Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Juvenile Justice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Students testify as Senate advances graffiti-liability bill requiring cleanup or alternative restitution for minors
Summary
Following testimony from Jackson Elementary students, the Senate moved House Bill 85 (graffiti civil and criminal liability) to the third-reading calendar; the bill allows courts to order minors or parents to pay for cleanup or perform community service, but senators debated 'may' vs 'shall' language and how indigent youths would pay for paint or cleanup.
Senators advanced House Bill 85, which adds graffiti and defacement to criminal mischief provisions and establishes civil and restorative options for offenders, after a high-profile committee-of-the-whole hearing featuring testimony from elementary-school students.
Senator Baird introduced HB85 and invited students from Jackson Elementary who described neighborhood problems including drive‑by shootings and widespread graffiti. Student Lillian Jacque said her mother was nearly shot at while working in a store and urged the Senate to support stronger penalties for graffiti, drive‑by shootings and weapons near schools. Several other students recounted personal incidents of shootings and vandalism and said they want offenders to clean up graffiti themselves or that parents be held partially responsible.
Substantive debate focused on statutory wording and execution. Senator Hilliard and others flagged differences between 'may' and 'shall' in the amended bill — for example, the court 'may' require a first-offense offender to perform clean-up for up to eight hours, while another provision uses 'shall' where parents must provide cleanup materials or payments. Senators asked how the statute would treat indigent minors who lack funds to pay for paint or cleanup and whether alternative restitution or community contributions (cities providing paint) would address such situations. Senator Baird said the bill allows alternative restitution and noted examples where municipalities covered cleanup costs when youths lacked resources.
Supporters pointed to reviews by the Attorney General’s office, the statewide prosecutors association and the judiciary interim committee; opponents urged careful review of constitutional and fiscal implications. The Senate voted to move HB85 to the third-reading calendar for further action; senators signaled agreement with the bill's intent but continued to seek clarity on mandatory language and funding for indigent defendants.
Next steps: HB85 will appear on the third-reading calendar. Sponsors and staff will likely refine language about court discretion versus mandates and specify remedies for indigent juveniles.
