The Real Cost of Prisons Weblog

« March 2006 | Main | May 2006 »

April 29, 2006

OR: Walla Walla a tourist spot despite prison

Published: April 25. 2006 6:00AM PST

WALLA WALLA, Wash. — Swirling a splash of shimmering plum-colored shiraz around their glasses, Philip and Heather Marlatt inhaled deeply before downing their first sample at the Ft. Walla Walla Cellars downtown tasting room. The Marlatts, with 9-month-old son Keegan in tow, were enjoying their first trip to Walla Walla.

“I just heard it was a nice little town,” said Philip Marlatt, who brought his family down from Pullman. The couple, self-described wine novices, decided to make the drive after the owner of his local wine shop recommended the trip. He had no idea the 35,000-person city was also home to the state penitentiary.

“It doesn’t bother me,” he said of the prison.

That’s the sentiment all over Walla Walla, a rural town once known best for onions. Now it’s enjoying a renaissance as home to more than 75 wineries, most of which were founded in the last decade.

Residents and tourism officials there agreed that Walla Walla’s formula can’t be copied, but they also offered some advice on how Madras can make the most of what it has.

Surprise, surprise

Local lore has it that more than 100 years ago, Walla Walla had the choice of hosting Washington State University or the Washington State Penitentiary. Residents chose the prison, Waterbrook Winery founder Eric Rindal said, because they thought it would be a more reliable employer than the startup university.

Today, Walla Walla is unique among prison towns in Oregon and Washington. For one, it is the only one that also draws accolades from the likes of Sunset magazine. The lifestyle publication named Walla Walla’s downtown “Best in the West” in 2002 and dubbed the city “Wine Destination of the Year” in 2005.

On summer weekends, packs of tourists wander between the 11 downtown tasting rooms or shuttle to farther-flung destinations on dedicated wine buses.

Washington’s most southeastern town is gaining a lot of attention now for top-shelf wine, but 15 years ago the sleepy city wasn’t on many lists of must-see attractions, said Timothy Bishop, executive director of the Downtown Walla Walla Foundation.

“It used to be on Sunday, you could literally hear the pigeons crossing the street,” Bishop said.

That was true in 1983, when Rindal founded Waterbrook Winery, the city’s fourth.

“You’d come down here at 5 p.m. and the only thing you’d have to miss to find a parking spot was the tumbleweeds,” Rindal said.

He got into the wine business as a hobby, helping Martin and Megan Clubb with their fledgling L’Ecole No. 41 winery. The region’s climate is ideal for growing premium grapes, they found, and eventually the hobby turned into a full-time job.

As word of the area’s unique climate spread, more and more winemakers migrated to Walla Walla, turning the small circle of winemaking friends into a full-fledged community, Rindal said.

By the late 1990s, more than 30 wineries had sprung up in Walla Walla. Now, a new wave of developments — higher-end restaurants and a proposed destination resort-style private community — are coming to “the town so nice they named it twice.”

“These things all came up and jumbled together to make a great town,” Rindal said. “I don’t think it was something anyone created.”

Walla Walla’s new economy centers around the burgeoning wine trade — which generates more than $100 million annually, according to the Walla Walla Valley Wine Alliance. But Walla Walla has more going for it than just wine.

Historically, the town’s economy revolved around agriculture, two private colleges and health care, Davidson said.

Whitman and Walla Walla colleges each draw thousands of middle- and upper-class students to the town and enrich the city’s cultural diversity, Davidson said. Whitman, founded as a seminary in 1859, predates Washington’s statehood and is now a top-tier liberal arts college. Walla Walla College is a 1,900-student school affiliated with the Seventh-day Adventist Church, founded in 1892.

The city hosts three hospitals: the Catholic-affiliated St. Mary’s Medical Center, Adventist-affiliated Walla Walla General Hospital and the federal Jonathan M. Wainwright Memorial Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

The farming sector includes wheat, potatoes, peas and Walla Walla sweet onions. Those industries, along with the prison, have given the town a stable employment base.

Madras, which is still seeking employers to complement the 1,100-employee Bright Wood mill, has farther to go than Walla Walla did. Wine changed Walla Walla. For Madras, the continuing flood of newcomers to Central Oregon could be an even more powerful trend, if Redmond and Bend are any measure.

Less than two years before regional growth and the new prison converge on Madras, Walla Walla tourism officials shared their tips for making Madras a more tourist-friendly destination: Make improvements with residents, not tourists in mind. Play to the city’s strengths. And if everyone ignores the prison, it’ll mostly go away.

Not for the tourists

As Rindal, the Waterbrook Winery founder, said, no government agency decided it was time to make the city nicer for tourists. Instead, private citizens worked with city officials to spruce up their own downtown.

“I don’t think downtown revitalization happened because someone said we need to do something for the tourists,” said Dave Warkentin, executive director of the Walla Walla Valley Chamber of Commerce. “I think we did it for ourselves.”

The revitalization included restoring original facades to downtown buildings, adding sculptures and installing retro-styled street lamps, said Bishop, executive director of the Downtown Walla Walla Foundation.

Improving Walla Walla’s appearance didn’t change the way the town worked, but it did make the city more “livable,” he said. And as cities become more crowded and commutes get longer, that lure of livability will only be greater, Bishop said.

Doing it naturally is preferable to trying to be something you’re not, said Michael Davidson, director of Tourism Walla Walla, the city’s year-old promotional arm.

“Ultimately you are what you are, and if that’s something people would like to be part of, that’s great,” Davidson said. “Manufactured destinations, to me, they’re horrible.”

Davidson and other Walla Walla residents frequently commented on the town’s authenticity, the fact that locals, not just tourists, shop downtown, too.

“You can go downtown and buy a pair of socks,” Davidson said.

Playing to Madras’ strengths

For Madras, according to the Downtown Foundation’s Bishop, it’s all about location and size. The city is less than an hour north of Bend and smaller than Bend and Redmond.

It’s a tactic that Madras leaders have already seized upon.

“I think Madras particularly has the advantage of being part of the whole Bend regional drive,” Bishop said. “I think that’s a very realistic opportunity.”

To be successful, though, leaders from all parts of the community need to share a vision, said Davidson, of Tourism Walla Walla.

“There was an understanding by the local business community and the city that there was something here and how can we take advantage of it,” Davidson said.

In the late 1990s, once tourists began to discover the city, Walla Walla nudged the process along by adopting a lodging tax to fund tourism promotion, said City Manager Duane Cole.

“I think we’ve kind of developed a brand and become a destination through that investment,” Cole said.

Now the region targets its relatively limited promotions budget to wealthy wine drinkers in Seattle and Portland.

What prison?

Maybe the most important lesson Madras can learn from Walla Walla is that if your city is someplace people want to go, they won’t care if there’s a prison there or not. It just happens that most towns with prisons aren’t the sort of places people usually visit.

“I can’t think of any time I didn’t go someplace because there was a pen there,” said Elizabeth Martin-Calder, executive director of Walla Walla Valley Wine Alliance.

The prison doesn’t seem to be keeping tourists away from Walla Walla. From north-facing rooms at the Holiday Inn Express here, guests enjoy an unobstructed view of the Washington State Penitentiary, home to the state’s most dangerous criminals. At night, especially, the blaring lights can’t be missed.

But few tourists who stay at the hotel ever guess that they’re looking at the high brick walls of a 119-year-old prison, said General Manager Liz Pierce.

“They think it’s a stadium,” Pierce said.

That’s proof that torrents of good press have swamped old ideas of Walla Walla as a prison town, Davidson said.

“Walla Walla gets so much positive attention these days,” Davidson said, “the prison doesn’t even register for most people.”

“We’ve knocked it down to number three now,” in people’s minds, Davidson said. “We figure it’s wine, onions and then penitentiary.”

Not everyone in the tourism business ignores the prison, though. Jim and Kathy Ruzicka’s Gotta Go Embroidery T-shirt shop makes good money selling the penitentiary to tourists.

“We use it a lot for humor,” Ruzicka said.

There’s an entire rack of prison humor T-shirts in the store, displaying slogans like “What’s your cell number?” “Hard Time served” and, in homage to the prison’s floodlights: “Walla Walla, we’ll leave the lights on.”

Keith Chu can be reached at 541-504-2336 or at kchu@bendbulletin.com

Posted by lois at 09:10 PM | Comments (0)

Prison fears are not reality

By Keith Chu / The Bend Bulletin
Published: April 24. 2006 6:00AM PST

Department of Corrections administrators deny it. No government agency tracks it. Yet, while the scale is unknown, families of inmates do follow their husbands, wives and fathers to the towns where they’re imprisoned.

The Bulletin spoke to four such families in trips to the prison towns of Ontario and Walla Walla, Wash. Family members in those towns, and one academic study, say perhaps 5 percent of inmates — about 100 or more families in each city — have relatives who have moved to the area.

It’s these families, along with the threat of inmate breakouts, that Madras residents have cited as the drawbacks of the Deer Ridge Correctional Institution.

