The Joint Ways and Means Public Safety Subcommittee met Monday to review agency proposals for meeting a 5% reduction target in general fund and lottery accounts, roughly $276,600,000, and to hear the Oregon Office of Economic Analysis' October criminal-justice caseload forecast. Agency leaders from the judicial branch, corrections, youth services, the state police, public defense, the Department of Justice and the Criminal Justice Commission warned that the recommended cuts would have substantial operational and downstream consequences.

Michael Kennedy of the Office of Economic Analysis summarized the October forecast, saying the update is largely in line with April baselines but flagged one notable exception: probation caseloads are slightly higher than previously projected after melding the projected impact of House Bill 4,002 with attorney-availability assumptions. "Rates of offending, crime rates, juvenile offending rates have...are at pre pandemic levels," Kennedy said, noting the forecast remains broadly similar to prior estimates.

The judicial branch urged caution about across-the-board reductions. State Court Administrator Nancy Cozine told the committee that most of the Judicial Department's general-fund operations are personal services and that judicial compensation — cited at $139,500,000 in testimony — is constitutionally protected and cannot be cut. She said that a 2.5% or 5% target effectively translates into deeper cuts to operations and could require repurposing planning funds, reducing pass-through supports such as county law libraries and legal-aid funding, and implementing court closure days to reach targets. "Our constitutional duty is to resolve cases completely and without delay," Cozine said, urging options that preserve access to justice.

Public Defense Commission Executive Director Ken Sanchikrin said the PDC prioritized constitutionally mandated public-defense services and minimizing staff impacts while developing its reduction list. He told members the commission's 5% scenario equates to about $34,000,000 and that early items include eliminating county discovery reimbursements and reductions to contracted providers — changes the commission warned could shift costs or create gaps in defense services statewide.

Oregon State Police Superintendent Casey Connington and Deputy Superintendent Josh Brooks described a personnel-heavy budget and stepwise reductions. For the 2025–27 biennium testimony presented OSP's total funds budget as $717.2 million with 1,397 positions and reported roughly 112 vacancies, including 37 sworn vacancies. Initial reductions concentrate on travel, training and equipment, but deeper cuts would affect officer training hours and forensic capacity; Brooks said the second 2.5% package would include closure of two forensic labs and reductions to drug enforcement and evidence teams, risking diminished local disruption of drug distribution.

Department of Corrections Director Mike Reese framed options through DOC's mission and strategic priorities, listing low-impact measures such as delaying capital projects and reducing overtime, but warning that closing institutions or cutting core correctional services would have broader public-safety consequences. Director Reese's testimony indicated elimination of major correction services to meet deep savings would amount to on the order of roughly $129,000,000 and would jeopardize constitutionally required services and safe operations.

Oregon Youth Authority Director Mike Tessin emphasized developmental and safety considerations for youth in custody and said a 5% reduction would "compromise the structural integrity of our system." Tessin identified Camp Florence and the Tillamook campus among options modeled as least disruptive closures but warned that losing transitional placements could force premature releases, overcrowd remaining facilities, and increase recidivism risk. He also flagged culturally specific programs and small grants that sustain residential providers as vulnerable to reductions.

Barry Leslie, chief operating officer for the Department of Justice, and Legislative Director Alicia Temple described DOJ's complicated funding mix, noting general fund comprises about 21% of DOJ's budget, which makes isolating general-fund savings difficult. Leslie said DOJ sought to protect core legal functions and federal funding while identifying community grants and victim-services items as possible—but painful—areas for reduction.

Ryan Keck, interim executive director of the Criminal Justice Commission, emphasized that nearly all of the commission's dollars (described in testimony as about 94–95%) are pass-through grants; reductions therefore largely affect local programs and future award opportunities. Keck identified options such as pausing enhancements and, in more severe scenarios, applying modest reductions to already-awarded grants — which he said would eliminate opportunities for local jurisdictions downstream.

Committee co-chairs and members closed the hearing by asking agencies to provide follow-up materials in writing on specific data points (for example, historical indicators linking recessions to crime, downstream costs of outside counsel, and DOJ internal billing/fund flows) and by emphasizing continued stakeholder engagement as the subcommittee refines reduction options.

Why it matters: agency leaders repeatedly framed the exercise as a balance between short-term fiscal necessity and protecting services that, if cut, could generate larger downstream public costs — for courts, indigent defense, local governments, corrections, youth services and law enforcement. The hearing produced no formal actions; members requested additional written follow-up and signaled more consideration and stakeholder meetings to come.