Senate Judiciary discusses adding H219 language to S109 to expand 'Kids Apart' parenting program

Senate Judiciary members heard from House sponsors on a proposal to add language from House Bill 219 to Senate Bill 109 to resolve a gubernatorial veto point and extend a parenting program currently operating in women's facilities to male correctional facilities.

The change matters because the bill’s backers say it removes language the administration considered unconstitutional during the veto of H 219 and would put the program’s administration and funding into the statutory framework of S 109. Representative Allison, chair of the House of Emergency and Institutions Committee, told the committee the sponsors have worked with the administration and “we have agreement on the language.”

Representative Evans told the committee the program—referred to in testimony as “Kids Apart”—has operated in a women’s facility for almost 20 years and that lawmakers want to expand it to male facilities. “The intent is just putting in all of our facilities, not just the women's facility,” Evans said. Evans said a summer working group and a survey of male facilities showed the most interest at the Newport facility, which lawmakers intend to reach first.

Evans said funding already exists in the current budget and cited a figure of $390,000 already appropriated. He told the committee the Department of Corrections has testified that it intends to fund the expansion within its budget going forward, though that remains subject to future budget processes. The committee chair asked that the Department of Corrections provide written testimony or appear to confirm support before lawmakers formally add the H 219 language to S 109.

Committee members framed the change as a technical fix to address the governor’s veto, not a new program start, and said they would only add the H 219 language to S 109 if the administration and DOC put their support on the record. Representative Allison said the bill “came out of the house, passed the senate, was vetoed by the governor because there was a section that the administration said is unconstitutional,” and that the new language is intended to align with the administration’s concerns.

The committee did not take a vote on adding the language during the hearing. Members said staff will seek formal confirmation from the Department of Corrections and the administration and that committee staff will reconvene with updated language if those confirmations arrive.

Lawmakers said the next step is a revised draft to be presented to the committee; staff were scheduled to return with further changes on Tuesday. If the DOC and administration confirm support, sponsors said they will attach the H 219 language to S 109 and move forward.

The discussion remained procedural: lawmakers repeatedly distinguished between past legislative action (the original H 219 passage and subsequent veto) and the current, conditional request to amend S 109 only after DOC/administration confirmation.