What’s surprising, according to law enforcement officials in those towns, is that inmate relatives and friends don’t commit more crimes than anyone else. Just as prison backers in other rural towns learned that the penitentiaries’ economic impact was less than they hoped, so, too, opponents learned the social cost of prisons has been less than they feared.

A worrywart
Measures in place to prevent escapes

On Feb. 28, 2001, Lee John Knoch, a 23-year-old convicted murderer, became the only person to successfully escape from Snake River Correctional Institution. The feat took several hours, as Knoch cut through fences, eluded guards, stole a pickup and fled the state.
No one has escaped an Oregon prison since the incident, according to Department of Corrections spokeswoman Perrin Damon, although 39 inmates have walked away from work crews.
Knoch’s escape fulfilled the fears of many in Ontario who opposed the Snake River prison, but confirmed a popular belief of prison supporters: If someone breaks out, they’re not going to hang around town.
Knoch cut holes through four fences and made his way five miles to Ontario without being spotted by guards.
Police apprehended Knoch the next day on the Fort Hall Indian Reservation, 300 miles away in southeastern Idaho.
In Madras, the Deer Ridge prison will rely on a variety of measures to prevent inmates from breaking out:
• A 12-foot-high, no-climb fence will surround the medium- and minimum-security portions.
• A second 12-foot fence will encircle the medium-security prison.
• Rolls of razor wire will line the fences and the space between the double fence layer.
• Electronic surveillance devices, which DOC officials declined to identify, will monitor the perimeter.
• An armed guard will patrol the site in a truck or jeep.

Longtime Madras resident Margaret King, 84, was afraid when she first heard plans for a prison in her town.

“I’m always afraid of escapes,” King said. “It’s not too close to the middle school, but it’s there (on the same road).”

“I think it’s going to bring a lot of undesirable people,” King continued. “I assume not many of them have much, so it’s just going to be where we’re supporting them on welfare, and we’ve got enough of those here already.”

“I’m just a worrywart I guess,” said King, a widow who moved to Madras 56 years ago.

King is not the only worrywart. Deschutes County Sheriff Les Stiles, among others, has expressed concerns that criminally inclined friends and families of inmates will bring their problems south from Madras to Redmond and Bend.

Yet, crime rates in Umatilla and Ontario are down since prisons opened, and most residents say their communities haven’t changed much.

In those cities, the social cost of the prisons fell most heavily on two groups of people — the officers who work in prisons and the families of inmates who relocate to be near loved ones.

Misplaced fears

Fears of escaped convicts, overloaded social services and an influx of welfare families were common reactions from opponents of new prisons in Ontario and Umatilla.

In a survey of 800 Ontario residents taken just before Ontario’s Snake River Correctional Institution opened in 1991, 45 percent of people said they thought inmate friends and family members would move to Ontario, and that it would be a “bad thing.” More than 70 percent said people who moved would “share the inmates’ lifestyles.”

More than 10 years later, though, the crime rate in Malheur County, where Ontario is located, is down slightly from 1994, the year the prison expanded from 500 to 3,000 inmates.

All of the 15 social service providers The Bulletin interviewed said they haven’t noticed a large impact, although they don’t track how many clients are associated with the prison. The worst fears — of escaped cons and inmate families clustering together in “felony flats” — never materialized.

“We were real concerned with people following their loved ones to be closer to their inmates and that hasn’t happened, except in a few cases that I know of,” said Ontario Police Chief Mike Kee. “It’s been nothing but positive as far as we were concerned.”

Harlan Hartman, a retired factory worker who lives less than a mile from Snake River Correctional Institution, said the prison’s impact has been small.

“Wal-Mart changed Ontario more than the prison,” Hartman said.

A prison family

In Walla Walla, the site of the Washington State Penitentiary, Helen Schaub agreed that the prison doesn’t have much effect on their lives.

For the past 55 years, Schaub has lived in a cozy white house a block from the penitentiary, home of the state’s most dangerous prisoners. Schaub, 78, raised four children there with her late husband, George Schaub, and never feared for their safety, she said.

“I’ve lived here 50 years and never had any trouble,” Schaub said.

In that time, she said she never met any former inmates or even any family members of inmates.

“Usually those guys, they have somebody pick them up out on the highway or something,” Schaub said. “They don’t come around the neighborhood.”

Last month, it was an invasion of roosters, from the neighbors next door, perhaps, that most concerned Schaub.

Yet, there’s at least one of those prison families in Schaub’s neighborhood. Just a few houses down the street in an old white trailer, Junior Gonzales, 25, lives with his 5-year-old daughter Leticia and a couple of friends.

It’s crowded, said Gonzales, who works at a nearby car wash, but better than he had it as a kid, when his mom raised him and his six brothers and sisters while working minimum-wage jobs.

His dad, Rogaciano Gonzales (he was convicted under the name Rogaciano Mendoza, according to a prison spokeswoman), was never around, at least not after he was sent to prison 23 years ago for murdering two people in the Tri-Cities.

To be close to him, Junior’s mom moved the family to Walla Walla, Gonzales said. Gonzales was 2 years old; his youngest brother, he said, was conceived in a conjugal visit trailer.

No agency in Oregon or Washington tracks where inmate families live, according to officials at several state departments, but activists and researchers in Walla Walla and Ontario say there are plenty of people like Gonzales, who move hundreds of miles to be near incarcerated parents or spouses.

A study in the early 1990s by Whitman College professors Keith Farrington and Pete Parcells found that at least 93 families in Walla Walla — a total of 286 people — had transplanted to the town to be near inmates.

Oregon law enforcement officials, including Ontario Police Chief Kee and other community leaders, said that doesn’t happen here because the state Department of Corrections can transfer inmates from one prison to another with little or no notice.

Snake River Correctional Institution Superintendent Jean Hill, who reviews visitor logs regularly, said only a handful of inmates have family in the Ontario area.

“We know of two or three, half a dozen at the most,” Hill said.

Wendy Hill, Department of Human Services child welfare manager for Grant, Harney and Malheur counties, said she hasn’t noticed much impact from prison families either.

“We thought there would be this big influx of people moving to Ontario and overloading our systems, but that didn’t happen at all,” Wendy Hill said.

Charles Logan-Belford, head of the Umatilla County Juvenile Justice Department, a county that includes Pendleton’s Eastern Oregon Correctional Institution and the Two Rivers Correctional Institution in Umatilla, said his department doesn’t know the impact of the two prisons, but plans to start tracking whether youths have connections to them.

“We often get told ‘my Dad’s in prison,’ but what we don’t ask is which prison,” Logan-Belford said. “It’s actually a question we’re going to start asking.”

Todd Siex, who currently oversees the DHS offices in Grant, Harney, Malheur, Baker, Union and Wallowa counties, put it even more succinctly:

“We’re pretty remote,” Siex said. “Families just don’t do that.”

Under the radar

But families do move. By knocking on doors in an Ontario neighborhood for just half an hour, The Bulletin spoke with two families that moved there to be near incarcerated loved ones.

Becky Smith, founder of Freedom SPIRIT, an advocacy group for families of inmates in Ontario, said she’s spoken with 75 families in the past year who relocated to be near loved ones at the 3,000-inmate Snake River Correctional Institution. The real number of relocated families is probably double that, or about 5 percent of inmate families, Smith estimated.

That ratio is similar to what Farrington and Parcells discovered in Walla Walla, where 93 families at the then-1,700-inmate penitentiary — 5.5 percent — relocated.

If that trend continues for Deer Ridge, Central Oregon could expect 94 families of inmates to make the move. But there’s reason to believe even more will move to this side of the mountains, Smith said.

“You’ll probably have more people relocate there because there’s more that that area of the state has to offer,” particularly recreation and a large number of low-wage jobs, Smith said.

Madras is closer to Portland than Umatilla or Ontario, which could also make the move easier, but far enough away to make visiting difficult, she said.

Families move because it just isn’t feasible for wives and family members of inmates to make regular visits to Ontario, situated on Oregon’s far eastern border, Smith said. That’s especially true for those from the Willamette Valley, where most inmates are convicted.

“It’s an extreme burden: a time burden, emotional burden, financial burden, for people to make that commute,” Smith said.

Smith, 50, knows that firsthand, since both her husband and her brother are currently housed at Snake River Correctional Institution.

Her 60-year-old husband, Robert, has been in prison almost two years after being convicted of assault in Newberg, about 20 miles southwest of Portland, a Snake River Correctional Institution spokeswoman said. Smith declined to discuss the details of his case.

Smith said she doesn’t worry her husband will be moved without warning, as some law enforcement officers have claimed. Unless inmates cause trouble, they’re seldom moved and usually given notice before that happens, Smith said.

Inmates are assigned to prisons based on a variety of factors, said Bobbi Burton, community corrections manager for the department of corrections.

First, they’re assigned to a minimum, medium or maximum security level, based on the length of their sentence, gang affiliations, mental health and other risk factors. Then the department sends the inmate to a specific prison, Burton said, taking care to keep accomplices or enemies from the same facility.

