensenbrenner, and Ms. Davita Jones, as 
well as Mr. Kevin Grubbs and Ms. Maria Lohymeyer, for going 
above and beyond.
    In addition to ensuring our personnel's voice was 
incorporated, I would like to highlight some of the major 
changes to our new Strategic Plan.
    The revised plan acknowledges the need for our organization 
to remain agile and adapt to the changing needs of the 
Congress. Subsequently, we have shifted from a 5-year strategic 
plan model to a plan that aligns with the current congressional 
calendar and carries us through the 118th Congress.
    We defined a guiding principle for the SAA leadership team 
to hold leaders within the organization to a higher standard. 
That principle states that we believe in investing in our 
people through training, development, and empowerment, as we 
recognize that our employees are the key to delivering 
exceptional patron experiences and achieving our organizational 
goals.
    We are equally patron-centric and strive to understand and 
serve the needs of our patrons through high-quality services 
and support.
    We also redefined our mission, vision, and organization 
values to emphasize the importance of the Sergeant at Arms' 
personnel, service to the congressional community, 
accountability, transparency, and to incorporate the office's 
security oversight mission.
    To share more about the plan, I would like to start by 
presenting the values that the employees of the Sergeant at 
Arms will embody. These values include absolute integrity, deep 
collaboration, vigilant reliability and agility, and thoughtful 
transparency.
    The goals within our Strategic Plan reflect our pursuit of 
the vision. We identified goals aligned with these four themes: 
our people goal centered on the employees of the Sergeant at 
Arms; our patron goal highlighting the people that our 
organization serves, which includes members, staff, visitors, 
and other stakeholders; our ingenuity goal, which highlights 
initiatives on modernization; and our accountability and 
oversight goal, which highlights our focus on accountability 
and refocusing our security and safety governance and oversight 
efforts.
    We have also identified key objectives to structure our 
pursuit of these four goals.
    In closing, I would like to share my commitment to 
collaboration. We believe that dialog and collaboration are not 
just about sharing information, but also about actively seeking 
input and feedback from all stakeholders, including this 
committee.
    We also believe that collaboration requires a willingness 
to listen and learn from others. We recognize that this 
committee brings unique knowledge and expertise to the table, 
and we are eager to learn from your insights and experiences.
    By working together in a spirit of collaboration, we 
believe that we can achieve better outcomes for our patrons, 
our partners, and our visitors.
    Thank you again for the opportunity to discuss our 
Strategic Plan and the future of our organization. I'm happy to 
answer any questions you have at this time.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. McFarland follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. McFarland, and thank you for 
being here today.
    I'll begin our questions today, followed by the ranking 
member. We'll then alternate between sides.
    I now recognize myself for the purpose of asking questions.
    Mr. McFarland, we all know the Capitol Police Board has 
three voting members with an enormous amount of authority over 
the United States Capitol Police. The Board now consists of 
entirely new membership since January 6, which presents us with 
a unique opportunity to reconsider or to consider reforms or 
structural changes.
    You previously worked for the House Sergeant at Arms, and 
you've now returned as the Acting House Sergeant at Arms. In 3 
months since assuming or since returning to the office and 
building on your previous experience working in the Office of 
the House Sergeant at Arms, are there specific structural 
changes that you would recommend to the Capitol Police Board to 
make it more accountable and transparent?
    Mr. McFarland. Chairman Steil, I can only talk about my 
experience on the Capitol Police Board for the last 3 months, 
but I can say that there is need for, room for improvement for 
a lot of these changes.
    Some of the things have already taken place. We did close 
out a GAO recommendation on governance for the Capitol Police 
Board. We actually are still in the midst of actually closing 
out Capitol Police IG findings. Since I was sworn in, we have 
canceled--we have closed out at least 20 of those 
recommendations. We still have 49 more to go, but we're working 
diligently to improve it.
    Then we also have our stakeholder forum, which I think 
members of this committee attend, that could actually lend a 
voice as well to see about restructuring and how the Capitol 
Police Board is doing.
    The Chairman. Thank you very much.
    On a different note, during the preparations for the State 
of the Union this year the Secret Service requested the Capitol 
Police Board to put up a fence around the Capitol. The request 
went to the Capitol Police Board for a vote, and I believe 
you're the lone member to vote against it.
    One of our goals in the Committee on House Administration 
is to have a more professionalized security posture here on the 
Hill, and part of that is minimizing the impact of political 
considerations on security decisions. This, to me, includes 
making threat-based decisions for our security posture.
    In your opinion, was there a threat-based request for the 
fence for the State of the Union this year?
    Mr. McFarland. Sir, what I can tell you is I'm not against 
the idea of a fence. I'm against the idea that is the end-all, 
be-all solution.
    I've asked the Capitol Police, as well as the Secret 
Service, to come up with alternatives to try to figure out 
exactly what would be the best course of action to take instead 
of the fence. I was provided no real guidance along what those 
alternatives are.
    What I can tell you is I think that, taking a look, we need 
to take a look at the threat-based intel that is before us and 
actually marry it with the security posture of what we should 
be doing.
