Advocates: New prison debt law doesn’t break ‘cycle of poverty’

Da’ee McKnight paid his debt to society by serving 17 years for a murder conviction.

He’s since also paid the state a 50 percent cut of two car accident lawsuits he won in accordance with a “cost of incarceration” law that wasn’t even on the books when he went to prison in the late 1980s.

McKnight and Fred Hodges, who also has a murder conviction and has also paid the state 50 percent of a lawsuit, will no longer be impacted by the law thanks to a change that was implemented through the state’s budget this legislative session.

But the men are vowing to continue to fight for those who will still be charged.

“This is a more serious issue than people think,”

said McKnight, who along with Hodges, works at the New Haven-based Family Reentry, a nonprofit that helps formerly incarcerated people get back on their feet. “I am grateful that we were able to move the issue this much, but it is counter to reentry. You are burdening people with fees who are trying to get back into the community.”

McKnight and Hodges are not alone. A team of students from the University of Connecticut, Yale and Quinnipiac law schools and members of the state’s Sentencing Commission plan to press on next year to seek the elimination of the liens, which they said are keeping people in the cycle of intergenerational poverty.

“Certainly, we were hoping for a complete repeal, but this is a positive step,” said Alex Tsarkov, executive director of the state’s Sentencing Commission, which backed the push to eliminate the law. “The changes in the budget are really important and will go a long way in helping a lot of people. The fact that there was a lot of traction was good, but this is a real barrier to reentry and it encourages a cycle of poverty that is difficult to escape.”

A federal lawsuit filed by three former inmates who owe Connecticut money for their incarceration is also moving forward, despite the change that will narrow who is required to pay, their attorney David Slossberg said. The three represent more than 30,000 people who have paid or potentially will pay a portion of any wealth they have gained since being released, court documents said.

“The statute does not remedy the fundamental injustice here,” said Slossberg, who believes the change in the budget made in the last week of the legislative session was sparked by the lawsuit. “The lien encourages the cycle of poverty and has a disparate impact on communities of color.”

The “cost of incarceration” law enacted in the mid-1990s allowed the state to place a 50 percent lien on any inheritance, lawsuit settlement or other “windfall” that a formerly incarcerated person gains for up to 20 years after they have been released. The calculation as to how much someone must pay is based on the length of their prison stay multiplied by $249 a day.

“The resultant prison debt — imposed on people who are almost uniformly destitute, and two-thirds of whom are people of color — is crippling,” Slossberg said in the lawsuit. “Even people who are held pretrial because they cannot afford bail face staggering bills upon sentencing.”

The state has taken in an average of $6 million a year, seizing 50 percent of inheritances and financial gains from lawsuits, which are designed to make people whole, said state Rep. Steven Stafstrom, D-Bridgeport.

As the Judiciary Committee co-chair, Stafstrom brokered a deal in the final days of the legislative session to reduce the number of former inmates impacted by requiring only those with the most serious convictions to pay.

Now only those people who have a conviction for six of the most serious offenses, including felony murder, murder with special circumstances and first-degree aggravated sexual assault, will be required to pay the state 50 percent of any windfall, including gains from a lawsuit or an inheritance for up to 20 years after they are released from prison.

All other formerly incarcerated people will not have to pay unless they receive an inheritance that is over $50,000. The change will allow a significant number of formerly incarcerated people to continue their lives without the concern that they owe the state for their incarceration, Stafstrom said.

“We’re helping 95 percent of those people who are affected by the lien,” Stafstrom said.

A bill that would have repealed the cost of incarceration law was approved by the Judiciary Committee, but not taken up by the House or Senate. Instead, Stafstrom crafted a compromise that exempted most people except for those convicted of the

“most heinous offenses” within the implementer bill balancing the state budget for the next two years.

“It is a permanent statutory change that had a direct financial impact on the state,” Stafstrom said. “It was a revenue adjustment. The state had to account for $5.6 million of the $6 million that was taken in annually.”

Stafstrom anticipates that going forward, the state will take in about $400,00 a year from the change with the money going to the General Fund.

But for those who are not exempt, it will still inhibit their ability to build intergenerational wealth and create a stable life for themselves and their families, McKnight said.

“Fred and I are an exception,” McKnight said. “Because we have a strong foundation, the obstacles we faced didn’t cause us to give up and turn back to crime. I know people who say the state still wants my blood and I wasn’t given a life sentence.”

Although he will no longer face a lien, Hodges said he is ready to continue the fight to repeal the law.

“I hope we can appeal to the human side of lawmakers,” Hodges said. “Punishment and profit devastates the most vulnerable people in the community. Once they have completed their sentence, they deserve a change.”