House Finance subcommittee reviews Department of Corrections operating budget request

Representative Hannon, chair of the House Finance Committee subcommittee on the Department of Corrections, opened the subcommittee meeting in Juneau on Jan. 28, 2025, to review the department’s operating budget request for fiscal 2026 and to gather information the subcommittee will forward to the full finance committee.

The department’s presentation, led by April Wilkerson, deputy commissioner for the Department of Corrections, outlined staffing levels, fund sources and several line items that drive the request. Wilkerson said the department has 2,124 full-time permanent positions and described the department’s constitutional mission “to provide secure confinement, the reformation of those offenders that are placed under the department’s custody and supervision, and then a form of supervised community reintegration.”

Why it matters: the subcommittee’s review focuses on the operating (numbers) section of the budget; its recommendations guide the full finance committee’s committee substitute for the operating budget. Members repeatedly pressed for data on vacancy rates, historical budget changes and how recent policy shifts have affected Corrections’ costs.

Key details from the presentation and committee discussion

- Budget composition and size: Wilkerson said the department’s operating budget is primarily general fund (over 90 percent) and that personal services account for roughly 65–70 percent of the agency’s total. The presentation packet listed an overall budget figure and a 5.4% increase over the current budget; the packet’s numeric formatting was inconsistent in the recorded transcript and committee members requested a clearer historical breakout for committee materials.

- Vacancies and staffing: Wilkerson told the committee the department’s vacancy rate recently declined to 10 percent from 12.2 percent in December. She said vacancies typically translate to overtime for other staff, primarily affecting correctional and security posts. The department confirmed it will provide a staffing trend (sentenced and unsentenced populations) and historical budget comparisons for committee members.

- Federal reimbursements and fund shifts: Wilkerson said the department has seen a downturn in federal collections tied to a change in U.S. Marshals Service practice. "We were notified by the U.S. Marshals...and the U.S. Marshals were no longer going to pay for those individuals," she said, explaining the department has an associated fund-change proposal to replace some federal authority with general funds.

- Collective bargaining and salary adjustments: The department outlined several negotiated or pending salary adjustments the subcommittee will need to account for. Wilkerson described proposed salary changes for several employee groups and gave percentage figures: "For LTC, it was 2.5%... for the non law enforcement supervisory, that was 3%... supervisory that are considered law enforcement, they are 5.5%." Committee members and staff noted that negotiated labor costs can have the same effect on the budget as inflation-driven cost increases.

- Overtime and standby pay reporting: The department described a prior realignment that moved premium-pay funding into a specialized overtime allocation and said, as part of that work, it identified a shortfall tied to standby pay for supervisors. The presentation indicated a reporting allocation for maintenance and operations was created at the request of the Office of Management and Budget to better track utilities, repairs and similar operating costs that support facilities.

Selected exchanges and clarifications from the meeting

- On vacancy data: Wilkerson to Representative Ruffridge: "our vacancy rate overall within the department is down to 10%." The department agreed to provide the committee a look back on budget changes and population trends since 2019, including the effects of policy changes and facility reopenings raised by members.

- On how the subcommittee should treat inflation and labor costs: Connor Bell, fiscal analyst with the Legislative Finance Division, told the committee, "when legislative finance speaks very specifically about inflation, we're talking about the consumer price index..." He added that labor contracts are related to price changes but do not always track exactly with CPI.

What the subcommittee asked for next

Committee members requested follow-up materials: a historical budget and population trend line (with major policy actions like Senate Bill 91 and House Bill 49 marked), a clear breakout of the packet’s dollar figures and a reconciliation of the department’s fund-source shifts (federal collections replaced by general funds where applicable). The subcommittee deferred several detailed slide items to its next meeting and adjourned with plans to meet again on Feb. 4 at 9 a.m.

Ending

No formal votes were recorded at the Jan. 28 meeting. The department and legislative staff committed to provide supplemental documentation requested by members, including clearer numeric formatting and historical context linking policy changes to budgetary impact.