[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-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],{"_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",6348175,"mediaKeyId","2243192-fa3c3eddf6f344423e6ec60e0b13f8d0","parentId",2243192,"title","House committee backs transfer-to‑ISRB path for some resentencing cases after divided debate","audioSeconds",1782,"startMs",3491000,"endMs",5273000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2243192-fa3c3eddf6f344423e6ec60e0b13f8d0&start=3491&end=5273","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2243192-fa3c3eddf6f344423e6ec60e0b13f8d0/thumbnail_3491000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6348175/Washington/House-committee-backs-transfer-toISRB-path-for-some-resentencing-cases-after-divided-debate","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6348175-2d87089d39d3f3d2beb3388403238765/orig.mp4?Expires=1771087945&Signature=hLVl9Iv3wHdRulQ0W~JcvZTz-W56m7eVmc0o24mfks9tKTgH7AXLxpFseWEgvWmIx-iuG34I6R3Xf12mN2i0fKLfMgT06NJFtPSuE83bmJxtMHnhM3vvhkjaOOtkIowwZuMJGQxlIEKczA561B9lw9J-XuL1A1SWVSePtbXBk9ftTfmpAOJ277C1bGG40989vqqq0-9Z-QDbnMWgsV0AIZZwMAId1poZJJZ1557Q2ktfZd-TzHURaiWQg-DeGrC6RfrJOE3fuEIX52iOwLCA5i5915Inn2F0AmrNAp9wQXBCW7T99-LIC3KzEt5WJEW8wKRlBIGaL1Rpb0zUu9mLdQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","House Community Safety","date","2025-02-06T00:00:00Z","article","The House Community Safety Committee on Feb. 6, 2025, voted to report out substitute legislation that replaces a judicial resentencing process with a procedure to transfer eligible felony cases to the Indeterminate Sentence Review Board (ISRB) for possible early release consideration.

The substitute language, adopted as the committee advanced House Bill 11 25 (substitute) and House Bill 12 74 (substitute), removes a judge’s ability to resentence de novo and instead requires a court that finds a petitioner meets statutory eligibility and proof standards to transfer the case to the ISRB for a board review and potential early-release decision.

Committee supporters said the ISRB’s multi‑member structure, routine use of evidence‑based risk assessments and access to DOC programming make it better suited than individual judges to evaluate rehabilitation and public‑safety risk. Representative Davis argued, “If the state's going to engage in retroactive re sentencing policy, then the appropriate mechanism is through the ISRB.” Representative Simmons, sponsor of one substitute, said the substitute “encourages and provides support for victims to attend these hearings” and noted the bills include community‑custody requirements and other procedural protections.

Key provisions described to the committee include: eligibility tied to the offense and minimum years served (examples in the text include thresholds of 15, 20 or 25 years depending on the underlying offense); notification of victims and survivors; an ISRB hearing scheduled after statutorily specified timeframes following a court transfer (the committee heard timings such as no earlier than 18 months after transfer in one striker and 180 days in another context); required DOC assessments and individualized reentry planning prepared 12 months before a potential release; and a default community‑custody term of five years following any granted modification or release as described in the substitutes. Committee briefers and sponsors also said the ISRB would be required to give victims’ and survivors’ statements significant weight and to convene listening sessions to improve victim involvement.

Opponents said the bills would lessen victims’ rights, remove judicial safeguards and, in some drafts discussed during committee debate, remove the right to appointed counsel for certain petitioners. Representative Davis told the committee judges lack the institutional tools and regular exposure to these cases necessary to assess risk consistently, saying, “Judges are not qualified to run a parole board.” Other members pressed that some forms of intimate‑partner offenses or crimes originally charged as aggravated murder should be exempt from early‑review unless victims consented.

The committee considered and rejected at least one striker that would have replaced the judicial‑review path with a transfer to the ISRB while also removing appointed counsel for some petitioners and adding other eligibility restrictions. After debate and recorded votes, the committee reported substitute House Bill 11 25 to the floor with a due‑pass recommendation (5 ayes, 4 nays) and reported substitute House Bill 12 74 with a due‑pass recommendation (5 ayes, 4 nays). Members who voted aye on the final HB11 25 report included Representative Goodman, Representative Simmons, Representative Faribhar, Representative Fosse and Representative Obras; members who voted nay included Representative Graham, Representative Griffey, Representative Burnett and Representative Davis.

Committee discussion emphasized the bills’ tradeoffs: sponsors framed the measures as a narrowly structured “second look” for aging or long‑term incarcerated people with reentry plans and supervision; critics warned the changes would undermine victims’ expectations and the determinate sentencing promises embedded in plea agreements. Committee members also differed on whether the legislature should expand the ISRB’s role or retain judicial resentencing as the mechanism for any retroactive sentence modifications.

The committee chair said further adjustments and floor‑level negotiation were expected as the bills move forward.

Votes at committee: Substitute House Bill 11 25 — reported out with a due‑pass recommendation, roll call 5 ayes, 4 nays. Substitute House Bill 12 74 — reported out with a due‑pass recommendation, roll call 5 ayes, 4 nays.

