Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Justice:probation Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee backs probation reforms, drops parole fees and shortens supervision for low-risk probationers
Summary
Senate Finance advanced a probation-reform measure that would eliminate parole fees and allow early termination of probation for low-risk supervisees who complete court-ordered tasks; corrections officials told the committee it would shift resources to higher-risk cases.
The Senate Finance Committee gave a do-pass recommendation on a probation-reform measure (Senate Bill 375) on Oct. 12, 2025, after testimony from the corrections secretary and department leadership.
Alicia Tafoya Lucero, Secretary of the Corrections Department, told the committee the department supports eliminating parole costs (fees historically paid by people on supervision) because those charges divert limited resources from restitution, counseling and other court-ordered obligations. The bill would end parole fees while preserving supervision requirements; people on parole would still be required to check in with parole officers but would not be charged supervisory fees.
The measure also provides a pathway for early termination of probation for people assessed at minimum risk under a validated assessment tool (the committee heard the department uses the COMPAS or similar validated assessment). A person on probation who completes all judge-ordered conditions, pays restitution and has served at least half the original probation term could be discharged early; speakers and staff said this would concentrate supervision resources on higher-risk cases and reduce caseloads for officers.
The committee heard that roughly 1,400 people are on parole supervision at any given time. Department officials and supporters argued that reducing fees and shortening probation for low-risk individuals would improve supervision focus and public-safety outcomes, citing models and data from other states that have implemented similar risk-based supervision reforms.
Senate members asked about recidivism studies and whether other states’ experiences showed safety gains; staff and the sentencing commission representatives told the committee that multiple states have adopted risk-based supervision and that research supports targeted supervision of higher-risk individuals. The corrections secretary said probation officers would continue required check-ins and treatment referrals; the reform would not remove supervision, only the fee and, for qualifying probationers, shorten the term based on completion of conditions.
The committee moved the bill with a do-pass recommendation and asked staff to continue coordination with probation leadership on implementation details and caseload impacts.
