BENTONVILLE -- Area prosecutors and justice reform advocates have differing views on changes to bail requirements that went into effect Monday.
Act 659 of 2023, also known as the Protect Arkansas Act, requires bond companies to collect 10% of any bond up front. Previously, they were supposed to be getting 10% of the bond amount when providing bail, "but there's no real enforcement mechanism to hold them to that, so some of them are allowing it to be financed," letting people seeking bail make payments, said Matt Durrett. Durrett is prosecuting attorney for the 4th Judicial District, which includes Washington and Madison counties.
"One of the arguments against that bill is you're going to be keeping more people incarcerated and bonding companies ought to be able to make bad business decisions if they want to," he said.
Jon Comstock with the Arkansas Justice Reform Coalition said his group is very disappointed by the provision of the Protect Arkansas Act. The law makes it even harder for poor people in the state to receive the benefits of the presumption of innocence when initially charged with a crime and held pretrial in jail, he said.
"When a monetary bond is posted utilizing a bail bonding surety, the norm is for 10% of the bond to be paid," Comstock said. "Often times, the representative of the surety may get sufficient information whereby they allow the person charged to pay a portion of the bond fee immediately," with the remainder of the balance paid on an agreed-upon schedule.
Comstock said the new law prohibits this grace period for payment.
Benton County Prosecuting Attorney Joshua Robinson said he did not expect the new law to have a significant effect on the jail population. He said he does not believe it will impact the bond amounts the prosecutor's office will recommend nor the bond amounts ordered by judges.
"I think that the bonding companies in Benton County have already been largely operating in a manner consistent with the new law," Robinson said. "It is my understanding that this law was created to address issues or concerns in other parts of the state."
Kelly Cantrell, a spokesperson for the Washington County Sheriff's Office, said it's too early to know if the new law will lead to more overcrowding. She said they continually monitor the jail population.
Durrett said the law makes it harder for people to get out of jail, but it also keeps more violent offenders in jail.
"A lot of this is on those bigger bonds with the more serious offenses," Durrett said. "I think it makes the bonding companies a little bit more selective because you've got to have somebody who can take someone posting a $25,000 bond, is gonna have to put up $2,500, and they're going to have to collect that before they can pay the bond for the person."
Curt Clark, owner of Action Bail Bond and chairman of the Arkansas Bail Bond Licensing Board, said the new law may keep several more people in jail. He said a bail bond insures the defendant's appearance in court for all of their court dates until their cases are over.
"We are required by law to charge 10%," Clark said. "In the past, we had the ability to get paid after the defendant was released from jail. For example, someone's arrested and had the money or debit/credit card with them at the time of arrest."
Clark said bondsmen previously could bond people out of jails and receive payments after they were released.
"The new law does not allow this at all," he said. "Today, we must be paid before the defendant is released from jail."
Durrett said he's talked to some bondsmen who don't like the law, and a couple of them are saying in the next legislative session they're going to pass a bill to undo it.
Comstock questioned lawmakers' rationale in crafting the change.
"What is frustrating is that the prohibition was enacted without any data that compared persons who posted the full 10% with those who were able to pay the fee over time," he said. "Nothing told the Legislature that the latter group was less likely to appear in court."
He said rather than coming up with ways to honor the right of pretrial detainees to their freedom, the Legislature and governor took a punitive step backward. Comstock said the only result will be that more poor people will fill up more county jail beds -- thus allowing the government to insist a new prison is needed as the county jails are overcrowded -- and the taxpayers will be left with the bill.
In the end, no one knows for certain what impact the change will have long term, Durrett said.
"It's one of these things, we'll see after a year or so of it being in place," he said. "You don't always know the effects that these bills are going to have. It's going to be down the road a little bit."
Durrett said bonds in Washington and Madison counties have been historically reasonable, especially compared to other areas. He said there are also releases that utilize ankle monitors and releases on one's own recognizance.
"So, traditionally, our bonds have always been pretty low, so that's going to be the key. It's going to go back to a reasonable bond, and if somebody's got a $25,000 bond on a first-offense meth charge, here that would be considered unreasonable," Durrett said. "Reasonable is also a matter of perspective; it's a relative term, so we'll just have to see a year or two down the road what effect it's having on the jail population and if people are having a harder time bonding out."