Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Reentry Procedures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Reentry panel weighs ending probation fee, after-hours drug-testing and child-support fixes
Summary
Members of the Joint Interim Committees discussed removing the state probation fee (PUFF), allowing drug tests outside work hours and improving how child-support accrual is handled during incarceration. The group asked staff to put the items on the March agenda and to compile implementation proposals for an April report to the legislature.
At a meeting of the Joint Interim Committees, committee members and agency representatives discussed three operational barriers to reentry: the state probation/upkeep fee (commonly called the “PUFF” fund), the scheduling and notification of court-ordered drug testing, and the process for stopping child-support accrual while a person is incarcerated.
Why it matters: Committee members said these procedural issues create practical obstacles to housing and employment for people leaving incarceration and asked staff to return concrete implementation proposals in time for an annual reentry report the group plans to release during April’s Second Chance Month.
Commissioner Buckner said she wanted to see simple, implementable changes added to the committee’s annual report and singled out the probation fee as an item she would like to see removed. “There’s something called a probation fee… I really don’t see why we have it when we have people struggling to get on their feet and support their families,” Buckner said.
A participant in the discussion described the fund — referred to in the meeting as the probation or upkeep fund, “PUFF” — as generating roughly $8,000,000 a year for the agency but difficult to enforce in practice. Committee members characterized the fee as a continuing impediment to successful reentry and discussed whether elimination or significant reform should be recommended to agencies or the legislature.
On drug testing, speakers urged more flexible scheduling and better public education so people on supervision do not lose jobs because they must report immediately after a coding or app notice. One committee member suggested administrative changes under the Administrative Procedures Act to allow tests either before a work shift or after hours rather than requiring immediate departure from work when notified.
The group also discussed child-support accrual during incarceration. Committee members noted a form exists that can stop child-support from accruing while someone is imprisoned, but corrections does not always forward that paperwork to the Department of Human Resources; that gap means support can continue to accrue and create steep balances after release. A staff participant said the problem appears to be logistical rather than purely legal: the form can be filed in court, but it is often not sent from intake to DHR automatically.
Next steps and directions: Committee leadership asked staff to place the child-support/form logistics and PUFF fund discussion on the March agenda and to draft a menu of options — including whether changes could be accomplished by agency policy rather than new legislation. Members asked that each committee participant come to the next meeting with at least one concrete proposal for the annual report. The committee set a timeline to compile recommendations in March and roll out the report in April during Second Chance Month.
The meeting closed with members agreeing to develop implementation options and to provide a mechanism for submitting proposals in advance of the March meeting.
