Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Corrections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
JBC approves prison‑caseload supplements while urging administration to speed parole placements
Summary
The Joint Budget Committee approved supplemental actions to fund prison and local jail obligations but repeatedly pressed the administration to move parole‑approved people into community placements instead of adding beds. The prison caseload request passed 5–1 amid concerns about safety, costs and unfilled community placements.
The Joint Budget Committee on [date] approved supplemental funding tied to prison capacity and local jail payments while pressing state officials to show progress on parole placements.
Members voted to approve the staff recommendation for prison caseload (S1) and payments to local jails (S1.5). The motion to approve the prison caseload passed 5–1, with Senator Amabile recorded as the lone objection. Vice Chair Bridges said the decisions were “extremely difficult” and emphasized the state’s contractual obligations to county jails. Senator Mobley, who opposed expanding beds, urged the committee to “do the work” to move people already approved for parole into empty community corrections slots rather than increasing capacity.
The debate centered on two competing risks: members warning that denying supplemental beds could cause unsafe double‑bunking or expensive county backfills, and others arguing that large numbers of parole‑approved people remain in DOC custody because they lack placements. Senator Mobley described roughly 700 people on a “tables list” who are parole‑approved but have no placement or required programming; she said approximately 500 staffed but unused community corrections beds exist statewide.
Representative Taggart and others pressed departments to show concrete steps on recruiting, placement coordination and how many of the 700 could realistically be placed without additional beds. Several members asked for specific data for figure setting and said they would revisit long‑term funding in the 2627 budget cycle.
The committee attached clear direction that the administration must report back with more detailed plans before figure setting. The JBC noted its supplemental approvals do not bind long‑term budget decisions and reserved the right to revisit these items during the main budget process.
