House Corrections panel discusses recidivism bill, agrees Judiciary should lead review

Chair, House Corrections & Institutions said the committee considered a bill “that recalculates recidivism” and agreed that the House Judiciary Committee should take the lead on drafting and reviewing the measure.

The measure under discussion would change how the state calculates recidivism. As described in committee, “Recidivism right now ... is calculated on a 3 year basis,” and the draft bill would replace the current, simpler three‑year calculation with a more complicated system that separates classes of recidivism.

The committee heard that Senate Judiciary has been examining similar language and may include it in a miscellaneous Senate bill that would be referred to House Judiciary if passed. The chair said members of House Corrections could “sit in on judiciary while they're working on this” so the committee can “be in the loop” and highlight issues that affect corrections.

Members repeatedly emphasized the bill’s links to the courts and sentencing. One member noted, “It's talking about criminal offenses, which ... that's judiciary,” and clarified, “It's all at the courts.” Committee members said that some parts of the draft tie the start of the recidivism clock to the offender’s release or sentencing date, and that the Department of Corrections (DOC) would be asked to calculate repeat‑offender rates “based upon individuals convicted of a criminal” offense under the draft language.

Committee members raised questions about intentions behind the bill, potential impacts on incarcerated people and whether the Corrections committee should continue to shepherd the measure. Several members said they had no objection to Judiciary taking control because Judiciary handles criminal‑offense definitions and sentencing issues. The meeting record contains discussion and a general committee consensus that House Judiciary should lead further work; the transcript does not include a formal roll‑call motion, mover/second, or recorded tally.

Next steps described in the meeting: the Senate bill may be used as a vehicle, House Judiciary may draft or amend language, and a member of House Corrections may be designated to attend Judiciary hearings to raise corrections‑specific concerns. Committee members said they expected further opportunities to weigh in when House Judiciary circulating or when a Senate vehicle arrives in the House.

Ending — The committee left the recidivism draft in Judiciary’s hands for further work while preserving the option for Corrections members to follow testimony and propose changes later; no formal referral vote was recorded in the transcript.