Bills: HB3725, HB3260, HB3660, HB3369, HB3370, HB2937, HB3419, HB3264, HB3266, HB3267, HB3268, HB3310, HB4311, HB3841, HB3024, HB3075

Keywords: labor, e-verification, immigration, employers, employment eligibility, Department of Labor, penalties, funeral licensing, continuing education, Oklahoma Funeral Directors Association, professional development, licensing requirements, HB3660, natural organic reduction, human composting, soil reduction, green burial, funeral services, cremation, burial permit

Transcript Highlights:

• Retirement Fund currently eligible for the LECO Supplement Fund includes custodial offers such as a parole

Bills: HB886, HB1514, HB2434, HB2688, HB2802, HB3161, HB3221, HB4029, HB4339, HB4591, HB4774, HB4802, HB4853, HB5627, SB1737

Keywords: retirement, supplemental payment, benefits, Employees Retirement System, eligible annuitants, legislation, annuity, service credit, Employees Retirement System of Texas, employee benefits, pension reform, public retirement systems, municipality pensions, firefighters, police officers, retirement age, DROP program, actuarial studies, pension benefits, municipal retirement

Bills: HB886, HB1514, HB2434, HB2688, HB2802, HB3161, HB3221, HB4029, HB4339, HB4591, HB4774, HB4802, HB4853, HB5627, SB1737

Keywords: retirement, supplemental payment, benefits, Employees Retirement System, eligible annuitants, legislation, annuity, service credit, Employees Retirement System of Texas, employee benefits, pension reform, public retirement systems, municipality pensions, firefighters, police officers, retirement age, DROP program, actuarial studies, pension benefits, municipal retirement

Transcript Highlights:

• incentivize good behavior and for those who've met all the terms of their probation, supervision, parole

Bills: SB1627, SB227, SB366, SB1193, SB1433, SB1450, SB1481, SB1749, SB1810, SB1812, SB1921, SB1948, SB2044, SB2178, SB169, SB1877, HB1409, SB1266, SB1432

Keywords: criminal code cleanup, duplicate statutes, statutory consolidation, repealer bill, emergency clause, Title 21 crimes, Title 47 DUI, child abuse reporting, child neglect, child sexual abuse material, child pornography, sex offenses, rape, stalking, domestic abuse, domestic violence, human trafficking, sex trafficking, gang-related offense, eluding police

Transcript Highlights:

• , field parole officer.
• guess, assisted by parole.
• Parole, or help me.
• We have parole officers.
• For purposes of parole?

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:

• of parole supervision.
• We still have some remnants of parole, so this is what I refer to as our like parole-ish laws that are
• So that's different from parole.
• So if a system of parole is established, I think the question is: what should parole accomplish?
• And you just said that with parole, we could... ...disproportionately in terms of granting of parole.

Summary: The committee held a work session on tort liability and parole, with the chair explaining that the topics were linked because criminal justice reform and state liability often intersect, especially in cases involving child welfare and corrections. Staff first outlined Washington’s tort liability framework, including the state’s broad waiver of sovereign immunity, statutes governing mandatory reporting and investigation of abuse, the childhood sexual abuse statute of limitations, and the lack of caps on non-economic damages. Staff and presenters also compared Washington to other states and noted that Washington remains among the broadest states for state liability and childhood sexual abuse claims. Presenters from the Attorney General’s office, Washington State Association for Justice, DCYF, DSHS, and DOC discussed how tort exposure has grown, especially in claims involving DCYF, historical child abuse, juvenile rehabilitation, vulnerable adults, employment discrimination, medical negligence, and negligent supervision. DCYF and AG staff said claims and payouts are rising, with many claims tied to older abuse and new theories of liability, while defense counsel emphasized the human harm behind the claims and argued that tort cases have historically driven accountability and reform. Agency witnesses said they face large volumes of old claims with limited records, rising verdicts and settlements, and staffing and systems challenges, and they highlighted efforts such as early resolution programs, electronic health records, medication-assisted treatment, and improved incident review processes. The committee then shifted to parole. Sentencing experts reviewed Washington’s move from indeterminate sentencing to the current determinate sentencing system under the Sentencing Reform Act, and explained how parole could be integrated with sentencing guidelines through different models used in other states. They also summarized Criminal Sentencing Task Force recommendations related to a determinate-plus approach for three-strikes and persistent offender laws and a second-chance review process, noting there was no consensus on those ideas. Judges from the Minority and Justice Commission and the Superior Court Judges Association said a parole system could support rehabilitation and reduce disparities if it includes data collection, fairness, transparency, due process, and meaningful judicial review; they also pointed to research suggesting parole and structured reentry can reduce recidivism and costs, while warning that access and outcomes can vary by geography and other factors.

