[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-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",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_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":73},"mediaId",6373405,"mediaKeyId","2145922-9eb0b1a01c2170f39adc26821ebcc962","parentId",2145922,"title","Judicial Discretion Act hearing draws survivors, judges and formerly incarcerated witnesses; committee to continue testimony","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",3321000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2145922-9eb0b1a01c2170f39adc26821ebcc962&start=3321&end=3321","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2145922-9eb0b1a01c2170f39adc26821ebcc962/thumbnail_3321000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6373405/Washington/Judicial-Discretion-Act-hearing-draws-survivors-judges-and-formerly-incarcerated-witnesses-committee-to-continue-testimony","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6373405-f53ebe62a59e05dd2f1979f263e398ed/orig.mp4?Expires=1771057754&Signature=ozZuY3HxGxEdFBZ7zPGCad8zxS5oCk3zwZdYkKwNOKvnFQZTjldIPnMHwVEnc2R7Sp5HDp2PFa4lSyBMiEC0P9dwfG9fgiLGbihbSMdTwOJHKxm4mjTlbdBYVd8ph2H6IuPzEZaWFMImoGiDreU4jsjoTVv0KQrwhrWmpciDQ6tLMcndr~41UWPMlQPcDVeSAWrGKVYGfBt0QFvYF01Hbe1euDwiJGl-Joi~eYdn0T2yEDR9nq7yebj8C3Jd9wGzVOYIne~COhQak40U7qGbvbG0xsy~mqsAFJ0C9-8h53uAQvQv4kSJU7PTWFHjkbNVR6I-uXUJBEy4t7ugYFG4iA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","House Community Safety","date","2025-01-23T00:00:00Z","article","House Bill 1125, a multi-year phased process creating a path for certain people convicted of felonies to petition courts for modification of their sentences “in the interest of justice,” was the subject of a lengthy public hearing Jan. 23 before the Community Safety Committee. Committee staff outlined a six-year eligibility rollout beginning July 1, 2026, and excluding certain persistent-offender designations and first-degree aggravated murder.

The bill would allow people meeting eligibility criteria to petition the original sentencing court to consider post-conviction behavior, rehabilitation and medical frailty; if the court finds eligibility by a preponderance standard it must hold a hearing within 120 days and may reduce a sentence to one no greater than the original. The bill requires DOC assistance compiling records, victim notification and offers for appointed counsel for indigent petitioners, and it creates a flexible fund for victim services.

Several people with lived experience spoke in favor. Azias Ross, incarcerated and serving a sentence he described as the product of consecutive weapon enhancements, said his sentencing judge told him the court lacked meaningful discretion at the time of sentencing and that review mechanisms are necessary. Ross quoted the judge as saying the court’s current sentence was “significantly disproportionate to the crimes committed when evaluating Ross as he is today.” He asked for judicial tools that would allow resentencing when appropriate.

Amanda Knight, who identified herself as incarcerated at Washington Correction Center for Women and described a long sentence for her role in a robbery that ended in a death, testified in support: “My worst choice has defined my life,” Knight said, and urged courts be able to account for rehabilitation and life context.

Victims and family members voiced opposition. Krista Stogner testified on behalf of a brother who was murdered and said the bill risks re-traumatizing victims and could jeopardize public safety. Anthony Mixer, speaking for a campus chapter of a conservative student group, described the bill as undermining consequences for crime.

Judge Veronica Galvan, co-chair of the Minority and Justice Commission, supported second-look policies and urged the committee to consider data showing disproportionate impacts of long sentences. She said, “We know better and we are obligated to do better,” and pointed to research showing low recidivism among people granted similar resentencings in other contexts.

