At a time when the state is facing hundreds of millions of dollars of red ink, a panel hearing updates on the satellite monitoring of sex offenders is likely to focus on the cost of the program and how money is being spent, a Republican senator said.
Sen. Jim Waring, R-7, is also worried the program’s allocation could get slashed when lawmakers come in next year to address the budget deficit.
“It could get cut,” Waring said. “It is not voter-mandated. I hope that’s not the case. I hope that’s not even considered.”
In any case, Waring does not see the program expanding, given the fiscal difficulties facing the state.
Already, Waring said the current amount allocated for the Global Positioning System (GPS) monitoring of sex offenders — $1.5 million — may not be enough as more and more people are required to wear the GPS device. In 2006, Arizona required GPS monitoring on persons convicted of dangerous crimes against children, such as sex offenders, while on probation. Waring is the architect of that law.
Waring said based on preliminary data, county probation offices could run out of money enforcing the program. The senator said he would get more definitive answers when the Joint Legislative Study Committee on Global Position System Monitoring meets on Nov. 6. Probation officers will discuss implementation of the program, the meeting’s agenda stated.
“We are getting kind of short on money with the county, it sounds like,” he said.
On hindsight, Waring lamented that Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed a bill he introduced last session that would have required only the worst sex offenders — those with a Level 3 classification — to wear a GPS device but still allowed authorities to place one on other offenders.
The aim was to ensure that there would be enough money to outfit the worst offenders with the monitoring device when they are released on probation.
“I was trying to be ahead of the curve with last year’s bill,” Waring said.
Rather than run the same measure, Waring said he may try to transfer some of the money set aside for the Department of Corrections to the counties. “The Corrections Department, from what I gather — this is all preliminary — is not spending as much money.”
Waring expects to get confirmation of the information during this month’s committee hearing.
Sen. Jorge Luis Garcia, D-27, said he would prefer that lawmakers, when mulling possible cuts, survey building projects first before looking at the sex offender monitoring program.
Garcia, who has clashed with Waring over other issues, agreed that GPS monitoring is needed. He said if authorities were to monitor sex offenders at all, it might as well be done using GPS.
“In one perspective, GPS monitoring is a better tool than just plain monitoring,” he said.
Garcia also suggested that sex offenders who are released on probation and who get the device pay for the cost rather than the state.
“If they want their freedom they should pay for it,” he said.
Another issue that is likely to come up during the hearing is the long-standing debate about the effectiveness of GPS monitoring in reducing recidivism.
Elizabeth Houde of the Arizona Sexual Assault Network said the focus of law enforcement should be Level 3 sex offenders, those determined to have the highest risk of re-offending.
“When you get below Level 3, you need to begin to look at each case individually,” she said. People tagged as sex offenders are not a homogenous group, she said.
In a report, the Arizona Sexual Assault Network said that “all evidence indicates that GPS tracking does not deter or prevent sex crimes.” The group cited research indicating that more than 90 percent of sex crimes against children are committed by people the victims know. But GPS legislation is generally designed to address situations in which the sex offender is presumed to be a stranger, the group said.
The group also pointed out that GPS monitoring can only tell probation officers where a person is located, “not what a person is doing.”
“Is GPS tracking necessary for high-risk offenders? Definitely yes,” the group said. “Is GPS tracking necessary and effective with the majority of the 90 to 96 percent of all sex offenders who are known to their victims? Probably not.”
The group had supported Waring’s vetoed bill.
“If the state-level legislative process demands the use of GPS on all level sex offenders, it is overburdening the parole officer… So instead of helping control released sex offenders, it is actually defeating the system,” the group said.