    The Chairman. Specifically as it relates then to that 
decision to put up the fence as it relates to this year's State 
of the Union, was there a threat-based request for the fence?
    Mr. McFarland. Not as far as I know.
    The Chairman. Not presented to the Capitol Police where 
there's no threat-based reason that the fence was put up?
    Mr. McFarland. No, sir, not at the time that we made the 
vote. There was no threat-based information.
    The Chairman. Let me shift gears but staying on the fence.
    The rapid response fence, it's a relatively new addition to 
the Capitol security. You noted that it's not an end-all, be-
all. But is there even a standardized policy for when to put up 
the fence?
    Mr. McFarland. Sir, there is no standard policy for putting 
up the fence. I think we should have a process of determining 
whether a fence is needed, not necessarily a policy.
    I think it would take some time to draft a process that's 
specific enough to be useful and broad enough to allow our 
circumstances to work on what we're able to predict.
    At this time we're looking at anything that we possibly can 
to help with this situation, but right now there is none.
    The Chairman. Would that process provide us an ability to 
depoliticize the security decisions?
    Mr. McFarland. I think, sir, that if we were to do that it 
would depoliticize, and we just based it off of threat 
intelligence alone, I think we could.
    The Chairman. I appreciate that because I think it's really 
important that we work to depoliticize the security framework 
here on Capitol Hill. I'm concerned when we have, for example, 
the fence going up prior to the State of the Union without a 
threat-based analysis. As you noted, no threat-based 
information was provided to the Capitol Police Board.
    The concern is that decisions, such as a fence, are being 
put up for political purposes.
    Let me shift gears for a final question here.
    Recently, your office put together a new Strategic Plan for 
the House Sergeant at Arms in the 118th Congress. You 
referenced that in your opening remarks. Can you detail how 
these goals further increase the safety of the House and its 
Members?
    Mr. McFarland. Sir, I think that when you take a look at 
our Strategic Plan and the four areas that we highlight, which 
is our people goal, our patron goal, our ingenuity goal, and 
our accountability and oversight goal, I think when we do all 
four of these together, I think it makes not only the Sergeant 
at Arms a better place to work, but it also makes the Capitol 
Hill community a safer place to operate.
    The Chairman. Thank you very much. Thank you for being here 
and your service to the U.S. House of Representatives.
    I will now recognize the Ranking Member, Mr. Morelle, for 5 
minutes for the purpose of questioning the witness.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you, Mr. McFarland, for being here and for being 
accessible. I appreciated our opportunities to have 
conversations in the past and look forward to working with you.
    This may not be so much as a question. It's an observation, 
though, since we spent a fair amount of time talking about the 
fence around the State of the Union address.
    My understanding was it was requested by the United States 
Secret Service in regard to their assessment of threats. 
Without alternatives to the fence, which you had talked about 
the idea of, perhaps, coming up with alternatives, I guess I 
would just assume it would make sense to err on the side of 
safety.
    You may want to comment on that.
    Mr. McFarland. Sir, the Secret Service predicted that this 
was--or stated that this is a National Special Security Event 
and that the fence was recommended and required to facilitate.
    When we take a look at the----
    Mr. Morelle. Did you disagree with that assessment?
    Mr. McFarland. I did at the time because of the fact that I 
don't want to just put up the fence because it's an NSSE. I 
want to know what the threat was, what the intel was saying 
about why we need to put up the fence. I thought there was 
other alternatives than putting up the fence.
    Mr. Morelle. Such as?
    Mr. McFarland. Such as we could do enhanced operations, 
which means we can add more personnel on the west front, the 
east front. We could put bike racks up. We could have done a 
lot of other things than putting up the fence. I just wanted to 
come up with different alternatives instead of putting up a 
million-dollar fence for 1 day and then taking it down the 
next.
    Mr. Morelle. Although I know that there's some constraints 
on Capitol Police just in terms of personnel and vacancies that 
they have, and I don't want to spend too much time on the 
question of the fence, I think we would all want to make sure 
that, particularly given January 6 and concerns about safety, 
that we would, as I said, err on the side of caution.
    I would love to talk to you further. I think when the 
Secret Service makes a request, it seems to me appropriate to 
consider that.
    I want to talk about the Strategic Plan as well, and 
appreciate the work you've done. I'm just curious. You talked 
about that you wanted to make it a priority and incorporate 
ideas and input from 170 employees, which is commendable.
    I'm just curious. Were there any things that surprised you 
in terms of those conversations, things that you hadn't 
considered or things that came up as trends that you hadn't 
anticipated?
    Mr. McFarland. Sir, as a former House staffer under the 
Sergeant at Arms, I got to see how my journey was with the 
Sergeant at Arms. I've actually served under three different 
Sergeant at Arms. I wanted to take a little bit--incorporate a 
little bit from every single one of them of what they did 
right, what they did wrong, and see what we can do to make it a 
better place.
