<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=192888919167017&amp;ev=PageView&amp;noscript=1">
Thursday,  November 28 , 2024

Linkedin Pinterest
Check Out Our Newsletters envelope icon
Get the latest news that you care about most in your inbox every week by signing up for our newsletters.
Opinion
The following is presented as part of The Columbian’s Opinion content, which offers a point of view in order to provoke thought and debate of civic issues. Opinions represent the viewpoint of the author. Unsigned editorials represent the consensus opinion of The Columbian’s editorial board, which operates independently of the news department.
News / Opinion / Editorials

In Our View: McNeil Island Needs Plan B

Report shows it’s time for new approach regarding commitment center

The Columbian
Published: August 1, 2018, 6:00am

Protecting the public from sexually violent predators is an invaluable function of state government and is not the place for penny-pinching. But if Washington can provide the same level of protection while closing the money pit that is the Special Commitment Center on McNeil Island, the public will be better served.

McNeil Island, in the waters of Puget Sound west of Tacoma, has been used as a correctional facility since 1875. It now serves as home to more than 200 of the state’s most dangerous criminals, people who have been involuntary committed under a 1990 state law that says sex offenders can be held for therapy after serving their prison sentences.

Releasing such offenders into the public should not be considered an option; but it is time for state officials to reconsider the facility and to examine alternatives. Having the commitment center on an island provides a sense of security for the public, but that approach no longer seems practical.

A recent report by The (Tacoma) News Tribune detailed the fiscal irresponsibility that comes with maintaining McNeil Island. While basic medical services are provided at the facility, more intricate medical needs require a trip off the island. Last year, there were 557 planned medical appointments off the island, and with an aging population at the center, that number is expected to increase.

Meanwhile, 32 emergency medical trips have been necessary this year, requiring speedboats to take patients from the island to meet an ambulance that transports the resident to an emergency room. Last year, 49 such trips were required. A six-member team has been designated to transport a prisoner off the island when necessary.

It is no wonder the cost of running the center this year is more than $185,000 per resident. And while it is difficult to put a price on the value of keeping the most dangerous offenders from the public, there also is a need for the state to be effective stewards of public funds. The cost for running the center next year is projected to be nearly $50 million — a 20 percent increase since 2016.

At the same time, maintenance issues continue to increase at the aging facility. In 2016, residents filed a lawsuit claiming that drinking water, described as the color of mild coffee, was making them sick. Another lawsuit alleged poor treatment programs that were more punitive than therapeutic, leading to a settlement promising more individualized treatment for residents suffering from mental illness or disability.

With passage of the law that created the Special Commitment Center, Washington became the first state to establish a two-stage system for sexual predators. Nearly 20 states have followed with similar programs, demonstrating intense interest in keeping violent offenders away from the public. The purpose of maintaining involuntary commitments remains relevant, but the McNeil Island facility has become too inefficient.

Developing alternatives will not be easy; siting a treatment center for violent sexual predators will understandably be met with opposition from local residents. Nor will it be inexpensive; building a new facility or renovating an existing one to meet the unique needs of McNeil Island’s population will be costly.

But it is time for state officials to begin considering those alternatives. The long-term costs involved with operating and maintaining McNeil Island demand a close look from the Legislature.

Loading...