BILL NUMBER: S4327

SPONSOR: SEPULVEDA
 
TITLE OF BILL:

An act to amend the executive law, in relation to requiring the state
board of parole to reflect the composition of the prison population in
race, age and geographic area of residence

 
PURPOSE:

To change the composition of the state board of parole to reflect the
prison population that it serves and to ensure professional diversity
among its members.

 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:

Section 1 amends subdivision 1 of section 259-b of the executive law, to
require that the members of the board of parole be appointed by the
governor with the advice and consent of the senate. This board shall
consist of not more than nineteen members and not less than fifteen
members. In making appointments to the board, the governor shall ensure
              

that the membership adequately reflects the composition of the prison
population in race and ethnicity, age, and geographic area of residence.
The percentage of each demographic characteristic of the members shall
be directly proportional to that of the prison population.

 
EXISTING LAW:

Under subdivision 1 of section 259-b.of the executive law, the governor
appoints not more than 19 members of the parole board with the advice
and consent of the Senate.

 
JUSTIFICATION:

Currently the composition of the NYS prison inmate population is 49.5%
African American, 24.6% Hispanic, 23.1% White, and 2.8% Other. The aver-
age age of an inmate is 37.5; 47.5% are from New York City and 23.9% are
from Upstate Urban areas. However, the NYS Parole Board does not reflect
the: population at all. While African Americans and Latinos are overrep-
resented in the prison population, they are underrepresented in most
every other area of the criminal justice system, including membership on
the Parole Board. Currently, the Board consists of a majority of Cauca-
sian members. It is important that the Board reflect the population it
is required to serve.

Moreover, it is important that the Board issues fair decisions. The
Executive Law mandates that in making a parole release decision, the
following factors are to be considered: the institutional record includ-
ing program goals and accomplishments, academic achievements, vocational
education, training or work assignments, therapy and interpersonal
relationships with staff and inmates; performance, if any, as a partic-
ipant in a temporary release program; release plans including community
resources, employment, education and training and support services
available to the inmate; and the written statement of the crime victim
or the victim's representative (see Executive Law 259-i(2) (e)). This
mandate, however, has been undermined by the Parole Board as a result of
a shift in parole policy.

Since 1999 the percentage of prisoners released on parole has dras-
tically declined. The sharp drop in parole rates is the result of two
major changes in parole laws since 1995 in an effort to get tough on
crime. .1n 1995, a law was passed that requires all people convicted of
a second violent felony to serve 85 percent of their sentences. And in
1998, Jenne's Law required that all violent felons serve 85 percent of
their terms. This shift in policy away from determining parole based on
an individual, case-by-case basis to an en masse denial of parole based
on the original crime undermines the purpose of parole.

In order to achieve the standard set in the Executive Law, the Parole
Board needs a diverse membership that reflects the prison population and
includes members with a background that gives them a perspective other
than law enforcement.

 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

S. 4958 of 2021-22: Referred to Crime Victims, Crime and Correction

S. 0740 of 2019-20: Referred to Crime Victims, Crime and Correction

S. 4518 of 2017-18: Referred to Crime Victims, Crime and Correction

S. 968-A of 2015-16: Referred to Crime Victims, Crime and Correction

S.  4431-A of 2013-14; Referred to Crime Victims, Crime and Correction

 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

None.

 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately.