WA lawmakers reject bills aimed at halting Kennewick sex offender home

An attempt by lawmakers to stop a proposed sex offender home in Kennewick suffered a major setback this week.

Eight measures introduced in both the House and Senate, aimed to limit the locations and ownership of the private transition homes for sex offenders leaving McNeil Island.

The bills sponsored by four Tri-City legislators were prompted by the news of a transition house expected to open at the corner of Eighth Avenue and Edison Street.

The proposals came late into the 60-day session and needed a hearing in front of a committee before a deadline on Wednesday.

Senate Bill 6339, sponsored by Sen. Nikki Torres, R-Pasco, and Sen. Matt Boehnke, R-Kennewick, was the only one to reach a committee hearing. It required the owner of the transition home to be the one providing the therapy.

Testimony to the Senate’s Human Services Committee was divided during the Wednesday hearing between Kennewick community members, who wanted more accountability, and defense attorneys and state officials, who said the new rule would likely be unethical and unconstitutional.

Committee Chair Claire Wilson, D-Auburn, said there were still too many unanswered issues around the bill for it to move forward.

“I believe there is some conversation and communication that needs to occur,” Wilson said.

The state legislation covered a variety of concerns including keeping the homes out of areas with children, increasing the distance from schools and increasing the number of people who must be notified of that program being placed in their neighborhood.

Sen. Matt Boehnke, R- Kennewick, whose family lives near the proposed Kennewick home, said getting the hearing took a lot of work and graciousness from the committee.

He told the Tri-City Herald the local lawmakers planned to continue working on making changes to the rules around the placement and ownership of the transition homes. They will try to introduce changes in other bills.

“We haven’t given up,” Boehnke said. “We still have a path forward of getting it into state law, but it may not be in the current format.”

He said he wasn’t going to surrender, and that the process needed to be more transparent.

Senate hearing

The fight around the Kennewick home involves people being released from McNeil Island. The Pierce County facility houses sex offenders who have finished their prison terms, but are found to have a mental health or abnormality requiring additional treatment.

A jury needs to find beyond a reasonable doubt that the offender would be likely to engage in “predatory acts of sexual violence if not confined in a secure facility.”

If they do, the person is sent to McNeil Island where they can receive treatment until a judge determines they are safe to be released.

Once it’s determined that they are safe. They can either be released to one of two state run facilities or to a private home that is reviewed by the state Department of Corrections and then signed off by a judge.

The Kennewick home at the center of the controversy is owned by Lydenne Vieira and Isabel Valle, but the program to watch the men will be run by Joe Field, a former drug addict turned social worker.

The measure, Senate Bill 6339, would require Field to own the home as well. It’s unclear how it would impact more than a dozen other homes spread across the state, including Field’s facility in Walla Walla.

Torres argued that the investors in the house receive about $20,000 per resident per month, but they don’t have any stake in the home if things go wrong. This would make sure there is a “clearly identifiable, accountable party who has a direct stake in how the home is run and how the residents are supervised.”

“This bill will ensure that the less restrictive alternative placements, especially those housing sexually violent predators, are held to the highest standards of accountability,” Torres said.

It’s unclear what data Torres is citing on the payments.

Her call for accountability was echoed by Kennewick city officials, including Deputy City Manager Lisa Beaton and Mayor Jason McShane.

They said the measure would increase the transparency of the program.

“This can significantly reduce the likelihood of unsafe or unsuitable placement in communities, and this is very particular to this placement in Kennewick,” Beaton said.

Conflict of interest

State officials warned the proposal would be difficult to implement, and raises potential legal issues, said Tony Bowie, the acting deputy assistant secretary for the Department of Social and Health Services Behavioral Health and Habilitation Administration.

He said the dual relationship of being a provider and an owner is heavily scrutinized and potentially violates various Washington regulations.

He added that not all of the existing homes are owned by individuals, instead they’re handled by property management companies.

“Not all owners of the home would be able, or appropriate, to monitor a resident’s treatment,” Bowie said. “Implementation of this legislation would be challenging.”

Daniel Davis, the chief executive of special commitment center on McNeil Island, said that residents are monitored by a team from the Department of Corrections, Department of Social and Health Serves and a sex offender treatment provider.

“This is a multi-disciplinary team that really focuses on the treatment that’s provided to the resident and it does not fall under the housing provider at all,” he told the committee when he was asked who was responsible for the offenders when they’re released from McNeil Island.

Three defense attorneys raised additional issues around the proposed change.

Sonja Hardenbrook with the Washington Defender Association said there are multiple steps a resident goes through before being released.

Kelly Canary with the Office of Public Defense also opposed the measure, saying she understands the desire for accountability, but this measure would render the process illegal and possibly unconstitutional.

“The constitutionality of (the law that allows the civil commitments for sex offenders) rests entirely on the premise that civil commitment is for treatment and not punishment,” she said. “For the statute to remain constitutional, there must be a realistic, attainable path toward a less restrictive alternative for those who have progressed and no longer require treatment in the total confinement facility on McNeil Island.”

The law would effectively eliminate the transition homes as a possibility, and make it so no one could be released from McNeil Island. This would mean people were imprisoned for a crime they have already served their time for.

“If the path to the community is blocked by impossible administrative hurdle, the entire SVP (sexually violent predator) statute becomes unconstitutionally punitive,” she said.

This story was originally published February 4, 2026 at 5:37 PM.