I just read the proposed reform of the reformed bail-reform reform.

I really didn’t expect much, but to say I was disappointed would be a huge understatement.

Forget about the fact that our legislators did absolutely nothing to fix the ridiculous discovery law, which has resulted in district attorneys’ offices hemorrhaging assistant DAs and dismissing close to 70% of their cases because it is impossible to comply with the law in every case.

I thought our legislators would look at the carnage being wrought on our streets and the rampant criminal activity since these reforms took effect in 2020 and be responsible.

But no. After months of wrangling they came up with essentially nothing.

To listen to our politicians you’d think everything in New York City was hunky-dory. “We’re safer than Chicago, Philadelphia and Baltimore,” they say. New York has been safer than those cities for decades.

Crime here declined even as crime rose in those cities — until the 2019 bail reform.

The mayor touts the city’s 125 murders so far this year, an 8% decline, as “progress.” If you were honest about crime, you’d compare city crime now with crime in 2019, before these criminal-justice “reforms” took effect. Then you’d see the havoc these laws have created.

Murders are up a staggering 44% from the same period in 2019. Index crimes (murder, rape, robbery, burglary, felony assault and auto theft) are UP 47% from 2019. Reported petit larcenies are UP 36%, but you have to wonder why anybody even bothers reporting petit larcenies these days.

In response to these sobering numbers, the only “substantive” change legislators made in the law was to change the requirement that the judge set the “least restrictive conditions that will reasonably assure the defendant’s return to court” to a requirement that the judge’s conditions of release must “reasonably assure the defendant’s return to court.”

This change, by itself, will mean little because a judge still cannot consider whether the defendant poses a danger to the public or is at a high risk of reoffending.

A judge still cannot, except in very limited circumstances, set bail on defendants charged with “nonviolent felonies” or misdemeanors.

Car thieves, drug dealers, shoplifters, commercial burglars, pickpockets, phone thieves and catalytic-converter thieves, for example, CANNOT have bail set no matter how many prior convictions they have, unless they have another open case.

Thus a defendant arrested for shoplifting who has dozens of prior convictions could literally tell the judge to hurry up with the arraignment because he has to get to Macy’s to steal a suit for his future court appearances, and the judge could not set bail on him.

Then there are the needless additions to the legislation to give the legislators “talking points” so they can sound as if they made substantive changes to the law.

The amended legislation now specifically allows judges to order “mandatory” mental-health and chemical-dependence treatment as a non-monetary condition of release. Sounds tough, doesn’t it? But even under the current law, judges can order mandatory treatment of any kind, including mental-health and chemical-dependence treatment.

Legislators obviously added this language to the bill so they can say they are addressing the mental-health and substance-abuse problems. If a defendant does not attend these “mandatory” treatment programs, the judge cannot set bail or remand the defendant unless the defendant is charged with a violent felony or other “qualifying offense.”

The judge can only continually set ever-more non-monetary conditions and continue the defendant’s release status. Since most of the defendants who would benefit by drug or alcohol or mental-health treatment commit the lower-level felonies and misdemeanors (drugs, shoplifting, thefts, random misdemeanor assaults, for instance) there is nothing a judge can do to force them into treatment.

Legislators also gave themselves another talking point when they added language stating that the question of bail is “in some cases” required by law and in other cases “is within the discretion of the court.” Politicians can now claim they gave judges “discretion.” After all, they’ll say, it’s right in the bill! How disingenuous. Judges have “discretion” within the parameters the Legislature gave them, and those parameters still remain very limited indeed.

Legislators and the governor will tout how they did away with the “least restrictive” language, how they gave judges “discretion” in setting bail and how they added “mandatory” mental-health and chemical-dependence programs. But they will have minimal effect on what judges can really do when it comes to bail.

Our legislators are more concerned with how they are perceived by their base than by what their policies are actually doing to people on the street. It is shameful.

The governor was rolled, yet again, by the hard left in her party. And once again, important legislation will be written by three people in a room, put into a gigantic budget bill and submitted to legislators with mere days’ notice.

Hundreds more people murdered? We’re still better than Chicago! Tens of thousands more crime victims every year? No problem. This is New York. We’re woke!

Jim Quinn was executive district attorney in the Queens DA office, where he served for 42 years.