RALEIGH -- A plan to change the way parolees and probationers are supervised in North Carolina gambles on the premise that spending money to keep better track of them will save money in the long run.
The concept emerged last year with support from the governor and lawmakers from both parties, and was crafted with a broad influence from those involved in the criminal justice system. Leaders of both parties in the General Assembly have promised to get the bill passed this year. But it hit turbulence Tuesday when several Democrats in the House Appropriations Committee said it's not clear whether the numbers really add up.
The Justice Reinvestment Act gives probation officers more authority, requires drug treatment for probationers and parolees who need it, moves most misdemeanor offenders from state prisons to county jails, and imposes longer sentences for repeat breaking-and-entering convictions, among other things.
"This is the biggest piece of reform legislation since 1994 restructured sentencing," Rep. David Guice, a Republican from Brevard, said in an interview over the weekend. Guice is the primary sponsor of the bill.
Guice, a retired chief probation officer, said there had been no previous opposition to House Bill 642. He has identified about $45 million in changes that the bill would cost, and that amount is part of the proposed budget in the General Assembly. But a fiscal analysis from the legislature's research staff says the exact cost can't be determined, partly because the bill is such a big change from current sentencing laws that it's impossible to measure the effect.
Concern about funding
Despite the unknowns, the appropriations committee approved the bill, and it is scheduled to come before the full House for a vote today. Rep. Alice Bordsen, a Democrat from Alamance County, said she was excited about the legislation when it was proposed but has reservations about it because the financial numbers are so uncertain.
"We need to move slowly, carefully and know what we're doing," Bordsen said.
Bordsen said she had other concerns besides the source of funding: The bill would establish a habitual felon statute for those convicted of breaking-and-entering for the second time instead of the current fourth time; no other state has such a strict law, she said. The research staff noted there are already 3,000 admissions to state prison for that crime. Bordsen said other states that have successfully used the reinvestment concept took prison money that was available in less economically challenging times and spent it on mental health and other treatment programs at the community level. That wouldn't necessarily happen under this bill, she said.
Sponsor's math
Guice's formula breaks down this way: If the state spends the money to get the changes in place, it will avoid having to spend $267 million to build and operate new prisons to handle the projected increase in the number of prisoners by 2017. The state would also save $293 million by 2017 by diverting about 1,500 from prison into post-release supervision, Guice says.
There are about 41,000 prisoners in the state. Research found that in 2009 more than half of new prison admissions were for probation violations and that most of those were minor violations.
"We can keep doing what we're doing - releasing 85 percent (of our prisoners) without any support at all, and in a short period of time spinning them right back in through the front door because we never addressed the underlying problems of substance abuse and mental health," Guice said.
The bill is tied to the budget that is under consideration in the General Assembly. Some of the funding for these initiatives comes from the proposal to close four prisons and a diagnostic center. Other money comes from proposed increases in various court fees and a fee on inmates who receive medical care.
The bill would spend $7.5 million on treatment programs in the communities where ex-offenders are released. It would allocate $2.5 million to pay for additional probation and parole officers. The legislative research staff says close to 300 probation officers would have to be hired to accomplish this.
Moving inmates
It also sets aside $35 million to pay for transferring some misdemeanor state prison inmates to county jails that have room for them. That cost, along with transportation and medical expenses, would be paid by the state and not the counties. The sheriff's association would run the program. If a particular county doesn't have room for more prisoners, an effort would be made to find a nearby jail that does. North Carolina is one of only a few states that send misdemeanor offenders to prison.
Guice said counties have been concerned that they will have to pick up the costs of the prisoners, and so he has written the bill to stress that the state will pick up the full cost. "The state in the past has left counties holding the bag," he said.
Guice said the bill went through 50 revisions before it was introduced, and as of Monday another 42 other changes were made. The bill began with recommendations from a yearlong study by the Council of State Governments Justice Center, the Pew Center on the States and the federal Bureau of Justice Assistance. The concept was to analyze data specific to North Carolina and come up with ways to keep prison costs down.
"The bottom line is we want people to become productive new members of our communities," Guice said.
