Some 347 inmates already approved for placement in community-corrections programs–comprising 1.5 percent of the state’s total inmate population–are still awaiting placement. State budget analysts say allowing accelerated placement could relieve the backlog and ease pressure on the state’s strapped budget because inmates placed outside of prisons cost less than those in a prison.

In testimony before the Joint Budget Committee, budget staffer Patrick Brodhead said speeding up placement would involve changing the current system of locally governed, community-corrections boards, but he acknowledged the idea could hit resistance from the communities themselves.

“It’s not going to be popular, I can tell you that,” Brodhead said.

Community corrections facilities provide an alternative to incarceration in prison for individuals convicted of less severe offenses and individuals in transition between prison and parole  in order to aid reintegration of offenders back into the community.

Under current policy, inmates must meet the criteria set forth by the community board in the locale where the inmates will be paroled—assuming beds are available in that jurisdiction. Local community-corrections boards currently have the authority to accept or reject any offender referred for placement, giving them the ability to determine which inmates they believe are acceptable for their community.

Three changes were suggested by Brodhead in order to increase the utilization of available beds.

• Standardizing criteria for placement across community board jurisdictions; the criteria now rest with each community board.
• Creating regional governance—central, northeast, southern, and western—rather than by judicial districts
• Transfering administration funding for the community-corrections program to the Departments of Corrections and Judiciary.

Rep. Jack Pommer, D-Boulder, who chairs the budget committee, said curbing statutorily recognized local control over the boards may be problematic.

“We’ve created a pretty powerful voice for community control,” Pommer said, adding that the proposal would “take away their control and essentially usurp their authority over their communities.”

Rep. Claire Levy, D-Boulder, recommended that further investigation be done to look into the individual components driving the issue to see if there are compelling reasons to override local control.

“I wouldn’t want to take that step without understanding all the dynamics of it,” said Levy.

No action was taken by the Joint Budget Committee and no potential legislation emerged today as a result of the discussion.

The early releases, initially projected to save the state budget $19 million, are now likely to net closer to $5 million in savings, according to Ritter administration spokesman Evan Dreyer.

Shortly after the program’s announcement last August, the initiative drew a flurry of attention from the media as well as criticism from some minority Republicans in the legislature who raised concerns about public safety. That was followed by media accounts in October indicating far fewer inmates were deemed appropriate for early release than had been anticipated—meaning scaled-back savings–and that some of those who were being released had extensive and even violent criminal histories.

Dreyer defended the program at the time as “good public policy and good fiscal policy.” However, David Michaud, Chair of the Colorado State Board of Parole, had told the Denver Post that public safety was his primary concern, trumping the budget concerns.

“I’m not going to let someone out early if I don’t think it’s safe,” Michaud said in an Oct. 15 Post report. “I don’t care how much money they save or don’t save.”

The parole board has so far granted early release to a total of 235 prisoners as of Dec. 15.  Michaud said today that no prisoners have been released who have committed serious crimes.

“There are no sex-offenders, class 1 or class 2 felonies,” Michaud said, adding that among the possible offenses committed by the prisoners released early, “there could be a variety of charges from drugs to auto-theft to forgeries.” Michaud said he stands by the effort.

Yet, Berthoud Republican Sen. Kevin Lundberg, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the administration’s entire approach was off-track from the outset.

“It’s the wrong place to look (for savings),” Lundberg said . “We set those laws (sentencing) in place for a purpose and this is short-circuiting that purpose.”

Lundberg cited a list of spending cuts elsewhere in state government that legislative Republicans unsuccessfully proposed during last spring’s budget debate.

“Now we’re looking at areas that we shouldn’t be looking in,” he said.

Colorado Department of Corrections spokeswoman Katherine Sanguinetti could provide no specific figures this week for overall savings to date. Sanguinetti said beginning in January, the corrections department will publish a monthly report tabulating the savings.