Senate Standing Committee on Public Safety and Military Affairs

Good afternoon. We are convening the committee on public Safety and Military Affairs this afternoon amidst a flurry of hearings going on all throughout the building. And so we're, gonna start with House Bill 1769, House Draft 2, relating to correctional facilities and note that this meeting is being streamed live on YouTube.

In the unlikely event that we have to end the hearing due to technical difficulties, the committee will reconvene to discuss any outstanding business on Friday, March 27, 1PM in Conference Room 16, and a public notice will be posted on the legislative website. This afternoon, each testifier will be given one minute to testify.

If you have already submitted written testimony, please submit limit your time to highlighting important facts for standing on your testimony. First up is relating to correctional facilities, requires the director of corrections and rehabilitation to incrementally return committed felons incarcerated in private

out of state correctional facilities to in state correctional facilities and requires reports to the legislature. First up, I believe we have Office of the Public Defender, Haley Chang. If not, next we have Director Johnson for Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Not here yet.

Office of Hawaiian Affairs. McKenna Woodward. Welcome.

Aloha, Chair. Mahalo for hearing this bill. McKenna Woodward on behalf of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs in strong support of this measure. The state said continent incarceration was temporary in 1995, and thirty years later, about 800 men are still in Arizona, which tells us this temporary fix became the status quo. If out of state incarceration had solved overcrowding, improved rehabilitation, and reduced Native Hawaiian over representation, we would see that in the data by now and we do not.

Native Hawaiians continue to bear disproportionate harm in this system, and sending pa how thousands of miles away only deepens family separation, cultural disconnection, and barriers to successful reentry.

This bill does not require an immediate return, but it does require phased progress, clear benchmarks, and meaningful legislative oversight. DCR says capacity is the obstacle, but the Oversight Commission and the broader public record show there are real opportunities to improve

classification, use under filled lower security lower security facilities, and move people through the system more intentionally. At this point, the question is not whether everyone can come home tomorrow, but whether the state is willing to act at all. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you very much. Next, we have Correctional System Oversight Commission. Are they here? Okay. Maybe not. Next, we have, Community Alliance on Prisons, Pat Brady.

Aloha Chair Fukunaga. Community Alliance on Prisons is in strong support of this measure. The corporate profiteers who own CoreCivic only are concerned with their bottom line. Many of our people have died there or have been hurt.

Hawaii kinda takes a hands off approach to that, which is really probably as of March 16, the weekly population reports from DCR show that there is room in Hawaii prisons. Koolani, with an operational capacity of 200, has 77 people there.

We respectfully ask the committee to exercise care and concern that is lacking at DCR. This is a Menini start on the road to justice.

That's a operational rate of 38.5. And Waiawa facility with an operational capacity of 335 has a 165 people with an operational capacity of 49.4%. Each person who's incarcerated has family that love them.

Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Next, we have Inua Alliance, Chris Caulfield.

Aloha, Chair. Chris Caulfield speaking on behalf of Inua Alliance today in support of this bill. At times, Hawaii has held one of the highest rates of incarcerated people in out of state facilities in the nation. As you've already heard, incarcerating hundreds of people in private facilities like Saguaro,

has a detrimental impact on individuals themselves, separating individuals from family, cultural connection, legal support, reentry services. These are critical for successful reintegration. Research has consistently shown that maintaining family connections, especially during incarceration improves reentry outcomes.

It reduces recidivism risk. Whereas out of state incarceration raises serious concerns about oversight accountability in private prisons are operated for profit. And federal studies have found that private facilities often experience higher rates of violence, contraband safety incidents

compared to publicly operated facilities. And as has been previously said, we would note that this disproportionately would impact native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders who are incarcerated thousands of miles away from their culture and community.

So we hope that you will move this measure forward. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Next, we have, Shelby Pikaku Billionaire on Zoom.

Not on Zoom, Chair.

Okay. Next, we have, let's see. Aloha Independent Living Hawaii, submitted written testimony and support. Jamee Miller for ʻEkolu Mea Nui, on Zoom.

Yes. Aloha. Thank you. My name is Jamee Mahealani Miller. I'm the co Executive Director of ʻEkolu Mea Nui, and I'm in strong support of HB 1769 HD 2for decades.

I stand on my written testimony. I just wanted to point out that based on what everyone has said and shared that, you know, for years, Hawaii has relied on the private out of state prisons, a system that really weakens accountability for the state,

and it prioritizes costs over rehabilitation, and it really is time for us to the reliance on them, take responsibility for our own people. So in short, you know, this bill will provide a structured responsibility pathway to do that gradually by bringing people home,

and that public safety is the strongest when accountability and rehabilitation happen close to home. We have the capacity as we heard. We have data, and we have voices from the inside telling us that they wanna come back.

So I respectfully urge us to support HB1769 HD2.

Thank you very much for your testimony. Next, we have, let's see, Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii, Nicholas Leverenz on Zoom?

Not on Zoom, Chair.

Okay. Next, we have see, Kawai 0 Hawaii Iki, Amakalea, Kila in person. Okay. Maybe a little bit later. Next, we have Rishanda Mikayele on Zoom.

Not on Zoom, Chair.

Alright. Next, my notes show Carrie Ann Shirota in person.

Hello, Chair Fukunaga, Carrie Anne Chibota, an attorney justice advocate in strong support of this measure. As you know, this practice of transferring our people out of state started 30 ago, and a number of states also engage in out of state transfers as a temporary solution to

overcrowding. But we're thirty years in deep. We've never had a strategic plan to systematically bring people home. And as supported in my testimony, you can see a number of other states face a similar challenge, and they had the will and the ability to bring people home.

California at 1.0 at its peak sent out over 10,000 people out of state. In 2019, the governor made an executive decision to live up to his promise when he ran for governor. And in 2019, since then, zero people transferred out of state.

