WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SF 4753

Determine responsibility for detention costs in certain juvenile delinquency matters

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Michael Kreun

The bill clarifies and assigns detention cost liability by stage: pre-adjudication in state facilities requires county payment with corrections consent, detention in approved juven

Referred to Judiciary and Public Safety
#correctionsandcorrectionsdepartment
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SF 4753

Summary of SF 4753 (2025-2026) – Determine responsibility for detention costs in certain juvenile delinquency matters

Purpose

SF 4753 proposes changes to how detention costs are assigned and paid in juvenile delinquency cases in Minnesota. Specifically, it updates the process and responsibility for costs when a child is detained in state correctional facilities for juveniles or in approved juvenile facilities, clarifying which entity (state, county, or county of residence) is financially responsible at different stages of detention and adjudication.

Key Provisions

  • Detention with state correctional facilities for juveniles

    • Before a child can be detained in a state correctional institution for juveniles, the commissioner of corrections must consent to the detention.
    • The county where the child is detained must agree to pay the costs of the child’s detention, as determined in the bill.

  • Detention in approved juvenile facilities

    • If the commissioner's directive directs detention in an approved juvenile facility (with the facility’s administrative authority approval as provided in existing law), the costs of that detention are charged to the county in which the child is being detained, as determined in the bill.

  • Detention across counties (inter-county detention)

    • When a child is detained in a county other than the child’s county of residence, the requesting county must pay for all pre-adjudication detention costs.

  • Adjudication implications

    • Once a child has been adjudicated delinquent under Minnesota Statutes (as defined in section 260B.105, subdivision 2), any further costs of care fall to the county of financial responsibility as determined by chapter 256G (the statute governing financial responsibility for delinquency and related care costs).

Who Is Affected

  • Children in juvenile delinquency proceedings who may be detained pre-adjudication.
  • Counties (both the county of residence and the requesting county) responsible for funding detention costs, depending on where detention occurs and the stage of proceedings.
  • Minnesota Department of Corrections (state corrections for juveniles) and administrative authorities of approved juvenile facilities (for non-state facilities), due to required approvals and cost implications.
  • State and local financial oversight bodies related to juvenile corrections funding (via the referenced statutes, including the framework in chapter 256G).

Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • The bill introduces a consent mechanism: the commissioner of corrections must consent to detention in state facilities.
  • It establishes cost-sharing/assignment rules at three stages: 1) Pre-adjudication detention in state facilities (consent plus county pay obligations), 2) Detention in approved juvenile facilities (county of detention pays), 3) Inter-county detention (detaining county pays all pre-adjudication costs), 4) Post-adjudication costs (county of financial responsibility per chapter 256G).
  • The bill was introduced and referred to Judiciary and Public Safety on March 23, 2026, with a co-sponsor noted (Michael Kreun).

Practical Impact

  • Potentially shifts financial responsibility for pre-adjudication detention costs among state facilities, detaining counties, and the child’s county of residence.
  • Clarifies when a county (rather than the child’s home county) must bear costs when detention occurs outside the home county.
  • Aligns detention cost liability with adjudication status, directing ongoing care costs to the appropriate county under existing financial responsibility rules.

If you’d like, I can provide a side-by-side comparison with current law (260B.181, subdivision 5) to illustrate how the new language would change cost responsibility in specific scenarios.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.