Judiciary Committee- House

Today we are in the questioning we are still in the questioning face there will not be any more testimony the testimony was taken last night from everyone who had signed up to speak in our committee we heard all those individuals last night we're not taking anymore testimony today so we are back to. Questioning on the bill. And with that are there any additional questions. That's fine I'll give everybody a minute to get everything opened up look at where they were from last night. And then when you're ready to. Begin again as we indicated last night this is the an important bill and we want to make sure that we have I looked at everything to the satisfaction of this committee so I will take just a minute or two and then we'll begin with questions face person Gazaway I know that it last night you do get cut off a little bit on your presentation is there anything else you want to talk about in your presentation that maybe we didn't cover because you were giving us the. Hello fifty to a hundred thousand foot view is there anything that may be you felt like you needed to come back to today I'll give you that leeway. Thank you madam chair certainly appreciate that we feel like we've done a fairly thorough explanation of the bill. Of course we're happy to answer any questions so but appreciate the opportunity. In college you're recognized for a question. Thank you madam chair so looking to the bill the credits with the the credit surveillance for work practices job responsibilities good behavior involvement in rehabilitative activities I guess I wonder what you guys expect as far as all of that work practices job responsibilities behavior involvement for people with either no credit eligibility or people who've already hit their fifteen percent there in eighty five percent in in that category. Are you asking what incentive they'll have and is that I'm asking what incentive I'll have and I'm asking do you think that they will without the incentive do you think that we will see worse outcomes within the prison with respect to work practices job responsibilities behavior involved in a rear adult tennis activities sure so I think I don't think there's any argument that being able to get out early as a pretty significant incentive for good behavior for certain individuals that said there are other things that class status for inmates impacts it impacted which jobs they can have I'm thinking specifically of the horse barn programs like paws in prison are based on and behavior just eligibility for some of the programming work release three oh nine re entry all of these things are programs and things within the present that are incentive that do not fall into just early release hello please you're recognized for a follow up have you guys looks at the experiences of other prison systems that maybe have done this and whether or not. Either you get a reduction in people taking advantage of what's being offered or. Secondly whether the president becomes in fact more dangerous because you have people who are not incentivized to maintain behavior and so. As far as I know there's not been any of that done to this point however there is a pretty long lead up for implementation purposes before that transition aren't release credits and I would certainly not speak on behalf of the Secretary but I suspect that there will be a lot of a lot of research nine into how to really maximize incentives for those individuals who are not eligible thank you. Per se Hudson you're recognized for a question. He had everything set up the way I wanted it in the other room to have to get situated thank you madam chair I wanted to go through just in in terms of sort of continue our conversation last night we're talking about some of the language income making a little bit sharper and a bit more precise and because I think that it's important to make sure that none of the things that you have put in here water down or and misinterpreted because as you know. Words on the page have meeting when we're talking about code and words that aren't there also have meeting so I wanted to if you could turn to page forty three. And I'm looking and section thirty eight. Dealing with aggravated residential burglary. Fifty hits and did you say page forty three forty three beginning at line ten section thirty eight. And and I know that this is kind of a little thing but at least in code but I think it's relevant to at least bring up so it says that aggravated residential burglary is committed when someone. enters an occupy a bull structure and that is either occupy the occupied structures occupied by another person or here she is armed with a deadly weapon. I'm concerned that the phrase occupy the structure is occupied doesn't adequately fleshed out that that needs to be occupied at the time that the crime is committed. It merely the fact that it is in the vacant house I don't know is necessarily what your intent was especially given the fact that it's then all residential burglaries essentially could be aggravated so I wondered if you could kind of walk us through that a little bit. So I appreciate the question so my I mean I'm gonna give you my perspective on it I think there is a very distinct difference between an occupy bill structure and the structure that is occupied by another person and occupy bill structure is just one that it is Capel being occupied that people live in and I've talked structure that is occupied is one that someone is actually in at the time and so I think there's a very clear difference between those two Those two phrases. You're recognized for a follow up. In that respect that I