Bills: HB154, HB153, HB180, SB70

Keywords: veterans affairs, Alabama Department of Veterans Affairs, State Board of Veterans Affairs, commissioner, governor appointment, board advisory, veteran service organizations, veterans homes, veterans cemeteries, veteran service officers, district managers, state veterans home trust fund, veterans benefits, military veterans, disabled veterans, elderly veterans, active-duty service members, state agency reorganization, executive authority, governance reform

Bills: HB414, HB457, HB475, HB611, HB616, HB740, HB897, HB925, HB926, HB931, HB949, HB962, HB1076

Keywords: healthcare, criminal convictions, employment, background checks, prohibited offenses, homelessness, homeless shelter, emergency shelter, transitional housing, group home, halfway house, shelter standards, housing standards, sanitation, habitability, fire marshal, inspection, local permitting, parish government, Louisiana Department of Health

Transcript Highlights:

• committed in 1994 and after, instead requiring the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry

Bills: HB2028, HB2047, HB2136, HB2244, HB2364, HB2406, HB2415, HB2557, HB2573, HB2589, HB2720, HB2749, HB2825, HB2861, HB2862, HB2870, HB2970, HB4070, HB4117, HCR2004, HCR2051

Keywords: community restitution, homelessness, indigence, court assessments, monetary obligations, forcible entry, detainer, writ of restitution, criminal trespass, judgment enforcement, civil terrorism, disorderly conduct, vandalism, political activism, public order, subversion, government security, evictions, judgment satisfaction, tenant rights

Summary: The committee first heard HB 2825, which would replace criminal enforcement tools for nonpayment of fines, fees, restitution, and related obligations with a civil collection process. Supporters, including the sponsor, argued it would streamline restitution collection and reduce costly incarceration, while opponents from victims’ rights groups, judges, and prosecutors said it would weaken victims’ constitutional rights and remove effective enforcement leverage. The chair adopted an amendment requiring a summons and clarifying that victims’ constitutional remedies are preserved, and the committee passed the bill 5-2. The committee then considered HB 4070, which would bar corporations from incorporating if an officer, director, or trustee had been convicted of sex or human trafficking, and would extend civil liability to those who facilitate trafficking. Supporters framed it as a “corporate death penalty” aimed at preventing trafficking through corporate governance, while the ACLU warned the facilitation language was vague and could sweep too broadly. After adopting the chair’s amendment defining “facilitate,” the committee passed the bill 5-2. The committee also unanimously recommended confirmation of Neil McDowell to the Arizona Board of Executive Clemency after hearing his background in corrections and his plans to review cases thoroughly and efficiently. Next, HB 2720 was heard, which would raise penalties for paying or agreeing to pay for sexual conduct, add a $200 assessment for the anti-human trafficking fund, and allow certain sex-trafficking victims convicted of prostitution to seal vacated records. Supporters, including law enforcement, prosecutors, and survivor advocates, said it would deter demand and help victims; opponents argued it could still sweep in trafficking victims and lacked sufficient safeguards. The committee passed the bill 4-3. The committee also heard HB 2028, a strike-everything amendment allowing community restitution in lieu of a $20 assessment for indigent homeless defendants, and HB 2047, which would increase trespass penalties for remaining in or returning to property after an eviction writ; both were discussed but no final vote is reflected in the transcript excerpt. Additional bills were introduced and heard later in the meeting, including HB 2136, which would create new offenses for “civil terrorism” and “subversion” and increase penalties for certain highway obstruction; the ACLU opposed it as viewpoint discrimination. HB 2406 would make images and recordings of abused children and deceased minors confidential and restrict dissemination and monetization; the sponsor said it was intended to prevent re-victimization and misuse of public records, while defense-side speakers asked for clearer access for defense teams. HB 2415 would tighten regulation of kratom products and specifically target concentrated 7-OH products; testimony sharply split between supporters who described public-health risks and opponents who said prohibition would harm consumers who use it for pain or recovery. The transcript ends before any final action on those later bills is shown.