So it really comes down to political will. And I'm so grateful that lawmakers are making this a priority for all the reasons you've heard. This isn't harmful to families and for individuals. And I think lastly, we've heard a lot of bills about immigration.

Do we really wanna invest our taxpayer dollars in the same companies that are kidnapping and detaining immigrants, our neighbors. So thank you for the opportunity to support this measure.

Thank you very much. We're going to return to the beginning of the agenda. I believe we had skipped over Office of the Public Defender, Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission. Miss Johnson?

Good afternoon. Chair. My name is Kristen Johnson. I'm the oversight coordinator with the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission. I apologize.

It's been back to back hearings, so thank you for calling me back up. The commission supports supports this bill regarding to my apologies. Bringing people back home from out of state facilities. We're extremely concerned about the usage of any private facility,

but especially out of state. It makes it extremely difficult for us to oversee those different entities to be able to get out there and make sure that people are treating in accordance to how they should be treated.

The other piece that I wanted to mention is that out of state facilities don't have to follow, Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation policies or procedures, and so things are very different there, and people are treated very differently there,

which we are concerned about. And so we are in deep support of this bill. We hope it moves forward. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone else in the room who would like to testify on, House Bill 1769 House Draft 2? I covered primarily individuals who had requested to testify in person or on Zoom, but we did receive 54 testimonies in support,

one testimony in opposition, and one with comments. So please proceed.

Thank you, Chair. You have a written testimony. I just happen to be in the room. Josh Frost. I'm the Policy Advocate for ACLU of Hawaii.

We stand in strong support of this bill. You've already heard lots of reasons why this is worth doing. I just wanted to highlight a couple things. One, this policy of of shipping prisoners to the continent was meant to be a temporary stopgap to address overcrowding.

This has now been policy for the state for thirty years. We believe it's time to end that policy and bring them home. We also, don't believe that the state should be supporting the prison industrial complex.

Saguaro is privately owned and operated, and you also heard from the correctional oversight commission that it's hard to keep track of, you know, our the people that we're responsible for. And, no, that's it. Thank you.

We hope you move the bill. Thank you.

Very much. Okay. Returning to the beginning of the agenda, director Johnson, we kind of have a lot of hearings going on this afternoon. So we're racing through the

I'll just summarize my testimony.

Hearing schedule.

And I apologies for being late, but I was upstairs in another hearing. Just kept on.

They're all going full blast because we do have to finish hearing all the measures by today in order to

I just need a minute then. We oppose this measure because simply we don't have the room to put to to return 25% of the people currently on the Mainland. The previous testifier was correct. In 1995, the state started sending its first batch of prisoners to the

Mainland for 300 folks, and it was supposed to be a temporary stopgap measure. However, the state is in dire need of a new jail and a new prison.

If we return these inmates to our facilities, we're gonna create an overcrowded condition overcrowding condition that's gonna be make the conditions inhumane, and we then open ourselves up to possible litigation from the DOJ.

So I would say either we build a new medium security prison or we add a 248 bed module to the Halawa Correctional Facility to appropriately house these folks. That would be considerably cheaper than a new prison, but it would also allow us to return those 250.

We would ask that any return of a large number of damage from the mainland be tied to the construction of a new facility or a new dormitory in which to properly house them in a medium security setting. Thank you very much.

K. Well, why don't you remain at the table? Sure. Is there anyone else who wishes to testify on House Bill 1769? Okay.

If not, Chair does have a couple of questions for the department because, you know, according to your testimony, the amount of individuals that are sought to be returned exceeds what you believe your capacity would be to house them because of the

uncertainties of what your jail population or prison population might look like Correct. At any given time. What, I guess, do you attribute the reduction in the number of, inmates that are held in Arizona to over the last several years?

Because it looks as though the department is sort of reducing the number of, inmates that are being housed there. And it would seem as though, you know, you are achieving a level of reduction even as we speak.

Is that not a fair statement?

That is correct. And back in the mid two thousands, we had just over 600,000 people in our custody and care, and we had 2,400 people on the mainland in the Saguaro facility and another facility across the street called the Red Rock facility.

Right now, we have about a little over 3,700 people in our custody and care. That includes about 800 folks, seven hundred and seven hundred ninety seven in Arizona.

A lot of that is to be to to changes in the criminal justice system where the courts have sentenced people to probation and resents to probation instead of prison, and a lot has to do with some jail diversion programs.

But I would like to state that I do not control the population in the prison. I have to take everyone that they sent to me from the courts and the Hawaii polling authorities. So it's impossible for me to gauge what my population is gonna be at the end of today until the

last court run comes in and see who's remanded to our custody. There's no way I can tell you how many people we're gonna have on the Mainland or here two years from now.

So that's why I think the bill is a little bit it's well intentioned, and we wanna bring the inmates back, but I don't think we should bring them back to to inhumane conditions.

And if you've toured any of our facilities, they're old and antiquated and man intensive, and we just need new facilities. And we do need to look at how much money we spent over the decades on private prisons as opposed to buckling down and building the

facilities we need here and improving the economy and doing rehabilitation here and providing jobs for our communities here and not on the Mainland.

Okay. Well, I think that's that's a fair statement. This is a report, you know, that was generated by the, what is that, HCR 85 task force.

Yes.

Creating better outcomes, safer communities. This was released in December 2018. And among the recommendations of the study was really a shift towards a more rehabilitative model.

Yes.

And looking towards reentry, reintegration. And in in that particular study, this report called for examining the feasibility of building smaller facilities rather than larger facilities because the emphasis was gonna be on really rehabilitation types of programs.

And so, you know, I guess my question is, what steps are is the department currently taking to move forward with recommendations contained in this study, as well as some of the other studies that your department has also, undertaken.

We're trying to shift to a to a more rehabilitative model instead of one that people the public may see as punitive. So So the legislature so we appreciate the legislature's support. Last year, they allocated $4,000,000 in our budget to help with reentry efforts.

We're in the process of going out to RFP for a good chunk of that money to build to build out our reentry efforts.

And I think what you'll see in working with the Oversight Commission in the next year or so, you'll see those reentry efforts really being flushed out.

The Oversight Commission did a fairly detailed report on our reentry efforts, and and, basically, we were failing because we didn't have the staffing of the funding. We did get the funding down. Now we need to get the staffing.

We have repeatedly asked for staffing for our reentry offices for additional case managers to bring the case manager the case management caseloads down.

We've got some money to, as you know, maintain the facilities to repair and maintenance the CIP, but we compete with the the need for new schools, new roads, highways.

So we get our fair share of the pie, if you will, but corrections is not sexy and it operates 24/7, and it requires a greater amount of funding targeted funding to improve our system across the board.

Not just intake and assessment, but what we do with the person when they're in our system and how we have the person reintegrate back into the community. And we're willing to work with all takers to try to improve our system.

Right now, our system is about ten years behind, on our facilities. Our newest facility was built in 1985.

It is currently the design capacity is 629, which is the Halawa Correctional Facility. We're now approaching 900, and it's been like that for a long time. And that puts a lot of wear and tear and strain on the infrastructure, the water, and the sewer.

We have two minimum security prisons that are some people say, underutilized, but we say that the inmates don't qualify. Our beds are not all beds are not equal.

So we're redoing our MA classification system. I provided information to the committee and to the oversight committee the oversight commission to take a look at. So you can see we are making progress. We are moving forward. Unfortunately, things take time.

And I know the push is to get things done right away, but we would prefer to get do it right the first time. And to do that, it will take some time.

Okay. Well, I think, you know, 2018, that's been kind of a long time. That's eight years ago. And with the studies that have been undertaken, everything seems to be pointing in the direction of returning people back to Hawaii and looking for, you know,

ways to have them take advantage of programs that may be appropriate in Hawaii that contribute to their long term success.

I don't disagree. And that's why I put forward the option of the, constructing a new module at Halawa Correctional Facility to plug into the the current infrastructure, water, sewer, electricity, and we then can bring 248 people back from the main.

But we do need to have facilities to put them in. And not just facilities, we need to have facilities with the room and the capacity per to provide the programming and treatment that they need.

Okay. Well, thank you very much for your comments. You have many bills and resolutions before us, so let's continue. Thank you. Thank you.

Next measure is House Bill 1628 House Draft 2 relating to compassionate release. Let's see. First up, we have director Johnson. Sorry. I should I've asked you to remain.

Yes. So I'll just summarize my testimony. We oppose this measure and I wanna make it clear. We're not against compassionate release. We have a compassionate release program in place now.

In fact, as the administrator of the HPA, I helped set up the expedited process we have with prosecutor's office and now with the Department of Correction and Rehabilitation. We oppose four four section four points in this bill.

One is that we do not believe that people who are serving life without the possibility of parole should be considered for compassionate release because the governor hasn't commuted their sentence to life with parole yet so the Hawaii polling authority could set a minimum term for which to reduce

to allow the person to get out on compassionate release. Two, we don't believe people who are serving a mandatory minimum term imposed by the court should be considered for compassionate lease because the court imposed the mandatory minimum term for reason and most likely by statute

because there are mandatory minimum statutes out there that require the judges, for instance, for repeat offenders to impose a certain level of a mandatory minimum term. Third, we believe that the this may infringe on the governor's right with respect to committing a person's sentence.

I did provide a diagram with information on 20 people serving life without the possibility of parole now in our system, have committed a total of 111 crimes, which is 5.5 crimes apiece. Most of them are murders, rapes, kidnappings, and some are multiple murders.

Now I'm not saying everyone serving life without the possibility of parole should never get out. I'm just saying that the governor should have the opportunity to commute their sentence so they can be considered for parole after HP sets a minimum term.

I also believe that the department also believes that in order for these folks to get out and HPA could provide more information on this, they have provide they have paroled people for compassion at least, but there's no place for them to go.

Once the care homes out there that can provide the services they need find out that they are convicted felons, they don't wanna take them. A lot of times, they need more a higher level of care than than a regular clean and sober home can provide, and the families sometimes can't provide that level of care.

So I think that's something to also consider. Even though HP like, the last 13 applications in the last two years that came before the Hawaii pooling authority to grant compassion release, they granted all 13 of them.

However, not everyone could be released because they did not the appropriate residence to go to that could meet their medical needs. So they end up languishing our facilities. We end up providing hospice care, and it is expensive, but HPA cannot release them to the street.

So even though it may seem inhumane, it may be better for those who cannot find a residence to take care of them to remain in custody so that we can provide the level of care that they need.

And when we can't, then we send them out to a hospice care or to a hospital, and then we initially pay for that money, pay for that, but then the federal government reimburses us for those costs.

Anytime an inmate goes out overnight from the facility, we reimburse we get reimbursed from the Federal Government.

Well, I think part of the whole, you know, purpose of the compassionate release legislation has been to identify instances where individuals whose medical needs are so advanced and so great that the cost that the state is bearing exclusively at this point is not eligible for any kind of federal subsidy

or Medicaid assistance. So, you know, the goal is really to help the state save some dollars so that those dollars can be used, you know, in other areas. So it's

I don't disagree.

It's not a either or. Yeah. I think we just need to find, you know, that happy medium. Thank you very much for your testimony. You're welcome.

Next, we have Crime Victim Compensation Commission. Pamela Ferguson-Bray with comments.

Good afternoon, Chair.