think that we're both as we both agree that it should be occupied at the time of the crime is that something that you'd be willing to clarify it so it just says at the time. The crime was committed or you know whatever fancy code language that we use. Well so I understand your I understand your point to me it reads very clearly the residential occupy bill structure is occupied by another person as a means to me that that seems to be pretty clear and you occupy will structure is as to suppose a term of art that's already used in the specific code section so. I'll certainly take it under consideration but my initial instinct is that it that doesn't need an amendment but I will I would certainly consider. Members any other questions representing the call you're recognized for a question. Thank you madam chair behaviors that reduce recidivism are defined in the bill is education workforce community service and behavioral health are these types of programs giving given any new funding or prior organization within the criminal justice system. Can you point me to which exact page I think that that I think is a page ninety seven and page one sixteen. I'm sorry could you repeat that Pitsch more time sure ninety seven and one sixteen. Members when you're asking a question if you're looking at something with this bill being the size let's make it let's try to reference the page I think that'll help everybody thank you I'm so sorry is there a line number I'm looking at one sixteen and I'm just not seeing. Say it could be. You know maybe one fourteen and one. That could be it okay. So the this specifically the sections are dealing with the offender violation guide we kind of discussed last night that as a consequence of prison sentence is getting a little bit longer and potentially well the length of stay getting longer an actual prison sentences perhaps indeed shortening that's going to have the effect of shortening at lessening our caseloads for a probation and parole officers so in some ways there's going to be a little bit of additional support given their there's also sections of the bill that require the secretary to have a doctoral level employee review all of this programming so there won't be any I don't know that there's any additional direct funding however through the review that's done by this doctoral level employee or contractor if they're unable to secure a dedicated employee to the process there will be an opportunity to really take the funding for programming that doesn't work as well and shift that to programs and classes that we know do in fact reduce recidivism. You're recognized for a follow up thank you madam chair so there is there's no guarantee that this person is going to be founder hired the doctoral person they actually already have a doctoral and. She's not a candidate a PhD who does work for the department who has started this process kind of in anticipation of this legislation coming. President Clinton you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair this is just going to be back on representative McCall's question but that's about the programs that are available while people are still incarcerated so I know right now a lot of these programs are not able to be accessed I'm hearing that a lot of these programs are able to be accessed until people are very very close to the release stated for looking at these early release credits you know for the I'm looking at page sixty seven for instance right just the the. Programs that they can participate in while incarcerated to earn those release credits. is there any assurance or can you can you talk to me a little bit about when in the term this program will be available will that will will incarcerate people be able to take advantage of those from day one what we know about that. again I'm not speaking on behalf of the secretary or the department as a whole I can just tell you that you know kind of there's gonna be a really holistic approach taken as to evaluating where and in what part of the process all of this needs to be done and those decisions haven't been made because there is eighteen months before those decisions have to be really put into place and I know everybody wants to be really intentional about how those decisions are made so that we make the right decision follows you're recognized so okay so just quickly I guess I would just like to register my concern and and you know it moving forward can I just count on you all to make sure that those those programs you in that role making process that we can make sure that those programs are available early on early on enough in terms of that they do make a difference when it comes to those aren't release credits thanks. Represent Collins you're recognized for a question. Thank you madam chair so one of the things in this bill that I think is really good is the investment in specialty court's you talked about that and I think you mentioned four point five million dollars for that which seems like that is you know a reasonable amount to get those expanded I don't think that that is in our essay I'm curious what is the funding mechanism and are we confident that that's going to be funded is that something that we hope will be funded or what's the level of assurance we have that that will actually happen. Well if that's not an or say you know I'd I'm disappointed to hear that my understanding when we prepared the bill. And worked on the bill that that was if this is an important component of the bill everyone recognized in that there would be funding for that we in a very intentionally. asked a the administrative office of the course to prepare