Transcript Highlights:

• Before parole can be granted, an in-bank hearing, meaning the full 21-person Board of Parole Hearings
• Before parole can be granted, an in-bank hearing, meaning the full 21-person Board of Parole Hearings
• number of denials of parole.
• It should be noted that people who go through the parole review process and are granted parole have extremely
• For reappointment to the Board of Parole Hearings.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate opened with a quorum, prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several floor recognitions, including a birthday acknowledgment for Senator Archuleta and introductions of former Senator George Runner and a Portuguese delegation tied to ACR 185 recognizing Portuguese Heritage Month. The body then approved the Senate journals and moved to confirmations of five Board of Parole Hearings appointees: William Muniz, Michael Ruff, Rosalind Sargent Burns, Mary Thornton, and Jack Weiss. Each confirmation drew extended debate centered on parole decisions, public safety, transparency, and the Board’s handling of elderly parole and sexually violent predator cases. Supporters argued the commissioners were applying existing law, using evidence-based risk assessments, and were not the decision-makers in the controversial cases cited. Opponents criticized the board for releasing dangerous offenders, questioned the commissioners’ judgment, and objected to the board’s closed-door in-bank votes. Roll calls followed each item, and all five appointees were confirmed, with vote totals including 25-9, 24-9, 24-9, 25-9, and 29-9. The Senate then took up Senate Concurrent Resolution 179 by Senator Niello, recognizing May as Celiac Disease Awareness Month. The resolution described celiac disease as a serious autoimmune disorder, highlighted symptoms and challenges with gluten exposure, and emphasized the need for awareness, labeling, and education. SCR 179 passed unanimously, 31-0. The session concluded with committee announcements and several adjournments in memory, including tributes to Marty Arnold, Jim McAulian, and Pat Gagoscos, followed by remarks from the President pro tempore about ongoing bipartisan legislation to improve transparency and public safety in parole decisions before adjournment until June 4, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• It just allows the parole board to say we can grant parole earlier than otherwise available based on
• And we already allow the Board of Parole Commissioners to change the minimum sentence and allow parole
• They would still have a hearing in front of the parole board. This is what the parole board does.
• Most of the other parole schemes that I'm aware of that allow the parole board to, for lack of a better
• is supposed to get regular parole.

Keywords: 909, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the MPOA is a union body that includes field parole officers, field parole supervisors, institutional
• So we have nine field parole offices.
• So can you separate out for me the training that parole officers receive to be parole officers versus
• And then we also receive parole-specific training, you know, writing parole violation reports or what
• the parole population would face.

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 the parole board makes a decision on medical parole? Yes. Not DOC. Not DOC.
• provision of elder parole.
• medical parole statute.
• Okay, so we need to reform parole. Parole is also the low-hanging fruit. Please, it's so easy.
• parole proceedings.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing before the Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security focused on several correction-related bills, including visitation reform, elder and medical parole, incarcerated persons’ human rights, and creation of an independent correctional oversight office. Vice Chair Christopher Worrell chaired the hearing in place of Chair Dan Cahill for much of the session and explained that the committee would first hear from incarcerated individuals remotely, then move to public testimony. The committee repeatedly enforced three-minute limits and accepted written testimony as well. Much of the testimony from incarcerated people emphasized that visitation is central to rehabilitation, family stability, and reentry, and that current DOC policies—visitor caps, pre-approval requirements, scheduling rules, dress-code enforcement, and restrictions on contact—have reduced family contact and caused harm. Several speakers argued that elderly and medically frail prisoners should be released through parole because incarceration is costly, ineffective, and inhumane for people who pose little public-safety risk. Others described poor prison conditions, limited programming, inadequate healthcare, segregation-like housing, and the impact of K2 use, suicides, and self-harm. Supporters of the oversight bill said an independent office is needed to address racial disparities, grievance failures, and lack of accountability within the DOC. A number of speakers tied their support to personal experiences, including alleged racial discrimination, denial of programs, and barriers to family visits. Some testified that rehabilitative programming, education, and restorative justice reduce violence and improve outcomes, while others said the DOC spends too little on programming and too much on punishment. Committee members asked a few follow-up questions, including about K2 contraband and how to reduce drugs in facilities, and one member asked about typical visitation lengths. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee heard testimony on the bills and several witnesses urged favorable reports.