Good afternoon. Ferguson-Bray, Executive Director of the Crime Victim Compensation Commission, offering, comments in opposition, as it relates to, issues related to crime victims in the bill. Criminal justice reform must not only serve the interests of offenders,

but must also include meaningful protection for the interests and rights of crime victims. We do not believe there's meaningful protection for crime victims in the bill. While there is notification, about, the release decision coming up, there's not an opportunity for victims to be heard.

And so that really deprives the paroling authority of information they need to make a determination about what the risks are to the victim and the community. Probably doesn't give victims the time to create a meaningful safety plan or to create release conditions that would

necessarily safeguard a victim's safety. We believe all those issues can be addressed. And in fact, the National Council of State Legislators, the National Crime Victim Law Institute, all have have a compilation of all their provisions relating to notification and the right to be heard for crime

crime victims. We also are concerned that the provision to create a task force, a working group to create the administrative rules, there's no voice for victims on the task force.

There's nobody representing the needs of victims. And we think that, that then, there'll be a set of administrative rules where, the victim community has not been heard and that, it will not turn out, to pro provide protection for crime victims.

So thank thank you very much. We we like I said, we we do believe that, these provisions can be included in the bill. And I think that suggesting, and having been to the last hearing, congratulations that everything it's a model that everything has been included.

That's if you haven't considered the rights and needs of crime victims in in making your bill, then thinking that it's a model when you haven't included crime victims, I think, really underscores what the problems and issues with the bill are.

Thank you. Okay. Next, we have Office of the Public Defender in person. K. If not, moving on to Hawaii Paroling Authority, Mr. Demello. Aloha.

Hello.

Hi. Good afternoon, Chair. Gene Demello Jr, Chairman Hawaii Boarding Authority. So we we do not oppose compassionate release at all. You know, you heard the Director mentioned the 13 cases that we had in the last three years.

All 13 were granted compassionate release. Eight of those offenders were actually released. Four are still granted release, but there is no placement for them. So that's kinda being held up until we can find a suitable placement.

And one had unfortunately passed away after being granted compassionate release prior to getting a placement.

So there is one section in the bill that we would like to suggest an amendment, and that is persons serving a mandatory minimum term should serve that term in full before they could be eligible for compassionate police. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we have, Office of Hawaiian Affairs, McKenna Woodward.

Oh, hi, Chair. McKenna Woodward on behalf of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and support. OHA supports the current language because it creates a more workable framework by clearly defining eligibility, allowing applications to be initiated by medical staff, the incarcerated person,

or a representative, and placing an affirmative duty on the department to identify and refer people who may qualify. OHA also appreciates the broader eligibility criteria including terminal illness, debilitating or irreversible conditions,

cognitive impairment in cases where the department cannot provide the level of long term care needed or where care would be more appropriate in a community setting. The bill also improves transparency and accountability by requiring a hearing within ten business days,

notice to the prosecuting attorney for victim notification purposes, and annual public reporting by both the department and the Hawaii Paroling Authority. OHA supports keeping eligibility open to all persons incarcerated by the state,

including people serving mandatory minimum sentences or life without parole because compassionate release is a medical and humanitarian safeguard, not a relitigation of guilt. Finally, OHA supports the working group because implementation will be stronger if rulemaking is

informed by correction staff, the polling authority, the oversight commission, lived experience, legal expertise, and subject matter expertise. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify. We respectfully urge the committee to pass this measure.

Thank you. Next we have Attorney Generals Office, Mr. Tom. Oh not Mr. Tom.

Good afternoon, Chair Fukunaga. My name is Lisi Tamura. I'm from the deputy, the department attorney general. We do offer comments on this bill. We support the intent, as you understood, from Chair DeMello and from Director Johnson.

There is already a compassionate release program that's ongoing. It is, you know, set up to go. The problem, of course, is always going to be where to place the person, and that's where the holdout has been with as Mr. Demello has pointed out.

The person needs so much medical care that they have to wait for a bed to open up in a nursing home or a hospice or something. We only ask that certain, I guess, parts of the bill be amended in order to specify and clarify, say, what is a terminal illness that qualifies?

What is a debilitating or reverse irreversible condition? You know, there's you know, asthma is a chronic condition or debilitating condition. Is, you know, does that constitute an illness that would qualify compassionate release?

I think the bill needs to be clarified a bit in order to make that clear. We also ask that the HBA be granted the discretion. I know the bill requires HBA to grant compassionate release unless there's two exceptions.

Basically, the person doesn't meet medical criteria or there's an unreasonable risk to public safety. I think we need the the partner would prefer that the applicant show like, if they were just applying for full, the applicant would have to show that they have a plan to live in the community.

They have, you know, they're gonna show that they can live in the community without violating laws or presenting a risk to the safety of the community. We think that those conditions should be imposed upon on application for compassionate release as well. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you for your testimonies. Next we have, Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission in person. Thank you.

Hello, Chair Kristen Johnson, the oversight coordinator with the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission. The commission is in strong support of this of this bill. I just wanted to focus on a couple different comments since you already have a written testimony that

kind of outlines our stance. One of the pieces is medical criteria has been brought up a couple times. I just wanna make it very clear that the language currently mirrors language that's already utilized in DCR's policies and procedures core 11 g 11.

So that's already the medical criteria that's being utilized for the current compassionate release process. The other piece that I wanted to point out is some people have noted, well, we already have a process, so that's fine, but we're the only state in the nation that doesn't have it

embedded in our mandates. We're the only state. A part of the importance of this bill is actually including life without parole and mandatory minimums. And one thing I wanna be very clear about is that the bill does not say we're gonna release all life without parole or mandatory minimums.

It's very specific to the medical criteria. This is a very low amount of people. We already don't have a significant number of life without parole. For the people who might be medically eligible, who are life without parole, we're talking maybe five, maybe, or less.

For mandatory minimums, I just wanna briefly state, I it would be shocking to me if it was the legislature's intent that if somebody receives a mandatory minimum of ten years and they receive a debilitating horrific diagnosis at year six that the legislature would want

the state to pay out for that significant medical care and watch them suffer and die in prison.