proposal as to what it would take to expand specialty court's they submitted that that was a given all the stakeholders who were involved in my understanding was approved this language has been a part of this bill for a long time since we've been working on the bill or at least part of the conversation now I don't know exactly when it got added to the bill but certainly specially courts have been a part of this conversation for months that we've been having it and my understanding is that is going to be funded so that's not funded in RSA and I haven't reviewed that yeah if you're telling me that that funding is not in our state everyone I'm very disappointed to learn that. And number two I would have the same questions you because we're gonna put the language in the bill then we need to fund it. And so I agree with you. Thank you for staying Crawford you're recognized for a question. Thank you madam chair. I guess my first question is. In on page two where rape is considered a felony. If you will kind of walk through this with me. What if. It's just a girl and a guy they've been out drinking. Things went a little too far. And. Is that. Going to be a felony for a first time offense in in that type situation is that all right so I mean I know one. On page twenty nine Page four it talks about forcible compulsion. But to be a felony on page two it just says rate. Can you help me with that. And so rate in all instances is already a felony if that's how it's charged and convicted it's a Class Y. felony and it's already a seventy percent crime under existing law so I don't believe this is a substantial departure from just thought portion in addition there's some mandatory minimums that have been set out in statute for some period of time of rape of a child under fourteen has a mandatory minimum of twenty five years so I just I don't. I hope that answers the question and I'm really sorry if it doesn't maybe someone else can weigh in on the kind of evidentiary issues to that. Yes thank you for the question representative Crawford so. I mean the particular conduct you described ultimately these are very fact specific situations and so the specific conduct you that you described it is going to have to be evaluated by law enforcement have to be evaluated by the prosecutor ultimately to determine number one if there were charges that are even appropriate if criminal charges are appropriate the first place and then number two what those if they were appropriate what those charges would be the conduct may not rise the level of rate depending on the circumstances and again that these are very fact specific situations and scenarios that have to be evaluated on a case by case basis so. You're given kind of that hypothetical it's hard for me to say exactly how person be charged but. To miss road point about the crime of rape in existing law that is currently a seventy percent. Role eligibility crime so if you're convicted of rape now in Arkansas you have to serve seventy percent of your sentence before you're eligible for the to be released if the rape involved a minor under the age of fourteen the minimum sentence in addition to having to serve seventy percent the minimum sentence is twenty five years now the particular portion the of the bill that you referenced was siding existing law and this is from a statute that we passed I think last session actually which says that if the defendant is eighteen years old and the victim was less than fourteen and we're talking about rape that involves forcible compulsion this was a bill that was ran by representative Josh Miller that is an automatic life sentence all those things have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt you know number one that the victim was under fourteen that it was rape by forcible compulsion if those but those things are proven in this is existing law this is anything that were changing that's an automatic life sentence of there there are already very high penalties written into the law with regard to rate but again as far as the evidentiary standard these are very fact specific they're evaluated on a case by case basis to determine if there are charges appropriate and if so what those charges would be thank you I have more do you want me to go ahead you know that I don't have anybody after you right now so go ahead okay I don't have the specific okay Page but we talked last night about people. Having a hundred and twenty days to pay their fines except in the case of restitution. And my question was how if they see if they don't have a job that's why they're not paying their fines then what is. What are you gonna expect or the court to expect out of someone who doesn't have a job yet to immediately start paying the restitution. And if that doesn't happen then the way this is set up they go back they serve the rest of that sentence plus what they've been charged with union so. So existing law provides that all of that is done immediately and less otherwise authorized by the court so the court even in this scenario would have the opportunity to say that they had some time to to get back on their feet I think a lot of times on orders you'll see that payments are to begin thirty days after release from the ATC this just pushes that out at least for fines and fees to say that it's a hundred and twenty days and like I said an existing lights it's immediately unless the court sets out a different option okay and I understand existing law and all that I think what. What is concerning me as this is no misdemeanor it is your down the river with a felony through most of this in my last question is on page five line two. Just