[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6356970,"mediaKeyId","2215677-856ba69d19cedebee6eb5c47c877a0f7","parentId",2215677,"title","Opponents say bill to ease juvenile overcrowding by sending older youth to DOC risks undoing JR-to-25 reforms","audioSeconds",435,"startMs",45000,"endMs",480000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2215677-856ba69d19cedebee6eb5c47c877a0f7&start=45&end=480","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2215677-856ba69d19cedebee6eb5c47c877a0f7/thumbnail_45000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6356970/Washington/Opponents-say-bill-to-ease-juvenile-overcrowding-by-sending-older-youth-to-DOC-risks-undoing-JR-to-25-reforms","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6356970-abe55cc20c803c475b941e342135d36e/orig.mp4?Expires=1774971070&Signature=ZGxsLmX3~4GPcXKBVRl47fkoZoCkoboKGryxVDsoiE5ypUOX7Kew9isz~1pWUXJQ2KxnteiPwWprdwdBACy44-tSrMSu-OKrH~EiGbEudIRSQ1D9b6BI78raovOnxv6t37WGCl00be6uHo7CE3BEFglPUiZ-DDt95LybupsgL1zA6A2JXlLmZZ6dweC56jaMOG7vcbBLC3pqm-7r-Bw9B5MRSyhYV3bvPjQwTJ9HMl28J35PAVem62RHEUeEglvwJZxtiGtNlocQ3ChobmwpCuCaPEs-rCGAUpnY3-3cN7QrMG2h6WkH3gNYMZui~4pDQ9JKRuj6GyHXo-18lY85dw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Senate Human Services","date","2025-02-03T00:00:00Z","article","Opponents of Senate Bill 5278 told the Senate Human Services Committee that the bill’s sweeping transfer powers would strip youth of procedural protections and risk moving people into the adult prison system for reasons beyond their control.

The bill, presented to the committee as the Juvenile Rehabilitation Overcrowding Relief Act, would require or permit transfers from the Department of Children, Youth and Families (DCYF) juvenile rehabilitation system to the Department of Corrections (DOC) when facilities exceed certain ‘‘rated bed capacity’’ thresholds, and it would change when hearings are required for transfers. Proponents said the measure is needed to address chronic overcrowding at Green Hill School; critics said it would reintroduce the very harms the JR-to-25 policy was meant to prevent.

Kelsey Anne Fung, staff to the committee, summarized the proposed substitute and said the bill contains five main elements including a requirement that DCYF adopt rules for safe operational capacity, authorization to move certain people to DOC without a transfer hearing when institutions exceed 105% of rated bed capacity, a process for some voluntary adult-court transfers, mandatory transfers for staff assaults, and accelerated deadlines for transfer hearings in certain disciplinary cases. Fung also noted DOC’s partial fiscal estimate: an indeterminate annual impact likely greater than $50,000 and a possible one-time cost of about $3,500,000 plus 29 FTEs to open dedicated housing if DOC must create space for persons under 18 separated from adults.

Sen. John Braun, R-20, sponsor of the bill, said Green Hill is ‘‘overcrowded by anywhere from 50 to 70 residents at any one time’’ and that the state is failing to deliver promised rehabilitative services under JR25. Braun said the bill is intended to give the agency tools to ‘‘make reasoned decisions’’ about moving people to relieve overcrowding, while noting that portions of earlier drafts dealing with staff sexual misconduct were being removed and handled separately.

Advocates and defense lawyers urged caution. Greta Schultz, an attorney with TeamChild, said the science that produced JR-to-25 recognized developmental differences between youth and adults and argued the solution is more investment in juvenile services, not moving young people into DOC. ‘‘Sending these youth to DOC would be the most harmful amongst them,’’ Schultz said.

Sarah Nagy, staff attorney at Columbia Legal Services and counsel in Tafalicia v. DCYF, said the bill would create mandatory transfer regimes that override statutory process rights for some youth. ‘‘A mandatory provision renders any discretionary provision meaningless in practice,’’ Nagy said, adding that the bill risks returning youth to a situation where they can be ‘‘taken away from one day to the next with no warning,’’ undermining rehabilitative incentives.