I just that that doesn't feel right to me or the commission, and I don't think that that was the intent of the mandatory minimum law. And so I just wanted to make those couple of notes. I'm, of course, here for questions, and thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Okay. Thank you. Next, we have, Louis Bertashik, Hawaii Disability Rights Center on Zoom.

Not on Zoom, Chair.

Okay. Next, we have, Community Alliance on Prisons, Pat Brady.

Aloha, Chair Fukunaga. We're in strong support of this bill, and we really like this bill better than the senate version. So no dispersions, but this bill is more comprehensive and really addresses the issue. So we work directly with people who are incarcerated, and many of them have

served as medical aids cleaning up after people who are unable to feed, clothe themselves, who are just bedridden. So when people say we don't want them to commit crimes when they get out, well, I don't know how they do that, actually, because most of them are in such

terrible shape that they're unable to do that. This bill is really about compassion. It's about the Aloha Spirit Law. It's about seeing humans rather than their actions that got them incarcerated. So to me, that is just shameful that the the department only looks at people by the

reason that they were incarcerated. I'm embarrassed for them. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, we have, 'Ekolu Mea Nui, Jamee Miller on Zoom.

Hi. Aloha. Jamee Miller with 'Ekolu Mea Nui, and I am in strong support of this measure. Compassionate release is about dignity, responsibility, and smart public safety. Individuals who are elderly, terminally ill, or permanently incarcerated, incapacitated, pose little to no risk, yet

remain incarcerated at extraordinary costs. This bill creates a clear, accountable process to ensure those who qualify are considered fairly and in a timely way. And then for native Hawaiians, incarceration at end of life further separates people from 'ohana, 'aina and the ability to

pass with dignity. So we can hold people accountable while still honoring their humanity and dignity. So I respect respectfully urge your support on this bill. Mahalo.

Thank you. Next, we have FAMM, F A M M, Molly Crane on Zoom. Okay. That does not look like Molly Crane. Here.

Nicholas. Nicholas Leverenz for Hawaii Health

Chair. Can you hear me?

Oh, okay. Okay. Please proceed.

Good afternoon, Chair. Thank you so much for the opportunity to testify about this measure relating to compassionate release. My name is Molly Crane and I'm an attorney at FAMM. We are a nonprofit nonpartisan organization,

and we've worked on compassion Reliefs for over 25 years in every state and in the federal system. We strongly support this bill and respectfully request two small amendments, adding an effective date and allowing other incarcerated people to initiate the process.

As you know, compassionate release is the best practice and exists in the federal system in every state because lawmakers recognize that people who are critically ill are the most expensive to incarcerate, the most burdensome to care for, and the least likely to recidivate.

I discussed many of the wonderful features of this bill in my written testimony, so I'll only cover two of them here. The first strong feature is medical eligibility.

The medical criteria in the original bill matches the Department of Corrections existing policies and aligns with best practices across the country. The second strong feature is allowing individuals of all sentence lengths to be eligible.

People serving mandatory minimums or LWOP are eligible for compassionate release in the majority of parole based states, and it will allow the bill to achieve the cost saving measures we detailed extensively in our testimony.

We ask to remove this language in section C restricting who can initiate the process. Medical staff in DCR are stretched thin and may not have the capacity to note when someone is sick enough to qualify. People who are dying and may lack the physical strength to submit themselves for medical release.

Other incarcerated people play a vital role in ensuring that no one slips through the cracks, and there are numerous safeguards in the bill to make sure there are no frivolous requests.

We also ask for an effective date so this bill can begin fulfilling the legislature's purpose as intended upon passing. We thank you so much for this bill and we encourage you to pass it.

Thank you for your testimony. Next, going back to Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction Center, Ms. Deliverance, please proceed.

Aloha, Madam Chair. Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction Center strongly supports this measure. We also ask that the bill be amended to restore the ability of other incarcerated persons to help with an application for compassionate release.

Often, these eligible patients are too ill to initiate the applications, and correctional medical staff are overburdened by their immediate workload.

HHHRC has long supported the implementation of mechanism where the state's correctional authorities are able to reassign prisoners who require high level of complex and costly medical care into community based settings that are more conducive to their ongoing medical needs.

HHHRC also supports a data collection and public recording requirements to help ensure that DCR is implementing the policy, adequately. I will also note that the argument against it saying that it would interfere with the governor's commutation powers is rather novel.

Mahalo to for the opportunity to provide testimony.

Thank you. Next, we have Dennis Dunn on Zoom. Is mister Dunn available? Welcome.

I am here, Madam Chair. I'm Dennis Dunn testifying, in opposition to this measure. I will start out by saying I am a strong supporter of compassionate release, but I believe this measure is lacking in several ways.

To begin with, there is no provision for identification or consideration of the concerns of victims, of the incarcerated person or that they'd be addressed prior to compassionate release. In some situations, the proposed release location, for example, might be problematic for the victim.

Or, for example, the victim's residence or workplace may be near the release location. By prior consultation notification to victims, we will assure that the release locations are appropriate and it's successful.

I guess that the other thing here is that although victim notification is included in the current language, there is nothing that specifies the best way that this should take place and only references notifying the prosecutor.

Since many of these cases are many years old, prosecutors may not have contact with the victims. I believe by setting up a process whereby people could sign up, be notified in advance and sign up for the vine automated notification system that that would make this work better.

And then just finally a one thought. Oh, I'm sorry. The also the proposed working group does not include any victims advocates or people with experience working with victims. So these are concerns and the administrative rules may not be addressed.

Finally, I just want to point out there's been a lot of talk about best practices and model legislation and so on. But I will point out that virtually every other state that has a provision for compassionate release in their statute has specific advance notification to victims.

