OKPOLICY.ORG
Oklahomans are eager for bold justice reforms that guarantee fairness and safety for everyone; they don’t want to regress back towards a system that unfairly punishes poverty and prioritizes incarceration over all else. Lawmakers still have the second half of the legislative session to deliver those wins. Looking ahead, legislators should prioritize expanding and protecting the proven and popular reforms from State Question 780 and SQ 781, building on past successes to reduce the harmful effects of Oklahoma’s system of fines and fees, and implementing common-sense parole reforms to help safely address overincarceration. While the early release of a privately created budget package has prevented some positive reforms from becoming law, the budget is not final yet. Lawmakers still have time to incorporate these important reforms into a better budget that more closely reflects the needs and desires of Oklahomans.
Expanding the reforms of SQ 780 and SQ 781 is good for our communities (and the polls)
Nearly a decade ago, voters passed SQ 780 and SQ 781 because they were tired of Oklahoma’s costly and ineffective tough-on-crime policies. SQ 780 reclassified a number of felonies to misdemeanors, meaning fewer people in prison for low-level, non-violent drug and property offenses. SQ 781 directed the Legislature to invest the savings from these reforms into community-based mental health and substance abuse programs. Recent polling by the Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) and Stratus Intelligence shows that the vast majority of voters across the board still support these state questions.
House Bill 4106 by Rep. Ross Ford, R-Broken Arrow, and Sen. Avery Frix, R-Muskogee, would roll back SQ 780 by lowering the larceny felony threshold from the voter-approved $1,000 to $900. This threshold determines if someone is charged with a felony, which carries more serious penalties and long-term consequences, or a lower-level misdemeanor. HB 4106 would also implement a three-strikes system for larceny, under which a third and subsequent misdemeanor larceny offense would become a felony punishable by up to two years in prison. The three charges must occur within 180 days, and the total value of the stolen items must exceed $900.
SB 4106 has passed the House and is eligible to be heard in the Senate. If this bill were to become law, it would not only increase incarceration but also reduce funding available to the County Community Safety Investment Fund created by SQ 781. This comes even as larceny rates have decreased since voters approved SQ 780 a decade ago — suggesting that the reforms are working as intended.
Instead of trying to roll back these reforms, lawmakers should expand on these wins. Lawmakers have the opportunity to fully fund the County Community Safety Investment Fund, which redirects savings from SQ 780 into community-based mental health and substance abuse services. The Legislative Office of Fiscal Transparency (LOFT) estimates annual savings of around $25 million, but the legislature appropriates only half of that.
Lawmakers can also pass measures that expand on the successes of SQ 780 and 781 by addressing issues that drive people to prison. Senate Bill 1381 by Sen. Dave Rader, R-Tulsa, and Rep. Erick Harris, R-Edmond, would address how Oklahoma’s broken pre-trial system leads to overincarceration by implementing a pilot program in Oklahoma City to ensure everyone has representation at their bail hearings. Research shows that individuals who have representation at their bail hearings are more likely to be released from jail while their case progresses. Individuals who are stuck in jail while they await trial are less able to contribute to their defense and more likely to plead guilty. This bill was approved by the Senate and has advanced to the House for consideration.
Fines and fees are bad policy: Eliminating them would be a win
Gov. Kevin Stitt has made reducing the harmful impact of fines and fees one of his top priorities during his tenure. In addition to any financial punishment people are charged when they are convicted of a crime (called fines), Oklahoma also charges numerous “fees” to cover administrative costs, often for systems entirely unrelated to the case. These fees often add up to tens of thousands of dollars — an unpayable amount for the vast majority of Oklahomans.
There are several bills this session that would deliver the reforms voters want. HB 4112 by Rep. Tammy West, R-Oklahoma City, would have built on last year’s success of eliminating several fees and helped standardize how judges waive outstanding fees for individuals deemed unable to pay. However, this bill did not progress out of the House Appropriations and Budget Committee. Lawmakers should continue exploring legislative solutions in future sessions to address this important issue.