Bills: HR73, HR272, HR273, HR278, HCR91, HCR99, HCR100, HCR111, HB255, HB261, HB328, HB378, HB479, HB517, HB564, HB778, HB1090, SB135, SB278, SB448

Keywords: domestic abuse, protective orders, victim protection, Louisiana State Law Institute, mandatory procedures, parental discipline, corporal punishment, child abuse, cruelty to juveniles, juvenile delinquency, juvenile justice, child welfare, DCFS, Office of Juvenile Justice, reasonable discipline, parental rights, family law, law enforcement reports, abuse allegations, single-parent households

Summary: The Criminal Justice Committee met on May 19, 2026, with a long agenda and several members’ bills and resolutions. The committee first considered HB 255, as substituted, which would add up to two years of imprisonment for a person charged with a felony or rioting offense who wore a mask or face covering to evade identification, with exceptions for religious coverings, motorcycles, and medical use. Supporters said it targeted concealment during felonies; the ACLU opposed it as redundant and potentially overbroad, while the Louisiana District Attorneys Association clarified the enhancement would apply only to felony convictions. The committee adopted the substitute and reported HB 255 favorably by a vote of 8-3. It then advanced HB 378, which creates penalties for using a vehicle to obstruct first responders and law enforcement; after an amendment narrowed the bill to first responders, it was reported favorably. HB 1090, increasing penalties for arson of a religious building, also passed favorably after testimony emphasizing attacks on houses of worship. HR 272, requesting a study on parental discipline, abuse allegations, and juvenile delinquency, was reported favorably as well. The committee also heard HB 479, the Fiscal Truth and Sentencing Act, which would require more detailed reporting on incarceration costs and sentencing impacts. Supporters, including the ACLU, said the bill would improve transparency and help lawmakers make better fiscal decisions; clerks of court opposed it as an unfunded mandate. Despite amendments shifting reporting duties and clarifying compliance with Children’s Code Article 412, the bill failed on a 4-7 roll call. The committee then deferred HCR 99 and took up HR 278, which asks the Attorney General to consult stakeholders and review electronic monitoring laws and regulations; supporters described serious failures in the current GPS monitoring system, and the resolution was reported favorably. HR 273, creating a task force to study work release programs, was also reported favorably after members said it would help refine the system and gather cost data. Later, the committee heard SB 448 on the Office of the State Public Defender. After discussion of a recent Supreme Court ruling and concerns about expert-witness funding and indigency determinations, the committee adopted an amendment adding a contradictory-hearing process and appellate review protections, then reported the bill as amended. HCR 100, concerning casino property sales, was amended to remove specific property references and instead urge the Gaming Control Board to consider economic development, job creation, and community benefit; the casino association withdrew opposition after the amendment, and the resolution was reported favorably as amended. The committee also voluntarily deferred SB 278 and HCR 91. HB 261, which would create exceptions to abortion laws for rape and certain sex offenses, drew extensive emotional testimony from supporters and opponents, including survivors and legislators discussing rape, incest, and fetal life; the bill was defeated 2-10. Finally, the committee took up HB 778 on kratom possession, with the author arguing for a distinction between natural kratom and synthetic products, and supporters and opponents offering conflicting testimony about safety, addiction recovery, and regulation.

Transcript Highlights:

• We provide more case management and reentry services.
• So we no longer have reentry navigators.
• So we no longer have reentry navigators.
• And actually, we used to have more training on reentry when we had our reentry navigator.
• We used to have more training on reentry when we had our reentry navigators in place.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Correctional Consolidation and Collaboration met on June 15 with co-chairs Senator Will Brownsberger and Representative Dan Hunt. After deciding not to approve prior meeting summary notes at this session, the commission heard testimony from the Massachusetts Parole Officers Association (Brian Lucier and Shauna Hawksley). They described parole officers’ work in both institutions and the community, including housing, mental health, substance use, employment, education, and benefits referrals, and argued that parole officers often know local service providers best. They also said the former reentry navigator positions were lost in 2025 and that regional reentry centers used in the past helped reduce duplication and improve information sharing; they urged more funding, staffing, and training, and said parole should be better integrated with MPTC/POST training and with community-based reentry resources. Commission members asked about the relationship between parole and Community Justice Support Centers, training and arrest authority, revocation practices, and coordination with sheriffs and the Department of Correction. The witnesses said CJSC access is limited by location, transportation, and scheduling, while parole’s older reentry centers were referral-based and did not require regular attendance. They also said parole officers are special state police officers with arrest authority, receive a parole-specific academy plus firearms/defensive tactics/first responder training, and would benefit from more formal reentry training. On revocations, they said they lacked data but believed parole now returns fewer people for mental health or first-time substance use issues and focuses more on public safety threats. They also said collaboration with sheriffs and DOC reentry staff is generally good but still suffers from duplicative referrals and last-minute changes that can undo work done inside facilities. After testimony, the commission discussed next steps, including extending its reporting deadline from September 30 to November 30 through the pending budget, finishing remaining DOC facility visits in the fall, and holding additional meetings on mental health and other unresolved issues. Members also discussed whether to seek more input from the judiciary and district attorneys, with agreement to continue outreach and document responses. The meeting ended with a motion to adjourn, and the commission indicated it would reconvene in the fall.

Transcript Highlights:

• And when you look at reentry, and I'm very proud to say this, okay, reentry started in Massachusetts
• And when you look at reentry, and I'm very proud to say this, okay, reentry started in Massachusetts
• One of the reasons sheriffs have been so consistent around reentry, the philosophy around reentry.
• But you can imagine civil process, local reentry.
• they're operating the local reentry centers and so forth.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission opened an informal discussion focused on developing recommendations for its September report on correctional consolidation and cooperation. Chairs Dan Hunt and Senator Brownsberger emphasized that the group is still in an information-gathering phase, but should begin putting ideas on the table, including possible written recommendations, further hearings, and additional facility tours. Members discussed whether the commission should seek more input from frontline stakeholders such as sheriffs, probation, parole, reentry centers, unions, and the judiciary, and whether recommendations should be organized around specific issue areas like medical costs, programming, reentry, and facility operations. A major theme was the need for a more integrated and consistent correctional system. Participants raised concerns about fragmentation across DOC, county sheriffs, probation, and parole, and suggested exploring step-down pathways, minimum security, pre-release, day reporting, and regional reentry hubs to improve outcomes and reduce recidivism. Several speakers stressed the importance of uniform standards, evidence-based programming, better data on outcomes and spending, and clearer alignment between custody conditions and rehabilitation goals. There was also discussion of looking to other states and international models, as well as revisiting older reports and plans, including the 2009 commission report and the 2010 corrections master plan. Facility-specific issues were also raised, including the need to examine women’s facilities such as Framingham, Bridgewater, and restrictive housing practices in light of suicide concerns and mental health needs. Members discussed the relationship between correctional custody and behavioral health, the role of the judiciary in sentencing and reentry planning, and whether judges should be better informed about available programming and step-down options. There was broad agreement that collaboration, transparency, and accountability should be strengthened, with some members urging that recommendations be based on firsthand facts and data rather than opinion alone. The meeting also included presentation of a written set of eight high-level recommendations compiled by advocacy and legal organizations, which focused on clearer and more consistent programming, equitable application of rules, and reducing punitive conditions that function like solitary confinement. The chairs said the document would be shared with members and posted online. No formal votes were taken during the discussion, and the meeting ended with plans to continue the conversation at a future session, including possible follow-up on reentry centers, restrictive housing, and other systemwide reforms.

Transcript Highlights:

• Reentry preparation.
• We had no reentry planning.
• Like ACC had reentry. We had, in 2014 in Norfolk, created a reentry fair in the gym, right?
• Like ACC had reentry. We had, in 2014 in Norfolk, we created a reentry fair in the gym, right?
• And everybody likes to use the word reentry. But what is reentry? What does it encompass?