And if we want to, in fact, use best practice, we wanna have model legislation. We need to have advance notification to victims as part of this measure. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Dunn. Next, we have Luana Patterson, on Zoom.

Not on Zoom, Chair.

K. If not, turning to Robert Merce who has signed up to testify in person. Thank you. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, chair. My name is Bob Merce. I just would like to say I I think I'd like to see the bill passed just as it is right now. I think what 1628 has done is is a good thing and and doesn't need much modification at all.

But I wanna take the little time I have to just point out one scenario that people are not thinking about. With life without parole and mandatory minimum sentences, the person gets sick. When they get sick, they get they go to the infirmary, whether they're coming from Arizona or they're

coming from some other facility or here, they end up in the facility. They get worse in the facility, and what happens? You can't release them, so they go to the hospital. And we have, I think, are there at least three of them that I'm I know of right now that are in the hospital.

And then the hospital, Queen's is the primary, you know, one, then they've got this person, and they say, okay. Now they've gone from a critical condition to a lower condition, but we wanna return them.

But we can't because we have a we have an infirmary that cannot take care of people with this degree. So I was in a meeting last last week. A person is over there, and they're saying Queen's is saying, help us.

We can't afford to keep this person. They don't need acute facility. We need the bed. You can't send them back. We stick them there. And but if they're have compassionate release, we can get them out. We can get them into some other type of facility.

But while they're in prison I mean, while they're in the hospital, there have to be guards with them. They're chained to the bed. It's it's just a horrible situation. So we really don't solve anything by ignoring these people who have life without parole or mandatory minimum. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Next, we have, Carrie Anne Shirota on Zoom.

Not on Zoom, chair.

In person. Sorry.

Good luck, chair, Senator. Carrie Anne Chirote in strong support of this measure. For a number of reasons, this is a humanitarian thing to do. This reflects our values in Hawaii. We have some of our jails in prisons as we hear with decrepit conditions. But also, chair as an attorney, you understand that we have a legal duty to provide standard of care for individuals.

And if that standard of care falls that the state can be subject to lawsuits and even doctors can be subject to personal liability. And we know that there's a shortage of medical care. The infirmary is at a very lower level of care. And so, again, if we fail to provide that, not only is there state case law that's clear, but there's also federal case law to say that we're on the hook, and that means taxpayers. The cost savings from this measure are indisputable.

Money saves can go towards reintegration program. It can go to victims, survivors of crime. And so let's make the best use of our funds responsibly. Let's follow best practices. And last, I wanna say the attorney general did not raise any legal constitutional claims whatsoever with this bill.

It does not infringe upon the governor's commancy powers, nor does it infringe upon the judiciary. Lawmakers have the right to pass laws, including changes to sentences. And if you decide that compassionate release reflects our values and is a best practice, then ultimately, HPA, DCR, and all of us need to respect that decision from you as lawmakers. Thank you.

Thank you. I believe we have come to the end of those who have signed up to testify on the measure. We had a total of 33 in support, seven in opposition, two with comments, and many of the individuals, submitted written testimonial only. If you'd like to come forward, please, please do so. Welcome.

Good afternoon. My name is Matthew Taufete'e. I'm the executive director and founder of an organization called The First LAP. LAP is an acronym for life after prison. So I've been housing men, released from prison since, 01/10/2002.

You know, I was a former convict. You know, I took a person's life in 1988. Exactly three months later, the family retaliated and took my older brother's life as well. So since coming out of prison, I was able to turn my life around, you know, through the help of my church, you know, and mentors. You know?

So since that time, you know, I was able to make amends with my victim's family in 2014. 2015, I received the hero forgiveness award with I didn't even know we had such a thing. You know, and since that time, I was able to meet a lot of great people in this world who's making a great impact. And one of them is father Greg Boyle, the founder of Homeboy Industries, the biggest gang intervention drug rehab in the world. So I was able to meet him in 2017.

I became one of his keynote speakers in LA. You know, he received the presidential medal of freedom award, you know, in 2024. You know? So just meeting a lot of these people, they've seen the compassion I've shown for a lot of people. You know?

Mainly, I'm a former gang member as well. So a lot of guys followed my path. We all served time, got out, you know, they just were inspired to see the work I've been doing. And today, I have the privilege of doing bible studies with them every Saturday morning. So they've turned their lives around and not just seeing being more compassionate to our community.

So we do a lot of community of service work. You know, they're just this morning. I received the honorary certificate from the city council. So I was there this morning, you know, being honored with that certificate, you know, just to be out there to help serve our community in any way we can. So I'm in strong support for this bill.

Thank you.

Thank you. Let's see. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? If so, please come forward.

Good afternoon, madam chair. My name is Susan Mahiai, and my daughter is one of the victims for a heinous crime. So my daughter is a little girl that got shot in her head, Richianna DeGuzman, little over two years ago. I'm strongly support this bill of compassionate my daughter has had no help with victim advocates. They have a suspect, not enough evidence to prosecute, but still me and my family had the compassion to forgive this person or persons that did this to my daughter.

My daughter continues to struggle but continues to progress, And I just feel we need to be more compassionate, yeah, with with everybody that that did wrong. You know? We need to give them a chance that there there is a chance to change. You know? I've heard this one person that that's in prison right now.

He his name is Beau. He did not kill nobody. They gave him 3,999 hours in prison. He's still in there. Where's the compassion for him?

He did not shoot nobody, and he's stuck in prison really, really for nothing. You know? I just feel we don't have to treat these these inmates like animals. You know? They're very sickly, and I think they should go home with their families and let the families take care of them.

Thank you for your comment.

Madam chair. God bless you. Yeah.

Good afternoon, chair and Senator. My name is Maysana Aldeguer, and I just wanna elaborate on what Susan shared about Edward Stanley who was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole on an attempted murder. We just heard from Matt that he murdered somebody. Well, Edward did not murder anybody, but they again, they sentenced him to 3,999 years. You know, he already served forty years.

