Repeals 42-56-38.1 and requires the department of corrections to provide free communication services to inmates and juveniles held in residential placement or detention centers and requires that those facilities provide in-person contact visits.
H5350 repeals Rhode Island General Laws § 42-56-38.1, which currently governs prisoner telephone use and allows inmates to choose between debit and collect calling systems while limiting prison phone rates and prohibiting state commissions or facility surcharges on inmate calls. In its place, the bill creates a broader new section requiring the Department of Corrections and other agencies operating state prisons, local jail cells, and youth residential placements or detention centers to provide people in custody with voice communication services.
The bill goes beyond telephone access and expressly allows facilities to supplement voice communication with video communication and electronic mail or messaging services. When such services are provided, they must be free of charge to both the person initiating and the person receiving the communication, subject only to program participation rules and routine facility procedures. The bill also requires a minimum level of access to telephones or voice communication devices in housing units, using either a 10-to-1 inmate-to-device ratio or at least two devices per housing unit, whichever is greater.
In addition to communication access, H5350 prohibits the Department of Corrections and other covered agencies from receiving revenue from voice or other communication services provided to incarcerated people. It also requires in-person contact visits for persons in custody in state prisons and youth residential placements or detention centers. The act would take effect immediately upon passage.
The bill’s impact on state law would be significant because it replaces the existing statutory framework for inmate telephone services with a more expansive access-and-cost-free communication mandate. It would affect the Department of Corrections, local jail cells, youth detention and residential facilities, incarcerated adults and juveniles, and communication service providers that contract with correctional institutions. It would also eliminate any ability of the state or facilities to profit from inmate communications through commissions, surcharges, or similar revenue arrangements.
There is no recorded committee testimony or vote history in the provided materials, so no formal sentiment can be drawn from hearings or roll calls. Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears to be framed as a reform to reduce the cost of maintaining family and community contact for incarcerated people and juveniles. The main point of contention likely concerns the fiscal and operational effects on correctional agencies and facility vendors, since the bill would require free services, minimum device availability, and in-person visitation while barring revenue generation from communication systems.
This bill would repeal current law governing inmate telephone use and replace it with a broader requirement that correctional and juvenile detention facilities provide free voice communication services, with optional video and electronic messaging services, to people in custody. It would also impose minimum access standards for telephones or voice devices, prohibit state or facility revenue from communications, and require in-person contact visits. The affected statutes are primarily within Chapter 42-56, and the affected parties include the Department of Corrections, local law enforcement agencies operating jail cells, youth residential placements and detention centers, incarcerated adults and juveniles, and communication vendors.
No committee transcript or vote data was provided, so there is no recorded legislative debate or roll-call sentiment to summarize. The bill’s framing suggests a generally reform-oriented and inmate-access-friendly purpose, emphasizing free communication and visitation. At the same time, the absence of recorded support or opposition means any assessment of sentiment is limited to the bill’s text and caption rather than documented legislative reaction.
The likely areas of contention are cost, implementation, and loss of revenue. Opponents may object that requiring free communication services, minimum device ratios, and in-person contact visits could increase operating expenses for correctional and juvenile facilities and remove commission or surcharge revenue that some institutions may currently rely on. Supporters are likely to emphasize family contact, rehabilitation, fairness in phone pricing, and access for incarcerated people and juveniles. The bill also broadens the scope beyond prisons to local jail cells and youth facilities, which may raise additional operational concerns for agencies not previously covered by the repealed statute.