People in the audience of the budget hearing at Senate Finance Committee at the State House on Monday. Paula Tracy photo
By PAULA TRACY, InDepthNH.org
CONCORD – Massive budget cuts for the state’s prisons will not save money and could place the facilities and the state in danger and cause real legal trouble, the commissioner told the Senate Finance Committee Monday.
In her first appearance after being denied that in the House Finance Committee Division I by its chair, who said he lost confidence in her, Commissioner Helen Hanks outlined serious impacts in what is envisioned as part of a 10 percent cut.
Corrections wasn’t the only department whose staff members were saying the House passed a budget for the state for the next two years that was being penny wise and pound foolish.
The committee heard from about a dozen state entities that are facing cuts and, in some cases, departments that would be eliminated under the House passed budget of about $16 billion.
The budget favored by the Republican House majority was based on an anticipated loss of revenue.
But the Senate will have a new look at revenues soon and it could be that the state’s finances are improving and more likely aligned with Gov. Kelly Ayotte’s proposed budget. But they could be worse or the same as the House used.
It will be in another two to three weeks that the revised revenue estimates will be released.
Cuts under the House budget are the Housing Appeals Board and the Office of the Child Advocate, among others who were heard from during the meeting.
The Senate Finance also heard from the Department of Administrative Services which would lose more than 30 employees and the Liquor Commission which would lose its enforcement wing under the House budget among other departments.
But one of the departments facing some of the most significant cuts went first, the Department of Corrections.
PRISONS
The state has three prisons, in Berlin and Concord which are occupied by about 2,000 inmates, down in population from about 2,800 a decade ago due in part to a recidivism rate that has gone from 52 percent to 40 percent in seven years, said Hanks.
Members of the House Division 1 Finance Committee, who did not include input from Hanks or her staff on impacts of the cuts noted the DOC housed 800 more inmates with 150 fewer staff.
The House passed budget proposes a 10 percent reduction in DOC compared to the governor’s recommended budget cut of 4.5 percent.
It will lead to the abolishment of 149 positions, 98 of which are filled and 16 sworn officers.
Hanks asked the Senate to restore budget funding from the House and she outlined some of the potential consequences of losing such a large number of staff.
She said the budget should not be based on the dependent population count.
The department has a vacancy rate of 41 percent, which is actually down from a high of 54 percent and staff working mandatory overtime, which will only increase, she said.
Hanks noted it is likely the state will need to again call up the National Guard to help protect the prisons if the House budget holds.
Recidivism rates, which have gone down in recent years, will go up and rehabilitation workers will be let go reversing “any traction that we have had” in recidivism, said Hanks.
And she noted clerical staffing cuts could lead to mistakes letting inmates out early and problems without counselors and staff to help inmates integrate back into society as functioning and contributing individuals, including learning how to be better parents behind bars.
She said the House budget “is not just a reduction in funding – it is a fundamental threat to the Department of Corrections’ ability to operate legally, safely and responsibly. These cuts severely inhibit our compliance….(with) court decisions. These are binding legal mandates rooted in Constitutional rights, not optional goals.”
After she noted the public comments of Division I Finance Chair Dan McGuire, R-Epsom, who told other lawmakers Hanks had lost his confidence, she said those were met with many calls from others to say they have full trust in her ability to be commissioner.
“The Democrats tweeted immediately thereafter they had not lost confidence in me,” she said.
Sen. David Watters, D-Dover, thanked Hanks for her thorough view of impacts and asked on the mental health side if the cuts could be in violation of court settlement agreements.
She said she was not allowed by McGuire to provide testimony on what the proposed cuts would mean to the department.
The current annual budget is about $170 million a year which would go to $146 million.
Sen. Howard Pearl, R-Loudon, asked if these cuts could lead to an unsafe working environment.
She said yes, it would immediately present a safety issue “and we will likely have to ask for the national guard,” again. The Guard had been called up to the prison in recent years when staffing levels went so low it became a safety issue.
“In total, these proposed cuts would cripple core services that help individuals succeed post release, reduce long-term costs to the state and improve public safety. The Department’s ability to meet statutory obligations and uphold its rehabilitative mission would be significantly compromised,” Hanks wrote in her prepared presentation for the Senate Finance Committee.
Republican Sen. Tim Lang asked about cuts to the Corrections’ Investigations Bureau which would go from eight investigators to four under the House plan.
Hanks said it would “gut” their ability to safely oversee the facilities and “poses a direct threat to the safety and security of our correctional facilities.”
“Removing these vital roles does not eliminate the work – they simply shift that burden onto an already overworked corrections officer workforce,” she said.
Hanks concluded by saying the result of the House passed budget would be a correctional system that “is under-resourced, overburdened and increasingly out of legal compliance. These cuts may appear to offer short-term savings, but they guarantee higher long-term costs through litigation, increased recidivism, staff burnout, and the public safety risk,” she said.
CHILD ADVOCATE
Elimination of the Office of Child Advocate is part of the House passed budget. The governor opposes it.
Cassandra Sanchez, who is the state child advocate, explained the work of her office and staff.
She said a lot of time is spent dealing with the children who are housed by the state or somehow in its custody including those who are part of the Division for Children, Youth and Families caseload.
She noted a publicized case of two children who were placed by NH DHHS out of state in a harmful situation with potential liability to the state, and advocated for them to be returned, which was accomplished.
HOUSING APPEALS BOARD
An alternative to the court system, people who are aggrieved by municipal zoning and land use matters have been able to go instead of just to Superior Court to a diversionary Housing Appeals Board which runs on a very slim budget, the Senate Finance Committee was told but is “on the chopping block,” said Elizabeth Menard, the Housing Appeals Board clerk.
Enacted in 2020 the idea was for there to be a small government approach to issues related to delaying development which could act faster than the courts.
Some have said it is far less expensive, but Republican House opponents said it is more expensive for the taxpayer to keep the Housing Appeals Board.
Menard said since January 2021 it has heard over 100 appeals on zoning and planning matters.
There are three administrative judges that have expertise in land use, engineering, and municipal land use planning.
Going through the Housing Appeals Board rather than Superior Court allows appellants to get a “comprehensive, well-rounded decision.”
With housing being a voter’s priority and the governor saying changes need to be made at the local level Menard said there are going to be more appeals and now might not be a good time to abolish this option.
“This is an avenue that New Hampshire did not have in the past …intended to be a light touch, small government approach,” that works quickly.
At the Housing Appeals Board decisions are made in 5.33 months, she said.
Terms for some of the board members go for the next two years so the state is obligated to pay those salaries if the board is dissolved.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman James Gray, R-Rochester, said he has invited a conversation with the courts about the Housing Appeals Board and whether it could be somehow incorporated.