Nelson County fiscal court approves state-inmate work program, bars county transport

Nelson County Fiscal Court voted Nov. 18 to approve a pilot program allowing certain state inmates to work for local employers while in custody, with an amendment that the county will not provide transportation to job sites.

The court’s discussion centered on eligibility, oversight, and financial arrangements. Justin Howell (S6), who presented the program framework, said the initiative would target low-risk, class D/level-1 state inmates and would require Department of Corrections approval for individual participants. "It allows a small portion of them ... if they're coming close on their release, probably about within 6 months," Howell said, explaining the program’s focus on those nearing reentry.

Howell outlined pay and deductions: 25% of net pay would be withheld for child support, 15% for restitution and court costs, and a participation fee equal to the lesser of 20% of net pay or $55 weekly to defray program costs. "Remaining funds may be used at the participant's discretion," he said, noting participants could maintain a bank account while incarcerated with the jail as a cosigner until release.

Members raised liability and supervision concerns for employers. Howell said contractors would be required to provide certificates of insurance and carry workers' compensation; the jail would include liability-language in contracts and would vet employers. "We would ... draft contracts up with each one of these employers and there'll be liability language," he said.

The court debated whether transportation to worksites should be provided by the county. After clarification that employers would be responsible for pickup and that the jail would not add staff or transportation costs, a member moved to approve the initiative and amended the motion to state explicitly that transportation will not be provided by the county. The amendment passed; the motion to approve the employment initiative carried by voice vote.

The program requires DOC approval before implementation; Howell said the court will send the proposal to the Department of Corrections and then return contracts for employer approval and a subsequent court vote on each participating employer. "If you all approve this tonight, then I can wait till the [DOC] gets approval," Howell said. He also said the county would draft the employer contracts for court review before allowing any employer to participate.

The court’s action was procedural approval of the program model and a direction to proceed to DOC review and contract drafting; it does not itself enroll any inmates or finalize employer agreements. Advocates in the discussion noted benefits including opportunities for participants to leave custody with funds and a job lined up; critics focused on transport and supervisory risk, concerns the court addressed by requiring employer-provided transport and insurance requirements.

The court’s next procedural steps are to submit the program for DOC approval, draft employer contracts with liability and transport provisions for court review and then vote on specific employer agreements before allowing participation.