He has certificates from the wardens on his good behavior. He'd been the the work line for the ministry, the Christian ministry. And I just wanna add that these the director, the attorney general, the governor, and the Hawaii Proline Authority, he applied for commutation three times and got denied. These are the people that approves it. He he was Mingle, Abercrombie, and Ige and got denied.

It's a template that they just rubber stamps. He applied for through governor Josh Green, and I'm hoping that these people is in opposition of the life without. Take a good look at his his files and realize that he did not hurt or kill anybody, but he was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. So I ask that you guys pass this to help people like Edward Stanley to have a fair shot at a second chance in life. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else who would like to testify on this measure? Senator DeCorte, any questions? Okay. If not, we're gonna keep moving forward because we do wanna make sure we get through our agenda before, the day is over.

Next up is House Bill 1752, House Draft 1, relating to emergency medical services. This measure we have... Let's see. General Logan for Department of Defense. Thank you. General Mitsuyoshi.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, and Members of the Committee. Brigadier General Retired Neal Mitsuyoshi for the Adjutant General. The department stands on his testimony in support and is prepared to answer any questions you may have.

Okay. Thank you so much. We also have comments from Department of Health. Anyone from Department of Health here? Okay. If not, next we have... Let's see.

Sorry, Chair. Department of Health is online.

Oh, I'm sorry. Please proceed, Mr. Hall. IT, the audio is not coming through.

Sorry, Garrett. It seems like we need to troubleshoot your audio.

Aloha.

Oh, there we... Go ahead.

Aloha. Okay. Garrett Hall, Chief of EMS for the Department of Health. We do... We offer our written comments. We do support this. However, we do not believe it's necessary for this continue to move forward because there are two measures that have already been amended to adopt this exact language, and they're moving through. They both crossed over. House Bill 2314 and Senate bill 3134, which have been amended to this exact language. So we just wanted to share that and offer our comments. Mahalo.

Thank you very much. I'm sure that, at this point, we wanna keep as many vehicles moving as possible. Okay. Is there anyone else who would like to testify on House Bill 1752? Okay.

If not, we'll turn to House Bills 2078 House Draft One. This measure relates to habitual violent crime, requires the Attorney General in consultation with the Criminal Justice Research Institute to submit ongoing annual reports to the legislature. First up, we have Attorney General's office. Oh, that's in person.

Chair, Members of the committee, Deputy Attorney General, Mark Tom, for the department. Department provides testimony and strong support of House Bill 2078, House Draft One. The current draft, essentially extends the sunset date for this section and requires some data collection.

This bill is part of the law enforcement coal, law enforcement coalition, which is made up by the attorney general's office, department of law enforcement, the chief of police of each county, as well as the prosecutor the prosecutor's office from each county and is submitted, with unanimous agreement. I'm here for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Next, we have Honolulu Police Department also in support on Zoom.

Oh, afternoon, Chair and Members. I'm acting major Dason Toma of District 6 Waikiki of the Honolulu Police Department. HPD supports House Bill number 2078 relating to habitual violent crimes. Act 213 has enabled law enforcement to protect the community from those violent offenders who habitually choose to inflict violence upon their victims. People who routinely resort to the use of physical violence to resolve conflict or victimize others are the most dangerous among us.

Many times, the criminal offenders who commit the most heinous crimes have a long history of propensity towards violence. House bill 2078 would allow law enforce to apply sufficient consequences for these antisocial behaviors.

Repeating the sunset day will ensure that law enforcement will continue to have the proper tools to address these crimes. Also, statistics have shown that Act 213 has not been overly used to prosecute people, nor has it dramatically increased incarceration. Rather, it has been used judiciously to identify those who may escalate to more violent criminal offenses and to prosecute the worst offenders.

HPD urges you to support house bill 2078 relating to habitual property, habitual violent crimes. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Next, we have Community Alliance on Prisons, Kat Brady, in person.

Aloha, Chair Fukunaga, Senator DeCorte, Senator Lee, Vice Chairman. We're always curious how a place like Hawaii passes laws like this. So I did some research, and, actually, this law and other laws are based on eugenics, which started in 1900 to make sure that black people never reproduced. And to me, this is just shameful that we're actually thinking about this.

So the best, they passed laws because they said the best way to to prevent certain individuals who've been convicted of crimes from reproducing, it's, it's a set of belief that originally underpinned the country's habitual offender laws.

So what really concerns me is that we label people and we actually create criminals, and that is really not what we should be doing. All the news is about crime is decreasing. It's amazing. The decline, some of the laws, they're more punitive than they were in 1900. So what are we doing?

We're incarcerating people. We're creating a criminal underclass. And to me, that is not, it doesn't comport with the Aloha Spirit Law. So when I've included a lot of research on the crime decline in my testimony, and I hope you read it because crime is declining in just about every category. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Next, we have ACLU. Mister Frost has submitted written testimony in support. Carrie Ann Shirota in person in opposition.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Senator, Carrie Ann Shirota, I oppose this measure. I do not oppose the fact that we should be collecting data, but the data should be collected before we start throwing spaghetti out on the wall and, and trying to see what the outcomes are for public policy. There is research to this year after year of how do we decrease crime and particularly violent crime.

And for some reason, even though we demand evidence in a lot of other fields, education, economics, environmental, climate change, for some reason, a lot of times, law enforcement agencies will come and say there's crime rates, even though other times we see the numbers dipping. And we hear on the media constantly a bombardment of crime rising, and so people are fearful.

And when we're fearful, we're not looking at the evidence. And sociologists and criminologists, we've looked at these challenges in other jurisdictions and have studied these issues and what you need to do in terms of strategies to actually decrease crime, to make us safer, to have less victims.