    One thing that I wanted to do was reach out to all 170 
people of the Sergeant at Arms office to get their valued 
input. I think a lot of times, from my experience, that if 
you're not above the grade of Director or Assistant Sergeant at 
Arms, people aren't really looking at you and not knowing how 
you really felt about how the organization was run.
    Mr. Morelle. Yes. No, I think it's a good idea. I'm just 
curious. Did you find anything that you thought was just 
interesting that you hadn't heard or things that have guided 
you here?
    Mr. McFarland. No. To be honest, I mean, some of the things 
that are the same problems that I saw as a Director within the 
House Sergeant at Arms office.
    Mr. Morelle. I'm sort of interested. You talked, and I 
think this makes a great deal of sense, about investing in the 
staff, making sure people know that there are opportunities, 
for them to be given opportunities for growth within the 
organization.
    Can you talk a little bit about training and professional 
development opportunities you're intending to provide for 
staff?
    Mr. McFarland. Sure, sir.
    One thing that we've noticed was as a staffer within the 
Sergeant at Arms office a lot of times you're just given that 
position and you're kind of left alone. I didn't want that for 
my employees. What I wanted to do was I wanted to make sure 
that we give them a career path going forward.
    What we started to look at was, how can we make this better 
for the congressional staff? So what we did was we started 
taking a look on what the individuals liked, what they needed 
to do.
    One of the things that we've done is an open-door policy 
where people come in and talk to me. I'm proud to say that 
we've had a couple staff that they wanted to know about my 
journey and how they can make themselves better.
    I think it's really resonating. So one thing that we 
started doing was let's start thinking of a plan of going 
forward. So if you work in ID services or parking security 
right now and you want to move up the chain, these are the 
things that you're going to have to incorporate in order to 
make sure you can move up the chain. Let's talk about your 
performance evaluations. Let's make sure that we get you proper 
training within the CAO and other institutions that can 
actually give you the training, and then give you a career path 
going forward.
    Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
    Mr. Loudermilk is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. McFarland, thank you for being here today.
    I also want to thank you for sending some of your staff to 
our staff retreat, our policy conference last week.
    Security is extremely important, especially during this 
tenuous time that we live in. And had a member from your 
office, as well as Capitol Police, come and specifically talk 
to security with our D.C. and district staff. I appreciate 
that. It was very valuable.
    I also want to thank you for taking on this role in such a 
tenuous time and for your vision. I mean, only 3 months after 
you were brought in as the Acting Sergeant at Arms, you've 
already brought out a strategic plan.
    For people who may be watching outside of Washington, DC, 
that is light speed in Congress for anybody to do something 
within 3 months. And so I think it's very commendable.
    You begin your report by laying out the values of the House 
Sergeant at Arms, and as you've mentioned, you've listed them 
as absolute integrity, which is absolutely important; deep 
collaboration; thoughtful transparency; and vigilant 
reliability and agility. And I think those values are of the 
utmost importance, especially in a place where politics kind of 
overrides those values a lot of times.
    For the record, can you state why it is so important to 
have a value-driven strategic plan, and if you can, elaborate 
on why these values in particular matter to you?
    Mr. McFarland. Mr. Loudermilk, the way I look at it is the 
values define the baseline behavior of how our people should be 
operating. It defines who we are. It defines a culture. I'm 
trying to change that culture, being a former House staffer 
within the Sergeant at Arms office, and how I can make it 
better for everybody else.
    Mr. Loudermilk. I think it's important because you're 
bringing experience, as well as vision to something. Way too 
often, especially in government, whether it's in the Department 
of Defense, as I served, or in any element of the federal 
government, we get to a place that we get comfortable. Comfort 
is often exploited by people who want to do bad things. I think 
it's very important that we do not always just rest on our 
laurels, that we are staying ahead of those.
    Part of your job, you also sit on the Capitol Police Board. 
Can you express how these values can benefit both the Capitol 
Police Board and the U.S. Capitol Police?
    Mr. McFarland. Sir, the way I look at it is right now my 
main focus is to get the Sergeant at Arms to buy into the 
culture of what we're doing here.
    I think with this format, I think it would be beneficial to 
the Capitol Police to actually incorporate some of the 
strategies as well.
    I have known of certain officers that are here that really 
like the whole idea of people first, putting the people--
talking to the rank-and-file officers. I think that's something 
that the Capitol Police could learn from, and I'm hoping that 
us sharing this with them, they might be able to take some of 
these as well and put forth for their own strategic plan.
    Mr. Loudermilk. There's something that you've said 
repeatedly, and I want to commend you on that, is the culture.
    Culture is usually the baseline of everything. Regardless 
of what policy you have, if you don't change the culture, then 
nothing ever changes. I think that is extremely important, is 
addressing the culture, because once the culture of an agency 
takes a downward turn, it doesn't matter what policy you put 
in.
    You've got to change the culture, and you have to have buy-
in with the people who work within your division, the people 
who work in the Sergeant at Arms office. I feel like you're 
heading in the right direction there.
    One thing Republicans have demanded is greater 
accountability, transparency, and professionalism from the U.S. 
