Aiming to ensure fair sentences for first-time offenders and youths, Ballot Measure 94 would repeal minimum sentencing for violent crimes and sexual offenses, such as murder, rape, kidnapping and robbery.
If passed, Measure 94 would repeal 1994’s Ballot Measure 11, which enacted mandatory minimum sentences. Measure 94 would require that all adults issued mandatory minimum sentences be re-sentenced using a grid system consisting of the type of crime and prior convictions.
Supporters of Measure 94 say it would give power back to judges and reduce Oregon’s prison population, thereby cutting the state’s prison costs. They also say that giving judges more power wouldn’t necessarily lead to more lenient sentencing for all violent criminals. Judges could still issue maximum sentences.
But many opponents say mandatory sentences keep judges from being too lenient and keep violent criminals out of society and in prison, where they could be reformed.
“[With this measure] judges can make the sentence fit the crime. It’s not our intention for people to just be set free,” said Cathi Lawler, a member of Parents Against Cruel and Unusual Punishment. Lawler’s son was one of the first people convicted under Measure 11 and has been in prison for five years.
Howard Rodstein of Crime Victims United argues that “minimum sentences are important because sometimes the judge has no choice but to give out the minimum sentence.”
“No one is happy about the attempt to turn back to olden days,” said Ray Montee, a member of National Association for Crime Victim Rights, referring to the repeal of Measure 11.
If the measure is passed, approximately 3,200 criminals will be re-sentenced; 11 percent of these are juveniles ages 15 to 17. These juveniles, who were tried in adult court under Measure 11, would be sent to juvenile court for a waiver hearing to determine whether the case will stay in juvenile court or be transferred to adult court. In adult court, the youth would get a re-sentencing hearing; if sent to juvenile court, the youth would get a new trial.
Along with human rights debates, both sides are also debating the financial impact of the measure. If passed, Measure 94 would reduce the state adult prison costs, and juvenile close custody will decrease by $10.8 million in 2000-2001. Also, state community corrections payments to counties would increase by $900,000 in 2000-2001.
“This money,” argues Lawler, “should be put on the front end [of the problem] for prevention and treatment programs.”
On the other hand, state costs to re-sentence criminals would be $6.9 million between now and 2002 and county costs for re-sentencing are estimated to be $2.1 million.
“There was an estimated $193 million budgeted annually for Measure 11, and 66 percent of the citizens voted in favor of that. The actual costs for Measure 11 were $48 million annually, almost one-fourth the estimated cost,” said Rodstein.