Marc Bennett and Ron Paschal: Juvenile justice reform bill raises concerns

The public needs to be aware of Senate Bill 367, a 110-page bill that proposes sweeping changes to the juvenile justice system. Many who work in the field of juvenile justice (judges, prosecutors and probation officers) have serious concerns about whether this bill will adequately address the needs of juveniles and their families in this community, and whether it adequately provides for community safety and the rights of victims of violent crimes.

This bill also lacks sufficient funding sources – which could result in a failure to deliver services to the juvenile, as required under the bill, or could shift costs from the state directly to local communities.

The bill is the product of a working group appointed by the governor. We believe it was a well-intentioned attempt to improve service delivery at a reduced cost.

The group included juvenile justice professionals throughout the state. However, very few came from the state’s largest judicial districts. Absent from the group were prosecutors and probation officers from Sedgwick, Johnson, Wyandotte and Shawnee counties. There were no judges from either Sedgwick or Shawnee County.

These are the largest consumers of juvenile justice services, and because we have the bulk of the juvenile offenders in the state, we have the greatest impact on whether any changes will be successful. The large jurisdictions should have been at the table.

The bill drastically limits the amount of time a juvenile accused of felonies can be placed on probation, under the jurisdiction of the court. It drastically reduces the sentence the court could impose at a correctional facility for commission of all but a few violent crimes.

For example, under the bill, a 16-year-old convicted of aggravated battery for intentionally shooting a citizen of our community, causing “great bodily harm,” would face a maximum term of incarceration of 18 months. The bill allows the same juvenile to be placed on probation for a maximum term of 12 months minus good-time credit.

How do we explain this to victims? How can we address the multiple issues this juvenile offender has in this short amount of time?

We support efforts to improve the system, but new alternatives to out-of-home placement cost money. Without a consistent funding stream, simply placing caps on punishment will do nothing to improve outcomes for young lives we are trying to steer out of the juvenile system and, ultimately, the adult system.

This is an important bill for Kansas kids and for public safety. We can’t afford to get this wrong.

This story was originally published February 8, 2016 at 6:02 PM with the headline "Marc Bennett and Ron Paschal: Juvenile justice reform bill raises concerns."