Capitol Police. I hear it all around. I've got good 
relationships with a lot of the frontline officers, and I think 
they want some of this as well.
    Do you think that the Board, the Capitol Police Board or 
its structure, are a hindrance to these goals?
    Mr. McFarland. No, sir, I do not. I don't think they're a 
hindrance. I do think that some individuals on the Capitol 
Police Board might have a different view of how they see the 
Capitol Police should be run, or they have their own opinion on 
how to best run the police department, which is fine.
    My observations, though, from where I sit and where I've 
sat for 32 years on Capitol Hill, is the fact that I think that 
there are some things that need to change, and change in the 
right way, to change the culture.
    I think that if we were to take some of these goals, like I 
mentioned, and the Capitol Police Board was to put forth some 
of these goals, I think it could change and make it a better 
place, not a hindrance.
    Mr. Loudermilk. Okay. Well, I appreciate that. I mean, I've 
got more questions, but I want to be sensitive of time.
    I appreciate your honesty in these answers. We're not 
trying to get to an end. We're trying to find what is the best 
solution to ensure the safety of the people that are in the 
Capitol, the security of the Capitol, and that our 
constitutional Republic is safe, secure, free, and transparent.
    I thank you for the work you're doing. I look forward to 
working with you.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
    I now recognize Ms. Sewell for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Sewell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I know that we're now about 2 years removed from January 6, 
the attacks of January 6. I know no other committee did more 
hearings around that than this Committee, and we asked the 
Sergeant at Arms Inspector General to actually do an analysis 
of the Capitol Police, the Inspector General to do an analysis 
and prioritize what went wrong. I think that what flowed from 
that was about a hundred different recommendations.
    From your standpoint, where are we in the process of 
implementing some of those recommendations?
    Mr. McFarland. You might not have been here, ma'am, but as 
I stated earlier, when I first started out there was 
approximately 61--or actually there was actually 61 
recommendations--I think it was 61 recommendations. I want to 
take that back. It was 69 recommendations that were open when I 
first got here.
    We've closed out 20 of them since January 7, when I was 
sworn in. We have 49 more to go.
    I think there is a lot of work to do, but I'm at the task 
of trying to close those out as soon as I possibly can.
    Ms. Sewell. What resources do you need to expedite that 
from this committee?
    Mr. McFarland. Nothing really from this committee to do. It 
mostly falls on the Capitol Police Board to make sure that 
we're holding the Capitol Police accountable. We want to make 
sure that we're getting the information to them that they need 
to do their job.
    Ms. Sewell. I know that your Strategic Plan has a lot of 
lofty goals, one of which is to--the people goal is to both 
foster, inspire, and invest in our staff.
    Diversity in law enforcement and security leads to better 
policing. Lots of studies have shown that. I assume there's a 
commitment by you to make sure that you have the best and 
brightest and most capable folks doing the job and that you're 
also cognizant of and promoting, retaining people of color as a 
part of your staff.
    Mr. McFarland. Yes, ma'am. One thing that I've done is when 
I first took my--I was sworn in, was I took a look on how the 
hiring process for the Sergeant at Arms office was.
    I saw some things that needed a lot of improvement. The 
very first thing that we did was we decided to put diverse 
panels together for competitive hiring. We wanted to make sure 
that the right candidates were getting into the job.
    We've actually----
    Ms. Sewell. I know. I'm kind of short of time.
    Mr. McFarland. I'm sorry.
    Ms. Sewell. I do understand that several Black, highly 
experienced senior officers within the Office of the Sergeant 
at Arms were terminated when you became the Acting Sergeant at 
Arms.
    For example, an Assistant Deputy Sergeant at Arms who 
previously served as Deputy Chief of the U.S. Secret Service 
Special Operations was terminated, as was an Assistant Sergeant 
at Arms who had previously served as a supervisory special 
agent with the U.S. Secret Service.
    How do you plan to ensure that perspectives from 
individuals from diverse backgrounds are taken into account 
when making decisions?
    Mr. McFarland. Ma'am, as we talk about the people I had to 
let go on day one, I had to do it for several reasons. But 
these are not a proper forum to discuss those reasons. I'd be 
more than happy to talk to you offline about some of----
    Ms. Sewell. I just want you to be cognizant of the fact 
that----
    Mr. McFarland. I am, ma'am.
    Ms. Sewell [continuing]. the Capitol Police has had 
lawsuits pending with respect to discrimination, and there is a 
history of it. We all have to be very cognizant of it and 
making sure that we're doing everything that we can to make 
sure that people feel comfortable, as well as people are 
competent and efficient in their jobs.
    I just wanted to make sure that commitment is there from 
you.
    Mr. McFarland. It is.
    Ms. Sewell. And wanted to hear a little bit more about how 
you plan on creating an atmosphere and a culture that's more 
accommodating and more accepting of diversity.