Law-enforcement organizations voiced conditional support. James McMahon, policy director for the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, said his organization supports the bill ‘‘with the hope that it’s never needed,’’ and warned that capacity failures in JR can create public-safety problems in local communities.

DCYF testified that the term ‘‘safe operational capacity’’ needs clear statutory or rule-based definition. Lisonbee Kreutzinger, a DCYF policy official, said DCYF engaged national juvenile-justice experts who recommended criteria — such as single-bed occupancy, access to showers and programming space — to calculate a safe capacity figure and suggested that number and the associated criteria be codified in rule so it can change without further statute. Kreutzinger also raised operational concerns about some transfer deadlines in the bill and said the department expects nontrivial workload and placement-planning impacts if transfers occur routinely.

Several testimony points touched on disciplinary practices and whether local prosecutorial charging contributed to the problem. Elizabeth Mustin of the Washington State Office of Public Defense said youth at Green Hill are disproportionately charged with serious offenses such as ‘‘prison riot’’ compared with adults in DOC institutions, distorting who is considered a safety risk. Multiple witnesses urged expanding community transition services and other community-based alternatives as less harmful tools to reduce JR population.

Committee members asked multiple follow-ups about definitions and consequences. Sen. Claire Wilson, serving as chair, and Sen. Mark Christian pressed about whether the bill would allow voluntary transfers, whether youth could change their minds after transfer, and how ‘‘safe operational capacity’’ would be defined in practice. DCYF and the bill sponsor acknowledged that work remains to refine definitions and operational details.

The committee heard a mix of support for the bill’s goal of relieving acute overcrowding and opposition focused on procedure and child-development concerns. No committee action or vote on the bill was recorded in the hearing transcript.

The committee received pro/con sign-in tallies during the 5278 hearing; staff reported 21 pro, 19 con and 1 other for that bill’s testimony day.

Looking ahead, proponents and opponents both urged further interagency work: DCYF recommended codifying safe-capacity criteria in rule; advocates recommended preserving current access to contract counsel and transfer hearing protections or creating other procedural checks if transfers proceed; and law-enforcement groups asked for durable, system-level capacity improvements so emergency transfer tools are rarely needed.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Human Services - 2/3/2025 1:30 PM","oneSentenceSummary","Opponents of Senate Bill 5278 told the Senate Human Services Committee that the bill’s sweeping transfer powers would strip youth of procedural protections and risk moving people into the adult prison system for reasons beyond their control.","taxTitle","Human Services, Senate, Legislative Sessions, Washington","taxId",20506,"location","Washington","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6356963,"Senate bill would expand judicial discretion, add review hearings and alternatives to reduce juvenile incarceration",1619,4809000,6428000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2215677-856ba69d19cedebee6eb5c47c877a0f7&start=4809&end=6428","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2215677-856ba69d19cedebee6eb5c47c877a0f7/thumbnail_4809000.jpg","/articles/6356963/Washington/Senate-bill-would-expand-judicial-discretion-add-review-hearings-and-alternatives-to-reduce-juvenile-incarceration","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6356963-e9a2d7a22c7e07ec7d7b47a96397e04e/orig.mp4?Expires=1774971070&Signature=Osm7eFNbk2dTKtObVibQ-XE3jjnOxsBJjbNNSYVW0VRHi93FxySNAxTxXLwRuHq5Ssfd6VtMUWn2CjRncVX7P4UzcCA0NCppPx9xcBou0DjkiaaUJZ6CtE3Gl4bkSYCiEaV7NTdPAenNIiIeidg70TWGEJmkeQBwFR-6mI0DIxnAs8Tsd~9AVL8KYy3q2e-4Ev4qTktKL6oaPmcD7xfEFo9QbbA7ZlMIYl5OEJ7AyNOyXSkrH3uEYwvGvA59rPqdaCZQmRU0VcxOC~ZOgnHTE3fW22lOvfsBrxawqs2Ui63RYHZsz3yKMRNtJB1vGyAlODtzf73MOANamD98G5xg9w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 5296 would change Washington’s juvenile sentencing scheme by giving juvenile court judges more discretion to keep many youth in their communities while preserving commitment for those the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, cannot be safely supervised outside JR.

Will Tronson, committee staff, told the Human Services Committee that the bill would require an independent judicial finding — supported by clear and convincing evidence — that a commitment to a state juvenile institution is needed because a community placement would not adequately protect public safety, except for a limited set of serious offenses. The bill would expand eligibility for suspended dispositions and other alternatives (including electronic monitoring), remove the statutory requirement that youth serve at least 10% of their sentence (but not less than 30 days in any case), and add a requirement that youth who receive JR time over six months have a six-month review hearing that would result in release on community supervision unless the court made specific findings to retain the youth.

Sen. Claire Wilson, sponsor of the bill, framed the measure as an ‘‘upstream’’ approach to reduce overcrowding by increasing diversion and community-based options. ‘‘We need to address this by finding solutions that meet the needs of our young adults and keep them from being in the deep end of the juvenile justice system in the first place,’’ Wilson said during her opening remarks.

Support came from juvenile-defender and advocacy organizations. Emily Justin of TeamChild told the committee that TeamChild has helped young people avoid JR by arranging housing, extended family supports and behavioral-health treatment and that community-based responses lead to lower recidivism. Katie Hurley, special counsel for criminal practice and policy with King County Department of Public Defense, said the bill would safely reduce admissions and short stays and estimated that the changes could lower JR average daily population by roughly 50 youth; DCYF witnesses said the likely population impact from the bill’s construction would be smaller, on the order of one to four youth, and stressed that local investments in community alternatives are needed for the approach to be effective.

Prosecutors and juvenile-court administrators voiced concerns about the bill’s scope and implementation. Russell Brown, executive director of the Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, cautioned that the proposal shifts substantial discretion to local courts and could produce inconsistent outcomes across jurisdictions; he also said the mandatory six-month reviews with presumptive release could be disruptive for victims and create new costs. Jack Murphy of the Washington Association of Juvenile Court Administrators said the bill contains ‘‘good ideas’’ but is large in scope and warned that option B (a disposition alternative for higher-risk youth) has historically been under-resourced; he urged working through operational details before enactment.

Other testimony stressed the scientific basis for treating youth differently from adults. Dr. Esther Matthews, a criminology researcher with lived experience of juvenile incarceration, said confinement is often ‘‘criminogenic’’ and advocated for policies that keep youth in community settings that support development. The ACLU’s Sandra Toussaint urged alignment of policy with adolescent brain science and said the evidence shows youth kept close to home are less likely to reoffend.

Committee questions focused on implementation details, funding, impacts on repeat offenders and victim-notification consequences. DCYF officials said they expect implementation workload and concurrent-jurisdiction reviews but provided a data-backed estimate that immediate population impacts would be modest under the bill’s current text. Supporters and administrators both emphasized that community-based alternatives must be funded and scaled to realize the bill’s goals.

The committee heard a broad range of stakeholders and flagged further technical and fiscal work; the hearing record does not show a committee vote during the session.","Senate Bill 5296 would require judges to make an independent finding, using clear-and-convincing evidence, that an institutional juvenile rehabilitation (JR) commitment is needed for most cases; expand disposition alternatives; create periodic review hearings; and remove the 10% minimum-served rule. Supporters say it would reduce overcrowding and",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6356966,"Bill to speed voluntary transfers from juvenile rehabilitation to adult corrections draws calls to keep legal protections",652,3600000,4252000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2215677-856ba69d19cedebee6eb5c47c877a0f7&start=3600&end=4252","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2215677-856ba69d19cedebee6eb5c47c877a0f7/thumbnail_3600000.jpg","/articles/6356966/Washington/Bill-to-speed-voluntary-transfers-from-juvenile-rehabilitation-to-adult-corrections-draws-calls-to-keep-legal-protections","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6356966-a504dc3e4cd6bcbb6182ee1b45b218dd/orig.mp4?Expires=1774971070&Signature=lmMPI5Lr8bpzlk~8CH8NVfRrFKOxq1Z9fb1AmwCwLVEwb6ePALKEnWJu2v8G4a~RN24wrABPgVshYqVX25SaA1ycpBysCW0coBwI8Fy8b3IO8Cid12PEpkTvSOWb4kyE6ChOgElySPU~VGvHI3nThWE4zEvQMfVE3N1S906XNx533gFb2~XeD1jyb-QoJuPzEB1pojvRdTwjOc-QEGBLxUy5iftYRXN-zI9O9xnjVo3BkB1TMeqrUwz7Dm~b2IaXhDJNZ07QNLSv-gebZS1MoAyHvuFuCBucB3b5UtvMNLAIslcYTPNljmNY0EpO6J2tQESS5YESXfAuo-xQpyhQBg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 5260, introduced as the Youth Rehabilitation Pathways Act, would streamline voluntary transfers from juvenile rehabilitation to adult corrections for people age 18 or older who request the move. Supporters said the change respects individuals’ agency and can relieve pressure on overcrowded juvenile facilities; defenders and juvenile advocates urged preserving due-process protections and building clearer information and transition planning into any change.

