MATTHEW RHODES

Testimony in Opposition to SB 412 Relative to Conditional Release of Delinquent Minors and Children in Need of Services Dear Members of the Committee, I am writing to respectfully oppose SB 412. While this bill is presented as a procedural clarification, it makes a meaningful structural change to how long courts may exercise authority over minors. Specifically, it allows the court to retain jurisdiction beyond the defined period of conditional release, so long as an alleged violation is filed during that period. This change may appear minor, but it alters an important legal boundary. Under current expectations, conditional release has a clear beginning and end. That clarity provides certainty not only for the court, but for the child and the family. SB 412 weakens that boundary by allowing cases to continue beyond the original timeframe, creating a form of extended or rolling jurisdiction. This raises several concerns. First, it undermines the principle of finality. Individuals—especially minors—should be able to know when their obligations to the court have ended. Extending jurisdiction beyond the release period creates uncertainty and prolongs court involvement in a way that is not clearly limited. Second, it expands court authority without adding any corresponding safeguards. The bill does not establish timelines for resolution, reporting requirements, or limits on how long after the release period a case may be acted upon. Authority is increased, but accountability is not. Third, the bill applies not only to delinquent minors, but also to children in need of services. These are not criminal cases. Expanding court jurisdiction over non-criminal children raises concerns about unnecessary system involvement in matters that are often better addressed at the family or community level. Finally, the bill shifts the system away from clear, time-bound legal processes toward a more flexible, administrative model. When enforcement can occur after the defined period has ended, the incentive to resolve matters promptly is reduced. This does not improve outcomes for children or families. For these reasons, I urge the committee to find SB 412 inexpedient to legislate. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully, Matthew Rhodes