for clarification remember I'm not an attorney and I don't know the law so these are just questions that I came up at asking. On the and lawful discharge of a firearm from a vehicle in the first degree I understand the reasoning for that. So first degree is probably you guys can answer my question and that that if that were. A hunter a hunter or something in that is it just are you after the gang related activity type stuff is that what this is about. Absolutely so if you look at the at the unlawful discharge of a firearm from a vehicle statute. Per person commits unlawful discharge of a firearm from a vehicle in the first degree if he or she knowingly discharges a firearm from a vehicle in by the discharge the firearm causes death or serious physical injury to another person this typically charge and drive by shootings okay so that's a yeah that's one way to committed there is a second degree version of it which is a recklessly discharges a firearm from a vehicle in a manner that creates a substantial risk that physical injury to another person or property damage to the home residents or other I compatible structure once again these are it's really intended to catch the drive by shootings that's the only scenario where I've seen it charged and in my experience I was a prosecutor. Yeah that's what that's referring to okay and I probably missed it since I was a few minutes late but did you guys talk about that negligent homicide before okay. We were talking about that yet okay when you're ready all right thank you represent McCauley recognized for a question thank you madam chair I want to get this on page seventy three seventy four. Want to go back to the the specially courts and ask a question about that I know here that to. Special courts are authorized to hire qualified attorneys and qualified treatment providers is this a true expansion of these types of court. So yes I believe that it is you you have to understand in part and I'm not saying that you don't but. Some understanding of how these courts operate they don't operate as a traditional court but they have a team. that's in its design toward again treatment and rehabilitation and the team consists of a lot of different members but you have the treatment professionals that are involved in so part of that that you reference Not. The additional. Funding for I'm sorry which one was it the qualified treatment provider. That's on my page seventy forms or. The professional service contract with a qualified treatment provider again these are gonna be people are going to be part of the team they're there to help the people help the people enrolled in drug court to get the treatment that they need to break their addiction and this will it be able to expand the team so that they can take on more people have more people in the program and and again ultimately treat more people into for more people from prison so that is the goal there. Representative clan you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair this is just kind in the same manner as representative Crawford's question earlier I'm looking at page three line eleven AM that makes fleeing one of those one hundred percent offenses and I just wanna make sure that I have this right so splitting if it if a Class B. felony which because as I think results in serious physical injury and and is done by means of vehicle or conveyance can you just talk to me a little bit about what conveyance means in other words will this apply to somebody who has fled on foot because you know. They're having some sort of mental health episode or something like that. Basically I know we start a lot of questions with I'm no lawyer but I actually I am a lawyer and I don't know conveyance means is asking for help that. I've. Thank you representative to answer your question it would it would it would be a vehicle and and now it would not apply to somebody who fled on foot so yeah and let me let me follow up on that I mean I think conveyance means typically where I've seen it used in other contexts any motorized conveyance so as not you not this the chaplain a motor vehicle which has a very specific definition but if you're playing on a four Wheeler for feet playing on some other motorized conveyance motorcycle what have you that that poses the risk of death or serious physical injury to people in the process that's that's the fleeing specifically they were referring to the Class B. felony version which is there is fleeing on foot that's a Class C. misdemeanor so this specifically refers to fleeing if a class B. felony in the Class B. felony language we make sure I got that. Is it serious I'm sorry if serious physical injury to any person occurs as a direct result of fleeing by means of any vehicle or conveyance. so that's what you're gonna have to have in order to qualify under this section is not fleeing on foot thank you. Person because you're recognized for a question. Thank you madam chair represent guys where I want to circle back to a conversation we kind of started last night when you're saying you know that one of the benefits to this was incapacitation of people and when I was trying to get at when I was talking about you know whether people are on rehabilitative all war we need to stop the revolving door other things other rhetoric that's been used ultimately most everybody is going to be getting out even under your system here I mean even if you commit a Class A. or or Y. felony unless you get live you it or you committed at a later point in life which is fairly unlikely for some of these severe violent crimes but possible usually you get out so why are we letting people out if