🛍️ Criminal Justice Reform

Restoring Justice, Accountability, and Second Chances

Iowa’s criminal justice system is broken. It prioritizes punishment over rehabilitation, ignores lived experience, and has allowed bureaucracy to outweigh public safety. I’ve lived inside that system, and I’ve seen where it fails and where it could succeed — if we had the courage to change it.

As your next representative for House District 88, I’ll introduce and advocate for bold reforms that make our system smarter, safer, and more humane. These aren’t abstract ideas — these are actions that will help families, reduce recidivism, and protect our community

The Breakdown of How I Will Address Each Issue

🔏 Prison Labor Fairness & Accountability Act

The Problem:

Incarcerated individuals in Iowa perform essential work inside prisons — from food preparation to maintenance to laundry services — yet they are compensated as little as $0.28 to $2.00 an hour. Meanwhile, their loved ones are often charged high transaction fees just to send money, and any funds received are heavily garnished through "Pay For Stay" charges and restitution holds. There is minimal transparency in how this money is handled, and little is saved to support reentry after release.

When inmates don’t have enough to meet basic needs, it leads to desperate decisions. Many turn to rule-breaking just to survive — engaging in contraband trading, stealing food, or worse, being exploited or coerced into sexual favors or manipulative arrangements for hygiene items or snacks. Even acts of kindness are punished: if one person shares an extra bowl or item with someone who has nothing, both can be written up and have their belongings taken.

Those who break rules out of desperation often receive disciplinary reports and lose their work assignment — sometimes their only source of income. After that, they may be forced to wait 30 to 60 days just to regain their privilege level, followed by another 60 to 75 days to reach the top of the institutional job list. This cycle traps people in poverty and hopelessness, making rehabilitation even harder.

This is not setting people up for successful reentry — it’s reinforcing trauma, poverty, and punitive control.

My Solution:

Where does the money come from?
The wages paid to incarcerated individuals come from the operating budgets of the Iowa Department of Corrections (IDOC), which are funded by a combination of state general funds, federal allocations, and revenue generated through inmate labor contracts and internal services. Many of the work assignments performed by inmates directly support prison operations (e.g., kitchen, janitorial, laundry), saving the state millions annually in outsourced labor costs. Raising wages to $1/hour is not only feasible within these budgets but also offset by improved institutional morale, lower misconduct rates, and reduced recidivism.

The increase in wages — from an average of $0.44/hour to $1/hour — may raise the direct labor costs slightly, but it will be balanced by cutting excessive administrative waste, redirecting Pay For Stay and canteen surplus funds more responsibly, and improving rehabilitation outcomes that reduce long-term incarceration costs.

The Prison Labor Fairness & Accountability Act will reform this broken model from the ground up. I will introduce legislation that:

✅ Sets a $1.00/hour minimum wage for all prison labor in Iowa

Wages may increase based on performance, responsibility, and tenure

Tiered pay scale will be established by an independent work board

✅ Reforms and expands the existing Reentry Savings Account (Gate Fee)

The current $100 gate fee system, which withholds 10% of incoming funds until release, will be increased to $250

Once the $250 threshold is reached, automatic deductions will stop unless voluntarily continued by the incarcerated individual

The savings are fully available upon release and protected from all garnishments

✅ Protects earned wages from excessive garnishment

Currently, 30% of earnings are deducted: 20% for restitution or child support and 10% for the gate fee. This will be reduced to a total 20% cap: 10% for the Reentry Savings Account (Gate Fee) and 10% for restitution or child support

Under the current system, the state recovers about $2.64 per week from the average incarcerated worker. Under this plan, the state will recover $3.00 per week — a slight increase that allows everyone to benefit: the state recovers more, and individuals take home significantly more.

Once the gate fee balance reaches the $250 threshold, the 10% for savings will stop automatically unless voluntarily continued by the incarcerated individual

This adjustment gives incarcerated individuals the ability to retain more of their income while still contributing toward obligations

For the average incarcerated person working 30 hours per week, that means a wage increase from $13.20/week (at $0.44/hr minus 30% deductions to leave them with $9.24) to $30.00/week (at $1/hr minus 20% deduction to leave them with $24) — more than double the take-home pay

Since prisons categorize these as "work assignments" rather than formal jobs (to avoid payroll tax obligations), the state should not be allowed to treat them as garnishable income

These earnings are intended solely to help incarcerated individuals afford hygiene, food, and communication with loved ones through canteen purchases and phone calls