Transcript Highlights:

• on parole in case A and then be granted parole.
• Two years of a parole period.
• parole hearing shall occur.
• At 15, 20, or 25 years, if the parole board decides you parole, you go home.
• If they've had their sentence, when they're paroled, they're paroled.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, that is not the parole rate; I'm not focused on the parole not focused on the parole rate.
• The chairman's personal parole rate was two percent. And And judges sentence based on parole.
• board and the parole process.
• higher parole rate because those people were never coming up for parole.
• I understand the difficult role the parole board is in. You know, it's a... parole board is in.

Bills: HB202, HB42, HB146, HB492, HB285, HB7, HB454, HB42, HB7

Keywords: law enforcement, immunity, civil liability, use of force, recruitment, bail reform, cash deposit, judicial discretion, criminal justice, Alabama law, youthful offender, capital murder, public safety, victims' rights, juvenile offenders, delinquent acts, juvenile court, nonfelony offenses, water safety offenses, illegal immigration

Transcript Highlights:

• So I was a parole officer for... I was a parole officer for about 10 years.
• is even on parole.
• parole board again?
• houses before they send them to the parole board, or even if parole is denied.
• decisions on parole.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• walls is even on parole.
• And then the parole board would then decide whether he goes back into the prison or stays on parole.
• parole board again?
• So we would rely on the parole and probation officers or the parole officer in the field.
• Does this parole board, should we have some guardrails for the parole board? Yeah.

Summary: The committee opened with a moment of silence for a deceased member, then approved the April minutes and heard a presentation from HHS on the Diversion Task Force and related youth services grants. Chelsea Florey described the $750,000 one-time appropriation from HB 1012, the five awarded grants, and how programs in Bismarck, Fargo, Grand Forks, and Minot are using the funds for youth diversion, including school-based groups, physical activity, and services for problematic sexual behavior. Members raised concerns about staffing shortages, family engagement, service silos, and whether diversion eligibility rules are too rigid; Florey said the task force is focused on better coordination, broader education about available services, and possible changes to diversion criteria, with the Children’s Cabinet likely to drive broader recommendations. The committee then received a North Dakota Lottery biennium report from Director Thomas Lawler, who reviewed the lottery’s history, games, retailer commissions, player programs, and revenue distribution. He reported about $67 million in ticket sales for the 2023-2025 biennium, about $16.2 million transferred overall, including roughly $13.6 million to the general fund, plus transfers to drug task force and compulsive gambling funds. Members asked about the compulsive gambling allocation and whether it is set by statute. Next, the Department of Corrections presented on criminal justice data sharing and reentry. Adam Anderson explained that jails, courts, DOCR, HHS, and other entities use separate systems with limited interoperability, making real-time communication largely manual. He outlined possible hub or point-to-point IT solutions, but noted cost, vendor, identifier, and data-definition challenges. Robin Schmolenberger followed with an update on a Medicaid data exchange project between DOCR and HHS to suspend and reactivate inmate Medicaid coverage automatically and improve care coordination, with full bi-directional exchange expected in fall 2026. The committee also heard from county representatives on 24-7 sobriety program fees and an AG opinion allowing local sheriffs to use cheaper testing options when courts waive fees. Finally, the North Dakota Racing Commission reviewed a troubling audit. Bruce Johnson acknowledged serious findings involving overspending from the promotion fund, missing grant documentation, a reversed decision on breeders fund eligibility, and repeated procurement violations. He said the commission has begun corrective actions, including monthly tracking of the promotion fund cap, stricter grant documentation, written procurement procedures, and clearer eligibility rules in condition books. Members pressed him on how the overspending occurred, whether the commission board would impose consequences, and whether statutory clarification is needed on the promotion fund limit and related spending rules.

Transcript Highlights:

• parole board again?
• So we would rely on the parole and probation officers or the parole officer in the field.
• Released and they're not on parole, I mean, they're not on probation or parole.
• decisions on parole.
• parole board, should we have some guardrails for the parole board?