we believe they are so you your redeemable that we need to keep them away from society I guess I'm asking will you make the case for under your system letting people out because we do let them out of your system. I I mean I think all of the offenses that we've we recognized here eligible for release at some point the vast majority of offenses there over a thousand felony offenses in the Arkansas criminal code we only set out eighteen that a person has to serve one hundred percent of their sentence now one hundred percent or cents may not be the maximum statutory time that the sentence allows so if the sentence maximum statutory time allowed by the senses twenty years not everyone's going to get twenty years. It again out of the. Out of the south over a thousand felony offenses that we recognized in the code there's only eighteen of in which I would argue are the most severe the most heinous and the ones I think the majority of people in the state of Arkansas would expect that people will serve one hundred percent of the time that they're given for but absolutely with regard the other offenses you know people are at think it's fair to look at people as irredeemable and that they don't have inherent worth and value and and able to contribute meaningfully to society I think that they I thank all human beings do and can and we hope that they do and so at some point they should be eligible for release absolutely but again do the ones that were more severely restricting the eligibility for release for are the most serious and heinous offenses that we recognize in Arkansas law the violent offenses in the sexual offenses involving children those people are going to have to do a bulk of their sense I don't see the unfairness and that. Thank you purpose representative Scott you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair representative Gazaway on page ninety four it talks about An inmate has to wait an additional year before being able to re apply for the pardon clemency is this the same or a conflict with representative Beatty's bill. So we just got a few different things okay so I just got to page ninety four and can you point me to where you're referring to. What line representative Scott. Just. Ninety fours seventy four. B. seventy four I just took notes last night and brought him down so I might have the wrong number okay so what exactly referring to because I'm sure I can find okay so what I'm referring to is there is an additional year before being able to apply to re apply for a pardon and I'm asking is this and conflict or the same language from representative Beatty's bill and I'm I apologize I got that page number. Are you referencing representative Beatty's bill that provides for pardons with hazardous yes ma'am so that adds additional information additional limits and I don't think it's not the same but I also don't think it's in conflict okay so. Represent Richardson you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair of resent Gazaway I'm looking and I know that we're talking about you know making people to a hundred percent of the time in in the expansion of three thousand bids do you I don't see it in here and I'm sure it at some point my question is regarding privatizing prisons where do you see that playing into this legislation. So if I can just tell you that's not been a part of the discussion at let's certainly not any meaningful part of the discussion. the expansion of the three thousand beds it's been discussed you don't have people call me you know we're we're is this going to happen where where where might these be located I don't have any idea and you know frankly that's not really my concern I think that's something that will come later they'll probably be I don't know request for proposals and various other request that are put out to try to locate that in in an area that would be appropriate and then in terms of the private prisons I mean that's something that me personally I've not been a fan of I think that's ultimately questions for the department and whether they want that to be an option on the table will be something for them it's not a part of this bill it's not anything that I'm advocating for and again has not really been any meaningful part of the discussion it's not something I see happening personally but Yeah I just that is really has been a lot of discussion about that. Represent Clowney recognized for a question thank you madam chair. I'm. King at page twenty one now and this whole section before that has to do with intermediate sanctions. I noticed there was a line that says let's see we're on page twenty one line for so intermediate sanctions can result according to this can result in an incarceration. but it says that an offender subject to an intermediate sanction does not have the right to an attorney at the intermediate sanction hearing so we incarcerating people without them having the right to counsel and if so why can you speak on that a little bit please. This is actually actually language that's ported over from existing statute as you mentioned these are intermediate sanctions they're done in lieu of a revocation there's pretty short terms they're really put in place to provide some immediate feedback to the offender and like I said it's all this is language that exist in other parts of existing statute this is this section we talked about where it's kind of in three places because it needs to apply to pro probation parole and to this post release supervision. Follow up you're recognized thank you madam chair and and I appreciate that it's an existing code I'm just kind of curious as a policy matter why we're