Senate debate resumes over building stand‑alone women’s prerelease center; lawmakers press costs, site, and service tradeoffs

Senator (Sen.) Lisa Washington, sponsor of SB 187, urged the Judicial Proceedings Committee to give a favorable report on legislation that would reassert the state’s legal mandate to build a stand‑alone prerelease center for women and establish statutory guardrails for site size, programming and procurement. "We either allow this or we don't," Washington said, arguing that a community‑based center — not a facility embedded in a maximum‑security prison — better enables family contact, therapeutic programming and successful reentry.

The bill prompted an extended panel of witnesses. Dr. Nicole Jarrett of the Council of State Governments Justice Center summarized research showing prerelease environments work best when facilities are intentionally structured for individualized services and proximity to transportation and community providers. "Location matters," Dr. Jarrett said, listing employment, health care and family connection as critical supports that a community‑based site must enable.

Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (DPSCS) officials described current efforts at the Maryland Correctional Institution for Women (MCIW), including Project Fresh, a prerelease housing unit with gender‑responsive programming. Amanda Cram, DPSCS director of social work, said Project Fresh provides concentrated services and peer mentorship and that many programs for prerelease women operate effectively on the compound today. "There is a great benefit to Project Fresh being present in MCIW," she said.

At the same time, Daniel Chase, chief of staff at the Department of General Services (DGS), told the committee the department paused the design contract for the previously identified site and is re‑evaluating properties after stakeholder concerns about size and neighborhood fit. Chase said about $350,000 has been spent so far on planning and the agency estimates that building at the formerly proposed 717 Forest Street site could cost roughly $108 million ‘‘all in.’’

Senators probed several tradeoffs: whether a separate center would duplicate or fragment existing volunteer and community services concentrated at MCIW; how many people would be served (DPSCS said about 70 women typically hold prerelease status, though the population can fluctuate); and whether separating prerelease residents would remove mentorship opportunities from women in other security classifications. Ellen Rappaport, DPSCS executive director of reentry services, said the department identifies people for reentry work roughly nine months before release and that many program elements are delivered to the broader compound. "Programs come to one place so they can reach more people," she said, cautioning that duplicating volunteer programming across two sites could be challenging.

Sponsor Washington said the bill’s purpose is to prevent another long delay and to ensure the facility actually meets gender‑responsive design and programming standards. She emphasized legislative intent and past history: Maryland once operated a women’s prerelease unit that closed in 2009 and, she said, the state has since missed repeatedly announced delivery dates. "This is not about delay," Washington said. "It's about building it right and making sure it delivers what the law requires."

The committee did not take a final vote on SB 187 at the hearing. DGS and DPSCS agreed to continue coordination with the sponsor on site selection and program details; several members requested further fiscal details and clarifications about transitions of services during any build period.

Next steps: the sponsor and agencies agreed to work on amendments clarifying service transition deadlines, procurement steps and site‑selection criteria and to submit revised language for committee review.