✅ Retains the Pay For Stay fee but reforms how funds are spent

Funds collected from Pay For Stay fees must be used exclusively to benefit the incarcerated population

Each institution shall be required to post weekly updates in every living unit showing the current inmate fund balance and a detailed breakdown of all expenditures

✅ Empowers Inmate Councils with real oversight

Inmate councils shall be given formal authority to propose expenditures from the inmate fund

Any proposed spending over a set threshold (e.g., $500) must be voted on by the general inmate population to ensure democratic approval

This prevents misuse of inmate funds on things like staff cookouts and stops the cycle of internal embezzlement or unjustified spending

✅ Caps fees on family money transfers at $3 per transaction

The state will contract only with financial vendors that agree to this cap

Transparency required for any deductions from inmate accounts

✅ Caps incoming fund deductions to 10%

Currently, up to 20% of incoming money from loved ones is garnished — this will be reduced to 10% to ease the burden on both incarcerated individuals and their families

While the state has a right to recover costs, it must not exploit those who are already economically vulnerable

✅ Creates an exception policy for individuals serving life sentences

For incarcerated people serving life without parole, a higher deduction cap of 15% will apply on incoming funds and earned wages

These individuals may still contribute toward system costs without being denied the ability to survive with dignity inside

✅ Creates a financial accountability dashboard

Each incarcerated person can track their deposits, garnishments, and balances

The public can see how DOC labor profits are used

✅ Mandates regular audits of inmate trust accounts and DOC labor revenues

Any misuse, overcharging, or hidden fees will be reported and prosecuted

Audits must be published publicly, annually

Impact on District 88:

This act protects working families who are already struggling — the moms, dads, and grandparents who send $20 a week so their loved one can buy soap, snacks, or make a phone call.

It prepares incarcerated Iowans for release by giving them a foundation — money saved, job experience earned, and dignity restored.

It reduces recidivism, improves behavior inside the prisons, and brings accountability to a system that currently hides behind fine print and private contracts.

And for taxpayers? It ensures that every dollar the state makes off prison labor is transparent, ethical, and used to improve rehabilitation — not pad a bloated DOC budget.

🧪 Iowa Corrections Integrity Act

The Problem:

Correctional officers in Iowa prisons are trusted with immense authority, yet they are not held to the same level of accountability as the individuals they supervise. Instances of staff showing up under the influence of drugs or alcohol are not uncommon — and when incarcerated individuals attempt to report these violations, they are often threatened, ignored, or retaliated against. Meanwhile, no independent system exists to investigate or correct staff misconduct.

In 2024, I personally witnessed this broken system. I reported a female correctional officer who appeared to be clearly under the influence of methamphetamine to the shift captain. His response was chilling: "You better have some serious proof if you're making allegations like that." When I asked when she was last drug tested, I was told, "All employees are drug tested upon hire." According to public records on Openthebooks.com, she was hired in 2021 — and had not been tested since.

While I’ve never used meth myself, the signs were visible to many of us — over 60% of the prison camp believed she was under the influence that day. Her behavior matched multiple common signs of methamphetamine use: erratic pacing, excessive sweating, rapid and pressured speech, repetitive movements, and intense eye twitching. Despite these obvious indicators, no action was taken, and no system existed for me to escalate the report safely or meaningfully.

What made the situation worse — and ultimately inspired this act — was that it was commonly known among the inmate population and even staff that this officer and her husband, who also worked there, frequently came to work under the influence. It wasn’t a secret. Yet instead of being held accountable, they were protected by administration. This culture of cover-up and negligence puts everyone at risk and highlights the urgent need for independent oversight and mandatory staff accountability.

My Solution:

The Iowa Corrections Integrity Act will restore public trust and institutional integrity by implementing the following reforms:

✅ Mandatory random drug testing for DOC staff every 60 days

Ensures that correctional officers are fit for duty and held to basic standards of professionalism

✅ Immediate termination and criminal penalties for working under the influence

Any staff member found under the influence while on duty will face mandatory termination

A mandatory 15-month prison sentence will be imposed for first-time offenders

Staff will be permanently banned from working in corrections or law enforcement in Iowa

✅ Felony charges for staff under the influence

This increases the penalty when the presence of drugs or alcohol creates a high-risk safety hazard

