House Corrections committee reviews H.294 to end inmate phone charges, cap commissary markups and require federal minimum wage for sentenced labor

The House Corrections and Institutions committee on April 10 reviewed H.294, a bill that would (1) require telecommunication services in state correctional facilities to be provided at no cost to incarcerated people and the parties they contact, (2) cap commissary prices to no more than 10% above fair-market prices in the surrounding community, (3) direct the Department of Corrections (DOC) to evaluate existing vendor contracts and report back, and (4) require that sentenced offenders be paid at least the federal minimum wage unless federal law provides otherwise.

John Gray, Legislative Counsel, said the bill would “provide for no cost to inmates, to their families and to other communicating with inmates,” and described the change as moving “from having telecommunications at cost to moving to no cost.” Gray also summarized the commissary provision as requiring that “prices shall be set so as not to exceed … more than 10% the fair market value for comparable products sold in the community where the facility is located.”

Committee members pressed staff on operational and definitional questions. Members asked how “community” should be defined for comparing fair-market value and raised concerns about vendor overhead and delivery costs inside facilities. The committee noted that the transcript language draws on terms used elsewhere in Title 28 but that the bill as drafted does not define the geographic scope for the fair-market comparison.

H.294 would also require DOC to evaluate certain existing contracts and report back to the Legislature. The bill specifically directs DOC, on or before Jan. 1, 2026, to evaluate contracts with the telecommunications vendor and the commissary vendor named in the draft and to report whether vendors offer services and products to incarcerated people at prices substantially higher than comparable community offerings or than competing vendors.

On compensation for offender work, committee discussion focused on scope and constitutional and operational questions. The bill text limits the federal-minimum-wage requirement to “offenders,” a term the counsel said applies only to sentenced individuals and not to detainees. Committee member Troy described his intent as rooted in the belief that “all labor has value,” and said the goal is to create mechanisms so wage payments can be split among victim restitution, inmates’ savings, and short-term purchases.

Members cautioned that paying wages to incarcerated labor raises practical and constitutional questions. Committee members asked staff to confirm how work programs (for example, work camp and court-ordered work crews) are defined and whether current statute or DOC practice already limits DOC’s ability to run a commissary or affects how wage and fund accounting is handled. Counsel noted existing statutory references in Title 28 and said staff would return with more detail on statutory definitions and operational statutes.

No formal votes were taken. Committee members agreed the next step is to invite DOC to testify about operational costs, contract terms, delivery logistics and how commissary proceeds are currently handled. Members also discussed inviting vendor testimony and collecting sample commissary price lists from facilities to get real-price comparisons.

The bill sets implementation dates in the draft: some operational updates would take effect July 1, 2025, and the contract-evaluation and policy-update deadlines are on or before Jan. 1, 2026. The committee did not adopt language changes or take final action during the April 10 meeting.