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Correctional Consolidation and Collaboration met at 10:07 a.m. and approved the minutes from its February 9 meeting. The commission said it would accept Department of Correction testimony in writing because of a scheduling issue, and then spent most of the hearing hearing from people with lived experience in county and state correctional settings. Members repeatedly reminded witnesses to keep remarks to about three minutes and focused the discussion on correctional consolidation, collaboration, programming, and reentry. Testimony from multiple sheriff’s offices was broadly supportive of county-based programming, treatment, education, and reentry services. Witnesses from Hampshire, Barnstable, Hampden, and Franklin counties described access to GED and college courses, vocational training, recovery meetings, therapeutic groups, housing and ID assistance, work release, and reentry centers. Several said these programs helped them gain sobriety, employment, family reunification, and parole readiness. Hampden County witnesses emphasized immediate reentry planning and individualized case management; Franklin County witnesses praised respectful treatment and an accessible off-site reentry center; Barnstable witnesses highlighted the women’s therapeutic treatment program, creative writing, and the Bridge Center; Hampshire witnesses described the Bridge House, work release, and transition supports. Several witnesses contrasted those experiences with what they described as limited or delayed programming in DOC facilities, especially for people serving longer sentences or with restrictive classifications. One witness said DOC programming was hard to access because shorter sentences and offense labels affected eligibility; another described overcrowding, little counseling, and no reentry planning in state prison. A juvenile lifer testified that classification barriers and lack of tailored programming left him feeling unprepared, and another witness said DOC’s handling of classification hearings and records was unfair and opaque. Some speakers also raised concerns about mental health care and visitation policies, especially at Framingham, where one witness said suicidal thoughts were met with inadequate responses and another said family visitation was denied without clear explanation. Commissioners asked follow-up questions about DOC access, step-down opportunities, family support, and whether more transitional housing or acclimation time before release would help. No formal votes were taken beyond approval of the prior minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• the reentry approach?
• reentry programs and the details I do know that Phil are much more familiar with reentry programs and
• There's a lot of people that have to go through that reentry office or that reentry process. walk in
• There's a lot of people that have to go through that reentry office or to that reentry.
• There's a lot of people that have to go through that reentry office or that reentry officer.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission on correctional consolidation and collaboration heard testimony focused on how Massachusetts uses custody levels, staffing, programming, and medical release tools, with Prisoners’ Legal Services arguing that the system is overusing expensive high-security settings and underusing step-down options. Dave Rainey said the incarcerated population has dropped substantially over the last several years, but spending and staffing have not fallen in proportion. He argued that DOC overclassifies people into medium and maximum security, relies too heavily on behavioral assessment units that function like segregation, and keeps people in restrictive settings such as Souza-Baranowski and Shattuck Hospital longer than necessary. He also said medical parole is underused and that many people with serious chronic illness or advanced age pose little public-safety risk and should be released through existing legal pathways. Sheriffs and other commission members pushed back on some of those points, emphasizing that staffing needs are driven by the acuity of the current population, that corrections is not overstaffed, and that classification decisions involve serious public-safety judgments. They also stressed that some high-cost medical placements are necessary because people remain under sentence and require care, and that furloughs and other release tools can create security risks if contraband or substance use is involved. The discussion also covered the role of county sheriffs versus DOC in reentry, with several members saying county systems tend to do more day-to-day step-down and release planning, while DOC has more difficulty moving people through lower-security settings before release. Ben Foreman of MassINC offered a more systemwide, data-focused perspective, praising the state’s transparency and arguing that Massachusetts has made major progress in reducing incarceration and increasing public safety. He said the state still has an opportunity to improve by right-sizing facilities, investing in community-based mental health treatment, and using the commission to better understand the capital and operating costs of the current system. In response to questions, he said he was aware of DOC studies on programs like furlough but had not reviewed recent ones, and he noted that total-control facilities like Souza-Baranowski have long been criticized in the research literature for poor outcomes. Nora Wassel of the Women and Incarceration Project then testified that the commission should issue an interim report and scrutinize the planned new women’s prison, which she said is not justified by current population trends or available data. She argued that women are overclassified under DOC’s own tools, that reentry beds and minimum-security placements are underused, and that the system may be failing to account for women’s distinct medical and reentry needs. The meeting ended with continued discussion of reentry, furloughs, day reporting, and whether consolidation should mean fewer facilities, better step-down pathways, or both.

