HB 1239 - 2025-26Preparing incarcerated people for successful reentry upon release from a correctional facility.

Here’s a plain-English breakdown of HB 1239 (2025-26, Washington State) — what it would change (the “what”), and what people see as benefits and drawbacks (the “pros & cons”).

What HB 1239 does (in simple terms)

HB 1239 is titled “Preparing incarcerated people for successful reentry upon release from a correctional facility.” Washington State Legislature+2LawFiles+2 Its goal is to increase opportunities and supports for people in prison so that when they are released, they have a better chance of succeeding (and not returning to crime). LawFiles+2LawFiles+2

Here are the key changes and how the bill attempts to work:

Change	What it means (plain)	Notes / details
Expand “earned release time” eligibility and limits	People in prison could reduce their sentence by earning “good behavior / good performance” time, up to 33.33% of their sentence (for those eligible). LawFiles+2LawFiles+2
Recalculate past earned release dates	For people already incarcerated, the Department of Corrections (DOC) would recalculate their release dates under the new rules (for sentences ending July 1, 2025 or later). WA Law+3LawFiles+3LawFiles+3
Create a “third track” for Graduated Reentry for long sentences	For those who have served at least 13 years in confinement, part of their last period could be in a more gradual, community-based setting (work release, home detention) instead of full confinement. LawFiles+2LawFiles+2
Modify rules about when someone may shift to partial confinement / community custody	The bill adjusts minimum confinement times before someone is eligible for graduated reentry, partial confinement, or home detention under community supervision. LawFiles+2LawFiles+2
Conditions and restrictions	Some offenses remain ineligible for these earned release benefits (for example, certain violent, sex, or other serious offenses). LawFiles+2LawFiles+2

In short: HB 1239 pushes for more rewards (via “earned release”) and more structured steps toward community reintegration, especially for people who serve long sentences.

Why supporters favor HB 1239 (pros)

Here are the main arguments in favor of this bill:

1. Stronger incentives for rehabilitationIf people know good behavior and participation in programs can shorten their time, they may be more motivated to engage in treatment, education, job training, etc. LawFiles+2LawFiles+2

2. Better reentry outcomes / less recidivismGradual transitions (rather than abrupt return to society) give individuals time to stabilize—find housing, employment, support services—lowering the chance they’ll reoffend. LawFiles+2LawFiles+2

3. More fairness / equityThe bill explicitly mentions addressing “racial inequities in earned time” and providing “equitable incentive” structures. LawFiles+2LawFiles+2

4. Applies to people already in prisonBy recalculating earned release dates, the bill doesn’t just help future prisoners but can benefit those already incarcerated. LawFiles+2LawFiles+2

5. Tiered approach for long-sentenced individualsThe creation of a third track for people with very long confinement terms adds flexibility and potentially humane treatment for those serving decades. LawFiles+2LawFiles+2

What critics / skeptics caution (cons / concerns)

No law change is without tradeoffs. Here are common concerns or potential downsides people raise:

1. Reduced deterrence / perceived “softening”Allowing more people to serve less time might weaken the deterrent effect of punishment (some worry).

2. “Gaming the system” / inconsistent standardsBecause “earned release time” depends on behavior and performance as judged by prison authorities, there could be inconsistency or favoritism.

3. Public safety risks / reoffendingCritics might argue some individuals released earlier might not be ready, especially if supervision or supports are weak, and could reoffend.

4. Resource burdens on DOC / servicesTo implement more programming, assessments, recalculations, monitoring, community supervision, housing plans, etc., DOC and related services need additional capacity and funding.

5. Limits on eligibility / exclusionsBecause some serious offenses remain ineligible, some may see this as unfair (those excluded might argue for equal treatment).

6. Complexity & administrative challengeRecalculating sentences, managing transitions, determining who qualifies, etc., adds administrative complexity, which could lead to delays or errors.

7. Available videos

   (Video links take you to the TVW website)

   
   

   Live video is available at the stated time. Archived video becomes available approximately two hours after the close of the hearing or floor session.

   Jan 28, 2025 House Community Safety at 4:00 PM