comfortable in this instance putting people in prison without the right to counsel. And so I will say that immediately below it does say that they have the right to consult with an attorney and I'm not going to pontificate on why that policy decision was made I think in twenty seventeen as part of of of. Reform bill but all that represented Gazaway kind of follow up on his end yeah and I just think you know become more to your point that we're talking about an intermediate sanction here it is kind of similar to the current parole revocation I mean these are not parole is kind of a. Really a privilege that we're letting people out who maybe not should otherwise be out parole is not right and so we have a parole revocation hearing there's not the same due process requirements that would apply in other context don't applying parole revocations because you're you've already been sentenced and convicted you were in the department of correction you were let out kind of I mean that they put this way because of by on the grace of had those people at the department of corrections it's not a right they're letting you out early they didn't have to. And with they go to bring you back in the same due process requirements that you would have saved a trial as to whether or not you were guilty or innocent and it sentencing it during the trial the same due process requirements don't apply at a parole revocation hearing for instance and the same thing similar to an intermediate sanction this is not the same type of proceeding that would carry with it all the same due process requirements that a trial would because you're at a different stage of of the criminal process okay then add to that. Represent Collins you're recognized for a question. Thank you and we talked a little about this awhile ago but so what happens in this bill if someone is sentenced to the statutory maximum generally they're getting post release supervision but I understand that they can't get it tell me if I'm wrong but they can't get post release supervision that they serve their statutory maximum on a hundred percent sentence is this right and and if so do we is there any opportunity for them to have post release supervision which actually might think would be a good thing if someone is serving time has been in there a long time under very severe felony is there anyway to get that kind of service to them. And you are correct that if they get the statutory maximum size term of imprisonment in there on one of those hundred percent offenses there is not an option for post release supervision on there just because we have laws that say that you can't sentence somebody to more than the statutory maximum I I mean I agree with you as a matter of policy that ideally that would be something that happened less often and and there's of course always options for S. I. S. at least if maybe there's something that has a higher felony Class that they could be sentenced to a longer term of S. I. S. but I hope that answers your question. Yeah just but to follow up on that I mean I think she said correctly but that would be if you can't exceed the statutory maximum and and so you are truly limited there in your ability to impose any type of post release supervision when someone has been sentenced to the statutory maximum sentence. I mean would it be a constitutional violation to do so so you we really can't do that I think what you see in practice a lot of times for cases where that happened yes people typically are just charged with one crime they typically have several and so what you'll see is that they may get stacked statutory maximum one one offense and they'll get a suspended imposition of sentence on the other offense may run consecutive to their their sentence of imprisonment so that when they are released there on some form of there on some conditions of good behavior if you will and there is at least they may not be direct supervision but there is some means with which to hold those people continue holding people accountable. Represent Hudson you're recognized for a question. Thank you madam chair I just want to follow up on a couple of things that that you've discussed with some of the other members going back to what representive Crawford was saying earlier about the treatment of rape on the one hundred percent on page twenty one. Thirty four I thank. Thank you. She raised a good point about these Romeo and Juliet situation where we'd be treating. an offender who you know maybe got his girlfriend's dad really mad and got him charged with rape because he's friends with the prosecutor friends with the judge or whatever and and I just wonder what what is the typical charge for those Romeo and Juliet situations and is there any way to carve that out I just I hate to treat those the same way we are kind of the same thing with with with these hardened criminals. So that that's it that's a great point and and thanks for bringing it up so there are if you will Romeo and Juliet exceptions built into the law already that provide defenses in those cases and I can't I don't have the specific section I'm sure Mister Cooper he per visit memorized so he'll probably quoted for you here in just a second but there's basically inspect entire section the criminal code devoted to. We probably need to look at it going forward because it's when you start looking at all the sexual offenses there all these different ages and you know some say sixteen and some say fourteen and and then there's the statute that creates all the the Romeo Juliet exceptions if you will but typically it's if the offenders not more than three years older and some in most