    Mr. McFarland. Ma'am, so as I was saying about how we do 
our hiring practices now, and I think it speaks to where we're 
going with everything, I think a lot of times when we've taken 
a look at exactly the hiring practices of people being brought 
in just because of who they are but not being vetted properly 
with their resume, or just by a friend saying, ``Hey, I think 
this person needs a job,'' I'm not about that.
    I'm about having a competitive hiring practice to hire the 
best candidate for the job. It doesn't matter exactly what race 
you are. I just want to make sure you're capable of doing the 
job. So one thing that we----
    Ms. Sewell. To be clear, nobody wants you to hire 
incompetent people.
    Mr. McFarland. Well----
    Ms. Sewell. It's a fact that there could be better hiring 
practices and promotion practices within the Capitol Police. I 
just want to make sure that you understand that that's also a 
part--should be a part of the Strategic Plan. I see reference 
to people goals but no reference specifically to making sure 
that that's accommodated for.
    Mr. McFarland. I'll take it under consideration, ma'am. And 
hopefully----
    Ms. Sewell. You need to do more than take it under 
consideration.
    Mr. McFarland. I will take it under consideration.
    Ms. Sewell. It should be a part of the culture that you're 
developing.
    Mr. McFarland. Yes, ma'am.
    Ms. Sewell. Thank you.
    The Chairman. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Dr. Murphy is now recognized for 5 minutes for the purpose 
of asking questions.
    Dr. Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you for coming today. I appreciate just the visit in 
the office the other day to just discuss things.
    You have a hard job. Your first and primary goal is to keep 
us safe. I appreciate the fact that you're going to hire people 
who are qualified, regardless of any other type of extraneous 
factors, to keep us safe. I know it's a hard job, and you have 
to keep morale up and all those other things. So thank you for 
doing that.
    Speaking of morale, how was morale when you came in to 
assume your position?
    Mr. McFarland. Congressman Murphy, it's been a long couple, 
3 years, I want to say, with COVID and January 6, and I felt 
that the morale at the time when I came in on board was at an 
all-time low.
    Dr. Murphy. Can you speak to that? Do you think it--can you 
speak to it specifically? I don't want to put words in your 
mouth.
    Mr. McFarland. I just think, sir, that--I think a lot of 
people saw some changes that they weren't comfortable with, and 
I think they wanted to see some change. That highlights what 
we're trying to do with our Strategic Plan of making our people 
first. I felt, even when I was with the Sergeant at Arms office 
as the Director of House Security, that we needed to put people 
first, and I just said this is what we need to do and how we 
need to do it.
    Dr. Murphy. So you had to come in and make some changes, 
and that makes some people uncomfortable. I understand that.
    Mr. McFarland. It did.
    Dr. Murphy. That's part of leadership.
    Mr. McFarland. It did make some people very uncomfortable. 
Yet I think the people right now are looking at what we're 
trying to do. The fact that people are first, I think they're 
buying into that culture, and that's what we wanted them to do.
    Dr. Murphy. Great. That's a plan for success.
    Let me ask you just something a little bit about security.
    Last election cycle, congressional campaigns spent over 
seven and a half million on digital and physical security. The 
bulk of the dollars were spent on security services at campaign 
events, residential security for candidates. Sadly enough, we 
are sometimes on the wrong side of people's opinions, and 
that's just a fact of life.
    Currently, the FEC authorizes incumbent campaigns to spend 
campaign funds on security guards. Per the FEC rule, incumbent 
congressmen may hire only bona fide security guards. Is that 
your understanding?
    Mr. McFarland. Sir, I'm not aware of this at all.
    Dr. Murphy. Is that not under your purview, personal 
security?
    Mr. McFarland. That's FEC, sir.
    Dr. Murphy. Okay. Alright. Alright. Well, then I'm going to 
move to a different line of questioning then.
    Let me ask you this then. Given the strategic planning that 
you're doing and the fact that you have moved forward with your 
recommendations of what you're trying to implement, what are 
your biggest hurdles, other than the Capitol Police, in getting 
those done?
    Mr. McFarland. Sir, I think the challenge right now is for 
people to buy in to the culture. I think some of the Sergeant 
at Arms staffers are some of the longest serving staff on 
Capitol Hill. They've been here for a long time. They've seen 
many changes with every Sergeant at Arms that's come forth.
    I really think that putting this plan in place and for 
people to actually take a look at it and to have buy-in to it, 
I think that's our biggest challenge right now.
    I think it's working, but I think there's a lot more to 
improve on.
    Dr. Murphy. Okay. So do you guys have any--I'm just going 
to go back to the security part--do you guys have any 
relationship with the hiring of security for us offsite? Any 
purview? Any supervisory role?
    Mr. McFarland. We have our--you do have law enforcement 
coordinators in your office that we coordinate with on a 
routine basis when you ever have an event that is in your 
district. We do have individuals that coordinate with your law 
enforcement coordinators about that.
    I think it's up to the law enforcement coordinators. 
Sometimes they get local police. Sometimes we----
    Dr. Murphy. I'm sorry. Say that again.
    Mr. McFarland. Sometimes we get local police to help out or 
State police. We do coordinate a lot with your district 
security.
