Texas Senate Bill SB879

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Out of Senate Committee: 4/14/11
• Introduced: 2/23/11
• Voted on by Senate: 4/28/11
• Refer: 3/1/11
• Report Pass: 4/14/11
• Refer: 4/29/11

Caption

Relating to a local community supervision and corrections department monitoring certain conditions of bond and the administrative fees associated with certain department services.

Impact

The enactment of SB879 will significantly alter how local community supervision departments operate within Texas. With the ability to impose these administrative fees, the bill enables corrections departments to generate additional revenue to support their services. This shift could improve the availability and quality of supervision programs available to defendants but poses financial challenges for those with low income or constrained economic situations. Additionally, the bill standardizes the monitoring process, potentially enhancing the consistency of supervision across different regions in Texas.

Summary

SB879 seeks to authorize local community supervision and corrections departments to oversee certain conditions of bond for defendants. Specifically, it allows magistrates in Texas to designate community supervision agencies to verify the installation of monitoring devices for defendants. The legislation introduces a tiered system of fees, whereby defendants may pay an administrative fee, ranging from $25 to $60 monthly, depending on the circumstances of their supervision programs. This bill is part of a broader effort to create more efficient management of community supervision processes and reduce costs associated with monitoring offenders.

Contention

While supporters argue that the bill streamlines processes and provides necessary funding for community corrections, critics express concern over the potential burden of administrative fees on low-income defendants. There is a fear that imposing these fees, even within the proposed range, could lead to further financial hardship or disincentivize compliance with supervision conditions. This debate reflects wider discussions about the ethics of charging fees in the criminal justice system, particularly regarding individuals who may already be facing difficulties reintegrating into society after incarceration.