Initially, Robert Smith bounced between Snake River Correctional Institution and a prison in Salem while undergoing treatment for a heart attack, but when he recovered, they both settled in Ontario, Smith said. She said she had been recently laid off, which made relocating easier.

They’ve been there for a year now, but it wasn’t easy at first, Smith said.

“When he first was brought out here, I was devastated,” she said.

Smith learned the system: what to wear when visiting her husband (no jeans, blue denim or revealing clothes), how to send him mail and other things she never even thought about.

And once she got to the visiting room, Smith began meeting other women who had moved to Ontario because of the prison.

Smith offered her home as a place to stay for women who were visiting prisoners over the weekend. Over the past year, those connections grew into a full-time job. Now, through Freedom SPIRIT, Smith is hosting a Saturday night support group and working to get discounts at hotels and child care centers.

“The one thing people fail to realize about families of incarcerated people is they are frequently alienated from their other family members, from their friends,” Smith said. “They become isolated. They’re trying to pay for the appeal and put money on his (commissary) books and pay for their usual expenses.”

She has a passion for the work. Smith got angry when asked about the stereotype of welfare-dependent inmate families committing crime and burdening local governments.

“That’s a bunch of (lies),” Smith said. “Anybody who will move umpteen hundred miles to be near an inmate is more concerned about the love of the inmate and supporting their family than attacking Madras, Oregon.”

But is that true? Do people who move to be near relatives who’ve been locked up for stealing, dealing drugs and hurting people really break the law just as often as the rest of us?

According to a study of inmate families in Walla Walla, the answer is yes. The study, by Whitman professors Farrington and Parcells found they committed crimes at almost exactly the same rate as the rest of the community. Inmate visitors to Walla Walla made up .7 percent of the county’s adult population, and were also .7 percent of people arrested over an 18-month period in 1990 and 1991.

State statistics show the crime rate in both Umatilla and Malheur counties followed national trends by decreasing in the years after their prisons opened. For the rate of crimes against people, both counties ranked below the state average in 2003, the most recent data available.

The cool kid

Families of inmates may not commit more crimes than average, but they do have their own problems, said Kim Haus, a teacher at Walla Walla’s Green Park Elementary School. Two years ago, Haus pioneered a program to work with children whose parents are incarcerated.

“Most of the time, these kids aren’t academically successful,” said Haus, who identified 23 children of inmates at her school this year. “They don’t have healthy outlets for their time.”

Almost 70 percent of children of incarcerated parents will eventually have some involvement with the justice system, a 2000 U.S. Senate report concluded. Those children are six times more likely to be incarcerated than other children.

The reason, according to Haus, is twofold: Kids lack positive role models and they’re traumatized by the effective loss of one or more parents.

“That other person is supposed to be there in the child’s mind,” Haus said. “These kids need somebody to fill that void.”

Schools and social service providers don’t ask if students’ parents are incarcerated, Haus said, which makes it hard to help those kids. Most parents are reluctant to volunteer that information and some don’t tell their children, she said. It took Haus a year of making discreet inquiries and befriending children before she compiled her current caseload, she said.

Junior Gonzales, the 25-year-old Walla Walla resident, said kids knew his dad was a murderer, but it didn’t cause any trouble.

“I wasn’t embarrassed,” Gonzales said. “I was the cool kid because of it.”

Still, the superintendents of the Jefferson County and Culver school districts said they don’t think Deer Ridge Correctional Institution will create any unique problems.

“I don’t have any worry about that,” said Guy Fisher, of the Jefferson County School District. “If we have students who come here for any reason, they’ll just be kids in school here.”

Higher-quality people

Inmate relatives, of course, aren’t the only people who relocate because of the prison. In Central Oregon, current and former DOC employees predict that hundreds of correctional officers will move here to work at Deer Ridge Correctional Institution.

Residents of Umatilla and Ontario described corrections officers at Two Rivers and Snake River correctional institutions glowingly.

“Their employees are what I would consider a higher-quality-type citizen,” said Bill Killion, president of the Ontario Chamber of Commerce and owner of the local Sizzler restaurant.

A large portion of prison employees also seems to take the time to volunteer for nonprofits, said Estela Gomez, former director of the Malheur County Commission on Children and Families.

“They really have people involved in the community,” Gomez said. Snake River employees sit on nearby chambers of commerce, Rotary clubs and domestic violence prevention groups, among others.

The Department of Corrections makes a point of hiring employees with a record of community involvement, said Snake River Correctional Institution Superintendent Hill.

“It’s just incredibly important,” Hill said. “There are things other than payroll that are important to us.”

Officer M. Willis was jobless, coming off five years as a waiter in Portland, before he joined the Department of Corrections seven years ago. Willis (who declined to share his first name, citing security concerns and prison policy) heard the department was hiring for jobs at Snake River Correctional Institution and thought he’d give it a try.

“I’d never had benefits before,” said the 34-year-old Willis, who transferred to the Two Rivers Correctional Institution in Umatilla a few years ago.

Benefits include paid vacation, full medical and dental coverage and particpation in a state retirement plan, said Bobbi Burton of the DOC. The starting salary for an Oregon corrections officer is about $30,000 ranging to $42,000, according to Department of Corrections Spokeswoman Perrin Damon. That’s well above Jefferson County’s $20,670 per-capita income.

According to the Department of Corrections Web site, qualified applicants:

• Must be at least 21 years old.

• Possess good hearing, vision and “overall good physical health.”

• Have a high school diploma or GED certificate.

• Be a U.S. citizen.

• Possess a driver’s license and “acceptable driving record.” Applicants who’ve had their license suspended or a DUII will have their records “analyzed on an individual basis.”

• Have a history of law-abiding conduct, with no felony convictions.

Fellow Two Rivers officer C. Stensrud, 43, said she signed up at the prison after losing her job at a food dehydration plant near Hermiston.

“I never thought I’d be in corrections,” Stensrud said. “This just came along and I thought I’d give it a try.”

Both officers said they like the work, but when Willis started, he said, he tended to take problems home with him.

“There were some days I was kind of stressed out,” Willis said. “You realize you’re doing it and stop doing it.”

Willis rarely had a problem with inmates in his seven-year career, he said, but he’s had a few run-ins. The worst was a 26-inmate fight in the chow hall at Snake River, but he got out of it OK.

“I negotiated it,” Willis said.

Umatilla County Juvenile Justice Administrator Logan-Belford said that stress might contribute to a high rate of domestic violence among prison employees. When Two Rivers Correctional Institution opened in Umatilla, that was the one impact he noticed.

“We saw a dramatic increase in the domestic violence,” said Logan-Belford.

Terri Cribs, supervisor of the nearby nonprofit group, Domestic Violence Services in Hermiston, agreed with Logan-Belford. Neither cited any statistics or studies.

Burton of the corrections department disagreed and said her agency takes those crimes seriously.

“That’s not acceptable behavior and employees can be disciplined on the job for that kind of behavior,” Burton said.

Both Willis and Stensrud said their most important challenge is the balance between keeping discipline and maintaining a good relationship with inmates.

“Treat others as you like to be treated has gotten me a long way,” Willis said.

Stensrud said she likes her job, particularly a policy that lets officers rotate jobs within the prison every six months, but she said she’s changed, too, since she became an officer.

“It’s just going to the grocery store and being able to spot things that maybe aren’t right,” Stensrud said. “Taking in the whole restaurant, not sitting with your back to the door,” where she could be surprised.

Steve Johnson, a 50-year-old first-year corrections officer, said it wasn’t an enormous adjustment from his old job at a food processing plant. He’s shifted his sleeping schedule to stay awake for the night shift. And every once in a while, at work, he realizes he’s locked in a prison, weaponless, with hundreds of inmates.

“It’s not stressful, unless you think about it,” Johnson said.

Constantly being in charge of other people in a place where there’s always a potential for violence also prompted Willis to undergo some soul searching, Willis said.

“It makes you examine yourself,” Willis said. “The environment necessitates examining yourself and choosing who you want to be.”

Keith Chu can be reached at 541-504-2336 or at kchu@bendbulleti

Posted by lois at 09:07 PM | Comments (0)

OR: Reactions from Madras

A new state prison, Deer Ridge Correctional Institution, is scheduled to open outside Madras in late 2007.
The penitentiary will hold 1,884 minimum- and medium-security inmates. Madras residents are excited by the promise of 400 to 500 jobs to energize the city's economy.
Others fear the prison. Prisoners could escape. Inmate families could move to Madras, bringing poverty and crime. The pitfalls may outweigh the benefits.
For this series, The Bulletin visited three other rural Northwest prison towns - Umatilla, Ontario and Walla Walla, Wash. - to see if a prison's promise is ever fulfilled.

Reactions from Madras

With just a year and a half until Deer Ridge Correctional Institution opens, it's too late for Madras to turn back now.

