Police and prosecutors around the state are lining up in opposition of recent state legislation that would repeal the decade-old "Truth in Sentencing" laws, remove mandatory minimums for convicted felons, and allow for early release of prisoners in state prisons to help balance Michigan's precarious budget.

The bills would allow more prisoners to earn credit for serving "good time" and put more prisoners into community placement programs. Supporters say the measure would mean 7,550 fewer inmates in Michigan prisons and a cost savings as high as $107 million annually.

In the Eastern Upper Peninsula, Mackinac County Prosecutor Fred Feleppa, Sheriff Scott Strait, and Chippewa County Prosecutor Brian Peppler are speaking out against the three bills , House Bills 4497, 4498, and 4499, which are now under consideration in a Michigan House of Representatives Judiciary Subcommittee.

"Truth in Sentencing" legislation refers to a group of bills that set limits on parole of convicts and maintains that the mandatory minimum sentence must be met before a prisoner is eligible for parole. For instance, someone sentenced to five to 10 years in prison can earn release through good behavior as early as after five years, but no sooner. The name truth in sentencing refers to the claim by its supporters that the laws provide the public and crime victims with more accurate information about criminal sentences.

Move Would Save Costs for State

The three bills could reduce the prison population by about 7,550 within four to six months after they are enacted, according to a legislative analysis prepared by the House of Representative's fiscal agency, using Department of Corrections estimates.

The corrections department worked with an assumption that the average prisoner would be considered for parole after meeting 85% of the minimum sentence and 70% of those eligible would be approved for parole, estimating that "good time" credits could amount to 5,650 fewer prisoners in the state. The department added to this an estimated 1,900 released inmates because of community placement programs proposed in the legislation.

The department estimated that cost savings owing to these 7,550 fewer prisoners could be about $107 million annually. These savings may lag, according to the House Fiscal Agency, depending on when the legislation would be passed, how quickly prisoners could be processed, how quickly community placements could be set up, and what costs may be associated with setting up those programs. Assuming 7,550 prisoners could be released before April 1, 2010, the Department of Corrections estimated potential savings in fiscal year 2010 to be about $42 million.

Local Officials Respond

to Proposed Laws

"When speaking with victims, it can be comforting or assuring to be able to tell them the exact time the person will be in prison," Mr. Feleppa said. "How the unnecessary release of hardened and dangerous criminals onto our streets protects the public, improves Michigan's business climate, and honors our victims is beyond comprehension."

Changing the rules now, he said, would make him into a liar for every family he promised that the convicted offender would not be out for certain number of years. That offender could now be released sooner under the new laws.

"Already, the rules have changed a little bit," Mr. Feleppa said. A few years ago, sex offenders would not normally be considered for parole until their second, third, or sometimes fifth time in front of the parole board, he noted.

"Now I am seeing sex offenders that were sent to prison a few years ago getting paroled on the first time around," he said.

State Representative George Cushingberry, Jr. of Detroit sponsored the three bills that would allow good time credits and community placement. Mr. Cushingberry chairs the House Appropriations Committee, under which the Judiciary Subcommittee resides. His chief of staff, Griffin Rivers, said the idea behind the bills is to both provide encouragement for prisoners to behave better in prison and to help the Department of Corrections save money.

"The chairman feels strongly that there are individuals in the prison system who deserve to be released," Mr. Rivers said. "It's also a measure to release the pressure on the institutions and to provide cost savings.

"It can also be used as a managing tool," he said. "Once a person is sentenced, there is a need for a light on the end of the tunnel." Providing the opportunity for prisoners to earn the time credits and be considered for early release, he said, could create this hope for prisoners and could improve behavior in the state's prisons on a larger scale.

Chippewa County Prosecutor Brian Peppler said the first months of 2009 saw about 267 more paroles per month than in 2008, which, if averaged out for the entire year, would mean about 3,204 more criminals released than the 13,317 released in 2008.

"According to a study released January 4 by Gongwer News Service, a majority of the parolees released in 2009 were in for violent crimes, and were already released at or very near their earliest release date," Mr. Peppler said. "It is clear that prison inmates, when released, have a much higher propensity to reoffend than individuals who have not been to prison. It is disingenuous then, to suggest that releasing prisoners early will not dramatically reduce public safety, particularly in our metropolitan areas, where most released inmates will go."

If this new legislation is passed, Mr. Feleppa said, this inconsistency could foster a distrust of the court system as well as putting convicts back on the streets who have not truly been rehabilitated.

"We will experience an increase in victims of crime and costs on local communities," he said. "They will commit new crimes, make new victims, damage our business community, fill our jails, and clog our court system on their way to a return to prison for an even longer stay."

The Michigan Department of Corrections has estimated that repealing Truth in Sentencing legislation would mean an additional 7,550 felons would be released within the first four or six months, Mr. Feleppa said.

"If you try to break into a house once, you are more likely to try to do it again," he said.

Mackinac County Sheriff Scott Strait said he sees parolees come back to the county jail as repeat offenders, and added that this new legislation could ultimately result in more prisoners in county jails, putting a greater financial responsibility on the local level.

"When somebody is sentenced by a judge or a jury to a specific amount of time, that should be entirely up to the parole board when that person is ready to come back," Mr. Strait said. "It shouldn't be up to the legislative branch. I'll fight against it as hard as I can."

When parolees are released earlier, owing to this new legislation, they will likely be arrested again and the burden of paying for their incarceration will then fall to the local and county jails, he said.

"What these bills are trying to do is to shift the financial burden from the state to the counties. They are pushing it back on us. To me it's just abhorrent what the state is trying to do."

The State of Michigan, he noted, has an agreement with county jails to pay them $43.50 per day for each felon diverted from the state prison system and housed instead at county jails. The state has been refusing to make these payments to the counties since September 2009, citing the state budget crisis as the reason.

"Now they want us to keep the prisoners, but not pay us for them," Sheriff Strait said. "We are the ones who pick up the mess when these early parolees get out and commit crimes. These people that are committing crimes should be in prison."

Mr. Peppler suggested that the state could find other ways to balance the corrections budget without letting prisoners out earlier.

"Our state should not be looking to shift these costs by retroactively reducing sentences and releasing thousands of dangerous and career criminals to local communities," Mr. Peppler said. "Instead, it should examine why it costs almost 30% more to house prisoners in Michigan than in Ohio, and over 80% more than in Texas. If our perprisoner costs matched Ohio, Michigan would save $340 million. This is where the search for true cost savings should commence."

Mr. Rivers said Texas has recently experienced a string of lawsuits against its prisons, something he said might explain why they spend less than Michigan.

"Texas has been on a number of court orders for some of their practices in prisons there," he said. The package of bills is still in the discussion stage, Mr. Rivers said, and if it is eventually considered for approval by the House of Representatives, many elements of the bills could be very different.

"It is a discussion that has been put on the table," he said. "It's a give and take type of situation."