Parole reform advocates call for end to revocations for technical violations

Attorneys, researchers and formerly incarcerated advocates urged the committee to pass S.1728 (parole supervision reform), arguing that parole revocations for non‑criminal “technical” violations drive a large share of new prison admissions and that statutory change would reduce needless incarceration without raising public‑safety risk.

Speakers cited national data showing supervision violations account for a large proportion of prison admissions and offered Massachusetts figures: one presenter said non‑criminal violations accounted for roughly 80% of parole revocations in recent years. They proposed replacing many arrest‑based revocations with a written notice and a required board hearing, arguing this procedural change reduced jail returns in other states.

The Committee for Public Counsel Services described concrete examples: people who lost housing or jobs following a brief procedural failure and were returned to custody, producing worse outcomes for the individual and higher costs for the state. Prison Policy Initiative noted that other states have enacted similar reforms and seen substantial admission reductions.

Supporters asked the Legislature to adopt targeted statutory language to require board hearings before revocation custody, restrict revocation for technical breaches to cases where public safety is demonstrably threatened and to expand community‑based responses to supervision noncompliance.

Ending: Advocates said S.1728 is a no‑cost, evidence‑based reform that would reduce incarceration and improve reentry if accompanied by robust community supports.