Kelsey Anne Fung, staff to the committee, outlined the bill’s core provisions. Under the draft presented, a person at least 18 years old could request a transfer from DCYF to DOC; the person would have three days to reconsider, and after that three-day period DCYF would be required to transfer the person to DOC within 10 days. The bill would require DCYF and DOC to develop a transfer-request form and would direct DCYF to inform people entering custody of the option to request a transfer. Fung repeated that DOC’s partial fiscal estimate is indeterminate but likely above $50,000 per year and that DCYF’s fiscal note was still pending.

Sen. Mark Christian, sponsor of the bill, said the measure is intended to honor situations in which an individual believes DOC will better meet their needs, including family proximity or programming options. ‘‘If somebody is wanting to…choose to go to DOC, why are we not honoring that?’’ Christian asked during the hearing.

Defense and youth advocates said the bill should preserve key protections. Sarah Zehr, director of Legal Services (TeamChild), and Sarah Nagy of Columbia Legal Services urged that the current practice — which includes consultation with DCYF’s contract counsel and a review board hearing that probes the young person’s reasoning and protects against coercion — not be eliminated. Nagy noted that current practice gives a youth the opportunity to consult with counsel and receive a set of procedural protections before transfer; she asked that those protections be retained or replaced with clear safeguards so a youth is not pushed out because of worsening conditions or staff pressure.

DCYF presented operational concerns and data. Allison (Lisonbee) Kreutzinger, representing DCYF, reported that in the last year there were 22 self-request transfers; 18 were granted and 4 denied after the review process. DCYF said it is neutral toward the bill’s intent but asked for clarifications: the agency highlighted that a hard 10-day transfer deadline could be disruptive to ongoing programming and medical or behavioral-health transitions and suggested more flexibility so transfers do not interrupt care. DCYF also said DOC staff are sometimes on-site at Green Hill to help classify people for placement, but witnesses and committee members also noted uneven information-sharing and gaps in transition planning.

Other witnesses echoed both the need to respect individual choice and the need to preserve process. Sarah Nagy and Sarah Zehr recommended explicit statutory language that preserved youth access to contract counsel before a self-transfer is finalized, required good-faith information-sharing between DCYF and DOC about likely classification and placement outcomes, and provided for a limited ‘‘transfer back’’ mechanism so a youth who immediately regrets a transfer has a defined pathway to return when appropriate.

Committee members asked whether a youth could change their mind after transfer; sponsor Christian said he would consider an amendment that allows a single return if appropriate, citing the logistical costs of frequent back-and-forth moves. DCYF urged flexibility and planning time for medical and treatment transitions.

The committee did not record a vote during the hearing. Testimony sign-ins on the legislative day indicated many stakeholders organized to comment across related bills on juvenile rehabilitation.","Senate Bill 5260 would let an 18-or-older youth in DCYF custody request transfer to DOC, require a short reconsideration period, and mandate transfer within 10 days. Supporters say it respects individual choice and eases overcrowding; advocates and DCYF staff said safeguards, clearer information-sharing, and flexibility on timing are needed.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Opponents say bill to ease juvenile overcrowding by sending older youth to DOC risks undoing JR-to-25 reforms

Senate bill would expand judicial discretion, add review hearings and alternatives to reduce juvenile incarceration

Bill to speed voluntary transfers from juvenile rehabilitation to adult corrections draws calls to keep legal protections