Program to ease overcrowding in state’s jails has yet to launch
A plan to ease overcrowding in Hawaii jails by releasing nonviolent accused or convicted petty criminals hasn’t gotten off the ground yet, and might not have much impact when it finally takes effect because too few inmates will qualify.
Gov. David Ige’s administration proposed a law last year to allow the prison system to release some inmates who were sentenced for minor crimes or were stuck in jail because they were unable to post bail for minor offenses, and lawmakers approved a modified version of the plan last spring.
Ige signed Act 217 into law July 6 to create the program, but Department of Public Safety Director Nolan Espinda said writing regulations for the law and getting the approval of the state Attorney General’s Office for those regulations have slowed the effort.
Espinda said he hopes to start releasing pretrial inmates under the new program next month but said it appears that fewer than 100 prisoners statewide will qualify. That is a small fraction of the 1,990 inmates Hawaii held in its four jails at the end of last year.
Relatively few inmates will be released, in part because lawmakers would not authorize the jails to free any prisoners under the program who were ever convicted of violent offenses or were ever arrested for abuse of a household or family member.
Lawmakers also excluded inmates who were on probation or parole for serious crimes, and prisoners who were denied bail or had bail set at more than $5,000.
Espinda said his department then further limited the scope of the program by deciding that “we’re not going to release anybody with mental health needs, we’re not going to release anybody who’s homeless.”
“That’s not in the statute, but for public safety we can’t do that,” Espinda said. “I can’t put somebody on the street who has no place to go. How can I expect that person to reasonably make their court appearance?”
As for people who are mentally ill, “for public safety purposes, we can’t put somebody on the street we know has a mental health condition and needs treatment,” Espinda said. “The law doesn’t say it but it is best practice.
“I don’t feel it’s right or that the taxpayers will expect us to release people who have nowhere to go or who are hearing voices in their head,” he said.
As for the delay in implementing the program, Espinda said that “getting anything done in six months in state government is exceptional work, if you ask me.”
Mateo Caballero, legal director of the ACLU of Hawaii, said the exclusion of the homeless and mentally ill from the early release program is “misguided, contrary to the early release statute, and unconstitutional.”
“It is misguided because prisons and jails should not be used as de facto housing for the homeless or mental hospitals for the mentally ill,” Caballero said in a written statement. “It is contrary to the statute because the statute contemplates a case-by-case determination based on ‘the circumstances and nature of the misdemeanant’s charge or offense,’ not on the wealth or mental capacity of the offender.
“Finally, it is unconstitutional because it arbitrarily excludes entire classes of otherwise eligible nonviolent offenders from the early release program without adequate due process of law,” Caballero said.
House Public Safety Committee Chairman Gregg Takayama said he was surprised by how long it has taken to implement the release program, especially considering that it was proposed by the administration.
As for the decision to exclude the homeless and mentally ill, Takayama said the original idea was to release people who were not considered a risk to public safety, and “to impose more conditions seems to defeat some of the intent of the bill.”
“It seems to me that as long as … they are not deemed a threat to public safety, they should be OK for release,” said Takayama (D, Pearl City-Waimalu- Pacific Palisades).
Overcrowding in state-run jails has been a chronic problem, and the ACLU of Hawaii Foundation has asked the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate Hawaii’s packed correctional facilities.
The ACLU filed its formal complaint after a yearlong investigation of prison and jail conditions that concluded conditions were so bad that they amounted to unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment for the inmates.
10 responses to “Program to ease overcrowding in state’s jails has yet to launch”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Create more laws & you create more criminals.
If the statutory penalties, for misdemeanors & felonies, are strictly adhered to, then expect a very packed jail or prison.
Legislation must be introduced, to change the strict standards, of statutory penalties.
A bracket range or statutory flexibility or sliding scale of incarceration, will have to be strongly considered. Otherwise, larger jails & prisons, will be needed, for a larger jail & prison population.
Espied got a good vision of this. ACLU, trying to what is right, again is halting progress. The ACLU should try finding housing and such for these people. Until they come up with actual programs, and the money, stay out of it.This ACLU action will cost more money in the long run.
Agree. Espinda is trying to help our mental health and homeless crisis by holding the person until health services has a place for them to ensure continued treatment. Very compassionate and smart. ACLU has no alternative plan.