That hasn't stopped Madras residents from debating the prison's impact. Skeptics, like 84-year-old widow Margaret King and hairdresser Karen Madrigal, still doubt Deer Ridge will deliver the promised turnaround. They fear crime will accompany its 1,884 inmates.

Former Mayor Rick Allen and other backers see the prison as a key employer in a fast-approaching Madras renaissance. For them, Deer Ridge is part of a 10-year-long effort to release Madras from its status as the seat of Central Oregon's poorest county. It is a chance to raise the standard of living for residents. The prison, they argue, will help Madras profit from its natural advantages and finally find a path to success.

Hopes and fears

Six ladies at the Jefferson County Senior Center represented both sides of the issue during an impromptu debate last month, while waiting to be called to the lunch line.

"I think (the prison) will probably change our town quite a bit," said Marguerite Olson, 88, who came to Madras from the Boise Valley in 1950. "We've got a little town now and I think in time we'll be a bit more cosmopolitan."

Another woman chimed in, wondering if the prison employees would live in Madras.

"In the 1950s, we had three women's clothing stores and a men's clothing store," she said. "Now we don't have any of that. Why would anybody come here if we don't have anything?"

"They say there's going to be some (new) shops," said 88-year-old Esther Stevenson, a Madras resident since 1961. "Progress."

"Progress? I call it regress," said King. "I just liked this town the way it was when we came down here."

The debate ended unsettled, as the center’s host asked diners to give their attention to the pre-lunch entertainment: a four-minute play written and performed by seniors about a sorority reunion party.

Of course, the women of the Methodist Table weren’t the first Madras residents to wonder about what a prison would do to the town. When the Department of Corrections proposed putting a prison in Madras in the early 1990s, community leaders asked the same questions.

Jefferson County was desperate for new jobs at the time to reverse a prolonged economic slump — per capita income lagged more than $5,000 behind the state average. But local leaders wanted to know how other prison towns viewed their penitentiaries.

To find the answers, a group of seven local politicians and city officials and one hairdresser, who was an outspoken prison opponent, chartered a plane and went to see some prison towns for themselves.

“We wanted to make sure we weren’t getting into something that was going to cause us more negatives than positives,” said Allen, the former mayor, Jefferson County commissioner and primary mover behind most of the happenings there for the past 15 years.

They traveled to Baker City, Ontario and Pendleton, the three Eastern Oregon communities that hosted prisons at the time, and came away with the feeling that most people in those communities thought the prisons had been a good thing, said Janet Brown, a trip participant and then-county commissioner.

“They didn’t feel threatened, they weren’t afraid of the facilities,” Brown said. “A lot of (people) were opposed to the citing of the facility before, but after (prisons) were in operation they felt they had helped the community.”

Madrigal, a hairdresser, was invited to go along because she was one of the early opponents of the prison.

“My biggest concern was the people following the inmates,” said Madrigal, now 40 and living in Bend with her 16-year-old daughter. “That’s the idea in my head, that they’re low-income people, and I thought we had enough low-income people in Madras.”

The trip initially changed her mind, Madrigal said, but today she’s still ambivalent about the prison.

How will it help Madras, Madrigal said a few weeks ago, if most employees decide to live in Redmond or Culver or even Terrebonne? After all, Madrigal, a lifelong Madras resident, moved to Bend so her daughter could go to better schools, she said.

“I don’t think it’s going to be as economically good for us, because people are not going to live there,” Madrigal said. “And it makes me feel sad to say that about the town I grew up in.”

Big stakes

City officials from Ontario and Umatilla both said their biggest mistake was failing to persuade more prison employees to choose their communities.

In Ontario, they blamed the Idaho border and restrictive land use laws that prevented developers from putting up new houses to accommodate the workers.

“The bad part was, we didn’t have a lot of subdivisions ready to go,” when Snake River Correctional Institution opened, said Larry Wilson with Coldwell Banker Malheur Realty. “I think 50 to 60 percent (of employees) went out across the river (to Idaho) because we didn’t have the housing.”

Now, 58 percent of employees at Snake River Correctional Institution live in Idaho, according to prison Superintendent Jean Hill.

In Umatilla, locals said, it was the lack of amenities like restaurants and stores that kept many workers from choosing their town.

Housing, at least, won’t be a problem in Madras, where about 541 homes are scheduled to come online before the prison opens, according to city planners. That’s nearly enough houses to accommodate the expected demand of 557 new homes the Department of Corrections predicted a need for in its economic impact study for Deer Ridge.

That number doesn’t include houses in Madras Land Development Co.’s 1,300-unit East Hills development, scheduled to have a first phase ready by late 2007.

The prison helped persuade uncertain developers that Madras was worth investing in, said Bill Bellamy, a Madras real estate agent and Jefferson County commissioner.

“It’s the one thing that pushed people over the edge,” Bellamy said. “The minute they said the prison’s a go and stuck the shovels in the ground, that’s when all the developers jumped in.”

Madras homes are the right price for corrections officers, said Allen. The median price of a single-family home in the first three months of 2006 was $154,900, according to the Central Oregon Association of Realtors, while corrections officers earn $30,000 to $42,000 annually. Redmond’s median home price was $238,000.

The next round of developments in Madras will start in the low $200,000 range, said Mike Ahern, a Madras real estate agent. Jefferson County’s economy is “wildly healthy,” said Ahern, a former county commissioner and current commission candidate, but he thinks the prison can still help the region.

“You’re not going to catch me saying, ‘Oh no, I wish we didn’t have a prison,’” Ahern said. “I just think it adds a strength to the economic base.”

Allen agreed the prison will help Madras. But he also said if he knew then that Madras’ economy would take off as it has, his strategy for wooing the prison would’ve been different.

“I would say probably not with the same zeal,” Allen said. “I would say when we originally went that route, certainly we wouldn’t have guessed that we would have this kind of growth.”

Postponed promises

The city’s future could’ve looked much different if Deer Ridge had opened when originally planned, Allen said. The Department of Corrections moved the groundbreaking date back at least three separate times, first to 2000, then 2002 before construction finally began in late 2005.

“Emotionally, this was tough for the community,” Allen said. “A lot of people said it was never going to come.”

It was tough financially, too. Local governments made big infrastructure investments, hoping more people would add to the tax base and defray the costs, said school and city officials.

To prepare for the 2001 prison opening, voters passed a $15.8 million bond that paid to expand Madras High School and remodel the buildings that are now Buff Elementary School.

When the Department of Corrections pushed back the prison’s opening — delaying the arrival of prison employees and their families — the Jefferson County School District found itself paying for space it didn’t need, said former Jefferson County School District Superintendent Keith Johnson.

“This community cared enough about schools to prepare for growth,” said Johnson last year. “The state pulled this little trick on us and left us holding the bag.”

While governments built up housing and infrastructure to prepare for growth, social service agencies haven’t kept pace, according to Jefferson County and nonprofit officials. Limited funding simply doesn’t allow agencies to stay ahead of growth, said Diane Seyl, Director of the county Health and Human Services Department.

“One of the issues with a tax base is that the taxes are collected after the people move in,” Seyl said. “You’re never really ahead, you’re always playing catch up.”

The city of Madras thought it was avoiding that problem when it built an $8 million wastewater treatment plant in 2001, timed to coincide with the prison’s opening. As of late last year, it was operating at 10 percent of capacity, said City Manager Mike Morgan.

Those investments may have caused some short-term pain, but former mayor Allen believes the city is better prepared for the prison now than it was in 2001. During the delay, local voters passed a levy for a new aquatic center and the city strengthened building codes and updated water and sewer buy-in charges.

“The best thing that ever happened to us was that three-year delay,” Allen said. “We wouldn’t have Madras Land Development Company, wouldn’t have a new swimming pool, wouldn’t have the (high school) built.”

Even Madrigal said she thinks the improvements will help Madras’ prospects for the future.

“I think that what will save Madras is the fact that they’ve been doing some beautification projects. They’ve been building some nicer homes and they’re closer to Portland.”

Simple math

As Madrigal and other Madras residents see it, the prison’s success is a sort of mathematical formula. It’s how many prison workers move to Madras, minus the number of inmate families.

In other words, will the economic boost outweigh the social cost? Will the workers really live there? And will Madras turn out differently than Ontario and Umatilla and other rural towns that welcomed prisons as economic saviors only to find that things never really changed?

As Madrigal put it: “I can’t re-ally see where the coming of a prison cleaned up Umatilla any.”

Rick Allen thinks Madras will be the exception. A decade or more into the future, Allen sees a town that will look quite a bit different from the northern outpost of Central Oregon that for years has held the region’s highest poverty rate.

Allen sees a host of new subdivisions ringing the 5,500-person city’s downtown, filled with middle-class workers who can’t afford to live in Bend or Redmond or early retirees from Portland looking to grab a piece of Central Oregon lifestyle for a fraction of the cost. Lake Billy Chinook will attract newcomers who prefer water sports over exclusive destination resorts. And skiers who value variety over proximity will appreciate the 68- mile drive to either Mt. Hood Meadows Ski Resort or Hoodoo Ski Area.

