By Nancy West
The Union Leader
CONCORD — The Department of Corrections hopes to reduce the state prison population by between 600 and 700 inmates -- about 25 percent -- over the next five years under a proposed law regulating parole and probation, the department’s commissioner said.
The reduction, Commissioner William Wrenn said, will save the state about $11 million.
Wrenn believes the integration of the released inmates into local communities will go largely unnoticed because it will be done gradually, with only 50 released in the first year.
And, he said, with about half the money saved going to programs aimed at reducing recidivism -- including community-based substance-abuse and mental-health programs, along with more targeted and intensive supervision for the most serious offenders -- public safety actually will be enhanced.
Not everyone agrees. Some parole officials, front-line parole and probation officers, and victims have expressed concerns, doubt and fear.
Wrenn noted the inmates entering communities are due for eventual release anyway.
“We are not going to just be opening the doors,” he said.
The alternative, Wrenn said, is far more costly.
“If we do nothing, we will end up building more prisons,” he said.
The chairman of the state Adult Parole Board, George Khoury, said the changes proposed in Senate Bill 500 severely limit the board’s discretion. And if such changes are made, he said, the Legislature might want to consider returning to determinate sentencing, in which the courts sentence people with an automatic release after the offender serves predetermined “good time.”
Predeterminate sentencing would preclude the need for a parole board, he said, noting that Maine and other states have no parole boards.
According to Wrenn, however, New Hampshire’s parole board would still have discretion in paroling violent offenders under the proposed legislation, although all inmates would be paroled at least nine months before completing their maximum sentences.
Details of bill
Wrenn’s plans hinge on passage of SB 500, which goes to the Senate floor for a vote Wednesday, then, if it passes, on to the House.
Supporters include former House Speaker Donna Sytek, a Republican who lays claim to the nickname “mother of truth-in-sentencing” for marshaling the law through in 1983. Truth-in-sentencing replaced the pre-1983 system in which inmates were eligible to shave about one-third of their sentences doing “good time.”
“Truth-in-sentencing remains intact,” under SB 500, Sytek said. “We need to invest in this.”
The Justice Reinvestment Leadership Team headed by state Attorney General Michael Delaney included top officials and stakeholders such as Chief Justice John Broderick and lawmakers. They worked with researchers from the national Council of State Governments Justice Center in making recommendations that became the heart of SB 500.
SB 500 is billed as providing changes to parole, probation and sentencing of some offenders to increase public safety, strengthen community supervision, and reduce recidivism.
Changes include the release of nonviolent offenders who have served 120 percent of their maximum sentence and a maximum setback of 90 days for an inmate returned to prison on a parole or probation violation.
Under current law, setbacks are up to the discretion of the parole board. Convicts are sentenced to serve a minimum and maximum term, and all are eligible to apply for parole after serving their minimum.
New Hampshire’s prison population increased 31 percent over the last 10 years, according to SB 500, while the Department of Corrections budget doubled from $52 million to $104.
Parole revocations increased 50 percent since 2000, and probation and parole revocations accounted for 57 percent of all admissions to state prison.
Wrenn said requiring violent offenders to be released at least nine months before their maximum dates might be misunderstood by the public. Allowing such inmates to complete their sentence and leave prison without parole would preclude outside supervision, he said.
“These are people who have been convicted of serious crimes -- sex offenses, serious assaults, murders in some cases -- going out without any supervision” under existing law, he said.
Questions of leniency
Some parole officials believe the proposed penalty for a parole violation is too lenient. Knowing they will only serve a maximum of 90 days for a violation reduces parolees’ incentive to behave on the outside, critics say.
But Wrenn said, “I don’t think the deterrent factor is the important piece.”
Parolees who violate will be sent back to a special unit at state prison to focus on their underlying substance-abuse and mental-health issues, and to re-focus on their parole plans, the commissioner said.
John Eckert, executive assistant to the adult parole board, said the state needs to move slowly on such major changes. “Is the threat of coming back to prison for only 90 days any kind of deterrent?” he asked.
Eckert often hears inmates say, “I could do that time standing on my head.”
If a paroled sex offender were caught with pornography, he would go back to prison for only 90 days under SB 500, Eckert said. Under the current procedure, the sex offender would most likely be returned to prison for at least another six-month treatment program in prison, he said.
“This shouldn’t be rushed through,” Eckert said of the legislation.
Steve Arnold, spokesman for the New England Police Benevolent Association, which represents the state probation and parole officers, doesn’t trust the state to provide the money for community-based programs, especially at the beginning before savings are realized.
"(Parolees) will be untreated, unemployed and homeless,” Arnold predicted.
The nonviolent offenders who will be automatically released after serving 120 percent of their minimum sentence include drug dealers and thieves, Arnold said.
“If you don’t treat thieves and drug dealers, in this economy when there are no jobs, no housing and no treatment, they are going to go back to doing what they know -- dealing drugs and stealing money,” Arnold said.
Wrenn, however, said there is start-up money for programs from funds targeted for the now-closed Academy Program, and, he said, the Department of Corrections is actively seeking grants to pay for the community-based programs.
Victim’s voice
For mothers such as Susan Perkins of Ipswich, Mass. -- whose daughter, Cindy Phillips, 34, was killed as a passenger on a motorcycle driven by her husband, Brett Phillips, when he crashed in June 2004 in Laconia -- SB 500 isn’t the answer. Phillips, now 43, was convicted of negligent homicide.
“I think it sounds good on paper, but how many repeat offenders are out there?” Perkins asked.
Too many, Perkins said, adding that she sees them all the time on the news and opposes the change to state law.
On Thursday, the parole board granted Phillips parole a second time after he was returned to prison seven months ago for violating parole by failing to follow the rules of a long-term substance abuse program.
Eckert said that if SB 500 already had become law, the parole board would have been able to send Phillips back to prison for a maximum of only three months.
Senate President Sylvia Larsen, D-Concord, SB 500’s prime sponsor, said naysayers may want to consider that most inmates will eventually be released from prison anyway.
“Do you want to have someone supervised and treated, or just released after they have served their time?” Larsen asked. “There is evidence that community treatment works better than treatment behind bars. It teaches (parolees) to live in real-life settings.”
Commissioner Wrenn said he believes the changes will make a huge difference in how inmates succeed on the outside, though he conceded there are no guarantees.
“I can’t guarantee someone won’t go out and do something horrible, but if we are going to be smart on crime, we have to start doing this,” Wrenn said. “We would not be doing our jobs if we didn’t try this and work hard to make it work.”
Copyright 2010 Union Leader Corp.