Welcome Visitor. Today is Thursday, March 28, 2024. Sign-on
Follow Us On Facebook
House Bill 463 - crafted to save KY millions
Kentucky's prison population exploded between 1985 and 2010.

House Bill 463 is in a word, HUGE. Huge in length at 155 pages and huge in its effect on crime and punishment in Kentucky. A product of a task force made up of all three branches of government, House Bill 463 sailed through the General Assembly in 2011. Less than one month passed between introduction in the House, passage by both houses and being signed into law by the governor. 

Introduced in the House on February 11, 2011, HB 463 passed the House with one dissenting vote and the Senate with no dissenting votes. Then it floated downstairs to the first floor of the Capitol to be signed into law by Governor Beshear on March 3, 2011.

Politicos will recall that 2011 was during the Senate presidency of Senator David Williams (R- Burkesville) when little was getting passed in the hyperpartisanship of a Democratic House and a Republican Senate.

HB 463’s passage in the Senate on February 28, 2011 was hailed by Williams as “…one of the best days in the 26 years I’ve been here.”

The new law was seen as a giant leap forward in Kentucky’s criminal justice system. Up until passage, crime and punishment was devouring an ever increasing share of the state budget. House Bill 463 was the answer to the out of control costs of incarceration.

Crafted with technical assistance from the Pew Center on the States, the Task Force on the Penal Code and Controlled Substances Act produced a series of reforms. Kentucky had been careening upward in rates of incarceration. According to a report published by the Pew Center on the States, the prison population in Kentucky increased 260% from 1985 to 2010. Kentucky was locking up more inmates than the national average, despite having a serious crime rate below the national average.

Kentucky taxpayers were paying dearly for the incarceration rate. Again, according to Pew’s Public Safety Performance Project report “2011 Kentucky Reforms Cut Recidivism, Costs,” imprisonment cost $140 million in 1990. By 2010, that rose to $440 million. Conversely, spending on probation and parole dropped. Between fiscal year 2005 and fiscal year 2009, state spending in that area dropped from $1,191 per offender per year to $961 per offender per year.

HB 463 reversed that course in a big way. Probation, parole and “evidence based” recidivism programs gained ascendance while incarceration was for serious criminals.

The law changed drug laws to differentiate between big drug dealers and “low-risk nonviolent offenders.” Selling small quantities of drugs would no longer trigger longer prison sentences. Serious drug traffikers would get the book thrown at them. Pushers of small quantities would face lower penalties. Some would get counseling, supervision and home incarceration. Penalties were revised downward for drug possession. For example, the Class D felony possession of a controlled substance sentence was reduced from five years to three years.

Prosecutors would have to make different choices for second and third offenses. Automatic enhanced sentencing for repeat drug offenders is out. GPS monitoring, paid for by the offender, and home incarceration with monitoring by probation and parole is in.
The pay-off for the changes? Again, according to Pew, Kentucky taxpayers will save $422 million dollars over ten years. Three thousand fewer inmates will be incarcerated.

A portion of the savings is to go into “evidence-based practices. The percentage increases year by year:

“Beginning July 1, 2012, twenty-five percent (25%) of state moneys expended on supervision and intervention programs for pretrial defendants shall be for programs that are in accordance with evidence-based practices. Beginning July 1, 2014, fifty percent (50%) of state moneys expended on supervision and intervention programs shall be for programs that are in accordance with evidence-based practices. Beginning July 1, 2016 and thereafter, seventy-five percent (75%) of state moneys expended on supervision and intervention programs shall be for programs that are in accordance with evidence-based practices.” HB 463 Section 50, Paragraph 5

To figure out what is working, there will be reports and studies. Reports by the Administrative Office of the Courts on drug court results. Reports will be expected from the Department of Corrections on recidivism, prison populations, offenses and offenders. Reports to the General Assembly, to the judiciary, to the Legislature, to the Task Force.  Lots of someones in lots of someplaces will be evaluating how well the evidence based programs are working.

A portion of the remaining savings is to go to a new local corrections assistance fund to aid local corrections facilities and programs.

Universally hailed as a new day in how the Commonwealth deals with offenders, HB 463 is a work in progress. A new budget just passed the 2014 General Assembly. Success of HB 463 depends a great deal on how the Legislature, so enthused in 2011, will allocate funding to probation and parole. If the budget starves corrections to serve other needs, HB 463’s success may be short-lived. Too often, Kentucky passes reform bills (ala KERA) then fails to properly fund the reform after the first burst of enthusiasm.

Serving as a warning is legislation that would address the growing problem of heroin use. That legislation failed when time ran out for passage. Senator Robert Stivers, now president of the Senate, is reported to be asking the Governor to call a special session to deal with heroin.

HB 463, universally hailed by reformers, is not universally loved by sheriffs, prosecutors and jailers. Those groups reportedly raised alarms that the bill would not reduce expenses as much as shove them downward to the local level. Smaller correction facilities, built during the days of rising jail populations, base their budgets on X number of state prisoners. Those prisoners are no longer coming. The math for small facilities is no longer working.

It will take time for the numbers crunchers to decide whether the present system reduces recidivism or whether the attempt will allow offenders more time to avoid punishment and to keep doing what got them in trouble in the first place.


Printer-friendly format




Do you know someone else who would like to see this?
Your Email:
Their Email:
Comment:
(Will be included with e-mail)
Secret Code

In the box below, enter the Secret Code exactly as it appears above *


 

website hit 
counter
Powered by Bondware
News Publishing Software

The browser you are using is outdated!

You may not be getting all you can out of your browsing experience
and may be open to security risks!

Consider upgrading to the latest version of your browser or choose on below: