Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hb 2413 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pretrial reform bill draws split testimony; committee defers HB 2413 for more data
Summary
HB 2413, a sweeping pretrial reform bill that would create a presumption of release for many nonviolent offenses, drew lengthy, divided testimony (85 in support, 37 opposed); after questioning the committee deferred decision-making to a later hearing to allow additional data and follow-up.
The Public Safety & Military Affairs committee heard hours of testimony on House Bill 2413, a broad pretrial reform package that would alter bail and release presumptions for many nonviolent offenses. Supporters said the bill would reduce pretrial incarceration of people who cannot afford bail; opponents warned it is overly broad and could endanger public safety by limiting judicial discretion.
William Bento of the Office of the Public Defender testified in strong support, saying the bill creates a default of release for many nonviolent charges and reduces the wealth‑based disparities of the current bail system. "This is really a bill for those that do not have the means to post bail," Bento told the committee.
The Department of the Attorney General (Deputy Attorney General Mark Tom) and several prosecutors and police representatives testified in opposition. Mark Tom noted ongoing work by the Penal Code Review Committee and urged allowing that process and data reviews to proceed, saying the bill as written is broader than recommendations now moving in other legislation. Hawaii County Prosecutor Calvin Walden and Honolulu prosecutors joined in opposition, arguing judges already have discretion and that the bill could remove case‑by‑case decisionmaking. Walden told the committee that at some facilities "over 90% of those in custody are being held on felony offenses," to underscore his view that local facilities' populations are driven by felonies rather than low‑level offenses.
Advocates including drug‑policy and harm‑reduction groups, survivors' advocates, the ACLU and community organizations argued the state's pretrial system criminalizes poverty, disproportionately affects homeless people, and prolongs unnecessary incarceration. Nicos Leverens and others cited national and local data showing long median pretrial stays and the high costs of incarceration.
Several individual victims and opponents told personal stories raising safety concerns; one speaker, identifying himself as a Waikiki resident and crime victim, described a self‑conducted study and asserted high failure‑to‑appear rates in his sample. Committee members requested jurisdictional data and the recent Criminal Justice Research Institute report to inform deliberations.
After extended questioning and acknowledgment of substantial written testimony (85 supporting, 37 opposing), the committee voted to defer decision‑making and scheduled further consideration on Friday, citing the need for additional data and follow‑up from agencies and stakeholders.
