MONTGOMERY, Ala. — A bill that would partially reform bail in the state of Alabama received a favorable report Wednesday from the Senate Judiciary Committee, despite opposition from the bail bondsman industry.
Under existing law, when issued a cash bail by a judicial officer, Alabamians charged and arrested for a crime are required to pay the total sum to be released on bond. Under House Bill 16, sponsored by Rep. Chris England, D-Tuscaloosa, courts would be afforded the ability to accept a cash deposit of an amount less than the total bond set for an individual.
“What this bill does is give the jails the ability to give partial bonds or not,” explained Sen. Bobby Singleton, D-Greensboro, who England asked to speak on behalf of his bill Wednesday morning.
“I think Rep. England’s intent is to make sure that money not just go to the bail bondsman, but on a cash bail, can come back to the court and for money to be given to victims in compensation or whatever happens inside the courts.”
The committee permitted public comment on the bill during the meeting, with one individual having signed up to speak: Chris McNeil, president of the Alabama Bail Bond Association and owner of Outlaw Bail Bonds in Mobile.
McNeil argued that states that had instituted similar reforms to bail bonds had seen increased instances of those released on bail failing to appear in court.
“This would be an attempt at bail reform that we’ve seen in many states that are on the news all the time, and what we get from this is just failures to appear,” McNeil said. “The states that have done this are averaging a 70% failure to appear rate.”
While there exists a lack of comprehensive data on failure-to-appear rates, a Harvard study found a negligible impact on failure-to-appear rates with the elimination of cash bail, and in Illinois, where cash bail was eliminated entirely last year, failure-to-appear rates remained largely stagnant, and jail populations have shrunk.
Sens. Lance Bell, R-Riverside, Rodger Smitherman, D-Birmingham, and Will Barefoot, R-Pike Road, the chair of the committee, all spoke in favor of the bill, highlighting the additional discretion afforded to courts and a positive.
“The one thing I can say on this is it allows the judge to have discretion, which I like,” Bell said.
Barfoot, attempting to clarify the risks undertaken by bail bondsmen, posed a question to McNeil.
“In cases where an individual doesn’t come back and you’re unable to find them on or before that court date, my thought process was that the courts would say you are responsible for this person, and we are going to forfeit your bond,” Barfoot said. “Does that happen?”
“Absolutely it happens,” McNeil said. “It doesn’t happen to me because I’m going to go get them.”
Singleton pushed back on Mcneil’s comments, saying that court-ordered bond forfeitures for bail bondsmen were a rare occurrence in Alabama, with the exception of several counties.
“I would just respectfully disagree with the gentleman based on statistics that are out there,” Singleton said.
“I think there are probably two or three counties that do forfeitures. Around the state of Alabama, the forfeiture hearing does not happen on a regular basis.”
A 2022 report from the Alabama Professional Bail Bonding Board, a state entity that regulates the industry, appears to support Singleton’s assertion, with one survey respondent saying that there were “too many companies writing bonds (that) are not being held responsible by counties for their forfeitures.”
Before voting on the bill, Barfoot said while he would vote in its favor in the committee, his continued support would be contingent on Singleton’s position – that a majority of Alabama counties do not forfeit bail bondsman’s cash bail when a defendant doesn’t show up for court – being accurate.
The bill ultimately passed out of committee with two no votes from Sens. Sam Givhan, R-Huntsville, and Larry Stutts, R-Tuscumbia.
Stutts later told Alabama Daily News that McNeil’s comments were what influenced his decision to vote against the bill, and that too much uncertainty remained as to what the impact of reforming Alabama’s bail system could have on failure to appear rates.
“The deciding factor for me, and I’m assuming what (McNeil) said was true – he seemed like he was telling the truth about it – is when you instituted this in other states, their no-show rate for hearings went up,” Stutts told ADN.
“So it looks like you do this and less people show up to court.”
Today is the final legislative day of this year’s session, HB16 still requires Senate approval and House concurrence to become law.