This includes any correctional staff member under the influence while in possession of any dangerous item or device considered a security risk, including but not limited to chemical agents such as pepper spray, OC spray, or similar irritants, whether on their person or attached to their uniform or utility belt

✅ Independent third-party oversight board

All allegations of staff misconduct will be referred to an outside investigative body within 24 hours

The board will have subpoena power, reporting duties, and whistleblower protections for incarcerated individuals and staff

✅ Protected reporting system for incarcerated individuals

Incarcerated individuals may report suspected intoxicated staff anonymously or openly

Any retaliation by shift captains or other staff will result in disciplinary action

False reports will result in no more than 15 days in segregation, with an appeal process

Impact on District 88:
This law will create safer, more stable prisons that operate on fairness, not fear. It reassures the public that no one is above the law — not even those wearing a badge. It protects incarcerated individuals who are trying to do the right thing, improves staff professionalism, and ensures that Iowa taxpayers are not subsidizing misconduct.

🔍 Transparency in Sentencing & Parole Decisions

The Problem:

At Newton Correctional Facility, access to pro-social programs has been steadily stripped away. Several core religious and recovery-based programs were cut, including Brothers in Blue, Celebrate Recovery, and regular Bible studies led by pastors from New Life Prison Church multiple times a week. Weekly movie night in the gym was canceled due to a single incident, yet they still host a Christmas Bingo event in the same space with over 250 inmates and only 2–3 staff members present. The monthly all-faith Christian service in the gym — an opportunity for more than 100 people to worship together — was also eliminated. Now, Christian activity is limited to the chapel, which only fits about 30 people per service.

A.A. volunteers used to be able to submit a generic note to an inmate’s ICON file showing participation — something the Board of Parole could review. That is no longer allowed. The Chapel is also no longer permitted to note if someone is attending services or participating in church leadership. I submitted proposals to start a Life Recovery program, but they were denied without explanation.

So while the parole board continues to use "more pro-social behavior" as a blanket reason for denying release, the DOC systematically eliminates the opportunities to demonstrate that behavior. And worse — even when people do participate in meaningful, rehabilitative activities, those efforts are not allowed to be documented in the system the BOP reviews. The only thing consistently recorded is disciplinary action. While technically, staff can submit a positive generic note, I have only witnessed that happen a handful of times.

The Iowa Board of Parole frequently denies release with vague and overused reasons such as "needs more pro-social behavior." However, inside Iowa’s prisons, pro-social opportunities have been severely cut — fewer college classes, restricted access to AA/NA groups, and limited or denied religious gatherings. Even when individuals are active in church, college, or mentoring programs, DOC staff often fail to include this participation in the generic notes — the very system the BOP uses to make release decisions. This is despite the fact that to attend programs like A.A., college classes, or church services, individuals are already required to sign in with their name and state number. This lack of documentation hides progress and undermines rehabilitation efforts.

Incarcerated individuals are left in a catch-22: expected to demonstrate rehabilitation while being denied the tools and documentation to prove it. The parole board then claims there’s not enough visible growth, even though the system itself hides that growth from view.

My Solution:

The Transparency in Sentencing & Parole Decisions Act will ensure that rehabilitation is both visible and valued:

✅ Mandatory documentation of program participation

All educational, faith-based, therapeutic, and community-based programs must be recorded in an individual’s official record

Volunteer facilitators and staff will have secure, authorized access to log this participation into the DOC’s tracking system

✅ Parole board access to full records

The Board of Parole must review updated, verified records of participation before making release decisions

✅ Annual transparency report on parole denials

The BOP must publish anonymized data detailing reasons for denial and whether they align with the individual's documented progress

✅ Eliminate vague denial language

Language like "more pro-social behavior needed" cannot be used without specific, documented examples and context

Impact on District 88:

This reform will reduce unnecessary incarceration, help end overcrowding, and give deserving individuals the second chance they’ve earned. It promotes integrity, consistency, and fairness in parole decisions — and it ensures that our justice system supports rehabilitation, not just punishment.

🛐 Religious Liberty in Prisons Act

The Problem:
Freedom of religion is a constitutional right — not a privilege to be arbitrarily restricted by prison administrators. Yet across Iowa correctional facilities, religious expression is increasingly suppressed. At Newton Correctional Facility, multiple proposals were submitted to move weekly Christian services to a larger, unused space so more people could attend — proposals that required no additional resources from the DOC. Each one was rejected without explanation.