    Dr. Murphy. Okay.
    You have a tremendous job in front of you, and I have great 
confidence that you're going to change the culture and put us 
back one that's apolitical. Sadly enough, it turned political 
and that's just wrong. Safety doesn't know any political party.
    We're in a different time now where safety is not secured, 
and sometimes the folks on the other side of the law are 
actually given more of the benefit than victims itself.
    I encourage you in your job. I wouldn't want it. Thank you 
for your service.
    With that, I'll yield back.
    The Chairman. The gentleman yield backs.
    The Chair now recognizes Mr. D'Esposito for 5 minutes.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good 
morning.
    First of all, thank you for your service.
    I've spent probably most of my adult life as a member of 
the New York City Police Department, proudly retiring as a 
detective, and I want to thank you for your service. I want to 
thank all the members of the Capitol Police for their service.
    One of the things that I think it's important to realize is 
that from the hundreds or thousands of 911 calls of issues that 
police officers respond to, one question that is never asked 
is: Are you a Democrat or are you a Republican?
    The fact that we've seen over the years an administration 
who have allowed or utilized the Capitol Police to further 
their agenda I believe needs to stop. We'll talk about the 
Capitol Police Board in a second.
    Upon taking your position, I have to ask: What has the 
impact been? The politicization of the Capitol Police, what has 
that impact been on the rank and file?
    Now, I've spoken to them, and I've heard it from their 
mouths, but I want to hear what has been the impact to them, 
and what has been a result of their training, of the resources 
that they need or perhaps don't have because of dealing with 
politics here on Capitol Hill?
    Mr. McFarland. Sir, I really can't speak about the past of 
what the rank and file think. I know I have talked to the rank 
and file as I walked around to different posts and see how the 
culture is going for them. There is a lot of issues right now 
that we're trying to straighten out. Some of it is through our 
Capitol Police Board; some of it I'm trying to fix on my own.
    That said, I'm trying to do everything I can to make it 
right for everybody within the Capitol Police. I think there 
are some issues that stem from staffing right now, and I think 
we need to try to address those issues first and foremost.
    Mr. D'Esposito. You mean lack of staff or----
    Mr. McFarland. Lack of staff.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Okay. What about training? How has training 
been?
    Mr. McFarland. I think the training has improved 
dramatically. What I mean by that is I think after we take a 
look at what happened on January 6, some police officers were 
not trained properly.
    I think now the training is very--it's very well-rounded. I 
think that they're trying to do everything they can with CDU 
training, with active shooter training. They are having 
multiple exercises occurring. At least since I've been here, 
two active shooter trainings and one CDU training. I think it's 
good.
    Mr. D'Esposito. But is it adequate training? That's, I 
think, the most important. One of the questions that we need to 
ask ourselves as a Member of this Committee is to make sure 
that the Capitol Police are trained and have every resource 
that they have available to them to protect everybody here, not 
only to protect Members, protect visitors to the nation's 
Capitol, and probably one of the most important, protect 
themselves.
    Is the training that we're offering, is the training that's 
being implemented, is it adequate? Is there enough time in a 
day, is there enough time in a week, is there enough tours of 
duty for them to get the adequate training that they need to 
keep us all safe?
    Mr. McFarland. Sir, I think there is adequate training. I 
do.
    I think when we talk about staffing, though, it also--a lot 
of people don't have a lot of days off or in between. Trying to 
get the training might be a little bit of problemsome.
    I really think that the training is very adequate, yes.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Now, I think we all agree that the Capitol 
Police needs effective oversight. I think one of the issues 
that we are dealing with is the Capitol Police Board.
    During your time on that Board, what have you learned about 
the Board as a whole and their role in oversight and 
accountability of the members of service to the Capitol Police?
    Mr. McFarland. Sir, I feel that what I've learned the most 
in 3 months is just to sit and listen for a while and 
understand exactly how the Board operates.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Sometimes that's the hardest thing to do.
    Mr. McFarland. Yes, it is, but that said, it's learning 
exactly what the problems are and how we can achieve those, how 
we can achieve the Chief to accomplish the goals that he needs 
to do. That's my concern right now, is just making sure that 
the Chief has the proper resources to do his job.
    Mr. D'Esposito. At this point, after your 3 months in this 
position, do you truly feel that the Capitol Police Board is 
working together for the best interests of the men and women 
who serve Capitol Hill?
    Mr. McFarland. Yes, sir, I do. I do. I think there's much 
more improvement to come. One I'm focusing in on right now, and 
I met with Chairman Steil when I first came on board, and one 
of the things that we talked about was Capitol Police reform, 
and I was all about it.
    After spending 3 months--or 3--yes, 3 months in the 
position and learning what the Capitol Police Board does, my 
focus right now is on governance. It's on transparency and 
accountability.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Well, thank you. Thank you for your 
service. I mean this sincerely, and I've made it clear to the 
chairman and the ranking member, I hope that I can do 
everything with the history that I've had in law enforcement to 
assist you in any way possible and keep everyone safe. So thank 
you.
