Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Corrections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee rejects Department of Corrections request to add inmate-call surcharge; bill fails on committee vote
Summary
House Bill 1953 proposed a surcharge on inmate phone and video calls to fund security-related monitoring services that vendors previously provided; after testimony and questions about fairness and indigent defendants, the committee voted the bill down.
Representative Randy Torres presented House Bill 1953, which would authorize a surcharge on inmate phone and video calls in state prisons and county jails to pay for services such as call recording storage, voice identification, keyword monitoring and related security tools. Sponsor and Department of Corrections representatives said federal FCC rulings cut existing vendor site commissions and made formerly “rolled in” services chargeable, creating an operational gap of roughly $1 million annually for the department.
Tawni Raul (chief counsel, Arkansas Department of Corrections) said the FCC capped per‑minute rates and eliminated site commissions; the bill would authorize a small surcharge set by the chief fiscal officer after consultation to restore security-support services the FCC no longer allows vendors to provide at no charge. Raul and DOC staff said the surcharge would be collected by the vendor but would be limited so overall rates would not exceed previous levels (historically ~14¢/minute) and would be tailored to recoup costs for monitoring, storage, voice ID and analytics the DOC used to receive as part of vendor contracts.
Representatives from the Arkansas Public Defender Commission, the Arkansas Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and other advocates opposed the bill, arguing the surcharge primarily burdens families of inmates (many of whom are indigent) and could harm pretrial detainees who depend on calls for counsel and support. Public defenders and defense commission witnesses raised concerns about county jails and pretrial detainees, the uneven impact on families, and potential for local variation if counties set different surcharges.
Committee discussion emphasized alternatives, including drawing general revenue to cover the costs, and questioned whether fees should be placed on families rather than the state. A motion to “do pass” the bill failed when the committee recorded “no” on the floor: the chair called for the vote, and the “noes” prevailed. The transcript records the motion and the vote: “All in favor… Aye. All opposed, say no. No. The noes have it. The bill has failed.”
No amendments were adopted; the sponsor and DOC representatives said they would continue to discuss alternative funding paths.
