A proposed rule under consideration by the state Supreme Court requiring judges to set the “least restrictive” bail for defendants in most criminal cases would allow potentially dangerous people to continue committing crimes while awaiting trial, local officials and attorneys said.

A notice of proposed rulemaking from the court's criminal procedural rule committee published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin in January said that sections of the state's rules of criminal procedures governing bail would be rescinded and replaced with a new rule.

“The goal of the bail determination procedures is for the least number of people being detained, through timely release at the earliest stage, as is necessary to reasonably ensure appearance for court and the safety of the community, including the victim, defendant and judicial system,” the introduction to the proposed rule says.

Butler County District Attorney Richard Goldinger said eliminating cash bail would compromise public safety.

“I'm opposed to what they're trying to do,” Goldinger said. “When bail is set, it serves several purposes. One is public protection from dangerous people. You're going to have more dangerous people committing dangerous things while awaiting trial.”

A court spokesperson said the court will not disclose the origins of the proposed rule change, but Goldinger said it likely is part of a wave of criminal justice reforms moving across the country.

He said the criminal justice system has flaws, but he doesn’t support the proposed changes to bail.

The Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association submitted its objections in writing to the rules committee, said Greg Rowe, association executive director.

“The proposed changes would make imposing monetary bail as well as specific conditions, even for violent crimes and high risk defendants, difficult,” Rowe said.

The Pennsylvania Sheriff's Association also opposes the rule changes.

Butler County Sheriff Michael Slupe said the proposed rule endangers public safety.

“I support keeping people accountable. I do not think this is a good idea,” Slupe said.

He said bail ensures defendants appear for court proceedings.

“It should be appropriate to the level of the criminal charge. Nobody wants someone who has committed a crime to go back out on the street without bail or bond to commit more crimes,” Slupe said.

Butler attorney Tom King, who represents the sheriffs' association, called the rule change a radical proposal.

“It's not reforming, it's changing or essentially eliminating bail,” he said.

King submitted a letter to the rules committee on behalf of the sheriff’s association objecting to the rule change

Armand Cingolani, a Butler attorney who also serves as court-appointed defense counsel, does not support the proposal.

“This is a terrible scheme with terrible consequences,” Cingolani said.

People won’t show up for court appearances without bail, he said.

“They say bail hurts indigent people, poor and minorities – and only the rich get out of jail,” Cingolani said. “The problem is, those who work in the court system know if people aren't given consequences, they don’t show up. If you take the cash bail off them, it’s hard to find them.”

He said public protection is a societal goal. When someone breaks that social contract by harming another person, a judge sets cash bail to make sure the accused appears in court.

“Eliminating cash bail is a utopian, idealistic scheme that believes in the basic goodness of people, but it’s not justified by the actual facts. People who are basically good aren't committing crimes whatsoever,” Cingolani said.

The identity of the person or entity that submitted the proposal or came up with the idea is not public information and is kept confidential by the rules committee, said Stacey Witalec, a spokeswoman for the Supreme Court and the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts.

The rules committee accepted public comments on the proposal until March 8. The committee doesn’t make those comments public, Witalec said.

The court is not under a deadline to adopt or reject the rule proposal. The justices will issue an order if the rule is adopted, she said.