Committee members asked detailed questions about eligibility, carve-outs for persistent-offender designations and how victim notification and funding would work. Because demand for testimony exceeded available time the committee recessed public testimony and set a continuation for Jan. 30; priority will be given to those who traveled to Olympia. The hearing remains open and the bill will be considered at a later date.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Community Safety - 1/23/2025 8:00 AM","oneSentenceSummary","House Bill 1125, a 'second-look'/judicial-discretion proposal, drew survivor and victim testimony, judicial support, and incarcerated-person accounts; the hearing was opened Jan. 23 and will be continued Jan. 30.","taxTitle","Community Safety, Justice, & Reentry, House of Representatives, Legislative Sessions, Washington","taxId",20257,"location","Washington","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_46":81,"_48":82,"_50":83,"_52":84,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":85,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":86,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6373410,"Public hearing on prison work programs: sponsors, incarcerated workers and DOC debate wages and voluntariness",1640,1747000,3387000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2145922-9eb0b1a01c2170f39adc26821ebcc962&start=1747&end=3387","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2145922-9eb0b1a01c2170f39adc26821ebcc962/thumbnail_1747000.jpg","/articles/6373410/Washington/Public-hearing-on-prison-work-programs-sponsors-incarcerated-workers-and-DOC-debate-wages-and-voluntariness","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6373410-8489d48da5052c2a43fc5aa219b1ac4c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771057754&Signature=S6rwA-z7HX~c~KKyTOtGaw4EKGe6PziKczeYWR8LQwAStZBaD4Ql2k-GonjxnEp0TXYcAtMIf-Y~Q~u~FSBkT8EWvsXMrswHLE44L7tc8TnWR9-hEuMBacwmoNbzGkP-M-guE7ko8Cz07BK-9Z53TTvQ8xgyq1yoHpt5yve~GswCdMizecas~wKJeDlSix0~7zCOJHgdNci2qvfmVa~TrJKVX-3mYohpsr-HYflMiJnskRD6KZD1TUjGVmpbpYxWb0Gh-~l2doPJSD4X4bLuDJV83FG7hJvUKFnUNIp~AI-M6Ivy-CMvz3bp9ghsyEkWFQqx-MCnJYfTXhH9Foy~6w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Community Safety Committee on Jan. 23 heard public testimony on House Bill 1233, which would make participation in most correctional industries work programs voluntary, forbid punitive discipline for refusing to work, and set a minimum wage/gratuity of at least $1 per hour for class 2 and class 3 work and a monthly maximum no less than $200 for class 3 payments.

The bill would not affect court-ordered community restitution work (class 5) but would end DOC’s ability to reduce earned early release or other privileges, issue infractions, or take punitive action solely because a person refuses to participate in a correctional industry program.

Carlos Bernardes, incarcerated at Washington Correction Center and a lead organizer for Look to Justice, told the committee that increased wages helped him support his family. \"Having the ability to receive a sustainable wage while incarcerated has alleviated the financial load for my family members and loved ones,\" Bernardes said, adding that higher pay made it possible to send money home for essentials.

Several formerly incarcerated or currently incarcerated witnesses described a lack of meaningful choice. Jermaine Williams said that once people are assigned to certain programs they cannot quit without suffering infractions and loss of good conduct time; he said, \"No, ma'am. Respectfully, and you can verify this, you do not have a choice. Once you have been chose to program, you absolutely must.\"

Hannah Warner, an attorney with Columbia Legal Services, testified in strong support, describing prison labor as rooted in an exception to the 13th Amendment and saying the $1 hourly floor adopted in recent budget language was vital for basic needs and reentry. \"Our state should not backslide on the progress we have made in the past two years,\" Warner told the committee.

Department of Corrections Assistant Secretary Danielle Armbruster said DOC supports policy that encourages programming but warned the department that making participation optional for facility-maintenance jobs would require hiring additional staff or contracting out essential operations, imposing substantial costs. Armbruster said Correctional Industries must be financially self-sustaining and that higher gratuities would increase operating costs that are passed to customers.

Committee members asked whether custody-related maintenance roles (class 3) differ from correctional industries (class 2) and whether existing law already requires individuals to participate in programs. DOC staff said class 2 (Correctional Industries) has been legally voluntary though individuals must give notice to quit, and class 3 includes custodial and maintenance work that is currently required in many circumstances.

Testimony reflected sharply different views: advocates and several incarcerated witnesses described coerced labor and urged a voluntary model and wage protections; DOC emphasized operational continuity and fiscal consequences. The committee did not take action on the bill and will consider it later in the legislative process.

Ending: Sponsors and witnesses asked the committee to keep the recent $1 per hour wage floor and to enshrine voluntariness and protection from punitive infractions for refusal to work. DOC requested further fiscal analysis.","A public hearing on House Bill 1233 drew testimony from incarcerated workers, advocates and Department of Corrections officials about making correctional industries participation voluntary and raising wages.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_46":93,"_48":94,"_50":95,"_52":96,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":97,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":98,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6373415,"Community Safety Committee reports out five corrections bills affecting supervision, clemency, segregation and hearing standards",1657,76000,1733000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2145922-9eb0b1a01c2170f39adc26821ebcc962&start=76&end=1733","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2145922-9eb0b1a01c2170f39adc26821ebcc962/thumbnail_76000.jpg","/articles/6373415/Washington/Community-Safety-Committee-reports-out-five-corrections-bills-affecting-supervision-clemency-segregation-and-hearing-standards","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6373415-278af14124f9280424a49298e9e80b60/orig.mp4?Expires=1771057754&Signature=bxkxODCYuVOedtRIlWuzbsTjy6g3zSHzbgf32pgs9v0HuCp7nPSpYLQSJZUe-oW~gfiTh5SESMA~R-T9q3diG5USkuDB-NaZJ~MxuYsNjLdhOVfPhSDn0o0Sj~BFzc6gFLLVN9bH32e~Uy5unDdL5729crgeTc8rtA8W7ajIYbZ~8DrFn1dn7BiOy3FkOpUGJqCwmFQHcqjuBbGdguhKzv~2ggIUhCeiNSZFnigL21yDBY31NfrU7rGqagl5oIwODXTIqTCqRbTMPn9l28SWwUW4GEkzIlinI6b0KM9o~cqdgCqFbX~8HR2xtJl243PkKPPJen8~AfnYpZoFmauGjQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Community Safety Committee on Jan. 23, 2025, reported out five bills with due-pass recommendations that would change how the Department of Corrections (DOC) awards supervision compliance credit, expand the Clemency and Pardons Board, set reporting and limits on administrative segregation, and lower the burden of proof for certain DOC disciplinary hearings.

