Restrictive Housing Legislative Working Group

Good morning. Convening our meeting of the Restrictive Housing Legislative Working Group. Today is Tuesday, January 27, 2026 9:30am we are in Conference Room 411. As well as having Members present by Zoom. My name is Della Belatti. I'm a co. Chair. Co chair for. May I take the call? Please proceed. Senator Fukunaga. Present. Representative Belatti. Present.

Mr. Johnson.

Present.

Dr. Champion. Excused. Mr. Patterson.

Here.

Ms. Brady. Here. Ms. McKenna. Woodward. Sorry, excuse me. Present. Mr. Alcubila. He may send the representative. Thank you. Excuse. Senator Rhodes. Representative Iwamoto.

Here.

Representative Shimizu. Excuse. He's walking in right now. Wonderful. Please come sit over here so you can see the Zoom presentation. Mr. Tafai. Excused. And Mr. Lynn Scott. Thank you. Members, we want to work through this meeting question quickly and expeditiously. I know people are very busy during this legislative session.

We have for Approval of Minutes December 16, 2020 Five agenda items that or meeting minutes that were circulated. Any questions, comments or concerns. Do I have a motion to approve?

So move.

Second. Second. Second. Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Second. Seeing none. Any discussion from the community? Seeing none. Members in agreement. Say aye. Any disagreement hearing? None. Minutes had been adopted. Okay, moving on to our next agenda item. Members.

We have the Hawaii State Correctional Oversight Commission here to do a presentation for us to help us kind of get grounded in some of the language and. And the terminology and just the state of restrictive housing within the system.

I believe we have a presentation by Ms. Johnson, Kristen Johnson, who is the Executive Director, the chair and Executive Director of the Hawaii State Correctional Oversight Commission and Chair mark Patterson. So, Mr. Patterson, you have the floor.

Good morning. Representative Bellotti, Senator Fuka, the rest of the Restrictive Housing Committee, thank you for this opportunity for the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission to present this morning at the meeting on restrictive housing. I think I'm just saying next. And then the slide can change is a slide.

They're trolling it up right now.

As a filler to those of you who may not know me, I am Mark Patterson, one of the commissioners and chair for the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission. My appointment to the commission in 2019 was made by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

And in the room with us is Commissioner Martha Tourney as well, who was appointed by the House of the House speaker back in 2019. And we're two of the four original commissioners that are still working at this time, since 2019. We can get the next slide, please. What we hope to cover today is about us.

Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission, the jail and the prison system, the DCR definition of restrictive housing, the Act's definition. Why Act 292 matters, what could help DCR now and our potential next steps. Next. Hawai' I Correctional system oversight Commission has taken us a while to get to where we are today.

And I'm proud to say since 2019 that we are a fully functional office and commission and board with staff. And we want to thank you for the staff that you have given us and the budget you have given us to do what we do. We have established five values that we hold ourselves accountable to in our staff.

I'll just go over real quick. Alohilo. Hi. Which is transparency. Kuleana, which is accountability. Pono, which is integrity. Aloha, which is compassion and Haha, which is humility.

We are a five Member commission and staff that is mandated to oversee the state correctional system, have jurisdiction over investigation complaints at correctional facilities and facilitate a correctional system transition to a real and therapeutic model. Next slide, please.

It's often important for us, especially at the legislative level, that we clearly understand that within the Department of Corrections rehabilitation, we have conversations. We are talking about not one system, but basically two separate systems, which is the jails and the prisons. When we talk about the jails, jail houses those offenders that are classified as pre trial.

They haven't been convicted yet or they have been convicted for misdemeanors and they're sentenced to less than one year in prison. So that's a key understanding to know what a jail is, that they're pretrial and sentence misdemeanors or probation violations or sentence felony probations. Typically you're less severe crimes in terms of misdemeanors. Okay.

When we talk about a prison, we talk about individuals who have been convicted. Yeah. After serving their pretrial, they're convicted and they have a sentence of more than one year and they will be sent to Halawa. When they go to Halawa, they'll be processed and assessed and evaluated on how their time is going to be spent.

Prison also houses our sentenced felons and parole violators. And these are typically or are your more severe crimes. So when we talk about jail, we talk about prison. You understand the difference. They both have similarities, but they have a lot of differences. Next slide, please. For clarity, we have four operating jails and one hybrid.

So we have jails in every county, Hawaii County, Kauai County, Maui and Oahu. We call them the Community Correctional Centers. And on the slide here, I'll just go over real quick. Hawaii Community Correctional center is currently housed 292 incarcerated. Kauai Community center has 83. Maui Community Correctional center has 209. And Oahu Community Correctional has 960.

These are pre trial populations and sentence misdemeanors. Of these jails, only the Hawaii Community Correctional center is considered overcrowded. Okay. So when we talk about overcrowded system, on our jail system, only Hawaii Community Correctional center is overcrowded. The female jail is the Women's Community Correctional center which is both a hybrid of a jail and a prison.

So they have pretrial and they have sentenced felons separately on the same property. And their jail population currently is at 157. Now when we look at our prisons, we have the Halawa Correctional facility at 812. Waiawa Correctional Facility at 170. Kulani Correctional Facility at 82. And the individuals housed in Arizona at Saguaro at 799.

With a total prison population of 1,863. Our total jail. I'm sorry. And the prison population at the women's facility is 143. Okay. Our total jail population is 1544. Next slide please. This gives you an idea of where they are. Majority of our facilities, both jails and prisons are on the island of Oahu.

Each Maui and Kauai both have one jail. And then the Big island has not only the Hawaii Community Correctional center, but it has the Kulani Correctional Facility prison. Important for us to know where they are. And of course there's a small inset of Arizona, Sudboro, Kulani and Waiawa are considered in the rural areas. Yeah.

Whereas you have Maui and Hawaii Community Correctional Centers are in the smack like OCCC in the neighborhood communities. Next slide please. Let's look at the restrictive housing definitions that DCR has presented us in this task force.

When we look at administrative segregation and the policies are listed here this place Administrative segregation is placed when they're in continued presence in General population presents an immediate threat to the safety of self or others Jeopardizing the integrity of an investigation of alleged serious misconduct or criminal activity or endangered institution security.

Disciplinary segregation placed on an individual after being found guilty of a misconduct violation and issued a sanction by former adjusting Committee hearing that requires restrictive housing. Okay. Special problem emits.

These are housed in restrictive housing units excluding protective custody that have been assigned there as a result of one or more disciplinary violations which have substantially endangered the safety, security and early operation of the facility. And lastly protective custody placed for separation from the General population for offenders requesting or requiring protection from the offenders.

This type of segregation is non punitive. Next slide please. Act 292 definitions when we speak specifically about the issue of restrictive housing Restrictive housing occurs when all three are present. A committed person is confined in a correctional facility pursuant to disciplinary, administrative, protective, investigative, medical or other purposes. 2.

The confinement occurs in a cell or similarly physically restrictive holding or living space, whether alone or with one or more other committed persons for 20 hours or more per day. 3. The committed person's activities, movements and social interactions are severely restricted.

Restrictive housing can be used when there is reasonable cause to believe that this committed person would create a substantial risk of immediate serious harm to the committed person's self or another as evidenced by recent threats or conduct, and that a less restrictive intervention would be insufficient to reduce this risk, provided that the correctional facility shall bear the burden of establishing the foregoing by clear and convincing evidence.

Next slide please. Why is this Bill important? Hawai' I Correctional System Oversight Commission believes that we're reframing corrections around health, safety and accountability that leads us from the punitive environment to a more therapeutic rehabilitation environment, shifting from isolation being a routine management tool to being used as a last resort that is tightened rather than regulated and monitored.

This is key. We want to assure in our restrictive housing that strong due process protections, including a prompt hearing, 24 hours, a written explanation for placement, the ability to challenge the decision and ongoing review impact Saguaro where they utilize a SHIP program that places people in restrictive housing for at least one year.

This will be banned through this legislation. For example, Just to give you an understanding of the SHIP program in Saguaro, one full year of combined Once an individual is identified for their SHIP program, they receive one full year of confinement separated into quarters.

First four months is 23 hour lockdown, next four months is 22 hour lockdown, next four months is 21 hour lockdown and the next four months is 20 hour lockdown. any point if you mess up, the process is restarted, meaning people can spend years in this program.

This entire stay would be considered restrictive housing as defined by Act 292 and will be banned since the Bill applies to out of state contracted facilities. We received many many complaints about this program and are deeply concerned.

We have heard many stories from those who have gone through shift and are traumatized afterwards even if they went through it months or years ago.

And then finally on this slide, this Bill is important because we can prevent psychological damage, self harm, suicide, potentially lowering the death in custody rate and then requires third party reporting and monitoring from us this is the importance of this Bill. Next slide please.

These are the examples of the complaints or the stories that we receive at the commission level regarding restrictive housing from OCCC. I've been in Module 7 protective custody for over three weeks and we haven't been to recreation yet.

Saguaro, I truly hope you are doing better than I am as I find myself on day 49 of what will likely be at least 450 days in segregation. Saguaro, again to be winding up in the hole while they're out of a 60 day period.

You're lucky if the mental health doctor shows up to see you twice out of those 60 days. And then finally an OCCC. The unit was under extremely high tension when nearly all people in custody from behind their locked cells were yelling complaints regarding not having daily access to showers, auto cell time, phone calls, programs and outdoor recreation.

High tensions such as these further the risk of inmate assaults, fights, suicide, staff assaults, use of force and other dangerous, potentially avoidable situations for staff and people in custody. We continue on a monthly basis to receive these complaints coming from almost every facility. Next slide please.

On the next few slides we're going to focus on system movement because we believe that this is something that can be started relatively immediately and have a very large impact on DCR's ability to be in alignment with Act 292.

Before we get into that, we also want to note that the staffing crisis that DCR is facing is very, very, very real. Yeah, and we see it across the state, especially with Honolulu Police Department. And DCR has been working diligently to fill vacancies, but it is extremely difficult.

We believe it is important for DCR to take our comprehensive report completed on the staff crisis that we released last year so that they can implement the recommendations that came directly from staff to help with the recruitment and the retention.

Lastly, we want to note that it is important for the Legislature to cover the funds for overtime costs. It seems that over the years the Director has been pressured to reduce overtime.

And although we can understand that, the reality is that when overtime is cut, the number of staff in the facility are reduced leading to the less out of cell time. This is how situations at Ultra Pusea occur. When folks aren't getting released from their cells for meals, recreation, showers, phone calls and programs.

You need overtime when you have vacancies to ensure that the number of officers you need to take people out of their cells are there. Addressing the staffing crisis is a long term solution, which is why we are going to focus on system movement for this conversation.

Moving individuals out of the hall of a correctional facility to a proper classification. Excuse me, gives the facility more room to breathe and separate individuals as needed. Having a smaller inmate population in one facility helps alleviate staffing shortages and facilitates effective population management. These solutions exist outside of funding or staffing restraints.

Systemic Change Continue to focus on staffing Crisis Helping Jails in Prison DCR has done a great job focusing its efforts on hiring if vacancies are filled, especially mental health and case management. This will help DCR be able to comply with Act 292. The Commission released a comprehensive I went over that already. Unit vacancies are filled.

It is imperative for Legislature to cover funds for overtime costs. Next slide please. Here we go. System Movement Friendly reminder, this is specifically applicable to the prison system, not the jail system. Next slide. In order to understand where people can be housed, you really need to have a grasp on the classification system on the slide.

We have here the top highest 3 maximum custody reserved for inmates who have shown their institutional behavior that they are unable to function appropriately in the General population regardless of the amount of time left to serve. When classified Maximum custody, the inmate will be assigned to the highest restricted area or to a maximum security type facility.

Close custody used for prison inmates with long minimum sentences, 21 years or longer, serious escape risk and other types of characteristics that may require higher controls than in the General population.

Inmates designated close custody can be assigned to facilities designated as medium but will be subject to restrictions concerning the hours they are allowed to mix with the General population and the types of programs they may access.

Medium custody are reserved for long term, moderate, low or marginal risk inmates or the inmate's institutional conduct and adjustment dictates a need for continuous control and frequent supervision. The medium custody inmate is assigned to a more secure resident area with a multi level security facility or to a medium security type.

Next slide Minimum custody reserves for prison inmates who pose a low risk and who have 48 months or less to parole release eligibility. Jail inmates may also be eligible who have demonstrated to their institutional conduct and adjustment a minimal need for control and supervision.

Inmates shall be assigned to the least restrictive housing area available within a multi level facility or a minimum security facility. Inmates assigned to these types of housing shall present low escape risk or pose minimal problems or for management and finally, Community Custody.

Community custody is the lowest designation for prison inmates who have previously met the requirements for minimum custody and are within 24 months to discharge or parole eligibility. DCR Policy Correctional 1801 the goal shall be to place an inmate in the least restrictive environment, using various degrees of security to remote correction and rehabilitation and opportunities for reintegration.

Next slide please. Everyone going to Halawa will be considered medium from them once their sentence begins. Time behavior will determine whether they go up or they go down. All of them are medium custody. Here we have the facilities. We wanted to show you this picture.

When you look at Halawa and Saguaro, these are basically medium security facilities, okay? Double or triple fence, lines, towers. All. Movement is managed and monitored. Wherever our body goes, they're constantly under supervision. Okay? Our open air facilities are like Waiawa and Kulani which is our minimum prisons.

Now if you ever go to these facilities and if you ever want to come with the commission, you're more than welcome. You'll find out it's almost like a college campus where the individuals are just walking around going to and from programs, to and from work, etc, etc. Most of the movement in Halawa is always monitored or escorted.

Your classification will determine the type of housing you receive. So when we talk about restrictive housing in these facilities, Halawa and Saguaro in their basic design designed restrictive housing.

So you'll have a segregation unit in Halawa that the individual can come out of his cell, walk X amount of feet and he'll be in a no contact visit cubicle and he can visit family and attorney visits, his recreation there. Everything is within the same unit that he's being housed.

That's a facilities designed restrictive housing and everything comes to them in terms of medical and mental health. Next slide please. We're going to give you a snapshot now of our minimum security. Wava and Kulani res from the oversight commission. These rehabilitated spaces are underutilized.

So what you have here, Waiaba, with a capacity of 334 beds are currently housed 17051% of their beds are currently being utilized. Kulani has 160 beds and they currently have 82 which is another 51% utilized. Next slide.

When you look at the restrictive spaces that are being overutilized, 235 minimum custody individuals are housed in more restrictive settings. So we have 193 minimum custody available in Halawa, we have 42 in Saguaro and we have 242 minimum custody beds that are sitting open at less restrictive facilities.

Now DCR has stated that the classification system is too strict and needs to be reformed. And we don't disagree with that. What's interesting is that we found that it isn't even the problem here. The problem is that people are not being placed in the facilities that align with their classification. Okay, next slide please.

The commission has found that at least for the past three years since we started tracking it. Rehabilitative spaces are being underutilized and this is important so we understand that, you know, several things can happen where individuals don't want to go or transfer or case manage. It process is taking too long.

So we see our minimum beds are empty and our medium security beds. If these minimums were to move out, you can see how much room would be freed up in the medium security for them to be able to be more effective in managing a system for restrictive housing to occur in in a more manageable level.

Let's look at what can be done now. Focus on system movement throughout prison system. Moving individuals out of a halawa to a proper classification gives the facility more room to breathe and separate individuals as needed. Separate? Having a smaller inmate population one facility helps alleviate staffing stories and facilitate effective population management.

Of course you folks are going to have these PowerPoints and you can read more. Continue to focus on the staff crisis helping jails and prisons. Next slide please. Potentially next steps for restrictive housing Working group. Refocus energy on how we can support DCR in making this important transition.

Shift focus to human centered goals and how to achieve them, not how they cannot be achieved. Return attention to vulnerable population as called in Act 280. Thank you for that presentation. Trying to keep it as brief as possible. Representative Senator Fukunaga. But if you have any questions right now, I'll take those questions.

I'll open it up to the working group if there are any questions. Senator?

I had a question maybe to start with. I noticed that the oversight commission has made visits to both Kulani and Waiaba. And in your reports, you know, you noted there were several infrastructure issues like say, for example, at Kulani, the water plant is inadequate. It's not really functioning well.

At Waiafa there were a couple of other issues that had been identified. To what extent have the oversight commission and the Department been able to kind of work together to elevate the conditions at these less restrictive facilities to allow for, you know, broader use of those facilities?

I'm going to ask Ms. Johnson to answer that.

Hello? Yes, thank you for that. So we have pretty consistently reported on the issues that we're seeing at the facilities. And especially if staff or wardens bring it up to us, we always want to make sure that we incorporate that in our reports. And Kulani, the water issue is definitely a huge difficulty for them.

But from our understanding, at least talking with the warden and facility leadership, that still wouldn't prevent them from having more people Housed there because they've still figured out ways to like divvy up showers and kind of work around that, even though it does need to be fixed.

Waiaba, we haven't heard any reason why infrastructure issues would prevent them from housing more people there. They have the housing units right now. They're sitting empty. In fact, when we talk to the warden, the chief, different staff there, they say that they want people there, they want to fill those beds.

So although we do continuously report out on the infrastructure issues, I wouldn't say that that's a reason why people can't be housed there. The other thing I just briefly want to note is that this issue of having minimum individuals housed at Halawa and Saguaro is not new. We've been reporting on this for at least three years.

We have been extremely concerned about the lack of utilization for the minimum facilities. And the reason why this may not feel relevant to this group. Right, but the reason why it is relevant to this group is because these minimum facilities don't have restrictive housing. Like that's not a thing there at all.

And so when we're talking about how can we lessen the use and how can we make it easier for the Department to try to navigate these really difficult populations?

For the commission, one of the potential options that doesn't take funding, doesn't take policy change, doesn't take any legislation, is moving the people who are defined as minimum custody and are defined as low risk who should be at these facilities and actually getting them there. That's been continuously reported on.

I noticed your reports also noted that there was some discussion of where the wardens had indicated that people were unwilling to participate in work activities or other programs. Is that something that between the Department and the commission, there have been discussions or opportunities to address that?

There's definitely been discussions. So what's interesting about that point is when I was looking over policy to try to better understand the limitations myself, it's actually written in policy that if people are refusing to participate, they should actually be reclassified as medium. So that's not even an issue necessarily here with getting people there.

I think that there's a few different issues and concerns. And this is something that I've brought up to the wardens that we have respectful disagreement on, frankly. But for the commission, if we're going to be serious about transitioning to a rehabilitative and therapeutic system, we have to be willing to give people chances.

Guayava is a no tolerance facility for mistakes. And so if you mouth off to a corrections officer for Example, and I'm not saying you should do that, but if you do, you're going back to Halawa. It's no tolerance. It's no chance. You're gone.

If you show up and you're not willing to participate in programs, they don't work with you. You don't sit down and try to figure out what's going on, what needs to happen here. You're going back to Halawa.

So that is something that is hugely concerning to us because it's a massive transition to going from a space like Halawa that is inherently more restrictive and you're in your cell the majority of the time to then going to somewhere like Guayava where Suddenly you're working 810 hours a day or going to school or whatever it may be.

Like you have a full schedule. There's very high expectations of you. And it's not that there shouldn't be high expectations. It's just we should try to prepare people a little bit more before just saying you made a mistake, you're heading back.

Okay, well, I guess there seems to be a lot of room for greater dialogue.

And certainly, you know, I think on the legislature's part, I know there was an effort to provide additional CIP funding for renovations, rehabilitation for Kalani, and I believe that has been lapsed or, you know, so it seems as though the disconnect has been affecting many different discussions, both between the commission, the Department, as well as the Legislature.