Transcript Highlights:

• Saul Murkado, reentry coordinator, Planning Justice.
• Issue 2, Rehabilitative Reentry Programs in California's Women's Prisons.
• We want them to be successful and flourishing upon reentry. Is some of that...
• We want them to be successful and flourishing upon reentry.
• And so they're outdated. ...successful in my reentry.

Summary: The hearing focused first on sexual abuse, harassment, and retaliation in California’s women’s prisons, with testimony from CDCR wardens, the Office of Inspector General, advocacy groups, and formerly incarcerated survivors. Legislators and witnesses described a pattern of staff misconduct, fear of retaliation, gaps in reporting, and the need for stronger accountability, better investigations, and more outside access for survivor support organizations. CDCR said it has expanded training, body-worn and stationary cameras, outside partnerships, and PREA-related response procedures, while the Inspector General requested additional funding and staff to monitor more grievances and staff sexual misconduct cases under SB 1069. Members pressed CDCR on why accused staff are not always placed on leave, how cases are referred to prosecutors, and whether current protections are enough; several members argued the state should aim to investigate all complaints and do more to prevent retaliation and repeat abuse. The second issue was rehabilitative and reentry programming in women’s prisons. CDCR’s Division of Rehabilitative Programs and the wardens highlighted education, vocational training, substance use treatment, peer support, and community reentry programs, citing increased enrollment and recent graduates earning diplomas, degrees, and certifications. They said these programs are intended to reduce recidivism and improve public safety. Formerly incarcerated advocates and community providers argued that current offerings are still too limited, outdated, and not aligned with today’s job market, especially around digital literacy and transferable credentials, and they urged more funding for community-based, trauma-informed, gender-responsive programming. A coalition representative asked for a $20 million continuation and expansion of the Wright Grant program, and members discussed additional budget requests for reentry and related women’s services.

Transcript Highlights:

• Field services, we deliver our reentry services to parolees to support...
• Because I think that that goes hand in hand with the work of the reentry services.
• So we're trying to pivot that part of the organization to do more reentry.
• And then we're using the same reentry centers, or people who are referring people to reentry centers,
• Because that’s sort of our reentry universe, or supervised reentry universe, sounds like more of it at

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Criminal Justice Reform 3.0 heard a presentation from the Massachusetts Parole Board focused on consolidation, cooperation, and evidence-based supervision across the correctional system. Parole Board Chair Angela Gomez-June described the board’s mission, its coordination with the Department of Correction, houses of correction, courts, probation, law enforcement, victim services, and UMass partners, and outlined 2024 activity including 2,810 institutional release hearings, 18,238 victim notifications, 53 pardon petitions, 70 commutation petitions, 41 early termination applications, and supervision of 2,993 parolees. She emphasized the board’s shift toward individualized, data-driven decision-making, including revised GPS use, graduated sanctions, and more service-oriented community supervision. Members and sheriffs pressed for clearer breakdowns of the board’s data, including the difference between releases, hearings, and active supervision; average length of supervision; the share of lifers in the caseload; and how many people are placed in housing, employment, and treatment. The board said its active supervised population fluctuates around 1,600 to 1,800, with more than 400 lifers, and that about 30 to 36 percent of its population is housed through programs such as MASH, community justice resource centers, and sheriff-run residential programs like Rocky Hill and HOPE. Members also discussed parole refusals, noting that some individuals decline parole to avoid supervision or to serve time inside instead, and asked for a more detailed breakdown of those cases. The board and commission also discussed collaboration with DOC and UMass on risk assessment, reentry planning, and community pathways, including a tablet video explaining the parole process and pharmacist support for medication-related drug test issues. The board reported that after the SJC’s Matus decision, 210 individuals were identified as affected, 144 were immediately eligible for hearings, 100 hearings had been completed, and 10 more were scheduled; it also said clemency and commutation work had been slowed by staffing and Matus-related demands. The meeting ended with a request for follow-up data on outcomes, supervision lengths, housing and employment placements, and other consolidated statistics, and the commission announced its next public hearing for March 9 at 10 a.m. before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• They're continuing their GED education in our buildings of reentry centers.
• They're coming and they're doing parenting skills in our reentry centers.
• We've got a reentry center up and running for over 27 years in Hampden County.
• We've got a reentry center up and running for over 27 years in Hampden County.
• What role do community organizations play in reentry services?

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission met to continue its review of the county sheriffs’ role in corrections, reentry, and public safety. After approving the prior meeting minutes, the sheriffs completed a lengthy presentation describing how their offices provide regional jail services, women’s programming, mental health and substance use treatment, reentry support, community partnerships, and auxiliary public safety functions such as BCI work, TRIAD, Meals on Wheels, and event support. They emphasized that services are tailored to local needs, that women’s facilities are designed to keep mothers close to family and support reunification, and that programming, housing, and job placement are central to reducing recidivism. They also discussed challenges including K2/synthetic drugs in facilities, gang classification and separation, and the difficulty justice-involved people face obtaining IDs and birth certificates, especially for people from Puerto Rico. Commission members generally praised the sheriffs’ work and asked for more detail on how regional women’s facilities operate, how community-provider cuts might affect reentry services, how no-cost phone/tablet communication is balanced against programming time, and what the most essential programs are if funding is reduced. The sheriffs said programming must come first, identified mental health, substance use treatment, domestic violence programming, and housing/job placement as critical, and explained that community organizations and the Registry of Motor Vehicles are key partners in reentry. They also described their approach to gang management through classification, separation, and information sharing, and noted that the Registry has become more flexible but Real ID requirements have made documentation barriers more significant. The commission chair stressed that the purpose of the study is collaboration and improving system performance, not an adversarial effort against the sheriffs or a decarceration debate. Members noted that future meetings would hear from probation in June and the Department of Correction in July, and that the commission would continue gathering information before deciding on next steps. The meeting ended with a motion to adjourn, which passed unanimously.

Transcript Highlights:

• Mike Ash believed in reentry, and we've stood up a reentry center. We've been doing it now...
• Mike Ash believed in a reentry and we've stood up a reentry center, we've been doing it now.
• Mike Ash believed in a reentry and we've stood up a reentry center.
• Very easily said: reentry starts day one.
• Hampshire's Reentry Center.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The meeting was the third public session of the Special Commission on Correctional Consolidation and Collaboration. Members introduced themselves, and the commission approved the prior meeting minutes. The main presentation came from the Massachusetts Sheriffs’ Association, led by several sheriffs, who described the role of sheriffs’ offices as independently elected county institutions that operate jails and houses of correction, regional lockups, civil process, 911 communications in some counties, school resource officers, and investigative units. They emphasized that most of their population is pretrial, that admissions and releases are far higher than the Department of Correction’s, and that their facilities now house more people overall than DOC despite having a smaller budget. The sheriffs argued that their work has shifted toward rehabilitation, reentry, and public health, highlighting extensive programming in mental health, substance use treatment, medication-assisted treatment, education, vocational training, and gender-specific, trauma-informed services. They said standardized risk/needs assessments and better funding would help make services more consistent across counties. They also described specialized units and models such as regional evaluation and stabilization units, older-adult housing, emerging adult and gang-intervention programs, and reentry centers that connect people to housing, employment, family support, and community services. Several examples were cited, including Suffolk’s Project Evolve, Middlesex’s older-adult unit, Hampden’s MAGIC program, Worcester’s STOP program, and county reentry centers across the state. A major theme was that these programs are expensive but, in the sheriffs’ view, reduce recidivism and improve safety by stabilizing people before release and supporting them afterward. They pointed to COVID-19 as a period when sheriffs adapted facilities for quarantine and medical care, and said they continue to work with public health partners. They also stressed that their facilities are heavily audited by state and federal agencies and that maintaining humane, safe conditions requires significant staffing and operating costs. Commission members responded favorably at points, noting the importance of the turnover in sheriff populations and the need to understand the different correctional mission compared with DOC. The meeting ended with discussion of future commission dates and a note that the presentation materials would be shared electronically.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our second ask is that Program 700, which is currently called Offender Change, be changed to Reentry
• Those things would continue to be under reentry services. Got it.
• We propose that we would like to change it to be reentry services. back in that we would like to change
• it to be reentry services.
• Those things would be fall, continue to be under reentry services. Got it.