The bills matter because they alter both operational practices inside state prisons and procedural standards that affect who may earn time off, how long someone can be held in administrative segregation, and who sits on the state clemency body.

House Bill 1091 was reported out with a due-pass recommendation by voice vote. The bill would prohibit a person from earning supervision compliance credit on any cause being served concurrently with a less-restrictive-alternative (LRA) placement subject to DOC supervision. Committee members said the change is intended to address what supporters called a “supervision cliff” when compliance credit is applied to people not truly in the community. The record shows the committee voice vote was affirmative with all members present voting in favor except Representative Farvar, who was excused.

House Bill 1119, carried at committee request, would modify how compliance with supervision credits is determined and would exclude those granted a governor’s conditional commutation from eligibility. After debate the committee voted by roll call to report the bill out with a due-pass recommendation; the recorded tally was 5 ayes, 3 nays and 1 excused.

Substitute House Bill 1131 would expand the Clemency and Pardons Board from five to 10 members and shift the review language toward whether clemency is “in the interest of justice.” The committee also adopted an amendment replacing the statutory term “offender” with “individual” in reporting provisions. The substitute was reported out by roll call, 5 ayes, 3 nays, 1 excused.

A proposed substitute to House Bill 1137 addresses administrative segregation and disciplinary procedures. The substitute specifies narrower circumstances that may warrant administrative segregation, requires DOC to evaluate policies with a goal of reducing placements to 15 days or less where possible, mandates updates to individuals placed beyond 30 calendar days, and requires secretary-level authorization to extend segregation beyond 45 days. The committee also adopted an amendment requiring DOC to publish an annual report on its use of administrative segregation that must include counts, mean/median lengths of stay and reasons for placements. The substitute was reported out by voice vote; the record shows all present voted in the affirmative with one member excused.

Substitute House Bill 1192 would change the standard of proof used in certain DOC disciplinary hearings from beyond a reasonable doubt to preponderance of the evidence. Supporters argued the change aligns administrative hearings with civil standards and eases burdens created by current statutory language; opponents raised concerns about due process and victims’ interests. The substitute was reported out by voice vote with all present voting aye except one excused member.

Votes at a glance:
- House Bill 1091 — reported out with a due-pass recommendation (voice vote; all members present voted aye; Rep. Farvar excused).
- House Bill 1119 — reported out with a due-pass recommendation (roll call: 5 ayes, 3 nays, 1 excused).
- Substitute House Bill 1131 — reported out with a due-pass recommendation (roll call: 5 ayes, 3 nays, 1 excused). Amendment Lang 076 (replace “offender” with “individual”) adopted.
- Substitute House Bill 1137 — reported out with a due-pass recommendation (voice vote; all present voted aye; Rep. Farvar excused). Amendment Lang 077 (annual administrative segregation report) adopted.
- Substitute House Bill 1192 — reported out with a due-pass recommendation (voice vote; all present voted aye; Rep. Farvar excused). Amendment Lang 075 (change standard of proof to preponderance for certain disciplinary hearings) adopted.

Committee members debated several bills at length before voting, and two items (1137 and 1192) included sponsor amendments to narrow scope or add reporting requirements. Committee leaders said they would coordinate with members on outstanding concerns as bills move forward to other committees.

The committee then moved into public hearings on two separate bills; those hearings are covered in separate articles.","At its Jan. 23 meeting the Community Safety Committee reported out five bills with due-pass recommendations covering supervision compliance credits, clemency board composition, administrative segregation limits and discipline hearing standards.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Judicial Discretion Act hearing draws survivors, judges and formerly incarcerated witnesses; committee to continue testimony

Public hearing on prison work programs: sponsors, incarcerated workers and DOC debate wages and voluntariness

Community Safety Committee reports out five corrections bills affecting supervision, clemency, segregation and hearing standards