Respectfully, are you nuts? You cannot just lock people up because they are poor or have an illness! Remember these people are PRETRIAL, that means innocent. This stinks on ice, ACLU is correct.
Send them all to Espinosa house.
Send the mentals and the homeless to the ACLU office since they want them out of jail
It is sickening that our Department of Public Safety thinks that freedom on bail is only for the wealthy and mentally whole – especially when they offer NO meaningful mental health services and/or medications inside. Itʻs not just unconstitutional, itʻs disgusting and immoral. And, itʻs not what our new law requires. By a long shot. Vomitous. They deserve the lawsuit they are going to get. We need housing and community services for our mentally ill, not warehousing five to a filthy room at OCCC just because you canʻt afford bail.
Most mentally ill defendants and inmates qualify or are enrolled in Medicaid (MedQuest) before and after incarceration, yet many lack access to medically-necessary mental health care – apparently to the point that they are unable to be released from jail. This is not only immoral, it is UNLAWFUL.
According to Federal law, State law and MedQuest contract provisions, all MedQuest plans MUST maintain an adequate network of providers (doctors, clinics, therapists, case managers) so that ALL members are able to access mental health care. Here is a partial list of the laws:
Federal statutes:
42 C.F.R. 438.206 – Availability of services
42 C.F.R. 438.207 – Assurances of adequate capacity and services
ADA, Sec. 504 – Rehabilitation Act, and Title VI – Civil Rights Act of 1964
Haawaii Administrative Rules:
HAR 17-1735.2-4 Requirements of participating health plans
MedQuest Contracts
RFP–MQD–2014-005 Request for Proposal QUEST Integration (QI) Managed Care to Cover Medicaid and Other Eligible Individuals
40.200 Provider Network
40.220 Specific Minimum Requirements
40.230 Availability of Providers
40.240 Geographic Access of Providers
50.450 Member Rights
50.460 Provider Directory
For example, MedQuest contracts state:
“The health plan is solely responsible for ensuring it: (1) has the network capacity to serve the expected enrollment in the service area; (2) offers an appropriate range of services and access to preventive, primary, acute, behavioral health, and long-term services and supports (LTSS); and (3) maintains a sufficient number, mix, and geographic distribution of providers of covered services.
The following is a listing of the minimum required components of the provider network. This is not meant to be an all-inclusive listing of the components of the network, rather the health plan may add provider types, or the DHS may require that the health plan add providers as required based on the needs of the members or due to changes in Federal or State law. At a minimum, the network shall include the following medical care providers:
.…
• Primary Care Providers (PCPs) (at least 1 per 300 members) as described in Section 40.250;
• Physician specialists, including but not limited to: cardiologists, endocrinologists, general surgeons, geriatricians, hematologists, infectious disease specialists, nephrologists, neurologists, obstetricians/ gynecologists, oncologists, ophthalmologists, orthopedists, otolaryngology, pediatric specialists, plastic and reconstructive surgeons, pulmonologists, radiologists and urologists;
….
• Psychiatrists (1 per 150 members with a SMI or SPMI diagnosis);
• Other behavioral health providers to include psychologists, licensed mental health counselors, licensed clinical social workers, Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN) – behavioral health (1 to 100 members with a SMI or SPMI diagnosis); and
• Certified substance abuse counselors;
….
In geographic areas with a demonstrated shortage of qualified physicians, a behavioral health APRN with prescriptive authority (APRN Rx) may assume the role of a psychiatrist in order to meet network adequacy requirements.”
Although these various legal requirements are robust and sensible, and although state officials are aware that many MedQuest members do no have adequate access to mental health care, MedQuest officials have taken no reasonable actions to effect proper oversight or enforcement of these billion-dollar contracts. None.
They have turned a blind eye to this problem and it has festered and deepened into a crisis.
This is extremely troubling.
Excellent reply
Release all misdemeanors, homeless and mental ill it is not Public Safety job to uphold the laws in wrong views and avoid the overcrowded prison’s/and population in jail, why should taxpayers keep flipping the tab, public safety should stop over spending and let OCCC remain in place/just renovate by going up, in building. We need an audit done on PSD by an outsider CPA Firm……..All State Department should be audited, yearly…..and cut back on over speeding, etc cars, supply, pay, upgrades and consultation plus the rail ….and make the audit public record!