Colorado lawmakers prepare to relaunch criminal justice commissions amid skepticism from reformers

Colorado Legislators Working to Shape Criminal Justice Policy

Colorado legislators are working to launch two commissions that will help shape criminal justice policy statewide into the near future, an effort that’s drawn the praise of policymakers while reigniting the same simmering tensions that helped sink a predecessor last year.

Guided by Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

1. Goal 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

Under recommendations issued last month by a working group convened by Gov. Jared Polis, the formation of criminal justice policy in Colorado would be guided by two commissions, one focused on juvenile matters, the other adult. The two bodies would oversee specific task forces — focusing on topics like sentencing or police reform — which would, in turn, provide recommendations to the larger group.

Creating Data-Informed and Evidence-Based Policies

• The commissions would be charged with providing “data-informed, evidence-based” criminal policy recommendations.
• The recommendations aim to “reduce incarceration, disparities and disproportionalities” and improve “safety, health and well-being of all Colorado communities.”
• The policies could then be turned into legislation, with the commissions’ approval acting as a boost in the Capitol and to Polis.

Democratic and Republican lawmakers are now working to turn the working group’s recommendations into legislation in the coming weeks, aiming to send them to Polis before the legislative session ends in early May.

Replacing the Colorado Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ)

The two commissions would replace the Colorado Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ), the longstanding policy group that lawmakers allowed to expire last May. The CCJJ had guided criminal justice policy in the Capitol for years: Policies approved by the commission had a stronger chance of becoming law, while those that were denied or hadn’t been presented to the commission were more easily rejected.

That gave law enforcement officials and the governor’s office a stronger say in shaping — or, critics said, smothering — policy before it hit the Capitol. Indeed, Polis first called for a replacement CCJJ when he vetoed a bill passed last year that would’ve studied the costs of the War on Drugs. In that call, he said the issue should’ve been examined by the commission.

Concerns about CCJJ’s structure — and its ability to be influenced — spurred House lawmakers to allow it to expire last spring.

Over the course of the CCJJ’s life, “views of how we build policy evolved to the point where it was very much needed to get a fresh view of how we build a policy creation team or commission,” said Maureen Cain, the director of legislative policy and external communications for the Office of the Colorado State Public Defender. She chaired the CCJJ replacement group with Tom Raynes, who leads the Colorado District Attorneys’ Council.

Cain added that she “felt very strongly that the CCJJ had done good work, but the time was ripe to look at the method of identifying issues — the membership, the goals and objectives, the mission — with a fresh set of eyes.”

In a statement, Polis spokeswoman Shelby Wieman said the governor appreciated the working group’s “thoughtful recommendations” and looked forward to seeing the legislation putting them into place “to help make Colorado safer.”

Addressing Concerns and Ensuring Independence

Cain and Raynes praised the work of the CCJJ replacement group, which included attorneys, law enforcement officials, and advocates. They said it had been responsive to criticisms of its predecessor. Advocates and reformers had argued that the legislature should create individual task forces to study specific issues, rather than a standing body overseen under the executive branch and the governor. Raynes said it was important that the CCJJ’s replacement be as independent from any one branch as possible.

The recommendations met those requests halfway: The two commissions will be housed under the Department of Public Safety, which is part of the executive branch. The bodies will be permanent — at least for the foreseeable future — but will include issue-specific task forces beneath them. Juvenile and adult matters will now be handled separately, rather than lumped together.

Reformers’ Skepticism and Critics’ Concerns

While reformers praised those changes, they remained skeptical of the broader approach. Several referred to the new commissions as CCJJ 2.0.

Policymakers “worked hard under very short timelines and came up with a recommendation that reflects some community input,” said Rebecca Wallace, the policy director for the Colorado Freedom Fund, a cash-bail and criminal justice reform advocacy group. “But in many — too many — places, it replicates the CCJJ.”

Still, critics said the two commissions would still have too many “system actors,” meaning officials who work within the criminal justice system like prosecutors and law enforcement. Under the recommendations now being turned into legislation, the two commissions would feature law enforcement, prosecutors, victims, advocates, and experts, as well as representatives from the legislature and state agencies in nonvoting capacities.

Ensuring Independence and Resources

Critics of the CCJJ wanted its replacement to be under the authority of the legislature, in part to ensure it couldn’t be influenced by Polis or the next governor. But Rep. Mike Weissman, an Aurora Democrat, said the Public Safety Department had the staffing and resources to support the research and year-round work that the commission would undertake.

“It’s a valid point of concern,” Weissman said of a governor influencing the commissions. Weissman is one of the legislators working on the bill to create the groups. “It was a point of concern of mine throughout the interim process and the years preceding it. Honestly, I favored housing this new structure in the legislative branch, but there was an inherent and ultimately not resolvable tension there” when it came to resources.

Polis’ executive order called for the creation of a “transformational” working group to replace the CCJJ. But Tristan Gorman, the policy director of the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar and a member of the working group, said the result wasn’t transformational.

“We really ended up with a fundamental disagreement around what transforming criminal and juvenile justice would look like,” Gorman said. “I think what we’re going to end up with is basically more of the same: a carceral and prosecution-forward approach.”

Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

The article discusses the formation of two commissions in Colorado to shape criminal justice policy. This aligns with SDG 16, which aims to promote peaceful and inclusive societies, provide access to justice for all, and build effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.
• Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable, and transparent institutions at all levels.

The article mentions that the commissions would be responsible for providing “data-informed, evidence-based” criminal policy recommendations to reduce incarceration disparities and improve the safety, health, and well-being of Colorado communities. These targets align with the goals of promoting the rule of law and developing effective and transparent institutions.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator: Number of evidence-based criminal policy recommendations implemented.
• Indicator: Reduction in incarceration rates and disparities.
• Indicator: Improvement in safety, health, and well-being outcomes in Colorado communities.

The article mentions that the commissions would provide recommendations to reduce incarceration disparities and improve safety, health, and well-being outcomes. The implementation of evidence-based criminal policy recommendations, reduction in incarceration rates and disparities, and improvement in community outcomes can serve as indicators to measure progress towards the identified targets.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Table

Behold! This splendid article springs forth from the wellspring of knowledge, shaped by a wondrous proprietary AI technology that delved into a vast ocean of data, illuminating the path towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Remember that all rights are reserved by SDG Investors LLC, empowering us to champion progress together.

Source: denverpost.com

Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.