Summary: The committee opened with a moment of silence honoring a deceased member, then approved the April minutes. The first major presentation was from Chelsea Florey of Child and Family Services on the Diversion Task Force and related grant programs created with one-time funding from HB 1012. She reported that five of six proposals were funded, with youth diversion services operating in Bismarck, Fargo, Grand Forks, Minot, and a Red River Children’s Advocacy Center program focused on problematic sexualized behavior. Members discussed barriers such as staffing shortages, voluntary family engagement, service fatigue, and the need for better coordination, broader outreach, and possible changes to diversion eligibility rules so low-level cases can remain in diversion longer. Several legislators pressed for more practical system changes and clearer service navigation, while Florey said the task force is trying to build a service array or hub and is leaning on the Children’s Cabinet for broader recommendations. The committee then heard from North Dakota Lottery Director Thomas Lawler, who gave an operational overview and biennium report. He described the lottery’s history, games, retailer commissions, Pick and Click subscriptions, Players Club membership, and revenue distribution. For the 2023-25 biennium, about $67 million in tickets were purchased, with roughly $16.2 million transferred overall, including money for the general fund, drug task force grants, and compulsive gambling prevention and treatment. Members asked about the compulsive gambling allocation and whether the amount is set by statute. A lengthy presentation followed from the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation on criminal justice data connectivity and reentry. Adam Anderson explained that North Dakota’s jail, court, HHS, and correctional systems use multiple separate databases that do not communicate in real time, requiring manual cross-checks and staff communication. He said the department is exploring a centralized hub or other integration approach, but noted challenges with identifiers, vendor contracts, confidentiality, and cost. Robin Schmolenberger then updated the committee on a Medicaid data-sharing project with HHS, saying monthly application assistance is now occurring in correctional facilities and that automated bi-directional data exchange is expected in late 2026 to help suspend and reactivate Medicaid coverage and identify former foster care youth. Members also discussed parole, probation, transitional housing, and the need for better real-time notifications and clearer data definitions. The committee also received an update from county representatives on the 24/7 sobriety program, including a recent attorney general opinion that if a court waives 24/7 fees, sheriffs may use the cheaper twice-daily breath test or urine testing instead of SCRAM bracelets or drug patches. Finally, Bruce Johnson of the Racing Commission presented on an audit report, acknowledging serious findings involving overspending from the promotion fund, grant documentation failures, a breeders fund eligibility reversal, and repeated procurement violations. He said the commission has already changed its procedures by tracking fund limits monthly, requiring grant applications and itemized reports, enforcing breeders fund rules as written, and routing purchases through procurement with written contracts. The committee asked follow-up questions throughout but took no formal votes on these presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's how I see parole.
• That's how I see parole at.
• I just want to emphasize how parole really works. Like, your parole... Parole is not guaranteed.
• They don't ever have to give you parole. Parole is a privilege.
• I am on lifetime parole.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on the Judiciary held a lengthy hearing on several juvenile justice and parole-related bills, with much of the testimony focused on H. 2051/S. 1087 to end lifetime parole for juveniles and emerging adults, and H. 1923 to raise the age of juvenile court jurisdiction to include 18-, 19-, and 20-year-olds. Chairs Brandy Fluker-Reid and Lydia Edwards opened the hearing by noting the large number of bills and witnesses, the need to keep testimony moving, and special procedures for incarcerated witnesses and sensitive testimony. They also acknowledged the historic nature of the hearing being chaired by two Black women attorneys. No votes were taken during the hearing itself. Many incarcerated speakers and advocates supported ending lifetime parole, arguing that young people can change, that lifetime supervision creates constant fear of technical violations, and that it undermines rehabilitation, family stability, employment, and reintegration. Several testified about their own trauma, youth, and growth in prison programs, while others emphasized the costs of decades of supervision and the racial disparities in the system. Support also came from elected officials, UTEC, the Transformational Prison Project, United Way, CPCS’s Youth Advocacy Division, the Massachusetts Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence, and others, who said juvenile systems are better suited to developmentally appropriate treatment and that the bills would improve public safety and reduce recidivism. There was also opposition, including testimony from family members of a murder victim who argued that lifetime parole should remain for serious violent crimes and that some offenders are not sufficiently rehabilitated. One virtual witness described a family tragedy involving the kidnapping and murder of her infant nephew and warned that ending lifetime parole could remove needed long-term supervision for dangerous offenders. In addition to the juvenile justice bills, the committee heard testimony on H. 1867, a bill related to continuing care for severe mental illness, and H. 2063, which would increase penalties for assaults on correction officers and other prison staff; the correction officers’ union supported H. 2063 and related safety bills. The hearing continued with many more witnesses and bill topics, but no final committee action was announced in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• violations for parole?
• There's also a thing called parole. We work with parole.
• Get positive parole.
• DOC for parole.
• were released on parole.