instances then that's not considered a criminal offense or there's a there's a defense to that conduct in some cases I think it may be five more than five years older. It's been awhile since I've looked that statue like I said I'm sure Mister Cooper can quoted for you but those things are already typically the Romeo Juliet scenarios are exempted. Rob. Criminality now I you know I personally prosecuted a case where. I think it was eighteen or nineteen year old and a fourteen year old. And Commission may been thirteen but he was convicted have been thirteen he was convicted of rape and once again it's a seventy percent crime and because of his age because of her age even though he was relatively youthful the minimum sentence was twenty five years and seventy percent time it's eighteen years so that's a and that's how it works under existing law we have people that are closer in age there are defenses that are available for that knowledge Mister Cooper from the AG's office respond. Thank you representative I've. And just just so I can try to address your your your question representive heights and Each of the each of the decisions on what to charge is fact intensive I do take exception to because I knew the prosecutor the judge. Each the prosecutors in the state have one job and one job only that's and you do justice and I can tell you they take it very seriously. The A Romeo and Juliet seven scenario would not be rape and and in that scenario what you're still going to have to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt is the forcible compulsion aspect or one of the other criteria for rape itself. It's it's not a it went too far kind of thing not not typically anyway again that would have to be looked at by law enforcement looked at by the prosecutor's office and then ultimately tried to a jury where they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Richey had to do you need to follow up then representative Scott you're recognized. Thank you ma'am thank you madam chair. Okay I think this is my final question representative Gazaway so I'm pretty sure you know where I stand on this bill but there are some things that I really like about as far as the fine suspension for a hundred and twenty days of the female bonding with the child I really like that the dog program I wish they could be expanded to the beyond just children the collaboration with other state agencies I think my concern is two questions maybe safety of our personnel in the prisons because it looks like with us transitioning to this hundred percent eighty five percent that you're going to have inmates there who when I talked to just people who work at the prison for seven years breaks a person twelve years institutionalize the person is so when they get to that point to where they're hopeless and I think im pei sixty seven we're talking about the programs that they can kind of go through if there is no the hundred percent centers because they're gonna have to come back into society at some point but they're limited on what they'll be able to have access to I think according to what I heard last night they're not going to be prohibited but they're limited to what they're going to have access to I'm concerned about the culture we're going to create in the present and I know we ask all about did you have research about you know these people doing longer sentences and what is going to do as far as violence or the culture of the prison so I think my other question is the price tag how much is all this going to cost. Talk about those are my those are my concerns right now. And so I think I was the one who answered the question about availability of programming last night so I'm. Really apologize if I misstated something these the people who have to do a hundred percent are still going to get to the programming so I don't want to to have ever indicated that they're going to be excluded from programming because they have to serve a hundred percent again they're just going to not be able to earn credits for it against their sentence thank your next question was about cost The parole the changes in release eligibility and kind of start. You're one twenty three thousand dollars because there will be one offender impacted again that's based on date of offense so that's going to it's going to start stocking it's a hundred and sixty three million dollars over ten years I think you'll probably have this printed on green paper that was put together by a consultant who works out of state and I'm going to be completely honest and tell you that her Microsemi elation model is above my head but I'm happy to get information about how exactly those determinations were made and. As far as the it incentive in the safety of officers I I don't have a specific answer to that but I can say there are a lot of states that require inmates to serve a hundred percent on at least some offenses so it's it's certainly something the department can look at and I just practices represent representative Scott you're recognized for follow up. Last follow up I think I'll address this last night but I forgot because we were here for the long. This actually takes place January twenty twenty for the hundred percent for the hundred the people they're gonna have to do the hundred percent so if they are caught up in the justice system right now with the prosecutors trying to negotiate stuff they are going to fall under this possibly if. How what is that transition look like I guess for people from the date that this bill passes their emergency clause on it there's no emergency calls representative so anytime you change somebody's release eligibility