The growth won’t be driven by the prison, either, according to Allen and Roger Lee, director of Economic Development for Central Oregon.

Although Madras leaders have predicted the town’s resurgence since the mid-1990s, only to see growth rates hover around 2 percent, Lee said that’s about to change.

“I’m going to say it’s a year to two years behind in Madras,” Lee said. “If you look at the private sector investment community, they really believe it’s so.”

In Allen’s vision, the new people will double the town’s population and attract new stores — from downtown restaurants and boutiques to big-box chains — that make the city even more livable than its neighbors to the south.

“Those looking for a smaller town with less traffic, less congestion and a small environment” will choose Madras, Allen said.

It’s a vision endorsed by Central Oregon’s biggest developers, including Brooks Resources and Eagle Crest, who are jointly developing the 800-acre East Hills subdivision.

“Madras is a logical alternative for folks who are not finding the (homes) they’re looking for in Redmond, or Bend or Prineville for that matter,” said Stuart Woolley, executive vice president of Eagle Crest. “You’re likely to see a similar mix of year-round residents, vacation home purchasers and pre-retirement purchasers.”

The group’s Portland-based planner, Madras native Doug Macy, agreed.

“It’ll definitely distinguish Madras as a sort of more middle class, more affordable for retirees community,” Macy said. “It’s always going to be a little more modest of a place. It’s not going to attract as many people or as much money.”

Amid all that, thousands of new houses, an 18-hole golf course and a revitalized downtown, the 1,800-inmate Deer Ridge Correctional Institution will be almost an afterthought. “It’s just out there,” Allen said. “What you will have is the workers and the employees out there in the community.”

Keith Chu can be reached at 541-504-2336 or at kchu@bendbulletin.com

Posted by lois at 09:04 PM | Comments (0)

OR: Promises of prison-inspired economic turnarounds seldom pan out

Prisons Fail Economic Hopes
April 24, 2006
By Keith Chu / The Bend Bulletin
The series
A new state prison, Deer Ridge Correctional Institution, is scheduled to open outside Madras in late 2007.
The penitentiary will hold 1,884 minimum- and medium-security inmates. Madras residents are excited by the promise of 400 to 500 jobs to energize the city’s economy.
Others fear the prison. Prisoners could escape. Inmate families could move to Madras, bringing poverty and crime. The pitfalls may outweigh the benefits.
For this series, The Bulletin visited three other rural Northwest prison towns ‘ Umatilla, Ontario and Walla Walla, Wash. ‘ to see if a prison’s promise is ever fulfilled.

In 2000, the Oregon Department of Corrections predicted that a prison in tiny Madras would set off a minor economic miracle. The Deer Ridge Correctional Institution would employ 500 people on its $22 million payroll.

Nearly 70 percent of employees would be hired locally. The spillover effects would create an additional 1,666 jobs, according to a DOC-commissioned study.

While the prison could turn out to be Madras’ ticket to economic prosperity, no Oregon correctional institution has lifted the town where it was located out of economic hardship in the past 20 years.

After three months of research, including visits to three prisons and more than 60 interviews with residents and city officials of current prison towns, professors, current and former corrections employees, The Bulletin identified a handful of reasons prisons don’t deliver on their economic promise:

‘ Prisons hire far fewer local employees than the DOC predicts.

‘ They don’t pay taxes to local governments or buy supplies locally.

‘ Corrections officers and other employees often don’t live in the towns where prisons are located.

‘ Unpaid inmate work crews compete with locals for low-wage jobs.

‘An optimistic view’

In the early 1990s, like today, Malheur County was one of the poorest in the state. Unemployment was more than two points above the state average, while per capita income was thousands less. Even for a place whose French name translates to ‘unfortunate’ county, times were tough.

Residents embraced the idea of 1,000 jobs when the state announced it planned to expand a 500-bed prison into a 3,000-inmate correctional institution.

‘When they built it in our area, what it immediately did was give a sense of optimism economically,’ said Malheur County Sheriff Andy Bentz. ‘Folks who were holding off on building a new house went out and built one. People just got an optimistic view.’

A similar sense of optimism is growing in Madras today. In less than two years, the Deer Ridge Correctional Institution is scheduled to open, with up to 500 new jobs and 1,884 inmates.

For years, Madras leaders have hyped the prison as a way to add jobs and boost wages in Central Oregon’s poorest county. But other rural Oregon prison towns, such as Umatilla and Ontario, found that the prison wasn’t the windfall they expected.

There’s no local backlash against those prisons. After all, they’re one of the biggest employers in each county, with wages and benefits that outstrip most, even after the majority of prison employees decided to live elsewhere. But the continued struggles of rural prison towns suggest that betting heavily on corrections institutions for economic development doesn’t always pay off.

A big payroll

In Ontario, 10 years after the prison opened, locals say the prison’s few naysayers have been proved wrong. Here, in Malheur County’s largest city, with 12,000 people, there are no ‘felony flats’ ‘ apartment complexes filled with families of inmates. The crime rate has dropped from 165 crimes per thousand to 156. And home prices exceeded $100,000 for the first time in the years following the prison’s construction, according to longtime real estate agent Barbara Lee.

Still, some locals say the prison hasn’t been the panacea some made it out to be. Ontario’s Snake River Correctional Institution employs 1,000 people, yet the county’s unemployment rate, 7 percent in 1994, was up to 9 percent last year. Per-capita income has dropped from more than $20,000 that year to less than $19,000 in 2002, the latest data available.

Worse, the problems that have always plagued the region ‘ poverty, drug addiction and a stagnant economy ‘ haven’t improved.

And Ontario’s sense of optimism’

‘I’d say it’s leveled out,’ Bentz said.

Bobbi Burton, community development director for the Department of Corrections, said the department hasn’t studied the economic impacts of its prisons. It conducted impact studies before building the Umatilla and Ontario prisons, but destroyed the studies as part of regular records-cleansing procedures, Burton said.

But with yearly payrolls that range into eight digits ‘ in Madras it’s projected to be $22 million ‘ prisons must be good for local economies, she said.

‘We would view the economic impact as very positive,’ Burton said.

Scent of onions

The smell of raw sweet onions starts a few miles outside of Ontario. They grow in fields all around the city. Their smell grows stronger closer to the city limits, where it mixes with the scent of french fries made at the Ore-Ida plant near downtown.

Entering city limits, gas stations, fast-food establishments and mini-strip malls give way to neighborhoods of single-story homes in varying states of repair and then to the few blocks of slightly dingy two-story storefronts that make up downtown.

The highlights include the remodeled train depot, local watering hole Spuds n’ Suds and the Jolts & Juice coffee chain.

Snake River Correctional Institution, the largest prison in the state, hides a few miles outside of town, safely out of sight of travelers driving U.S. Highway 20 cross-country.

For years, the working-class community relied on agriculture and food-processing plants to sustain the local economy.

Over the past 20 years, however, foreign competition and new farming techniques have drained jobs from the county and forced many young people to leave the area to find employment, said the Rev. Jim Mosier, an Episcopal archdeacon and Ontario city councilman.

Total employment in Malheur County has dropped from 13,531 jobs in 1994 to 11,729 jobs in 2005, according to Jason Yohannan, a regional economist for Oregon Employment Department in La Grande. Farming jobs were hardest hit, Yohannan said.

‘It’s just been challenging to work in agriculture over the past few years,’ he said.

For those who do stay in Ontario, the penitentiary is one of the few places that offers benefits and above-average wages, said Harlan Hartman, a 60-year-old Ontario resident.

Hartman retired from the Ore-Ida plant after working there for decades. His son, Geral Hartman, got a job at the penitentiary.

‘The (inmates) he works with, he doesn’t like,’ Hartman said. ‘But around here it’s hard to find jobs.’

Mosier loves his city, but over coffee at Jolts & Juice, he wasted no time listing its problems.

‘We have a high rate of poverty in this community, hunger is a problem, the city has some real budget issues,’ Mosier said. ‘We don’t have nearly the hand labor (jobs) we used to.’

More than 18 percent of the county lives in poverty, according to state figures ‘ the worst in Oregon. The state economic development department rated the county as ‘extremely distressed’ last year.

These problems are not new, or because of the prison, said Estela Gomez, the former head of the Malheur County Commission on Children and Families.

‘For 30 years, children have lived in poverty in Malheur County,’ Gomez said. ‘We have generational poverty. We don’t seem to have good family-wage jobs. We have a high poverty rate.’

Every student in the Nyssa School District, 12 miles south of Ontario, qualifies for free or reduced lunches, Gomez said.

Back in the early 1990s, when the community was deciding whether or not to welcome the Snake River Correctional Institution, the debate polarized Ontario, Mosier said.

Opponents feared the institution would lead to the spread of diseases transmitted by inmates and families. They also worried about prison escapes, and declining property values, Mosier said. Proponents saw an opportunity for more jobs, a chance to sell services to the correctional institution and community growth. The proponents won out.

Now, 11 years later, prognosticators on both sides of the fence have turned out to be wrong.

‘The things we were afraid were going to happen didn’t and the things we hoped would happen didn’t,’ Mosier said.

‘A very large hotel’

Since 2000, three studies, two by professors at Washington State University and Iowa State University, and a third by the nonprofit group The Sentencing Project, found that small rural towns with prisons have less job growth than comparable communities without prisons.

‘What you’ve got with a prison is arguably a very large Super 8 hotel that nobody wants to live in but people are forced to,’ said Washington State University Professor Greg Hooks, who co-authored the most comprehensive of those studies in 2001 with fellow WSU Professor Clayton Mosher.

Hooks and Mosher acknowledged that prisons provide economic benefits for rural towns, including nearly recession-proof jobs and increased funding for local services. Still, Hooks and Mosher said, there’s no doubt that the facilities have a much smaller economic impact than, say, a similarly sized factory or lumber mill.

When the Snake River Sugar Co. factory in Nyssa closed last year, it wasn’t just the factory’s 700 workers who felt the impact, said Mosier, the Ontario city councilor. Farmers, truckers and suppliers supported by the factory all lost a major client. Local governments lost tax revenue. Economists call the phenomenon the ‘multiplier effect.’

‘With a prison, though, there’s less connection to the community, fewer links in the economic chain,’ Hooks said. ‘I don’t think there’s very many multipliers to use.’

That fact goes against the common assumption that any place employing 500 or 1,000 people has to be good for the economy.

After studying employment data from every U.S. county over a 30-year period, Hooks and Mosher concluded there’s slower job growth, lower total earnings and less income per capita in rural communities with prisons compared to rural counties without prisons.

‘Instead of helping counties in greatest need, (prison) expansion has the least beneficial outcomes for depressed rural areas,’ their study found. Meanwhile, in bigger and wealthier cities that already have diverse econo-mies and don’t need prison jobs, the prisons don’t have much impact at all, they found.

The direct benefits ‘ 500 jobs ‘ are easy to identify. But beyond that, there’s a lot less than there appears.

Hooks and Mosher didn’t prove the prisons caused the poverty in prison towns, but they did cite several aspects of prisons that tend to hurt local economies: The prisons don’t hire locally; don’t pay taxes; unpaid inmate work crews compete for low-wage jobs; and small towns invest too many resources to achieve limited results.

In Madras, backers originally pushed the prison as a way to boost the region’s economy and diversify the job market.

Jefferson County’s economy lags behind Deschutes and Crook counties, but not because the area lacks jobs, said Roger Lee, executive director of Economic Development for Central Oregon. The problem is the jobs, particularly agricultural jobs, don’t pay enough.

According to the state Employment Department, Jefferson County businesses and government agencies employed 6,390 workers in nonfarm jobs last year. Most of the jobs are located in Madras’ robust manufacturing sector, which employs 5,500 people, including Bright Wood’s 1,100-employee factory and 150 jobs at Keith Manufacturing. In Culver, Seaswirl Boats employs about 250 people.

‘What’s unusual about Madras is how many people are actually employed in Madras,’ Lee said.

But the county’s per-capita income is last in Central Oregon, at $20,670, compared to $27,880 in Deschutes County. Jefferson County’s median family income of $46,000 trails the state average by more than $12,000, according to statistics from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Pie in the sky

By now, it’s become conventional wisdom among Madras residents and DOC employees that current employees will flock to the Deer Ridge Correctional Institution because of its location in rapidly growing Central Oregon.

More transferred employees means fewer jobs that go to locals, said Brad Halverson, former administrator of drug investigations for the Oregon corrections department who now lives in Madras.

‘I know a couple of people (in the DOC) who are just waiting for the prison to open,’ Halverson said. Other current DOC employees in Ontario and Umatilla echoed Halverson’s sentiments.

Under the department’s procedures, current employees have priority over new hires when it comes to filling the slots, corrections officials said. The high number of expected transfers has caused corrections administrators to backpedal from a prediction in 2000 by then-DOC Director Dave Cook that 70 percent of employees would be hired from Central Oregon.

A year ago, DOC Community Development Manager Burton predicted fewer than 60 percent of employees would be hired locally.

‘I can’t see us having 70 percent local hires, I just can’t,’ Burton said at a meeting in December 2004.

Earlier this month, Burton revised her prediction again ‘ to 50 percent local hires.

‘I think it’s very difficult to try to predict what that number’s going to be,’ Burton said. ‘I would guess probably closer to 50-50, but that’s really what we’re doing is, we’re just guessing.’

At a Deer Ridge prison advisory committee meeting on March 21, DOC head of labor relations Gary Kilmer told the audience that kind of overestimation is normal for the department.

‘We kind of always start with a pie-in-the-sky number of 70 percent local hires, 30 percent transfers,’ said Kilmer, who also avoided predicting the ratio in Madras. ‘We’ve never quite gotten there.’

The highest percentage of local hires occurred in Ontario, Kilmer said, where the state hired more than 60 percent of employees at Snake River Correctional Institution locally.

A less-publicized economic drag are the cheap or free inmate work crews that sometimes compete with locals for low-wage jobs.

In Ontario, work crews sort onions at the Heinz Ore-Ida frozen foods plant and do maintenance work at nearby parks, according to Snake River spokeswoman Amber Campbell. If it weren’t for the prison, Hooks said, employers would have to pay at least minimum wage for that work.

In Jefferson County, for instance, the Culver Seaswirl plant wouldn’t lay off current employees to use prison workers, but the company would consider using the work crews for some jobs, said General Manager Curt Olson.

Another common pitfall, according to Hooks, is small cities devote so many resources ‘ both of time and money ‘ to secure new

prisons, they end up neglecting other development opportunities.

‘We think that the city or the county ends up overinvesting in this large employer and they don’t have the resources to go after other options,’ Hooks said.

The investments can be even slower to pay off than some towns expect, because states don’t buy supplies from local communities. For the majority of goods, Oregon puts out bids for the entire prison system, said DOC spokeswoman Perrin Damon.

‘Most items would come from centralized suppliers,’ Damon said.

So, unlike the sugar beet factory, supporting industries don’t see a boost from the prison.

Madras hopes to avoid overinvesting in the prison by going after a potpourri of other economic development opportunities, from its new industrial park to efforts to attract more tourists to Lake Billy Chinook, former Madras Mayor Rick Allen said.

Hooks and Mosher also noted that prisons pay no property or income taxes to local governments, meaning locals sometimes pick up the tab for the state’s wear and tear on city infrastructure.

In Madras, as in Ontario and Umatilla, the state has agreed to pay for the road to Deer Ridge and fund almost half of a new sewer treatment plant, which is more compensation than most states provide, Hooks said.

While Madras officials have worked hard to minimize the prison’s potential drawbacks, the reality is that, like other communities that house prisons, it has just one way to capture prison-generated wealth: by persuading corrections employees to live there.

Home near the big house’

Umatilla resident Carla McLane agreed that the prison hasn’t caused any problems, but said she wished more prison employees would settle in Umatilla. Instead, they live 10 miles away in Hermiston or across the Washington border in the Tri-Cities.

‘I know quite a few people who work at the prison and none of them live in Umatilla,’ said McLane, standing in the lobby of the cozy Umatilla Museum, before a Umatilla Historical Society meeting. ‘The commuting rate between here and the Tri-Cities (in Washington) is huge.’

Out of 400 employees at Two Rivers Correctional Institution in Umatilla, about 60 now live in or near the town, estimated City Manager Larry Clucas and Mayor David Trott.

That’s similar to Ontario, where only 42 percent of the 900-some Snake River Correctional Institution employees live in Oregon, according to Superintendent Jean Hill. The rest make their home across the Idaho border in towns like Nampa, Caldwell and even 60 miles away in Boise.

A few blocks from the museum at City Hall, an artist’s rendering of Sixth Street in Umatilla sits on a shelf, covered with a thin layer of dust.

Painted in bright colors, the image is strikingly different from the road just out the door. Empty lots and dilapidated, abandoned gas stations are filled in with new storefronts.

In the foreground, there’s a bright building adorned with a two-story clock tower, a possible replacement for the existing City Hall and police station, currently based in modular buildings.

The drawing is a few years old, according to Mayor Trott.

‘The downtown revitalization part of it is a big bite we have to take,’ Trott said. ‘We don’t really have the money to be able to pull that off.’

A soft-spoken man with steel-gray hair and a neat mustache, Trott, like each of the four mayors and city managers of prison towns interviewed for this series (in Lakeview, Ontario, Umatilla and Walla Walla), said he thinks his city is better for having a prison.

‘It’s been a community friend,’ Trott said.

Trott, head of emergency preparedness at the nearby Umatilla Chemical Depot, notes that since Two Rivers Correctional Institution arrived in 1999, the city has built a new soccer field near the banks of the Columbia River and has launched a neighborhood watch initiative designed to cut crime. They’re not directly connected to the prison, but they show progress.

‘The successes we’ve had around here are due because people see possibilities,’ he said. ‘Change is possible if they’re willing to put some sweat-equity into it.’

In a driving tour of Umatilla, City Manager Clucas points out the purple box-planters built by inmates that now decorate the sidewalks and the gazebo in a small, green park that replaced a mobile home site.

Frank Harkenrider, the former mayor of neighboring Hermiston, said the prison there has been great for his city, but for some reason just didn’t help Umatilla.

‘I go through Umatilla, it’s kind of sad,’ Harkenrider said. ‘They used to be the city down here. They just don’t have it.’

Clucas and Trott said their town is growing at the right pace, about 1.5 percent a year, according to the latest Portland State University population survey. Still, Trott said, he wishes new businesses would come to Umatilla along with the new people.

‘We’ve got to get some businesses in,’ Trott said. ‘If we don’t, all we’re going to be is a neighborhood.’

There’s brisk traffic through Umatilla during the day from commuters heading for Highway 82, the main arterial north to Washington and east to Pendleton, the county seat. The traffic attracted 12 gas stations, which lined the highway, in the 1960s and ‘70s, Clucas said.

Now all but two have been abandoned or converted to other businesses. At night, the town is quiet and dark.

The one exception is The Riverside Sports Bar and Lounge, a restaurant by day and the only strip club in Umatilla County from 6 p.m. until closing.

It’s been open for 12 years now, according to owner Paulette Dufloth, who’s married to a corrections officer at Two Rivers Correctional Institution. Along with the prison, it’s the only thing in Umatilla that regularly attracts folks from out of town.

The Riverside’s owners are good people, Trott said, and as far as he’s concerned, it’s just another business in a town that desperately needs them.

‘I don’t want Umatilla to be known as the adult entertainment capital of northeast Oregon,’ Trott said. ‘But if it’s bringing people into the area that wouldn’t otherwise take a look at the area, that would probably be viewed as positive.’

Keith Chu can be reached at 541-504-2336 or at kchu@bendbulletin.com

Posted by lois at 08:56 PM | Comments (0)

NY: Early Parole for Deportation and the Right to a Lawyer

By Stanley Mailman

New York Law Journal (p. 3, col. 1)

October 23, 1995

WHETHER THEY LIKE it or not, prison inmates can be released for deportation before they serve their minimum sentence, if they meet the terms of a New York statute enacted on June 10, 1995.*1 The new law was inaugurated on Aug. 28, when 86 Colombians were flown out of Kennedy International Airport under escort of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS).*2 Is the new law a boon for all concerned, or, as some critics complain, does it seriously prejudice the rights of foreign inmates, a convenient target in an anti-alien environment.*3

At a joint news conference held before the Avianca flight, Doris M. Meissner, Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, hailed the law as ``landmark event''; Governor Pataki said that it will ``take [these aliens] out of our state and off the backs of [our] taxpayers.''*4 Over five years, the early-parole law could yield savings to New York's prison system of at least $7 million, according to state officials who believe that there are some 8,000 non-citizen prisoners among the 68,000 inmates, only some of whom are subject to deportation.*5 For the federal government the dollar saving is significantly smaller, but the program encourages speedier deportation. Whether it yields that result -- a goal that the INS has historically found hard to achieve -- may be another matter.

Inmates who face certain deportation may well embrace an early deportation order if it means abbreviating a prison sentence. But to admit deportability and forgo appeals, they should know whether expulsion is inevitable or can be avoided. They badly need trained lawyers to give them informed advice and to provide effective representation at their deportation hearings. Such representation, however, is unavailable to many inmates, a serious flaw in the process that existed even when inmates could only be deported after they served their minimum sentence.

Aspects of the State Law

To understand the issues it is helpful to know how the state law works, how it meshes with the immigration laws, and what it means to non-citizen inmates. As a way of facilitating the transfer of such inmates to federal custody, New York enacted a law in 1985 to permit ``Conditional Parole for Deportation Only'' of those inmates who completed their minimum sentences.*6 The 1995 statute dispenses with the need to serve even the minimum term.*7 Now, the parole board may consider deportation as a factor warranting early parole as soon as the inmate begins to do time. Consideration will ordinarily await a final order of deportation that the INS assures it will carry out, and the board must specifically condition the parole on prompt deportation.

If the inmate has already served the minimum period of the sentence, the parole board can technically grant parole without a final deportation order, provided the INS commits to starting deportation proceedings promptly on the inmate's release from state custody. But the board, at least in the near run, is unlikely to use this alternative. Deportation proceedings can drag out. As the point of this program is to tie the parole to immediate deportation, INS and parole authorities are concentrating on inmates whose cases have gone to a final administrative order while they are still in state custody. For the same reason, the processing of a parole/deportation is unlikely while judicial review is pending or still available. Other conditions of this parole are a warrant for retaking custody of the parolee who is not deported and an assurance that the INS will cooperate in the transfer. Time spent in INS custody is credited against the term of the sentence. So, too, is the period of parole in the event of deportation.

What if the parolee is later imprisoned by New York for a felony committed after release under this parole program? Eligibility for parole under the new sentence would then be extended by any period the inmate needed to serve to complete the minimum sentence under the earlier conviction. What if the parolee illegally returns to the United States, but commits no New York felony? Return within a given period without permission of the Attorney General is itself a federal crime*8 but would seem to have no consequences under state law.

Can any inmate qualify under the new program? No; those convicted of a violent felony are ineligible for early release.*9 Nor does this provision relate to U.S. citizens, as they are not subject to deportation.

Who Is a Citizen?

Whether or not an inmate is a citizen is not always obvious. Persons born in this country are clearly U.S. citizens, unless they were born here to certain accredited foreign diplomats, or gave up their citizenship. Those born abroad are U.S. citizens at birth if one of their parents was then a citizen, a matter of fact or law or both that not even a wise child may know. And of course natives of other countries may have become naturalized in the United States. Hence, screening for foreign birth, the practice at state intake facilities, may not yield precise information on the alien population behind state bars. Although correction officials cannot be sure whether someone is an alien, the rough selection gives the INS an opportunity to investigate and to start deportation proceedings if appropriate. Understandably, lawyers who represent immigrants worry about New York's early-release program because it would seem to precipitate or hasten deportation.

As to the timing, the immigration laws bar the actual expulsion of persons sentenced to imprisonment until they are released from confinement.*10 But nothing restrains the INS from starting deportation proceedings at any time it has reason to believe that an individual in the United States is deportable. Indeed, in ``the case of an alien who is convicted of an offense which makes the alien subject to deportation,'' the immigration law has long required the INS to begin proceedings ``as expeditiously as possible after the date of conviction.''*11

In the past the INS may not have pursued that initiative with the vigor that some critics would want, including the State of New York, which unsuccessfully sued the Attorney General in 1992 to hasten enforcement.*12

In 1990, Congress required the Attorney General to report to Congress on INS efforts to identify, apprehend, detain and remove aliens convicted of crimes in the United States.*13 The Attorney General must arrange for deportation proceedings against aliens convicted of aggravated felonies, to be completed if possible before they are released from criminal detention.*14 So, making inmates available for deportation not only saves the state money, but supports an important congressional policy.

In cooperation with the INS, the New York Department of Correctional Services (DOCS) started the Institutional Hearing Program (IHP) in 1986, well before the early-parole provisions. The purpose of the program is ``to complete deportation hearings before an inmate is released from DOCS custody.''*15 To do this, DOCS provided physical facilities on site for the regular assignment of Justice Department personnel. But, even then, the pace of proceedings dragged.

Three Facilities

In 1994, after suing unsuccessfully to make the federal government bring deportation proceedings while inmates are still in state custody,*16 representatives of New York and the Justice Department arranged to streamline the process by centralizing the deportation operation within three facilities. Now, INS investigators are regularly stationed at Ulster and Downstate, the intake facilities for male inmates, and at Bedford Hills, the corresponding facility for females.

There, they interview foreign-born inmates to check for their deportability; INS trial attorneys prepare and prosecute the resulting deportation cases; and immigration judges, assigned by the Executive Office for Immigration Review, hear and decide those cases. The program has permitted the INS to pursue deportation hearings well before inmates complete their sentences. Indeed, IHP has every mark of a successfully run lawenforcement program, except for an essential ingredient of fairness -- availability of legal representation.

As discussed below, the arrangements made between the federal and New York authorities have made it virtually impossible to secure lawyers for the inmates placed in deportation proceedings. Given the stakes involved, the lack is critical, particularly in New York. In California, many of the aliens behind bars crossed the border illegally, or overstayed their visitor's permits, rendering them deportable apart from the conviction of any crime. More often in New York, alien prisoners are not ``illegal immigrants''; they are typically lawful permanent residents of the United States (``green card'' holders). Depending on the basis of conviction, those residents may not be deportable at all. But even if they are deportable, depending on the nature of the crime, non-citizens may be eligible to remain in the United States in the discretion of the immigration judge.*17 Eligibility can depend on whether they have resident status and how long they have been lawfully domiciled in the United States, or if have been physically present here for a continuous period of at least seven years.