And so I have pointed out to you, there's a number of studies here from council state government strategies of what we can do, but incarcerating people, particularly those who mostly will be targeted are houses people with mental illness, putting in them to jails where they will not get care. And also oftentimes are more likely to be assaulted or killed, is not the solution. Let's invest in best practices. Thank you, Senator.

Thank you.

Okay. Is there anyone else to testify on House bill 2078 House draft one? Members, any questions? Okay. If not, turning to the last measure on today's agenda, House bill 2581 House draft two relating to emergency management.

I believe we have Ted Kefalas testifying for Grassroots Institute of Hawaii, in person. Submitted written testimony in opposition. Let's see. Let next, we have First Justice on Zoom.

Not on Zoom, chair.

Okay. Next, we have Tara Gregory, individual on Zoom.

Please proceed.

Aloha. Can you hear me? Hello?

Okay.

Thank you. Aloha, Tara Fukunaga and Senator DeCourte. Tara Malia again, Gregory. I'm a resident and community advocate. I do stand on my oral testimony, my last two written testimonies.

I just wanted to add, that also last week, I did oppose this bill, and you did defer with the expectation of the necessary amendments, that they would be made. I just wanted to add to that with everything going on to the amendments just to ensure that the Lahui and the community are involved from the beginning of an emergency proclamation through its duration and into the aftermath.

As we see, I sent up the follow-up email requesting specific language changes, including the removal in chapter one twenty seven a of the replacement of the sole judge provision, and I hope that you did receive it. What we're experiencing right now shows exactly why this matters. An emergency proclamation was issued days before these storms, yet the preparation and coordination fell short, and the community has had to respond from the very beginning during and now in the aftermath.

I was personally boots on the ground and saw how the community was a 100% there for one another, providing food, services, rescue, and many, in many cases, life saving, situations, bringing bulldozers in to rescue Kupuna, and the city and state were not there at the time. Only 4% of Hawaii residents can afford flood insurance, and many are living along the waterfront and in the marina communities, and they cannot obtain coverage at all.

As we speak and last night and today, governor Green and the mayors are being questioned directly by the community regarding their boots on the ground efforts and the government's lack of preparedness. Now governor Green is asking the federal government to assume 90% responsibility, yet under state law, the governor and the mayors have a 100% authority and capacity to act ahead of time, but they didn't.

Under chapter 127 A 14, they remain the sole judge of the existence of the danger and continuation of the emergency.

If that authority rests with them, then so does the responsibility. As I stated in my written testimony in closing, the community did show up. And I would hope that these amendments are strongly considered. Thank you so much for the time to speak.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That brings us to the end of our agenda. Is there anyone else who would like to testify on House bill 2581? If not, we'll take a brief recess. Good afternoon. Returning to the agenda for Committee on Public Safety and Military Affairs.

First measure on today's agenda House Bill seventeen sixty nine, House Draft two relating to correctional facilities. Chair notes that there are several measures that have been encouraging, reduction of the DCR population out of state. And so we're gonna take a crack at a slightly different approach in this draft.

One of the testimonies had recommended that the department returned 5% of the number of felons in fiscal twenty seven, 10% of the number of felons in fiscal twenty eight, 15% of the number of felons in fiscal twenty nine instead of the 25% in fiscal twenty nine. So acknowledging that there may be some facilities issues, the goal is really to get started and really make progress as we seek to reduce our out of state population.

Are there any questions, concerns? If not, then vice chair Lee for the vote. Chair votes aye.

Just, with amendments.

Oh, so pass with the amendments

Yes.

As identified.

Okay. Voting on HB 1769 recommendations to pass with amendments. Chair and vice chair vote aye. Senator Hashimoto and Senator Inouye excused. Senator DeCourte.

Chair, the recommendation's adopted.

Aye.

Thank you. House bill 1628, house draft 2 relating to compassionate release. There are a number of really good recommendations that have come forward in this version of the bill. However, given some of the time constraints that, we are under in order to meet our deadlines, chair recommends that we pass with amendments to insert the contents of Senate Bill 2688, Senate draft one, and to identify some of the areas that we would like the next committee to take a look at in our committee report.

Any questions or comments?

If not, passing with amendments. Vice chair Lee.

Voting on HB 1628 HD two. The recommendation is to pass with amendments. Noting senators Hashimoto, Innouye excused. Are there any reservations or no's? Hearing none.

Recommendation's adopted.

Okay. Thank you very much. Turning to House Bill 1752, relating to emergency medical services. Chair recommends that we pass with an amendment to insert a new defective effective date of July 1, 2055. Any questions or comments? If not, Vice Chair Lee for the votes.

Voting on HB 1752, HD 1. The recommendation is to pass with amendments. Noting excused absence of Senators Hashimoto and Inouye. Are there any reservations or noes? Hearing none. The recommendation is adopted.

Okay. Next measure is House Bill 2078, House Draft 1, relating to habitual violent crime. Chair's recommendation is that we pass this measure with amendments to insert a new effective date and to note some of the concerns being raised during the testimony, which sort of were somewhat unexpected. But we'll note those in the committee report and continue this moving this bill forward.

Moving on HB 2078, the recommendation is to pass with amendments. Noting excused absences of Senators Hashimoto and Inouye. Are there any reservations or noes? Seeing none. The recommendation is adopted.

Okay. Last measure on our agenda is House Bill 2581, House Draft 2, relating to emergency management. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments to include the original contents of House Bill 2581 as part one and to add the proposed SD 1 as part two in the bill. Any questions, comments? If not, Vice Chair Lee for the vote.

Voting on HB 2581. The recommendation is to pass with amendments. Noting excused absences of Senators Hashimoto and Inouye. Are there any reservations or noes? Hearing none. The recommendation is adopted.

Okay. That brings us to the end of our agenda. Thank you, everyone, for your presence. We're adjourned.