it's gonna be based on the date of offense so this isn't going to apply to anybody who doesn't commit their offense after January first twenty twenty four for those hundred percent crimes and then January one twenty twenty five for everything else okay thank you. Representative. Crawford and members we have about five more minutes and they were going to have to recess so people can get to their other committee meetings and we will come back to this room at noon so represent Crawford you're recognized for a question thank you madam chair can you lead me to the page where we talk about minors and let's talk about those do you know where that is a. So and I'll tell you that large portions of the fair sentencing minors act or not in this bill because they are mostly not amended so I can tell you specifically that if you're looking at the engrossed version. if you're looking at the engrossed version on page seven at the very bottom starting on line thirty four you're gonna see references to the fair sentencing and miners Act. All this provision says is that effectively if you were a minor when you committed your offense you are eligible on the earlier of the date provided for in this act or the fair sentencing and miners Act. Which provides for release opportunity at twenty twenty five or thirty years kind of depending on the circumstances of the offense. Okay I'm probably gonna ask loaded questions but I'm gonna ask it anyway. I've been working with some people one of the bill. Where we're talking about brain science. And we're talking about that at the age of. Well they say now that it that the frontal cortex of your brain is not form to your twenty five with my son it was thirty that so they're kind of wanting to go back and look at that to possibly change. The law. To where if you're under twenty one. So I guess that loaded question is. What the because I haven't. Had time to study it you can read it but you need to study this. So can you help me. Will that ever happen I mean once this is laid out and everything is set in stone when it comes to minors would there ever be any room for change. So me say this this bill really does not concern minors at all except for. The specific portions that miss row referenced and in the ways that it does reference minors it only helps minors so they get out the earlier of if this bill changes things that would affect a minor in a way that would benefit them that would enable them to get out earlier this bill controls if under the existing law the fair sentencing of miners Act if under that law they would get out earlier than they would under a provision in this bill the fair sentencing of miners Act controls so other than that we really didn't address juveniles and minors in this bill I understand the bill that you're talking about or I don't know that you guys filed the bill but. I've I've heard from some of those same folks who are kind of part of that movement I think that's a conversation we can have another time I'm not saying that there are valid points and there are things that to be considered but I just think that's a conversation for another day all right thank you represent Richardson you're recognized for the last question. Thank you madam chair of so back to representative Scott's of questions she's talking about how long a person is incarcerated in the the help that's needed or that they get when is an inmate eligible to receive those benefits so that programming or whatever the term you guys use some incarcerated when do I begin to start getting some of that programming some of that help. That is a really fact specific questions I can tell you that there's considerations like availability class status of the inmate obviously and I I think that's a really difficult question to answer and in big terms except to just say that it's really looked at holistically and that thank you the place inmates in the programming and you know the order that it needs to be done and just based on resources and what they need to move on to the next portion of their rehabilitation. In the following yes ma'am okay Arkansas eight if you want no okay let's get it done now but we're getting. So you saying that there's it you don't really know when an individual can begin. This programming that's all for doing based in. We don't know and based on availability of resources that are located inside the facility well they get it risk needs assessment and I think that that's a big part of it I I would I don't work in a prison I don't you know work in their programming specifically so I don't want to give an answer specifically I just know that it is it's really looked out as a big pictures part of availability of the programming right we don't have seventeen thousand beds for every pro isn't. Of Mr is there something I can S. the department when we come back possibly sure okay yeah R. I. T. what represent Richardson you can ask them offline I mean the department will be here I'm sure I'm going to ask the folks who are back in the back of the room stick around for a little while also of committee members have something that maybe they can ask they can ask at that point in time all right members we are now to the point that we have got to get over to other committee meetings we will we are going to recess and we will come back at noon now we're we don't have any food so. You're on your own representive Underwood this room right here this the yes room one thirty representive Underwood. Find you some food. That's an inside joke he missed the misty was to speak couldn't roll back fast enough for pizza last night. All right folks with them we are in recess.