Read first time 01/17/2005.   Referred to Committee on Criminal Justice & Corrections.

     AN ACT Relating to studying electronic monitoring as an alternative to incarceration; amending RCW 9.94A.737; creating new sections; and providing an expiration date.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 1   The legislature believes that electronic monitoring, as an alternative to incarceration, is a proper and cost-effective method of punishment and supervision for many criminal offenders. The legislature further finds that advancements in electronic monitoring technology have made the technology more common and acceptable to criminal justice system personnel, policymakers, and the general public.
      In an effort to reduce prison and jail populations, many states are increasing their utilization of electronic monitoring. However, Washington state's use of electronic monitoring has been relatively stagnate.
     The intent of this act is to determine what electronic monitoring policies and programs have been implemented in the other forty-nine states, in order that Washington state can learn from the other states' experiences.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 2   (1) The Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs shall conduct a comprehensive study on electronic monitoring in every state. The study shall review and analyze each state's activity regarding electronic monitoring. Specifically, the study shall include:
     (a) How often electronic monitoring is used;
     (b) A description of laws and circumstances of when an offender is placed on electronic monitoring;
     (c) The discovery and analysis of specific programs used to promote electronic monitoring and how they are operated;
     (d) The type of electronic monitoring technology used;
     (e) Evaluation of offender pay programs and the amount of money recovered from these programs;
     (f) Overall perceptions of electronic monitoring from the criminal justice community, and any real or perceived problems or concerns with electronic monitoring;
     (g) Estimates on savings realized by utilizing electronic monitoring.
     (2) The findings and any recommendations from the study shall be placed into a final report and presented to the legislature no later than December 31, 2005.

Sec. 3   RCW 9.94A.737 and 2002 c 175 s 15 are each amended to read as follows:
     (1) If an offender violates any condition or requirement of community custody, the department may transfer the offender to a more restrictive confinement status to serve up to the remaining portion of the sentence, less credit for any period actually spent in community custody or in detention awaiting disposition of an alleged violation and subject to the limitations of subsection (2) of this section.
     (2)(a) For a sex offender sentenced to a term of community custody under RCW 9.94A.670 who violates any condition of community custody, the department may impose a sanction of up to sixty days' confinement in a local correctional facility for each violation. If the department imposes a sanction, the department shall submit within seventy-two hours a report to the court and the prosecuting attorney outlining the violation or violations and the sanctions imposed.
     (b) For a sex offender sentenced to a term of community custody under RCW 9.94A.710 who violates any condition of community custody after having completed his or her maximum term of total confinement, including time served on community custody in lieu of earned release, the department may impose a sanction of up to sixty days in a local correctional facility for each violation.
     (c) For an offender sentenced to a term of community custody under RCW 9.94A.505(2)(b), 9.94A.650, or 9.94A.715, or under RCW 9.94A.545, for a crime committed on or after July 1, 2000, who violates any condition of community custody after having completed his or her maximum term of total confinement, including time served on community custody in lieu of earned release, the department may impose a sanction of up to sixty days in total confinement for each violation. The department may impose sanctions such as work release, home detention with electronic monitoring, work crew, community restitution, inpatient treatment, daily reporting, curfew, educational or counseling sessions, supervision enhanced through electronic monitoring, or any other sanctions available in the community.
     (d) For an offender sentenced to a term of community placement under RCW 9.94A.705 who violates any condition of community placement after having completed his or her maximum term of total confinement, including time served on community custody in lieu of earned release, the department may impose a sanction of up to sixty days in total confinement for each violation. The department may impose sanctions such as work release, home detention with electronic monitoring, work crew, community restitution, inpatient treatment, daily reporting, curfew, educational or counseling sessions, supervision enhanced through electronic monitoring, or any other sanctions available in the community.
     (3) If an offender is accused of violating any condition or requirement of community custody, he or she is entitled to a hearing before the department prior to the imposition of sanctions. The hearing shall be considered as offender disciplinary proceedings and shall not be subject to chapter 34.05 RCW. The department shall develop hearing procedures and a structure of graduated sanctions.
     (4) The hearing procedures required under subsection (3) of this section shall be developed by rule and include the following:
     (a) Hearing officers shall report through a chain of command separate from that of community corrections officers;
     (b) The department shall provide the offender with written notice of the violation, the evidence relied upon, and the reasons the particular sanction was imposed. The notice shall include a statement of the rights specified in this subsection, and the offender's right to file a personal restraint petition under court rules after the final decision of the department;
     (c) The hearing shall be held unless waived by the offender, and shall be electronically recorded. For offenders not in total confinement, the hearing shall be held within fifteen working days, but not less than twenty-four hours, after notice of the violation. For offenders in total confinement, the hearing shall be held within five working days, but not less than twenty-four hours, after notice of the violation;
     (d) The offender shall have the right to: (i) Be present at the hearing; (ii) have the assistance of a person qualified to assist the offender in the hearing, appointed by the hearing officer if the offender has a language or communications barrier; (iii) testify or remain silent; (iv) call witnesses and present documentary evidence; and (v) question witnesses who appear and testify; and
     (e) The sanction shall take effect if affirmed by the hearing officer. Within seven days after the hearing officer's decision, the offender may appeal the decision to a panel of three reviewing officers designated by the secretary or by the secretary's designee. The sanction shall be reversed or modified if a majority of the panel finds that the sanction was not reasonably related to any of the following: (i) The crime of conviction; (ii) the violation committed; (iii) the offender's risk of reoffending; or (iv) the safety of the community.
     (5) For purposes of this section, no finding of a violation of conditions may be based on unconfirmed or unconfirmable allegations.
     (6) The department shall work with the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs to establish and operate an electronic monitoring program for low-risk offenders who violate the terms of their community custody. Between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2006, the department shall endeavor to place at least one hundred low-risk community custody violators on the electronic monitoring program per day if there are at least that many low-risk offenders who qualify for the electronic monitoring program.
     (7) Local governments, their subdivisions and employees, the department and its employees, and the Washington association of sheriffs and police chiefs and its employees shall be immune from civil liability for damages arising from incidents involving low-risk offenders who are placed on electronic monitoring unless it is shown that an employee acted with gross negligence or bad faith.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 4   This act expires December 31, 2005.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 5   If specific funding for the purposes of section 2 of this act, referencing this act and section 2 of this act by bill or chapter number and section number, is not provided by June 30, 2005, in the omnibus appropriations act, section 2 of this act is null and void.