So it sounds like this is an important step towards reopening those discussions, because if we all kind of pull in the same direction, you know, obviously we would want to make use of beds that are available and that are currently not being utilized to their full extent.

Right, right. And our. And I just want to be too clear, too, like, our goal here, by no means is to make the Department look bad. Like, this Department is, I would argue, probably the most challenging Department in the state. I don't know how the Director does it.

I think he has a lot to juggle, and I think he does a good job with that. Our goal here is to really highlight that there is potential opportunity outside of this working group to make things a little bit easier for them to be in alignment with Act 292.

Instead of suggesting a lot of changes before at least trying to make it happen, like, for us, for the commission, it just seems like a lot of the discussions have been focused on why we can't, why we can't, why we can't.

And so it was our goal today to kind of Refocus the discussion under we really need to focus on why we can. And also like these are real human beings being impacted every single day that we're hearing from, you know, because we're in the facilities. So. So again, this is not to make the Department look bad.

This is just to highlight a potential opportunity that we haven't seen taken advantage of yet.

Well, it sounds like we really have to step up both at the legislative level as well as at the community level. Because if more people realized that there were opportunities for us to utilize some of the minimum security programs and facilities, I think we would want to transition more inmates and individuals to a less restrictive setting.

Thank you.

Can I address this thread? And then I see Director might want to ask a question or a comment and then I see miss Woodward with her hand up. But I just want to pull on this thread a little bit and I think this is a really good time for dialogue.

And I appreciate that we're being kind of critical and looking at what we all can do. Legislature, DCR community. And I guess the question would actually be for the Director, is there opportunity to revisit particularly the no tolerance policy at Waiable, if that is in fact one of the barriers that's keeping people from going.

And I will share that. I. I've been very well. It's not. I think I visited Kulani. I visited. Wait. I mean the programming going on there is incredible. So I'm wondering is there opportunity to do some of this? The Legislature can look at the funding, but is there opportunities for this reclassification movement?

Sure, we can do. There's a couple things I think left out of the presentation. I'll cover that in a second. We can take a look at Wayawa's policies and practices with respect to zero tells because they should try to work with them. But I want to make it clear.

Inmates refuse to participate in programs at a work camp. They should not be there because then they'll be disruptive to the operations of the work camp when the other inmates are working and they land on their bunk and they don't want to do anything. So I'll have Mick Hoffman is. He's here. He's the institution division administrator.

He is the direct supervisor for all the wardens. So he will check with Sean or Nellis, the warden, while regarding its zero tolerance policy. A couple of the things that, that weren't mentioned in the presentation is of those 43 folks at Saguaro that are minimum, 37 of them are on their way back.

I think what you have to understand is that we do quarterly movements. So when someone is classified as minimum 3437 are coming back, they're coming back on the next movement. So that's going to reduce that number to less than 10.

With respect to Halawa, I just talked to the warden because when Kristen brought this up to me about the numbers we asked, I asked the wardens to give me the breakdown of those minimums and why. So the person just came back from vacation today who's responsible for that.

But there are a number of issues with people at Halawa. If they're minimum security, they can't go to the some of the minimum security facilities because they have health issues and we don't have 247 health care. There's not 200 of them. Want to make it clear they also have separate T issues.

But I will get you the list of the saguaro. Just the aggregate numbers of the folks that are coming back and when they're coming back. But that is not the transport is not public record of the date that they're being transferred.

With respect to the 194 at Halawa, I'll give you a breakdown of what the status of those minimum custodies are and just the aggregate. The Department is open to any type of discussion to better the system. We're taking a lot of strides in that direction. Meaning we had our classification System reviewed by Dr. Janet Davison at Chaminade.

We're waiting for the final report to come in. As I explained to the oversight commission Coordinator, I believe our system may be too punitive in that if someone creates a high misconduct or greatest misconduct, it's an 18 month sanction.

Well, we should be reviewing that person every six months to see if they've complied then maybe look at moving them down custody level. So it should be behavioral driven and not just event driven based on what the person did. So we're taking a look at that with respect to the staffing.

I want to make it clear as the coordinator indicated and Mark indicated, we're doing a good job in our recruitment efforts. We have a champion change program but corrections is not sexy and it's not for everyone.

And so our problem is we did, we were able to reduce our ACO vacancy rate from I think it was 34 to 36% down to 28%. But we still have a long ways to go. But what compounds issues for us is there is clear abuses in sick leave and fmla.

So we're trying to work with UPW now on a nap program, a New attendance program. Unfortunately, the director's wife, the director's mother, just passed away, so that meeting has to be postponed. So we're trying everything we can to get people to come to work, including incentives.

So I did provide the Director of D Herd, Brenda Hashimoto, about a year and a half ago, with some incentives that I thought would increase the pay for corrections officers, consider returning step movements to corrections officers, which they don't have now, and also provide what I considered hiring bonuses.

And then for the people that have been with us for a while, longevity bonuses, providing they came to work 80% of the time for the regular shift. Overtime not included.