Summary: The LEAP committee met on June 18, 2025, with introductions from members and staff, then received a clean audit report from the State Auditor covering 2020–2024. The audit reviewed accounts payable, general disbursements, theft-sensitive assets, and data backup/recovery, and found no findings. Staff also outlined the interim work plan, including a full rewrite of the capital budget application (Build Sum), updates to the transportation bond model and operating budget tools, website improvements, and continued research into secure, responsible AI use. Members asked about AI safeguards, keyword search improvements, and making the website more user-friendly, especially on mobile devices. The committee approved the July 8, 2024 minutes after a quorum was reached. It then considered and unanimously approved several budget format changes: the Department of Corrections moved chemical dependency and sex offender treatment into its health care program and renamed Program 700 from “Offender Change” to “Reentry Services”; the Department of Revenue moved the AMP program into its tax analysis and technology support program; and the Department of Transportation changed a toll program title and added new sub-programs for State Route 509 and State Route 167 toll operations to reflect new facilities and more accurate reporting. Kevin Feltis also provided staffing updates, noting the retirements of longtime LEAP staff, the hiring of three new associate consultants in October 2024, and an upcoming December 2025 retirement for Sherry Randage after decades of state service. The new staff members briefly introduced themselves and expressed enthusiasm for their work. The meeting ended with thanks to members and staff and adjournment after the committee completed its business.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is that a license accomplished through a reentry... Kathy.
• the Louisiana Community Technical College System, including through a reentry program.
• But when we say reentry, though, we're talking about reentry, yeah, right, right.
• But to your point, Senator Cathey, I do read through reentry program.
• The Department of Corrections reentry, but that as well I think is important.

Bills: SB147, SB414, HB220, HB750, HB799, HB827, HB952, HB953

Keywords: roof standards, construction code, residential property, fortified roofs, insurance, medical debt, interest rate, healthcare services, consumer protection, debt collection, Louisiana Medical Debt Protection Act, child exploitation, online reporting, platforms, cyber crime, PROTECT Act, automatic renewal, cancellation policy, subscription service, transparency

Transcript Highlights:

• How we're trying to address reentry and lowering recidivism.
• This is an introduction to the Resource Reentry Center.
• Our Resource Reentry Center opened just seven years ago in June of 2018.
• When they are released, we flag them at reentry.
• There's only five offices, and my team, the reentry staff, fill those.

Bills: HB59, HB74, HB159, HB167, HB175, HB255, HB330, HB364, HB458, HB525, HB568, HB656, HB1033, HB1034, HB1070

Keywords: public defender, funding, district court, East Baton Rouge, judicial expenses, Autism Spectrum Disorder, missing children, law enforcement, public safety, Spectrum Alert, inmate documentation, post-release employment, special identification card, Louisiana Department of Public Safety, reentry services, veterans, veterans services, lottery proceeds, special fund, grant board