When the prison chapel was capped at 36 people (including the three outside volunteers from New Life Prison Church), we even offered to split the service into two 45-minute sessions to accommodate the 15–20 people turned away each week. The volunteers agreed. We spoke with the Treatment Director, completed all necessary paperwork, and followed the process. The result? Silence, and then rejection.

Staff explained the denial by saying other Christian services were available — but this misses the point. Every service is different. The New Life Prison Church service brought in ordained pastors from outside the facility, creating a unique experience rooted in accountability, hope, and formal spiritual leadership. In contrast, other services were inmate-led with no outside guidance. Denying access to that kind of religious experience isn’t just arbitrary — it’s illegal.

Freedom of religion is a constitutional right — not a privilege to be arbitrarily restricted by prison administrators. Yet across Iowa correctional facilities, religious expression is increasingly suppressed. At Newton Correctional Facility, long-standing programs such as Brothers in Blue, Celebrate Recovery, and Bible studies led by pastors from New Life Prison Church were cut without justification. A once-monthly gym service that allowed over 100 people to gather and worship was eliminated, forcing all Christian services into the overcrowded chapel, which seats only 30.

While group activities like Christmas Bingo — with over 250 inmates — are permitted in the gym with limited staff, faith-based gatherings are deemed “security risks.” This inconsistent standard undermines both safety and spiritual development.

Volunteer chaplains and A.A. facilitators can no longer document attendance in ICON, the system used by parole boards to review behavior and rehabilitation. This means that even committed spiritual growth — a cornerstone of reform for many incarcerated individuals — is invisible to the people deciding their future.

My Solution:

The Religious Liberty in Prisons Act will guarantee equal access and protection for all faith-based programs:

✅ Restore and protect religious programs

Reinstate eliminated programs like Brothers in Blue, Celebrate Recovery, and large-scale worship services

Prohibit arbitrary cancellation of religious activities without documented justification

✅ Require equal access to space and time

Mandate that religious services receive space and attendance allowances equal to non-religious group events

Weekly or monthly interfaith services must be accommodated in larger communal spaces if needed

✅ Document religious participation in ICON

Chapel staff and volunteers will be authorized to enter generic notes showing attendance and participation

Participation in services, leadership roles, or religious study will be reflected in an individual's record

✅ Prevent religious discrimination

Prohibit retaliation or denial of access based on faith, denomination, or non-denominational beliefs

Create a grievance process for unresolved religious access complaints, reviewed by an independent board

Impact on District 88:
True rehabilitation happens when the internal void left behind by removing destructive behaviors — whether addiction, violence, pornography, or abuse — is filled with something meaningful. For many, that meaning is found in faith. Supporting religious liberty in prisons helps break cycles of trauma and poor decision-making, which in turn reduces recidivism and strengthens communities across District 88.

This act upholds First Amendment rights for all incarcerated Iowans, ensuring they can access the spiritual guidance that helps many transform their lives. It fosters a culture of respect, reduces idleness and conflict, and increases opportunities for true rehabilitation. Faith shouldn’t end at the prison gate — and in District 88, it won’t.

⛓️ Reentry Mentorship & Success Act (RMSA)

The Problem:
When individuals are released from prison in Iowa, many face overwhelming barriers to reentry — including finding housing, employment, healthcare, and community support. Without structured guidance and personal accountability, too many fall back into the same cycles that led them to incarceration in the first place. Iowa's reentry system is underfunded, impersonal, and inconsistent. Most individuals are released with minimal preparation and few local resources to guide their reintegration.

Even those who want to change struggle to find mentors, jobs, or places to live that will accept someone with a criminal record. Meanwhile, those who’ve walked the same path — formerly incarcerated individuals with the wisdom and experience to help others succeed — are rarely empowered to lead or support reentry efforts.

My Solution:
The Reentry Mentorship & Success Act will build a real support system that starts before release and continues through successful reintegration:

✅ Mandatory reentry planning for all individuals within 6 months of release

Reentry Coordinators will work with incarcerated individuals to create detailed plans for housing, employment, education, and healthcare

✅ Establish Peer Reentry Mentor roles

Create paid mentorship roles for formerly incarcerated individuals to support people preparing for release and navigating life on the outside

Peer mentors will be trained and certified through a DOC-supported program and embedded in communities across Iowa

✅ Promote existing second-chance employer tax incentives

Launch a statewide awareness campaign to inform businesses about underutilized tax credits available for hiring formerly incarcerated individuals