HB 3321 by Rep. Mike Osburn, R-Edmond, and Sen. Todd Gollihare, R-Kellyville, directs the Cost Administration Implementation Committee to collect and report data on cost arrests, including their prevalence and effectiveness in generating revenue. This bill was passed by the House and is now before the Senate. SB 1450 by Sen. Daniels, R-Bartlesville, and Rep. Brian Hill, R-Mustang, would expand opportunities for individuals who have substantially complied with a payment plan to have their outstanding court debt waived after a period of five years. It was approved by the Senate and has advanced to the House for consideration.
However, not every fines and fees bill filed this year would build on past wins. For example, HB 3262 by Rep. John George, R-Newalla, and Sen. Kelly Hines, R-Oklahoma City, would increase the sheriff’s service fee from $50 to up to $150. It was approved by the House and has moved to the Senate for consideration.
HB 3430 by Rep. Jonathan Wilk, R-Goldsby, and Sen. Warren Hamilton, R-McCurtain, is more complicated, but still quite harmful. It contains some genuinely helpful reforms, such as establishing ability to pay hearings at sentencing, preventing the loss of driving privileges due to fines and fees, and adding language to help some low-income people have their fees waived. However, those reforms are accompanied by language that would expand the role of private debt collection agencies in the fines and fees process. These agencies, sometimes called “Court Cost Compliance Liaisons,” can currently collect outstanding fees only in limited situations, but HB 3430 would send more cases their way. Such collection agencies have been accused of extorting indigent Oklahomans on behalf of the Oklahoma Sheriffs’ Association in a still-ongoing lawsuit. Under HB 3430, many people would have their outstanding fees entered as a civil judgment, making it much harder to have them waived and allowing private debt collection agencies to pursue them. This bill passed the House floor and is eligible for consideration in the Senate.
Parole reform is necessary to decrease overincarceration
Many of the criminal justice reforms enacted since SQ 780 and SQ 781 have focused heavily on reducing the number of people sent to prison but have largely ignored increasing the number of people safely released ; however, we need both to properly address overincarceration. One key policy area is parole reform, which is sorely needed. Right now, the Pardon and Parole Board (PPB) denies roughly 70 percent of cases it hears each year, meaning people stay in prison longer and continue to cost taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars to incarcerate.
One solution is to increase board members’ compensation and potentially make board membership a full-time role. Increasing compensation for parole board members could be a low-cost way to improve dedication and ensure more people can afford to serve. SB 1330 by Sen. Darcy Jech, R-Kingfisher, and Rep. Carl Newton, R-Cherokee, would raise board compensation from $24,800 to $46,000 for the Chair of the Board and from $22,800 to $42,000 for other Board members. While this bill passed the Senate, it has not been heard by a House subcommittee before the deadline and is unlikely to reachin a House subcommitteesub-committee before the deadline and is unlikely to make it to the floor.
Another key area that needs to be addressed is the use of parole for Oklahoma’s aging prisoners. Reforming aging prisoner parole is necessary to save costs, as older people cost taxpayers exponentially more to incarcerate than younger people. Oklahoma already has an existing, dedicated parole process for inmates over 65 who meet certain eligibility criteria. SB 1244 by Sen. Dave Rader, R-Tulsa, and Rep. Osburn, R-Edmond, would have expanded eligibility criteria for the process, but it did not receive a committee hearing. HB 3053 by Rep. Ron Stewart, D-Tulsa, and Sen. Rader would create a direct path to parole for certain prisoners over 65. While this bill was unanimously approved by the Judiciary and Public Safety Oversight Committee, it was not heard on the floor. Efforts like these are certainly a step in the right direction, but they aren’t a complete solution.
Regardless of the final disposition of these bills, the Legislature should investigate issues regarding older prisoners, including the increased cost to taxpayers, structural and systemic barriers to applying for parole, and the drivers of the increase in aging prisoners in our prisons.
Another simple solution the Legislature could implement would be standardizing the administrative parole process. During a 2025 interim study, several lawmakers expressed interest, but no bills were filed to address the problem.
There is still time to advance meaningful reforms
In the second half of this legislative session, lawmakers should prioritize passing meaningful reforms that build on proven wins instead of returning to a tough-on-crime system. Policies such as improving the pre-trial system, eliminating harmful fees, and reforming the parole process are investments in our future and should be treated as such. Lawmakers have the chance to pass legislation that is both popular and positive. They shouldn’t squander it.
