Committee backs SB 709 SD2 with clarifying amendments after debate over assisted community treatment and law‑enforcement training

The committee advanced SB 709 SD2 on March 19, a measure that would require the Department of Health to respond to reports about people with severe mental illness, assess eligibility for assisted community treatment (ACT), and coordinate appropriate care.

The bill’s supporters said it is intended to improve timely intervention and help secure treatment for people in crisis. ‘‘The laws that address people in crisis serve a vital role,’’ said Ian Soo of the Department of Human Services, who provided testimony in support and said the amendments are a ‘‘modest but impactful clarification’’ to existing law.

Opponents urged delay. Louis Shack, director of the Hawaii Disability Rights Center, told the committee the bill’s current form appears to have language inserted without adequate public input and raised specific concerns about section six, which he said would expand the attorney general’s role in administrative orders to treat at the Hawaii State Hospital. Shack said the provision as drafted could allow the AG to become involved in institutional administrative proceedings in a way that departs from current practice and that other parts of the bill risk expanding involuntary authority — for example by authorizing periodic blood and urine testing or specifying where a person must live.

An individual testifier, attorney Jim Gotstein, also opposed the bill and argued that mandatory psychiatric drug regimes can be harmful. He urged the Legislature to pursue alternative, recovery‑oriented reforms described in his written testimony.

Committee members spent much of the hearing questioning how the measure interacts with established processes and who should oversee crisis‑intervention officer (CIT) certification. Members asked whether a Ways and Means receipt of written testimony counts as a prior hearing; the AG’s office explained that, in this instance, the bill’s cross‑session history and testimony record supported the bill’s procedural posture.

A major strand of debate centered on moving responsibility for CIT certification from the Department of Health to the Department of Law Enforcement (DLE). DLE Director Mike Lambert said the proposal clarifies who coordinates the law‑enforcement training and certification process, noting that law‑enforcement agencies have CIT coordinators and that DLE would work with DOH and subject‑matter experts on exam content and standards. Lambert said properly trained CIT officers could make faster, field‑level determinations in high‑stress situations and help route people to behavioral health crisis centers instead of emergency rooms.

DOH witnesses and several members pressed for explicit statutory language guaranteeing DOH’s role in certifying training content and in routing or review, saying officers lack clinicians’ training and that the law should preserve clinician oversight and routing safeguards, including use of existing MH1/MH3 and mental health emergency worker (MHEW) processes for transport decisions.

The committee recommended passing SB 709 SD2 with technical amendments and asked staff to clarify the language in section two and to move a procedural proviso into its own line so it applies to the entire section rather than to a subsection. The committee report will also flag concerns raised by DOH and request follow‑up work before the next hearing.

Next steps: the bill passed out of committee with a recommendation to pass with amendments and will proceed to the next referral for further consideration.