Provide training and outreach to encourage more employers to adopt fair-chance hiring practices

✅ Dedicated transitional housing and job placement partnerships

Fund community partnerships to provide temporary housing and employment pathways, reducing the risk of homelessness and unemployment

✅ Increase awareness of automatic voter registration upon release

Launch public information efforts to ensure individuals know their voting rights and how to confirm registration after release

Provide clear guidance and assistance to those who must manually apply due to specific felony exceptions, such as homicide convictions

💰 Estimated Cost & Funding Strategy

Estimated Annual Costs:

Reentry Coordinators:
4 coordinators (each to cover 2 judicial districts, supervising 20 peer mentors) @ $50,000 salary = $200,000

Peer Reentry Mentors:
80 mentors (10 per district) @ $37,650 (250% of FPL) = $3,012,000

Awareness Campaigns & Employer Outreach:
Digital, print, and event-based campaigns = $200,000

Transitional Housing & Job Partnerships:
Seed grants for nonprofit and business partnerships = $1,000,000

Voter Awareness & Rights Education:
Outreach materials, registration guidance = $100,000

📦 Total Estimated Cost: ~$4.5 million/year

🧭 How It Will Be Paid For:

Reallocation of Existing Reentry Funds
Redirect ineffective spending within the DOC’s reentry budget to fund evidence-based programming and mentorship.

Domestic Violence & Drug Trafficking Registry Revenues
A large majority of this act will be funded with $250,000 in dedicated funds from the Domestic Violence Registry and $3,000,000 from the Drug Trafficking Registry revenue.

Federal Second Chance Act Grants
Leverage federal grants that support reentry mentoring, employment, and housing initiatives.

Community & Nonprofit Partnerships
Collaborate with reentry nonprofits and faith-based groups to share staffing, resources, and matching funds.

Savings from Reduced Recidivism
With incarceration costs at ~$37,000 per person annually, preventing just 120 people from returning saves over $4.44 million — fully funding this program through smart prevention.

Department of Corrections Spending
In 2025, the DOC had a net increase of $11.9 million compared to estimated FY 2024, with an increase of $1.3 million for corrections administration. This is bloated spending that I will work to reduce. If we can spend $1.3 million extra on adminstration that does not help reduce recidivism, we can come up with $4.5 million to save the tax payers money long-term!

Impact on District 88:
This act will reduce recidivism, ease the burden on our correctional system, and create a healthier, safer community. It empowers returning citizens to succeed — not just survive — by tapping into real mentorship and practical support. Our district thrives when everyone has a second chance to contribute, grow, and live with dignity.

This act also creates meaningful jobs — not for expanding top-heavy bureaucracy, but for empowering Iowans with lived experience. By hiring Reentry Coordinators and Peer Reentry Mentors across all 8 judicial districts, we’re creating a workforce rooted in credibility, transformation, and service. These roles provide real employment pathways for formerly incarcerated Iowans. Peer mentors must be at least 10 years from their most recent prison release, with no new convictions — proving their commitment to change and making them powerful role models for others.

💼 DOC Administration Pay Cap & Accountability Act

The Problem:
The Iowa Department of Corrections (IDOC) has become increasingly top-heavy, with bloated salaries at the highest levels while front-line staff remain underpaid and overworked. Directors, wardens, and administrative managers often earn well over $100,000 per year — some making as much as $189,000 — despite poor performance, repeated oversight failures, and deteriorating facility conditions.

Meanwhile, the people who actually facilitate rehabilitation — treatment counselors, educators, reentry coordinators — often earn $40,000–$60,000 per year. Incarcerated individuals are denied vital programming, facility maintenance is neglected, and meaningful reforms are delayed — all while top administrators enjoy generous pay and little accountability.

This imbalance is not just a misuse of taxpayer money; it’s a sign of broken priorities. In 2024, the Justice System Appropriations Bill (Senate File 2434) increased DOC administration spending by $1.3 million — with no clear accountability for how those additional funds improved outcomes.

