Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Corrections Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah House approves substitute to reimburse counties for housing state probationers
Summary
The House passed a second substitute for HB220 directing state payment to counties that house condition-of-probation prisoners, setting an annual payment schedule and a 50% reimbursement target though likely funded at a lower percentage; sponsors and county officials said it improves budgeting for jails.
The Utah House on Feb. 23 approved a second substitute to House Bill 220 to revise how the state reimburses counties that house people sentenced to serve time as a condition of probation.
Sponsor Representative Michael Noel told colleagues the bill establishes a predictable payment process: on or before Dec. 15 each year the state will pay each county for housing state probationary and parole inmates based on the number housed during the prior fiscal year and using a three-year average to calculate the state daily incarceration rate. Noel said the bill sets a reimbursement policy that could reach 50% of the state daily incarceration rate but is likely to be funded at a lower level (he cited a practical funding level near 42% in recent years).
Noel and other supporters argued the change helps counties and sheriffs plan budgets and avoids the timing problems that occur when state appropriations are spread or exhausted during a fiscal year. "Someone has to pay the bill," Noel said, adding that counties have shouldered costs and need a more reliable state commitment.
Representative Ferry asked whether the fiscal note changes with the substitute; Noel said the fiscal note does not change unless the Legislature elects to fund reimbursement at the full 50% level. Representative McKitt and others praised the fairness of the arrangement, and Representative Brown confirmed the bill applies to inmates held as a condition of probation and does not alter contract-prisoner arrangements.
The House substituted the bill and then voted to pass the second substitute; the clerk recorded the passage at 71 yes, 0 no. The bill was transmitted to the Senate for consideration.
What happens next: the bill moves to the Senate. Funding decisions — whether the Legislature will appropriate the full 50% reimbursement or a lower percentage — remain subject to the appropriations process.
Speakers quoted in this article are identified in the House transcript and are limited to those who spoke during the HB220 debate.