Can we get a copy of that request to Ms. Hashimoto? Sure. Sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off, Director. Anything else?

Okay. I think I covered. zero, respect to cip. I think the problem we have is we're a necessary evil and we compete with the need for. For new schools and new roads and other things like that. And so as an example, last year we asked for $20 million in CIP. We didn't get a penny.

The facilities are old and antiquated, and they require a huge amount of maintenance. I mean, OCCC alone requires somewhere between 8 and 12 million dollars a year just to keep it going. The Department has been historically underfunded for decades, which means the facility has gotten worse and worse and worse, worse and worse.

And the conditions of confinement are to the point at occc, at least, where we could be in some serious trouble with the doj. But along with that, we have to provide better working conditions for the staff because we're losing a lot of staff, too, because of working conditions and because the pay is not. It's not that good.

So I think the state as a whole, policymakers, Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation Oversight Commission, you know, concerned community Members need to understand that prisons and jails operate 24. 7. And that's a lot of wear and tear.

And as such, even though we understand we're competing against, you know, the needs of schools and hospitals and these things, we have to get a bigger share of the pie to maintain the facilities to a standard. And right now, we don't have that type of funding consistently.

Director, if I can follow up, can you provide us with the list of the CIP requests for the maintenance, the repair and maintenance? You said something like. What was the request that was not funded last year? 23 million.

20 million for CIP.

And that was for, like, regular maintenance?

It was for CFP projects.

Okay, if you could give that to us for this session for the supplemental budget. How far would you like us to go back? I think you need to give us, like, a list that's like the most top priorities.

And that would help because then we can advocate for that. I mean, we're not going to get everything, but it's important. And I know you provided this to us probably in other forms, but now this is a real specific ask to focus on the repair and maintenance monies we need for this session. I saw.

Okay.

Sorry, I saw Ms. McKenna, and I know Ms. Brady's up there, and then I know. Representative Shimizu, can we go to someone online first? Ms. McKenna? Ms. Woodward?

Yes. Mahalo, Chair. And mahalo to the Oversight Commission for the presentation. I feel this really helps me to visualize the system and then the space that the working group is operating within. And also mahalo, Director Johnson, for the additional context you provided.

So, going to the conversation about kind of movement through the different facilities, I just wanted to ask, you know, specifically, what can we do on the front end?

Whether that's a of piece policy change or looking at reclassifying risk just on the front end to ensure that minimum risk pahow are placed from the very beginning in minimum security facilities.

I'm hearing from Director Johnson with your last comment that, you know, medical issues are, you know, a potential reason that some inmates can't be housed in minimum security facilities even though they're minimum risk. But for the portion of the population to where that doesn't apply, you know, what can we do to make sure that happens?

And then my second question would be for the chair and I guess also to the Oversight Commission, maybe if they could provide recommendations, if at some point, you know, maybe we could hear from Pahau or their Ohana, you know, about their experiences in restrictive housing within state facilities or at Saguaro, just to really help keep us grounded in this work and understand the real impacts of restrictive housing.

So we can, you know, ensure any policies and recommendations that come out of this working group are according.

And then finally, I just wanted to highlight again that success, you know, what that looks like to me for this working group, or at least one way to measure that, is to, you know, ensure that individuals are properly housed in accordance with their risk level, since that really seems like, you know, a way that we can address this.

This issue on the front end. Of course there are longer term solutions, but that seems like a really great opportunity.

And then just also more, you know, more of the ability to track just a better, I guess, tracking system of Trying to figure out who's in restrictive housing at what time and why, and, you know, being able to track the different risk classifications and who might be able to go to another facility.

I think having that level of organization and oversight would be really helpful to, you know, the Department and then to working group Members as well. And if we don't have the capacity or the systems in place to do that now, what resources would be needed to. To make that happen.

So mahalo for the presentation and looking forward to working on this.

I'm going to let Director respond, and then we'll go to Ms. Brady.

Just real quick. We do have reporting, weekly reporting for everyone who's in any type of restricted housing. And so we're working on putting together the aggregate numbers for you, because you asked for that before. So the facilities are required to provide us with a weekly report of anybody in restricted housing, how many days are in restrictive housing.

But the issue was that that warranted placing them in restrictive housing. So we will get that to the commission, to the, to the Committee.

Okay, thank you, Ms. Brady.

Commissioners, and thank you so much to the Oversight Commission for that great presentation. I wanted to point out that in 2007, there was a classification study, and that was under Governor Linda Lingle, and it was done by Camille Camp, and the researcher was Patricia Handyman.

And the one thing they found after going through the entire population, which was 6,010 people at that time, was that Hawaii over classifies people. And that, I think, has been made clear by what's going on in the facilities.

So when people decide that they don't want to participate in a program or in a work program, understand where that comes from. And it comes from over classification and where people feel that they are stuck in the system, that the system does not move people through as actually it should be.

I mean, that's really how it should be designed so that people move through the system system rather than getting stuck in this bottleneck. Another thing is the Restrictive Housing Working Group has really focused on people who are severely mentally ill. And that is a huge population.

