Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Department Of Corrections Reorg topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears Department of Corrections reorganization amendment to SB 301; places bill in interim study
Summary
The committee heard testimony from the Department of Corrections on an amendment to SB 301 that would reorganize senior leadership and, officials say, reduce costs. The committee closed the public hearing without action and later moved SB 301 to interim study for further oversight coordination.
The Senate committee held a public hearing on an amendment (3102s) to Senate Bill 301 that would reorganize top-level leadership at the Department of Corrections and establish a new career path for professional and security operations, witnesses said.
Senator James Gray, who introduced the amendment, said the change is intended to help departments manage budget pressures by allowing a flattened organization to create one higher-level position and to be attached to a bill later this session so it can be implemented and signed by the governor. “We need to be responsive to them and that's what we're trying to do here,” Gray said.
Bill Hart, commissioner of the Department of Corrections, told the committee the amendment is primarily a cost-reduction measure and would separate responsibilities between a security side and a professional operations side. “Primarily, it is a cost reduction bill,” Hart said, adding that the restructure creates an internal career path and flexibility to contract or expand functions as needed.
Committee members asked whether the change would add lower-level position losses or affect front-line staffing. Hart said the change targets assistant commissioner and director levels and that “there won't be a change in positions at the lower level.”
The record contains inconsistent numeric estimates about savings. Hart described first-year savings in the tens of thousands and larger savings as attrition takes effect; another committee speaker referenced a multi‑million-dollar biennial figure. The committee did not resolve those differing figures during the hearing.
The chair closed the public hearing and expressly stated the committee would not take action on the amendment that day. Later in the meeting, after discussing the oversight role of a joint performance audit and oversight committee, Senator Lang moved to place SB 301 in interim study; the motion carried on an 'Aye' vote recorded in the transcript. The committee did not adopt amendment 3102s during the public session and left the amendment available to be attached to future legislation.
What happens next: SB 301 is now in interim study for further review and coordination with the committee exercising performance audits and oversight. The committee signaled it will await additional organizational charts and written details on positions and removals before advancing any formal change.
