Column & commentary: Sexually violent predators released from McNeil Island

Gov. Inslee & Bob Ferguson think they belong in the community

Gov. Inslee and Attorney General Bob Ferguson are supporting a policy to move sexually violent predators into communities after they've been civilly committed to the Special Commitment Center operated by DSHS on McNeil Island. Without public notice, without legislative debate, and without consideration of the rights of society to safety and security.

According to the initial study by the Department of Corrections, the registration compliance rate for adult sex offenders was 57%. If compliance was appreciably better, they’d probably feature it on their website. Compliance rates: https://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/1134/Wsipp_Adult-Sex-Offender-Registration-in-Washington-State-Initial-Compliance-1990_Full-Report.pdf

With thanks to Glen Morgan for tenaciously digging into this issue, and continuing to follow up as the story unfolds:

From E2SSB 5163 as passed in 2021 under covid restrictions in Olympia with no in-person testimony:
“(19) "Sexually violent predator" means any person who has been convicted of or charged with a crime of sexual violence and who suffers from a mental abnormality or personality disorder which makes the person likely to engage in predatory acts of sexual violence if not confined in a secure facility.”

Line Item veto of notification provisions: https://crmpublicwebservice.ofm.wa.gov/bears/attachment/vetomessage/521

“Sections 207(2) and 207(3), pages 206-207, Department of Social & Health Services, Community Notice and Consultation on Placement of Sexually Violent Predators These provisos are administratively burdensome for the Department of Social and Health  Services Special Commitment Center program when siting Less Restrictive Alternatives in communities throughout the state. These additional administrative tasks will likely result in the delay and availability of placement options for individuals ordered by a court to be moved out  of the McNeil Island facility. For this reason, I have vetoed Sections 207(2) and 207(3).”

The language that was vetoed from ESSB 5187 (total of 1405 pages)

(2) During the 2023-2025 fiscal biennium, the department must implement a pilot project for community notice and consultation as provided in this subsection.

(a) The department must provide notice and opportunity to comment to any community in which the department intends to propose placement of a sexually violent predator. Additionally, if the department intends to propose placement of a sexually violent predator within one mile, as measured in any direction, of the exterior boundary of the reservation of any federally recognized Indian tribe, the department must first consult with the tribe. When the department makes a sexually violent predator placement recommendation to a court, the department must provide the court with the results of the community feedback and tribal consultation, if applicable. The pilot project expires June 30, 2025.

(b) The department must report to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the legislature on the pilot project as follows:

(i) By October 1, 2023, the department must provide a preliminary report to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the legislature on the location of any proposed new placements and the community notification and tribal consultation processes.

(ii) By June 30, 2024, the department must provide a final report on the community notification and tribal consultation processes, along with recommended statutory language to codify a process for ongoing notification and consultation into the placement process, including recommended time frames for notice, opportunity to comment, and local government and tribal notification and involvement.

(3) As a condition of expending appropriations in this section for administration of the program for conditional release of sexually violent predators to less restrictive alternatives, the department must consider the following additional criteria when developing or issuing new requests for proposals: The distance of the housing facility from the reservation of any federally recognized Indian tribe; and for any housing facility within one mile, as measured in any direction, of the exterior boundary of the reservation of any federally recognized Indian tribe, whether the housing provider has consulted with the tribe and whether that tribe would support the placement.

Original column: https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2023/may/24/sue-lani-madsen-predators-in-the-neighborhood/

Grizzly & Wolf Discovery Center: https://www.grizzlydiscoveryctr.org/animals/the-bears

McNeil Island history: https://www.doc.wa.gov/about/agency/history/micc.htm