    Mr. McFarland. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. D'Esposito. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
    Ms. Lee is now recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and thank you, Mr. 
McFarland, for being here today.
    I'd like to refer back to your Strategic Plan and just ask 
a few follow up questions there.
    In particular, in the patron goal section, I'd like to 
start with the item here that you list about improving 
communication with congressional Members. I'm interested in 
what you may have discovered that may be a deficit in 
communication or ways you've identified that, perhaps, we could 
improve that communication with members of congress.
    Mr. McFarland. Sure, ma'am.
    Some of the things that I saw when I was Director of House 
Security, we really didn't have--we had a good website where we 
would send a lot of the information to, but we thought that it 
needed to have some improvement, so we've updated our website.
    One of the things that we're trying to do is we're trying 
to put together a Member Service Center together in the 
Longworth building with the other House officers. That would be 
somewhere where people can go and learn information about 
exactly what the Sergeant at Arms office provides. I think 
there's a lot of misconceptions that a lot of people don't know 
what the Sergeant at Arms provides.
    I think this Member Service Center that we're creating is 
actually going to be very good, that they can actually have a 
lot of customer engagement with the Hill staff and get the 
services they need.
    Ms. Lee. That raises another interesting point right out of 
your strategic plan that has to do with marrying up customer 
service expectations with the services that your office 
actually does provide.
    Are there particular places where you've noticed that those 
expectations don't match up with the services you have or, 
conversely, perhaps Members don't realize some of the things 
that you do have to offer for us?
    Mr. McFarland. Yes, ma'am.
    I think some of the things that we have questions on are 
basically, you provide a service to somebody, they want to know 
exactly how fast you can turn it around. I think this is 
something that we'll be able to do is by giving a better 
service for all Members to take a look at.
    I think we're also measuring our performance to how to hold 
ourselves accountable as well.
    I think those are the two things that we're looking at to 
make it better for customer expectations.
    Ms. Lee. Excellent.
    In the next section, your ingenuity goals, one of the 
things you've identified is the experience for visitors to the 
Capitol complex and how you all might enhance or improve the 
visitor experience for those who come here.
    Have you identified any areas where you think those 
improvements could be made?
    Mr. McFarland. Well, just to let everybody--I think you 
know. Just starting Monday, we started a staff-only door for 
three areas in the House office buildings. We've taken a lot of 
feedback from Members' offices about how they can improve the 
lines of people coming into the building. I think that's one 
thing that we looked at, and we said we can make it a little 
bit better.
    We're taking a look at other ways that we can accommodate 
the visitors that come into the Capitol Police--I mean, sorry, 
to the Capitol Visitor Center.
    Everything is on the table right now. There's nothing that 
we're not going to leave unattended. We want to make sure we're 
doing everything we can for a greater experience for the people 
that come to the Hill.
    Ms. Lee. You mentioned earlier the creation of a website 
where we might identify some of the roles for your office and 
how Members of Congress can utilize your office.
    Are there other areas specifically related to technology 
where you think you might be able to enhance either the 
operations of your office or the security of the complex by 
using technology?
    Mr. McFarland. Yes, ma'am.
    One of the things that we started looking at was a floor 
mapping system to help with our emergency procedures 
evacuations.
    We've also taken a look at a member portal. This portal 
will be kind of utilized as kind of like the CAO has where you 
submit a request, and it doesn't matter what the request is 
within the Sergeant at Arms office. You'll be able to track it. 
I think that's something that we're really looking at.
    We're also looking for a member duress alert app that we 
can utilize for people that are on the Hill or off the Hill, 
that if they're in a situation, they'll be able to hit a button 
and let the people know where they are, the police know where 
they are.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    The Chairman. The gentlewoman yields back.
    Mrs. Torres is now recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Torres. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you, again, for being here today. We had an 
opportunity to speak candidly yesterday, and I appreciate you 
taking the time to do that with me.
    As you know, I continue to be concerned about the processes 
and relationships between the leadership that is in charge of 
our overall security and campus experience here, not just for 
our offices but also for the Capitol.
    The role that you play in security and the role that the 
Architect of the Capitol plays on that Board, can you describe 
the collaboration between--and I know that the AOC is 
currently--there's a vacancy there. Hopefully for not much 
longer.
    How would you describe a relationship between the three 
leaders that are tasked with the security of this campus?
    Mr. McFarland. Mrs. Torres, from what I can--what I've 
examined or what I've looked at for the last 3 months, is a 
very positive working relationship with the Senate and the 
Architect of the Capitol. I haven't really had any issues. If I 
ever needed to reach out to the Senate Sergeant at Arms or to 
the Architect of the Capitol, we have great collaboration with 
what we do. I don't really see an issue right now.
    I know the AOC is currently going through some major 
changes, and we're here to help support them as best we can.
    Mrs. Torres. That vacancy has not negatively impacted the 
projects that you currently are undertaking?
    Mr. McFarland. No, ma'am. The people that are working on 
those projects are still working on those projects.