But it's also people who go into restrictive housing who have not had mental health problems and come out a little twisted. And this is a huge problem.

And it's something that good training of staff and people who interact with people who are incarcerated, that would really help if people were hired to know that your job is to help somebody get on track to be a contributing Member of the community rather than a liability, I think things would change.

So the way that we train people Is that people inside are really bad. And the courts put them in there because they cannot function in the community. So once you label somebody like that, it is really hard to get past that. And I think that we are.

The system is somewhat responsible for the bottlenecks that happen there and for the lack of hope that's provided to people. So this Bill, what was used to be called the solitary Bill, that Bill was written by me, by people who were serving time in solitary, by Ted Sakai, who was the Director two times of the Department.

And the one thing that became so clear is providing hope so that people actually understand they can move through a system instead of getting stuck and their points are going up, which keeps them in restrictive housing longer. We can fix these things.

And a lot of it is by the philosophy of the system that you're here, you're in our care and custody, and we care about you, and we want to help you be a productive Member of society and for your family. When you change that mindset, people change.

If they see that there's a glimmer of hope, things can change. So that has been my frustration working in this area. Because I see so many people who are smart, incredible, who have just given up. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Brady, for your comments. What I'm hearing is some of the things about needing more training, having more therapeutic individuals who are there to help. And I think part of the ask from the DCR is to have more therapeutic, social, trained psychiatric people to deal with the SMI population. So we're listening to.

I'm also hearing that maybe programming needs to be looked at based upon your comments. But I want to turn to Representative Shimizu and anyone in the room who might have any questions or comments to contribute. Representative Shimizu.

My gosh, I have so many questions. First of all, to piggyback on what Chair Bellotti requested, Director is besides the cip. I think for me, as an engineer, it's helpful to have a concrete list of what problems you have, the shortages, whether it's monetary, whether it's staffing. I mean, be very clear and specific about it.

And what are the consequences because of that. And then what do you need in order to correct that? And, you know, it's almost like a wish list. I mean, being very realistic of what is happening. And then your wish list of what is needed to correct that.

Secondly, is you mentioned, or it's been mentioned, that classification is a problem. You know, what prevents correcting that issue? Is it a matter of changing policy internally? Or do we as legislators need to change the law?

No, it's an internal policy. But before we change the policy and classification, we wanted to have a classification study done by an expert in the field, and then we take that report, and then we look at changing our classification system. So we're going to get the final report from Janet Davidson pretty soon. We're going to pilot assessment.

We're going to do a dual thing. We'll have people tracked on the current system and then the control group tracked under the new classification system to see the outcomes, to see if we have better outcomes. So we plan to do that later this year, beginning in July or August, I think.

But I can get the schedule and provide it. And you'll see what we're trying to do, because we want to see under the new classification instrument and system, are we having better outcomes or are we getting the same in the old system? I suspect we're going to have better outcomes.

I'm sorry. When was that pilot program going to be started?

I think it's July or August. But I'll get you the schedule with our inmate classification office. Because we met, Mick and I, and then Heather. We met about that about two months ago. So the pilot begins later this year.

Can I add, we need the final study. Yes. And this schedule so that we can then track this as a. As a working group. And then. One more question.

Okay, one more question, and then you can come back to me after this.

But you might be running this Committee soon, Senator.

You know, piggybacking off what Cat Brady was mentioning, besides security guards and training them better. Do you folks have positions that specifically are there to provide rehabilitation training, you know, mental health, practical skills? I mean, whatever it is.

Is your staff just relying on guards that have to have this training, or do you have additional staff that provides these additional services?

We have case managers, we have medical staff. But I'll give you an example how dire our situation is. We have 24 psychologist positions, right? 23. How many filled?

Four.

So we're down 19.

Okay. I feel for you, Bo.

I mean, you know, that's where I go back to my first request of having a concrete list and just being very blunt about it, because that's what we need to see, because otherwise we're just going in a circle and we're not trying to point fingers at each other, because I think it's been very respectfully presented as far as the attitude and wanting to work together to address the problem.

And I think we need to be blunt about it so that not only this Committee. But our fellow colleagues see what's the problem and will act accordingly because it is a crisis. You know, the word crisis was used and you know, fixing a bad role versus fixing people that need help, you know, they are vulnerable. For sure.

I want to take note of the time because I know people are very busy. I have one other question. I'm afraid to ask it because it's going to open up a whole can of worms. So I'm going to ask it and I don't expect an answer.

And maybe this is something that co chair and I can follow up actually in separate our prospective committees as we move forward. I'm very interested in knowing more about the program at Saguaro. Can you repeat again, what are the phases in which they are in and the times that they're in restrictive housing again?

Yeah, because I didn't quite catch what chair was saying.

So Saguaro has. They call it a program and it's.

Called ship, but it's special incentive housing. Housing in San Francisco.

Special. Yeah. And I just want the four phases.

What are the.

There was like the hours, right? It's a year total. Okay. So it goes in quarters. So for four months, somebody is in 23 hour lockdown.

Three months. Three. Three33.

