Summary: Collateral Consequences Workgroup: Session 2
Sept. 26, Legislative Building, Annapolis
Members present:
- Judge Alex Williams, Chair, Center for Education, Justice & Ethics
- Christi Megna, Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
- Glenn Fueston, Governor’s Office of Crime Control & Prevention
- Caryn Aslan, Job Opportunities Task Force
- Yariela Kerr-Donovan, Johns Hopkins HR Department
- James Brenton, Jr., Ahold USA, Giant Foods
- Mike Reynolds, Giant Foods
- John Huffington, Living Classrooms
- Jeb Tosi (representing Secretary Schulz, Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation)
- Rachel Sessa, Public Safety and Correctional Services
- Mike O’Halloran, National Federation for Independent Business – Maryland
- Shaina Hernandez, Greater Baltimore Committee
- Vickie Wilkins (representing Secretary Moyer, Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services)
- Overview of research on Employment and Occupational Licensing of persons with criminal records
Reporters: Jinney Smith, Ph.D, and Kiminori Nakamura, Ph.D, from Maryland Data Analysis Center, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of MD, College Park
The reporters provided a handout with 19 slides. They said there is NO Maryland-specific data, so the first 6 slides and graphs indicated things we already know at the U.S. level: the prison population shot up in the 1990s and thus “ex-felons” have increased as well, with African Americans being represented disproportionally.
They presented research and data on “Redemption:”
- Blumstein and Nakamura (2009): After 4 years, the recidivism risk falls below general population’s risk of arrest. Conclusions are that recidivism declines with the age of the former prisoner and the length of time he or she is out of prison and free of new crime.
- Kurlychek et al. (2006, 2007): Concluded that offenders and non-offenders become similar over time after approximately 7 years.
- Bushway et al. (2011): This Dutch study concludes that redemption times are longer for younger offenders and those with multiple records.
Remedies:
- EEOC Guideline: employers should consider the “age” of criminal records.
- Sealing/Shielding: after some redemption time, records should become invisible for most purposes.
- Expungement: Records are destroyed permanently. (Efforts of making records invisible are limited due to commercial databases, retrievable media coverage, etc.)
- Certificates of Rehabilitation/Good Conduct (one member noted that the JRA certificate would be available Oct. 1, 2017).
- Ban the Box (some discussion here that it only delays finding out about a record).
Four Recommendations
The reporters presented four recommendations, including recommendations to collect Maryland-specific data on collateral consequences.
#1: Limit the consideration of certain criminal histories older than 7-10 years after release:
- In certification/licensing and hiring decisions
- In awarding Certificates of Rehabilitation
#2: Use sealing or shielding instead of expungement of criminal history to counter the effects of collateral consequences
- Speakers noted there were limits to the effectiveness of each method.
- Expungement has implications for public safety as well as for research uses of records.
- Risk-level tools would be useful.
#3a: Data collection, reporting, and analysis from Maryland state licensing and certification boards
- The number of applications received for occupational certificates and licenses
- The number of applicants with a criminal history
- The number of applicants accepted and rejected (or revoked) for a criminal history.
#3b: Data collection, reporting, and analysis from Maryland agencies
- The number of applicants for state government jobs employed with, and rejected due to, a criminal history
- Follow-up on the employment outcomes of public employees hired with a criminal history.
Speakers also recommended:
- A study linking criminal history records to the MLDS Center’s data warehouse of individual education, employment, and income histories would provide Maryland-specific information for policymakers.
- A robust research design that allows measuring the effects of criminal justice system involvement and collateral consequences on re-entry outcomes.
#4: Maryland state agencies should disseminate more information and guidance:
- Should be addressed to potential certification/license applicants and employment applicants
- Should describe the types of criminal history, and the “age” of criminal history, that will be considered in applicant evaluation and hiring.
- Breakouts: Discussion Points and Questions
Members broke out into small groups to complete an exercise prepared by the Judge Alexander Williams, Jr., of the Center for Education, Justice and Ethics. The purpose was to get members thinking, in groups of 3 each, about the areas below and registering thoughts and questions.
Two Legal Consultants from the Williams Center, Kue Lattimore-Williams, Esq. (kue.lattimore@gmail.com) and Shakisha O’Connor Morgan, Esq. (shakishamorgan@gmail.com) gave an overview of general information from various states on employing returning citizens and why this workgroup was commissioned. They stated their purpose was to try to put shape and form to the final report by
(i) updating presentations given so far;
(ii) honing in on shaping the report, e.g., addressing questions that have been raised by members and determining which things should be focal points;
(iii) creating an opportunity for interaction on assumptions and parameters report should take.
Ken Glover, who was not present, is Project Lead: kenglover2012@gmail.com
Then, members numbered off and had 20 minutes to read and discuss the four areas below, each with 2-4 sub-questions:
- Subgroup 1: Balancing Public Safety with Successful Re-entry
- Subgroup 2: Background Checks, Records, and Point of Redemption
- Subgroup 3: Discrimination Laws and Stigma
- Subgroup 4: Expungements vs. Shielding/Sealing and Future Research, Ideas and Data Collection
Most didn’t finish reading and discussing in time for reporting. Members clearly expressed the fact that most felt they really didn’t know what the licensing situation is now or whether it is actually a problem.
Highlights of Discussion Following Exercise:
Two members from health and non-health licensing shared their experience: 450,000 health licenses are issued and very few licenses are denied by their groups. When they are denied, the individuals can go before the board within 30-60 days for a hearing. Possibly the barrier is at the employer stage. Denials would be related to public safety issues, e.g., an individual applying for a locksmith license who has a breaking and entering record. There are many boards operating for different occupations, with executive directors having varied delegated authority.
Rachel Cruse, Public Safety and Correctional Services, said we don’t have a robust understanding of licensing and expressed the need for the Collateral Consequences Committee to walk through the actual licensing process.
Glenn Fueston, Governor’s Office of Crime Control & Prevention, asked, “Do we have a licensing problem or an employment problem?”
Announcements:
October 31 Workgroup Meeting—10:00 – 1:00
- Review of subgroup discussion summaries
- Presentation of collateral consequences “homework” assignment: identifying specific Maryland statutory barriers to occupational and professional licenses and certifications that you want to see changed.
Next Stakeholder Meeting: Friday 14 at 1:00pm in Baltimore
Two more Workforce Sessions: Monday, Oct. 31 and Tuesday, Nov. 15.
Report due by December 1
Reports by the official minute-taker can be found on GOCCP.Maryland.gov after they have been approved by the body. At this session, Sept. 1 minutes were approved, and are available at: https://goccp.maryland.gov/wp-content/uploads/collateral-consequences-minutes-20160901.pdf
Notetakers: Barbara Thomas and Adrian Bishop