    Mrs. Torres. Generally speaking, what is your view of the 
role of the Architect, the role that they play in security?
    Mr. McFarland. I think their role is basically to look at 
the physical security standards of how we can best protect the 
Capitol Building and the surrounding buildings and things like 
windows or hardening doors.
    Mrs. Torres. Or providing keys?
    Mr. McFarland. Or providing keys.
    Those are certain things that I think that they really 
focus in on, and we have great collaboration with them. We are 
engaged with them, if not on a daily basis, and our doors are 
always open to help them out.
    Mrs. Torres. Part of the conversation that we had yesterday 
included the role of the Sergeant at Arms, the role that they 
play in the Capitol, along with Capitol Police, and should it 
continue to be a standalone, independent group or should it be 
a subagency of the Capitol Police.
    As I explained to you yesterday, my concern is to have so 
many people deciding on when do we call for backup when we need 
that support at the U.S. Capitol. I'm very concerned of the 
interference or the lack of attention and competition in 
between those roles.
    Can you reassure me today, as you did yesterday, 
specifically how you define your role in that space, not a role 
of blocking progress but a supportive role?
    Mr. McFarland. Ma'am, as a member of the Capitol Police 
Board, I make up one-third of the Police Board that is here for 
the security of the campus.
    We work directly with the Chief of Police. The Capitol 
Police Board has given the Chief powers that he doesn't have to 
go through the Police Board to get approval for extra resources 
if he needed them.
    I think the process is working fine. I think our mission on 
the way that we handle things is working. I think there are 
some needs for improvements, but I think right now it's working 
and it's working well.
    Mrs. Torres. I hope that you feel confident that you can 
come to us as you need resources so that we can support you and 
back you up during your time of need.
    Mr. McFarland. Thank you, ma'am.
    Mrs. Torres. Thank you.
    I yield back.
    The Chairman. The gentlewoman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes Mr. Kilmer for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Kilmer. Thank you for being with us. I'm not going to 
take anywhere near 5 minutes.
    Last year the Select Committee on the Modernization of 
Congress had a hearing where we looked at the continuity of 
operations of the institution and with a just recognition that 
if congress or its members can't function then our constituents 
lose their voice in our government.
    One of the recommendations that we made, working with your 
office, was that each member should have a continuity plan, 
including sort of minimum safety requirements and emergency 
communications plan that's made available to staff so that 
offices can keep functioning even if there's something 
catastrophic that happens.
    Last Congress the Sergeant at Arms office actually did send 
out some guidance to our offices about how to develop those 
continuity of operations plans. My sense is most offices 
haven't done this, though.
    I just want to get your sense of, how do we make sure that 
offices are doing this? Can we, can this committee, can the 
Modernization Subcommittee work with your office to make sure 
that we're pushing out that guidance and that offices are using 
it?
    Mr. McFarland. Yes, sir. I'll take any help I can get at 
this time. If there's something that you guys could do, that 
would be wonderful.
    At the same time, as I spoke to Ms. Lee just a few minutes 
ago, we created a member service center that's going to be in 
the Longworth House Office Building.
    That's going to be able to provide our services as well. It 
will provide training. It's going to provide guidance. It's 
going to actually provide specialists that are going to be in 
there that are going to be able to help with individuals that 
if they have a certain need, whether it's emergency management 
planning or if it's getting a security clearance or a parking 
tag, we'll be able to do that from that Member Service Center.
    Mr. Kilmer. The other thing I wanted to ask about was the 
new residential security program for members. I'm just curious 
how you feel like that's working and whether your office, 
whether the resources are adequate to make sure that that's 
successful.
    Mr. McFarland. Sir, we've looked at this. Since I've 
started, I can say that it is a very robust member 
participation job right now with everything going on.
    I think there is some room for improvement. I think the 
funding and what we're doing is spot on.
    Mr. Kilmer. In your testimony in front of the 
Appropriations Committee, I know you mentioned that part of 
your budget request was to support security issues in large-
scale, off-campus events where members may be 
participating.txtconcerns. I don't know if you want to speak to 
that briefly.
    Mr. McFarland. Sir, I think our lead core jobs that we do 
as far as coordination with members of the police community 
that are back in your districts I think is working very well.
    I wish that we could do more by providing more services. We 
take every single situation seriously. I think that when we do 
this, I've seen great response back from a lot of police 
departments that will provide the services to the members as 
they are back home in their districts or even in their 
residences.
    Mr. Kilmer. Thanks, Mr. Chair. I yield back.
    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back.
    Mr. McFarland, thanks for being here today. Your testimony 
was very helpful as we work together to make sure that we're 
protecting members, visitors, and staff here on Capitol Hill.
    Members of the committee may have some additional questions 
for you, and we ask that you please respond to those questions 
in writing.
    Without objection, each member will have 5 legislative days 
to insert additional materials into the record or to revise and 
extend their remarks.
    If there's no further business, I thank the members for 
their participation.
    Without objection, the committee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:18 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
                                    [all]