To provide transparency, here is a breakdown of warden salaries across Iowa correctional institutions for 2024 with the available public data I was able to find:

Anamosa State Penitentiary – Jeremy Larson – $138,000

Clarinda Correctional Facility – Shawn Howard – $159,000

Fort Dodge Correctional Facility – James McKinney – $142,500

Iowa Medical and Classification Center (Oakdale) – William Sperfslage – $149,000

Iowa State Penitentiary (Fort Madison) – Timothy Cutler – $145,000

Mitchellville Correctional Institution for Women – Rebecca Bowker – $141,200

Mount Pleasant Correctional Facility – James Benson – $138,700

Newton Correctional Facility – Scott Brown – $144,300

North Central Correctional Facility (Rockwell City) – Chris Tripp – $135,500

Additional top IDOC administrative salaries include:

Beth Skinner (DOC Director): $189,000/year

Deputy Director of Institutions: $158,000/year

Director of Operations: $151,000/year

Chief of Staff: $148,000/year

Treatment Services Director: $112,000/year

My Solution:
The DOC Administration Pay Cap & Accountability Act will restore fiscal responsibility and redirect funding toward rehabilitation, safety, and support services:

✅ Cap DOC leadership salaries

IDOC Director salary capped at $150,000/year

Prison Wardens capped at $120,000/year

Treatment Directors, Administrative Managers, or similar roles capped at $95,000/year

While these caps ensure fiscal discipline, all eligible staff will continue to receive full access to IPERS, the Iowa Public Employees’ Retirement System — one of the most valuable and secure retirement plans in the nation.

✅ Reallocate surplus funds to front-line staff and programming

Redirect excess funds to increase pay for treatment counselors, mental health workers, and educational facilitators

Fund expanded rehabilitative programs, facility upgrades, and mental health care

✅ Require salary and performance transparency

Expand public reporting for DOC employees earning over $70,000/year, including job title, salary, departmental role, and a summary of duties

Mandate cost-benefit audits to assess whether administrative salaries align with measurable outcomes such as recidivism reduction, program expansion, or institutional improvements

✅ Eliminate unnecessary upper-level positions

Conduct staffing audits to identify redundant or ceremonial roles that don’t directly impact safety, rehabilitation, or operations

Create a leaner, more efficient leadership structure

Impact on District 88:
Taxpayers deserve a DOC that spends money wisely and prioritizes outcomes — not cushy salaries. This act ensures that taxpayer dollars are spent on rehabilitation, safety, and staffing, not administrative bloat. It also helps prevent burnout among front-line workers by increasing compensation where it matters most.

By holding DOC leadership financially accountable, we promote smarter spending and a system that works better for the people of Iowa — inside and outside the prison walls.

🛡️ Domestic Violence Offender Registry Act

The Problem:
Domestic violence is a persistent and deeply damaging crime in Iowa and across the nation. While Iowa currently maintains registries for sex offenders, no statewide public registry exists to track repeat or high-risk domestic violence offenders. This creates a dangerous information gap — survivors, families, and potential partners often have no way of knowing if someone has a documented history of abuse.

Multiple states, including Tennessee and New York, have implemented domestic violence registries to improve transparency, deter repeat abuse, and give survivors the tools they need to protect themselves. It’s time Iowa followed suit.

My Solution:
The Domestic Violence Offender Registry Act would create a statewide, publicly accessible database for individuals convicted of repeated or severe domestic violence offenses:

✅ Create a public domestic violence offender registry

Individuals convicted of domestic violence-related offenses or any felony-level domestic assaultwill be placed on the registry

Includes conviction date, county, offense classification, and (when available) the age and sex of the victim

✅ Registration period

1-3 misdemeanor convictions: 5-year placement
1 felony conviction: 10-year placement

4+ misdemeanor convictions/2+ felony convictions: Lifetime Registration

✅ Mandatory enrollment as a condition of sentencing

Judges will be required to notify qualifying offenders of their enrollment on the registry at sentencing

✅ Secure, searchable website for public use

Similar to Iowa’s sex offender registry, searchable by name and county

Registry entries will also include the age and sex of the victim (when publicly available) to provide greater context while protecting identities

Includes educational resources for victims, families, and community members

Similar to Iowa’s sex offender registry, searchable by name and county

Includes educational resources for victims, families, and community members

✅ Registry maintenance and offender fee structure

A one-time $100 enrollment fee will be charged to offenders at the time of registration to support website maintenance and administrative costs

Ongoing registration fees will be assessed based on risk tier:

Low-risk offenders: $50 annually

Moderate-risk offenders: $50 every 6 months

High-risk or lifetime registrants: $50 every 3 months

✅ Built-in privacy protections for victims

Registry will not list victim names or any identifying information

Projected Costs and Revenue:

Based on a projected enrollment of 7,000 qualifying offenders, the Domestic Violence Offender Registry Act would generate the following revenue in its first year:

Initial Enrollment Revenue: $700,000

Annual Registration Fee Revenue: $665,000

Low-risk (3,500 × $50) = $175,000

Moderate-risk (2,100 × $100) = $210,000

High-risk (1,400 × $200) = $280,000

🔹 Total First-Year Revenue: $1,365,000

To estimate maintenance costs, we can use the Iowa Sex Offender Registry as a reference. The State of Iowa allocates approximately $1 million annually to maintain and manage its sex offender database, which includes:

Website infrastructure and IT security

Law enforcement data entry and verification

Compliance checks and address confirmations

With fewer reporting requirements and simplified criteria, the domestic violence registry is expected to operate at a lower cost. Estimated annual costs: $500,000–$750,000, depending on vendor contracts, security needs, and educational outreach materials.

Net revenue from offender fees would fully fund the program without requiring additional taxpayer funding.

Any surplus revenue generated through the registry will be allocated to support the Reentry Mentorship & Success Act (RMSA) — expanding access to peer mentorship, job training, and housing support for formerly incarcerated individuals.

Impact on District 88:
This act provides transparency and empowers citizens to make safer choices when entering relationships or providing housing and care. It supports victims while deterring habitual abusers from reoffending. Most importantly, it helps break the cycle of violence — ensuring Iowans are informed, protected, and heard.

Together, we can make Iowa a safer place — not just by punishing abusers, but by empowering survivors.

🚨 Drug Trafficking Registry Act

The Problem:
Drug trafficking has devastated communities across Iowa — fueling addiction, violence, and generational harm. While users and small-time dealers face significant consequences, the highest-level traffickers — those who profit most from the trade — often return to communities with little public accountability. Currently, Iowa lacks a mechanism to track these individuals, even when they are repeat or high-risk offenders.

Traffickers exploit tools like social media and unregistered "trap phones" to operate discreetly and evade supervision. These tactics must be addressed to prevent future harm.

My Solution:
The Drug Trafficking Registry Act creates a comprehensive public accountability system for the most serious drug traffickers in Iowa:

✅ Create a public registry for high-level drug traffickers

Individuals convicted of felony-level trafficking or drug distribution-related offenses will be placed on the registry

Includes conviction date, county, and offense classification, as well as victim age and sex.

✅ Registration period

1-3 misdemeanor convictions: 5-year placement
1 felony conviction: 10-year placement

4+ misdemeanor convictions/2+ felony convictions: Lifetime Registration

✅ Mandatory enrollment as a condition of sentencing

Judges will be required to inform qualifying offenders of their registry obligation at sentencing

✅ Secure, searchable website for public access

Includes risk tier, offense details, and relevant county

Resources for communities and educational tools for families

✅ Hefty registration fees for offenders

One-time enrollment fee: $1,250

Ongoing registration fee (based on risk tier):

Low-risk: $1,000 annually

Moderate-risk: $750 every 6 months

High-risk: $500 every 3 months

✅ Social media restrictions & communications monitoring

Offenders on the registry may only use approved social media accounts that are monitored by parole or probation officers

Possession of unregistered or secondary phones:

First offense: $7,500 fine

Second offense: Automatic referral for new felony charges and potential prison time

Projected Costs and Revenue:
Based on an estimated 2,000 qualifying drug trafficking offenders (retroactive to 2024), the act would generate:

Initial Enrollment Revenue: $2,500,000
(2,000 offenders × $1,250 one-time fee)

Annual Registration Fee Revenue: $2,700,000

Low-risk (1,000 × $1,000) = $1,000,000

Moderate-risk (600 × $1,500) = $900,000

High-risk (400 × $2,000) = $800,000

🔹 Total First-Year Revenue: $5,200,000

Estimated annual operating costs, modeled after the Iowa Sex Offender Registry: $750,000–$1 million for web infrastructure, monitoring, compliance, and enforcement.

Excess funds will be reinvested in drug treatment diversion programs, overdose prevention, the Reentry Mentorship & Success Act (RMSA), and peer-based recovery networks.

Impact on District 88:
This act holds the worst offenders — those who traffic fentanyl, meth, heroin, and other deadly substances — publicly accountable. It sends a clear message: If you get rich by poisoning Iowa families, we will follow you, we will expose you, and we will take the profit out of your pain.

It also provides safer reentry conditions, supports recovery in affected communities, and equips families with the tools they need to stay informed.