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:

• Parole was sort of drying up.
• And so they can be paroled.
• The parole board also can use it as a condition of their parole plan.
• If the parole board, or typically this can also happen by way of a parole regional parole supervisor,
• parole increases.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Correctional Consolidation and Collaboration met to approve the May 5 minutes and hear a presentation from the Massachusetts Probation Service. The minutes were approved unanimously, with a request that a member’s closing remarks be added to the record. The commission also noted online participants and confirmed quorum before moving to the presentation. Probation leaders described the agency’s role as the state’s largest post-release supervision system and emphasized its focus on reentry, accountability, and reducing technical violations. They outlined the from-and-after sentencing structure, dual supervision with parole, and efforts to reduce revocations and non-criminal violations. Members asked about racial and ethnic disparity work, and probation said that effort is funded through the trial court and state budget, not federal grants. The presentation highlighted community engagement, simplified and translated probation conditions, workforce diversification, and training aimed at improving trust and access for court users. A major portion of the discussion focused on Community Justice Support Centers, evidence-based programming, and shared services such as housing, MassHealth enrollment, transportation, and behavioral health referrals. Probation said the centers are underutilized but have shown improved outcomes in non-randomized studies, with lower recidivism among participants compared with similar probationers. Members discussed mental health access, veterans identification, medication-assisted treatment, and the importance of state IDs and driver’s licenses for successful reentry. The commission also heard about housing supports, including transitional and sober housing, and a statewide behavioral health initiative for justice-involved individuals. The meeting ended with plans for the next session on July 11 and a motion to adjourn, which passed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Under the existing statute, the parole board has limited discretion regarding the scheduling of parole
• reviews after initial parole eligibility.
• in between parole hearings.
• That abolishes the statutory parole officer salary, career ladder, and parole caseload ratios and instead
• the release and establishes a special conditions working group consisting of parole voters, TDCJ parole

Bills: HB153

Transcript Highlights:

• The next item on the agenda, um, we're going to skip down to Senate Bill 2041. parole offenders parole
• Senate Bill 2043 addresses parole.
• Senate Bill 2043 addresses parole.
• Senate Bill 2043 addresses parole.
• Senate Bill 2043 addresses parole.

Keywords: Corrections - Room 210; 29 January, 2026: 11:00 AM, 925, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 2778, which extends by four years the repealer on the authority to collect monthly supervision fees from probation and parole offenders for the Community Service Revolving Fund. Members asked no questions, and the bill was moved and passed by a sufficient motion with no opposition. The committee then heard Senate Bill 2041, which would require the Department of Correction to do pre-screening for dyslexia. Senator Hickman said the bill is intended to identify a condition that is reportedly more prevalent in the prison population and to help reduce recidivism through earlier intervention. Questions focused on cost and implementation; the sponsor said the fiscal impact would be minimal because the department already has the needed IT infrastructure and the screening would be an added step rather than a separate system. The bill was then moved and passed. Next, Senate Bill 2036 was explained as a narrow change from “shall” to “may” in language affecting probation, postrelease supervision, or suspension, giving judges discretion in revocation decisions. Senate Bill 2777, requested by the circuit judges association, would clarify that probation or postrelease supervision may be revoked if a person commits a felony, including in situations where the offense occurs before the prior supervision has commenced. That bill also advanced on a do-pass motion. Senate Bill 2043, dealing with parole eligibility for nonviolent offenses, was described as allowing the parole board to reduce eligibility dates by awarded days and to better assess whether offenders are truly eligible; the committee discussed a committee substitute and a reverse repealer before moving on. Finally, Senate Bill 2037 was taken up and amended to require medical care service providers to submit claims at no more than the Mississippi Medicaid reimbursement rate. The amendment by Senator Kirby was adopted, and the bill then received a do-pass-as-amended motion and passed.