Next steps: Both substitute bills were reported out of committee for consideration by the full House; committee members signaled additional floor amendments and engagement with victim‑advocacy groups and corrections stakeholders would follow.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Community Safety - 2/6/2025 8:00 AM","oneSentenceSummary","The House Community Safety Committee on Feb. 6, 2025, voted to report out substitute legislation that replaces a judicial resentencing process with a procedure to transfer eligible felony cases to the Indeterminate Sentence Review Board (ISRB) for possible early release consideration.","taxTitle","Community Safety, Justice, & Reentry, House of Representatives, Legislative Sessions, Washington","taxId",20257,"location","Washington","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":46,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6348172,"Votes at a glance: House Community Safety Committee actions on Feb. 6, 2025",3922,1351000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2243192-fa3c3eddf6f344423e6ec60e0b13f8d0&start=1351&end=5273","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2243192-fa3c3eddf6f344423e6ec60e0b13f8d0/thumbnail_1351000.jpg","/articles/6348172/Washington/Votes-at-a-glance-House-Community-Safety-Committee-actions-on-Feb-6-2025","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6348172-afab24b284308e43d5c3f7445114f1fd/orig.mp4?Expires=1771087945&Signature=K4N72OEb8P0-s7H0gb7uaLEgKRHD5NH9RruDCeMmCBEtwKG86DIMyEmhxujPDy3ilhksGQ9QaETMRlOqoAv~Y3XLFMYYVAFf5j9SPf0LgtTWeNu8l85IdFrPW3l7lJ4EiOvLNeZHTfgIIF-~Z8pUhs1-ZRdyxqbmp-HzSFKBzGbpiqVgqAcLQdxa8DIdXsGjAfZ7aIbmlKGJV1SL0YUV4ura3UQdq9zq4K21oOwNRL7r2wfFY~2CDZFHhO9~Syp5oqDj7p6a9eBQIxOAUkjRHz0OPpLjGk3Ule0UYz3VyifQ5HIEDfYGh0et-BzgP-UkBkkBmwk7GGE7cnucOpJ2Dw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Community Safety Committee met Feb. 6, 2025, in executive session and took recorded action on a set of bills. This “at‑a‑glance” summary lists each bill discussed in committee and the committee’s formal outcome as recorded in the meeting.

House Bill 1,400 (peace‑officer/corrections background checks): Reported out of committee with a due‑pass recommendation. Motion to report by Representative Farber; the chair announced that “all members are present and all members are voting in the affirmative.” Outcome: reported out (unanimous voice vote recorded as unanimous by the chair).

Proposed substitute House Bill 13 99 (sheriff/police eligibility, volunteer limits, CJTC procedures): Reported out of committee with a due‑pass recommendation. Roll call recorded 6 ayes and 3 nays. Sponsors and committee discussion focused on permitted volunteer tasks, suitability guidelines, and whether the bill should explicitly require sheriffs to enforce the U.S. Constitution as well as the state constitution.

Proposed substitute House Bill 11 78 (sentencing enhancements): Reported out of committee with a due‑pass recommendation (roll call recorded 6 ayes, 3 nays). The substitute preserved several mandatory confinement rules for certain enhancements while allowing courts discretion on stacking firearm/deadly‑weapon enhancements across multiple charges brought in the same case.

House Bill 11 85 (Correctional Industries Advisory Committee membership): Reported out of committee with a due‑pass recommendation after sponsor remarks that the measure adds two voting members nominated by the governor to the advisory committee; committee voice vote recorded as unanimous.

Substitute House Bill 12 74 (resentencing / transfer to ISRB): Reported out of committee with a due‑pass recommendation, roll call 5 ayes, 4 nays. The substitute replaces judicial resentencing in many cases with a process for transferring eligible cases to the ISRB for potential early release, includes victim‑involvement and DOC reentry‑planning provisions, and sets eligibility thresholds tied to offense and years served.

Substitute House Bill 11 25 (judicial discretion to modify sentences in the interest of justice / transfer to ISRB in substitute): Reported out of committee with a due‑pass recommendation, roll call 5 ayes, 4 nays. Committee consideration included a struck amendment that would have replaced judicial resentencing with ISRB transfer (the striker was considered and not adopted), and a later substitute that the committee approved.

Deferred items: At the end of the executive session, the chair noted that two bills — the school‑related crimes measure and the DUI vacatur bill — were deferred for further executive action at a later meeting.

Recorded votes (selected):
- Proposed substitute HB13 99 — reported out, 6 ayes, 3 nays (roll call recorded in transcript)
- Proposed substitute HB11 78 — reported out, 6 ayes, 3 nays
- Substitute HB12 74 — reported out, 5 ayes, 4 nays
- Substitute HB11 25 — reported out, 5 ayes, 4 nays
- HB1400 — reported out, unanimous (all present recorded in the affirmative)
- HB11 85 — reported out, unanimous (voice vote recorded as all in affirmative)

The committee chair and members noted that additional floor amendments and stakeholder engagement are expected as bills move from committee to the full House.","The committee took executive‑session votes on multiple bills related to corrections, certification, sentencing and officer background checks; several substitutes were reported out with divided votes and two bills were deferred for further action.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

House committee backs transfer-to‑ISRB path for some resentencing cases after divided debate

Votes at a glance: House Community Safety Committee actions on Feb. 6, 2025