Bills: HF4371, HF4317, HF2817, HF3496, HF4151, HF3826, HF4425, HF3990

Keywords: HF4371, Minnesota background checks, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, BCA, Office of the Legislative Auditor, Legislative Auditor, criminal history records, national criminal history record information, public safety, statutory amendment, section 299C.76, requesting agency, state audit, oversight, background screening, criminal records, county agencies, MNsure, Department of Revenue, Department of Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 1417 was part of a package of three bills that dealt with reentry.
• House Bill 1417 was part of a package of three bills that dealt with reentry.
• So oftentimes it serves as a barrier to reentry.
• fruits, if you will, that serve as barriers to reentry.
• I'm the reentry program manager.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to review fiscal aspects of House Bills 1417 and 1425, both part of a broader criminal justice reentry package. HB 1417 would eliminate the $35 public defender application fee and end court-ordered reimbursement of indigent defense costs, while also removing the $55 monthly community supervision fee. Testimony from the Commission on Legal Counsel for Indigents and the Department of Corrections said the bill would replace lost revenue with general fund appropriations of about $310,000 for indigent defense and $1.5 million for supervision fees, and that the fees are rarely collected and can hinder reentry. Representative Clemene said the bill is intended to reduce barriers to successful community reintegration and improve data and supervision practices. HB 1425 would create and fund front-end diversion, deflection, and pretrial services programs. Supporters described it as allowing prosecutors and local jurisdictions to divert appropriate low-level offenders from prosecution, establish deflection programs for people with behavioral health needs, and expand pretrial services. The bill includes a pilot program in three counties, a $1 million appropriation to DOCR for one FTE and contracts with local providers, $750,000 to DHS for treatment services, and $55,000 for a study of pretrial services cost savings. Committee members asked several questions about how the pilot counties would be chosen, how the consultant study would be procured, and what services the DHS funds would cover. The committee also heard House Bill 1603, which would provide a $500,000 matching grant for Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act compliance, with $100,000 available to each of North Dakota’s five tribes if matched. Sponsor testimony said the funds would support a Historical Society NAGPRA compliance committee and help catalog and repatriate human remains and cultural items in coordination with tribes. After questions about the federal mandate and the difficulty of identifying artifacts, the committee voted 4-0 to give HB 1603 a do-pass recommendation, with Senator Meyer assigned to carry it forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm joined here today by my colleague from the Reentry Division. Good morning, Mr.
• Chair and members of the committee, Haven Skobian, Deputy Director of Reentry for New Mexico.
• Because New Mexico, who has a reentry department, we wanted to make it very clear that in reentry for
• Also, in terms of what 1115 should be offering now is reentry case management.
• Is that how you are administering in the reentry program? Mr.

Transcript Highlights:

• Louisiana Community Technical College System, including through a reentry program.
• But when we say reentry, though, we're talking about reentry, yeah, right, right.
• But to your point, Senator Kathy, I do read through reentry program.
• It may need some clarification in the language about the Department of Corrections reentry, but that
• The Department of Corrections reentry, but that as well I think is important.

Summary: The Senate Commerce Committee met on May 6, 2026, with five members present and approved the prior meeting minutes. The committee first heard HB 750, a “click-to-cancel” consumer protection bill requiring subscription cancellations to be as easy as sign-up and to be available through the same method used to subscribe. An amendment was adopted, testimony included support from labor and consumer advocates and opposition from some business groups, and the bill was reported favorably as amended. The committee then took up SB 414, which was narrowed to cap interest on medical debt at 3%. After reconsidering and replacing prior amendments, the committee adopted the new amendment set and reported the bill favorably as amended. HB 799, concerning inspection licensing for elevators, escalators, and boilers, was presented by the State Fire Marshal and reported favorably with little discussion. The longest discussion centered on HB 953, a major plumbing workforce and licensing reform bill. The bill was amended substantially: the original proposal to move plumbing oversight to the Contractors Board was removed, the plumbing board remained in place, apprenticeship and journeyman/master plumber hour requirements were revised, penalties and reporting requirements were added, and language was included to support workforce development and reentry training. The committee heard both support and opposition, including clarification from the State Plumbing Board that it already has an appeals process through the courts, and HB 953 was reported favorably as amended. Finally, HB 220, the “PROTECT Act,” was heard to require covered online platforms to maintain a clear and usable mechanism for reporting child sexual abuse material and exploitation. An amendment was adopted to account for platforms that require registration to access content, testimony was supportive, and the bill was reported favorably as amended. HB 952 was deferred, and HB 827, a related plumbing workforce bill, was amended to align more closely with HB 953 but then failed a motion to defer by roll call vote, allowing it to remain pending. The committee then adjourned.