Sorry, three months. People are in 23 hour lockdown. For the next three months, it's 22. For the next three months, It's 21. For the final three months, it's 20. However, at any point during that year, if somebody gets an infraction, mouse off to staff, whatever it may be, the time resets.

So we've met people who have spent years in the SHIP program. One thing that's really interesting is recently I was at halawa to interview 12 people about things that are applicable to Halawa and not anything else.

And half of them had brought up the SHIP program and how much it had impacted them and how much they still feel shooken up and traumatized by it. And so we're very concerned.

So this is a big thing. This is new to me. And so maybe some clarity. Yes.

Okay. So in order for an inmate to be selected for the SHIP program, they have to demonstrate active gang activity or major misconducts. So then a Committee looks at the person's record, speak to the person, just like an adjustment Committee to determine if they're going to go into the SHIP program or not.

If they go into the SHIP program, they've earned their way to the program. I want to make that clear. It's not people being thrown, pulled out. A General Population who haven't done anything is people who have shown they cannot be in the General population without being disruptive. They go into the SHIP program.

The oversight commission is correct in that if you do have a misconduct while you're there, you can go all the way back to level one. You can be taken back one level if you're in level three. So that should be made clear. They don't go all the way back to zero all the time.

Also, with respect to out of cell time, access to phones, programs, books, those things are brought to them in the SHIP program. In addition, being in the SHIP program does not interfere with legal calls to their attorneys in any way. So as you move down in the SHIP program, there are more freedoms. You do get more things.

It's just. It's. Everything is in the housing unit itself. Just as Halawa, we bring everything. Yes.

So I appreciate the conversation. I appreciate the clarification. I think. I don't think we need to discuss it here, but I. Because I think we need to better understand that and better understand this as a Committee.

I'll provide the Committee with the same document I provided Commission where it provides all the information about the different stages of SHIP and what the inmates get in the SHIP program.

Yeah. But if I could add one brief. I'm sorry, I just. I have to do it. In no way is the commission suggesting that these are people who are just hanging out and doing their time and not causing any problems. In no way are we suggesting that they're just randomly plucking people from gp.

What we're trying to make it clear is that a year in that level of confinement is unacceptable when we have very clear, dedicated research across the nation going back at least to 2014 that says that 30 days or more in a solitary setting like that is traumatizing and detrimental to people's mental health for the rest of their life.

So it's not that we're saying that these are peachy people who are fine. It's that we're saying that a year is unacceptable. It's too long.

And I think what we need to do is we need further investigation into this. So I really appreciate the respectfulness, and I think. I really, really appreciate that it's been brought to our attention and we understand it, because this is something we don't. I think as a community, it's 10:30. I want to give one last question.

Is there any other questions besides Representative Shimizu? I don't have any other questions. Representative Shimizu, you have the last question. And then we're going to try to bring this meeting to a close.

I just want to put it there out in the minutes and on the floor. And I don't expect an answer at this point. But if you could follow up. The first question is, does Saguaro have to comply with Act 292? And then the second question. Where is it? Where is it? Where is it?

Okay, talking about Waiawa and Kulani, what I'm hearing is if we were able to reclassify people more accurately and populate this, these facilities that would make more room in the medium security for restrictive housing. Is that a correct statement?

No. So what's actually happening is that people are already classified as minimum. So it's not that we disagree that the classification system needs help and it's too restrictive. We agree with that assessment. But what we're saying is that there are people who are literally classified as minimum. Right now there are 235 minimum custody individuals between Halava, Saguaro.

Saguaro is not the main concern because they have about 40 and directors. Right. Most of them are coming back. The halawa has around 200193. So that's what we're talking about. Those individuals could be placed at Waiava or Kulani that currently right now have 242 empty beds.

And so what is preventing that?

Several things I mentioned earlier. Several things that are preventing it. But I'm going to provide the list for the aggregate total to the Restrictive Housing Working Group and then you'll see. Okay, thank you, Director.

To your other question, there is Chat would know better than me, but there is a specific line in the Bill where it talks about how this Bill is applicable to contracted facilities, which would include Saguaro on the mainland. So this would be applicable to Saguaro.

Okay, thank you. Thank you, Chair, for your indulgence.

All right, it's 10:30 and I don't see any other hands or questions. I want to open up to the floor any comments or questions from the public on anything that's happened so far. There's a lot of follow. I see none. There's a lot of things that we're going to follow up on.

I want to just remind Members that our next scheduled meeting is March 3rd. March 3rd, which was. Right. Yeah, that March 3rd. Right. So we will put together the minutes and we'll share the slide deck that was here. We'll follow up on the things that were requested and committed to be provided to the Committee.

We have some time before our next meeting. And of course, the legislative session will proceed. So there's still going to be work to be done. You will not convene again as the restrictive housing. I want to thank Mr. Patterson and the Oversight Commission for providing this kind of framework and some.

Some definitions and words we can start using together to understand and help move us along. Any last comments? Otherwise, we will adjourn this meeting. We are adjourned. Thank you all.

Sa.