In some cases, they may be able to adjust to permanent residence or readjust if they already have lawful resident status. Those inmates may have a U.S. spouse and children, and other strong equities in their favor. Their rehabilitation and contributions to the community, their long residence and close family ties and the medical, financial or other personal hardship that deportation would cause to them or their U.S. dependents, are factors that can figure strongly in favor of allowing them to stay.*18

Legal Complexity

The trial of deportation cases on behalf of the alien is difficult. It requires a careful, persuasive presentation of the facts. The legal issues are complex and dynamic. Appeals may be taken to the Board of Immigration Appeals with review by a Circuit Court of Appeals. It is a rare issue of the Federal Reporter that fails to carry such a case.

At the same time, it is extraordinarily difficult for an inmate at Ulster or Downstate to secure representation at a deportation hearing. Excepting Buffalo, the immigration bar is located almost exclusively in the New York City area. Even apart from the inconveniences of interview and preparation, appearance at a hearing held at Ulster means a trip to Napanoch in Ulster County, a two and a half hour ride by bus and cab. Appearing at Downstate involves a trip to Fishkill, in Dutchess County. In either case, a single appearance is an all-day affair.

Few inmates can afford to hire a lawyer. Apparently, the Legal Aid Society will not service these hearings because they are held outside of New York City. Prisoners' Legal Services, a not-for-profit organization that services those already behind bars, has been handicapped by a lack of expertise and by the uncertainty and limitations of funding. The Deputy Commissioner of DOCS, a lawyer, has supported grant applications and appeared at meetings of the American Immigration Lawyers Association to encourage pro bono assistance.*19 Still, the amount of funding remains at a trickle, the number of volunteers, small.

Lawyers we know in the Hudson Valley are reluctant to appear for lack of legal knowledge and experience. Lawyers in New York City have volunteered but find the travel a hardship.

The immigration statute assures to every person in deportation or exclusion hearings ``the privilege of being represented (at no expense to the government) by such counsel . . . as he shall choose.''*20 In practice, at least for inmates in New York State correctional facilities, the privilege has been a meaningless formula. Immigration judges will sometimes grant more than one adjournment to allow the inmate an opportunity to secure counsel. But then the hearing goes on, counsel or no counsel. The judges assist an unrepresented inmate by pointing out the possibilities of equitable relief, and by providing the forms for application. But a judge is no substitute for trial counsel. And without counsel, inmates do not know their chances of avoiding deportation. Nor do they know whether appeals are only likely to protract their prison sentence. Although opportunities for retaining counsel were no better when hearings were conducted at other correctional facilities, mainly located upstate, lawyers are undoubtedly more available for hearings at the INS in New York. Bar associations should do better in encouraging lawyers to volunteer their services, and in holding training sessions to widen expertise in the defense of a deportation case, as they and the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights have done in asylum cases. Meanwhile, there remains the question of whether deportation in these circumstances without an effective right to counsel raises a Sixth Amendment issue.

The courts have reminded us on several occasions that deportation hearings are civil and do not entitle the individual to the same due process rights assured in criminal proceedings.*21 The Board of Immigration Appeals has ruled that there is no absolute Sixth Amendment right to counsel in deportation hearings.*22 Even so, courts have held that effective deprivation of counsel necessarily deprives an alien of due process without the need to show prejudice.*23 Do the arrangements at Ulster and Downstate amount to such a deprivation?

One purpose of the Institutional Hearing Program is ``to assist the federal agencies responsible for administering and enforcing the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) in deporting an ever increasing number of criminal aliens from the United States.''*24 That purpose may be perfectly valid when viewed by itself. But the federal government must see to it that the arrangements do not sacrifice the right to representation, a critical component of any fair adjudication system, particularly when as here the decision can separate the individual from home and family and deprive him or her ``of all that makes life worth living.''*25 A system for processing deportation proceedings that effectively deprives the alien of representation strains the limits of the immigration statute under implicit constitutional norms.*26

Notes

(1) Sentencing Reform Act of 1995, 1995 N. Y. Laws, Ch. 3 (S. 5281, A. 7991), Sec.40 (McKinney September 1995), amending among other things N.Y. Exec. L. Sec.259-i. Section 30 of the act requires the sentencing court, with the acceptance of any plea of guilty to a felony, to advise the defendant on the record that the plea may have certain prejudicial effects under the immigration laws. One member of the first group of deportees under this provision, see text accompanying infra note 2, who protested as he was being deported that his deportation case was still under appeal, is being returned after a showing by his lawyer of administrative error by the INS.

(2) Ian Fisher, ``Pataki Announces Aliens' Expulsion,'' New York Times, Aug. 29, 1995, at 1, col. 3.

(3) See, e.g., opposing positions by Gov. George E. Pataki and Judy Rabinovitz, staff counsel, ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project, ``Deporting Criminals -- Is It Fair?'' (New York Daily News) Sept. 10, 1995, op-ed page.

(4) Supra note 2.

(5) According to information furnished by the N.Y. State Department of Correctional Services, of the 68,688 inmates, 59,661 are U.S. born, 8,794 foreign born, 233 of unknown birthplace; of the foreign born, 1,009 are awaiting determination by the INS; 2,694 are illegal aliens; 4,328 are legal permanent residents; 449 naturalized citizens, and 404 are Mariel Cubans. Cf. Cuomo v. Barr, 7 F3d 17, 18 (2d Cir. 1993) (``As of March 1992, New York held approximately 60,000 prisoners in state correctional facilities, 8 percent of whom were known to be aliens and an additional 4 percent of whom were suspected to be aliens.'')

(6) N.Y. Exec. L. Sec.259-i(2)(d) (McKinney 1993; see historical and statutory notes).

(7) Sentencing Reform Act of 1995, 1995 N. Y. Laws, Ch. 3 (S. 5281, A. 7991), Sec.40 (McKinney September 1995), amending N.Y. Exec. L. Sec.259i(2)(d).

(8) INA Sec.276(a), 8 USC Sec.1326(a). See also 3 Charles Gordon, Stanley Mailman and Stephen Yale-Loehr, Immigration Law and Procedure, Sec.85.07[2][d] (as revised, 1995).

(9) Also ineligible are those convicted of a class A-I felony (other than one defined in article 220 of the N.Y. Penal Law, which covers controlled substances offenses). Felony is defined in N.Y. Penal L. Sec.10.00 (McKinney 1987) as an offense for which a sentence may be imposed of more than one year imprisonment. N.Y. Penal L. Sec.55.05 (McKinney 1987) classifies felonies (A through E, with subclasses A-I and A-II) and misdemeanors (A through B and unclassified) for sentencing purposes.

(10) INA Sec.242(h), 8 USC Sec.1252(h).

(11) INA Sec.242(i), 8 USC Sec.1252(i), added by Act of Nov. 6, 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-603, Sec.701, 100 Stat. 3359, 3445. (12) See Cuomo v. Barr, 7 F3d 17 (2d Cir. 1993) (dismissal of New York's appeal) and Cuomo v. Barr, 812 F. Supp. 324 (NDNY 1993) (denial of New York's motion).

(13) Immigration Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101649, Sec.510, 104 Stat. 4978.

(14) INA Sec.242A(1), 8 USC Sec.1252a(1), as amended and renumbered by Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-322, Sec.130004(c), 108 Stat. 1796. (15) DOCS Today, Autumn 1995, at 18.

(16) See Cuomo v. Barr, 7 F3d 17 (2d Cir. 1993) (sustaining order dismissing application for permanent injunction to require the INS to take custody of criminal aliens in state prison release programs).

(17) See, e.g., INA Sec.212(c), 8 USC Sec.1182(c) (relief from exclusion and deportation for longtime permanent residents), INA Sec.244, 8 USC Sec.1254 (suspension of deportation), INA Sec.245, 8 USC Sec.1255 (adjustment of status to permanent resident with waiver of ground of exclusion or deportation). See generally 3 Gordon, Mailman and Yale-Loehr, supra note 8, at Ch. 74.

(18) See generally 3 Gordon, Mailman and Yale-Loehr, supra note 8, at Ch. 74.

(19) I was so advised of this by Ruth Cassell, of Prisoners' Legal Services, and by Linda Kenepaske, current chair, AILA, N.Y. Chapter, ProBono Committee.

(20) INA Sec.292, 8 USC Sec.1362.

(21) See, e.g., Bugajewitz v. Adams 228 U.S. 585 (1913); Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, 342 U.S. 580 (1952). See generally 3 Gordon, Mailman and Yale-Loehr, supra note 8, at

Sec.Sec.71.01[6][a], 71.02[3].

(22) See 1 Gordon, Mailman and Yale-Loehr, supra note 8, at Sec.4.01[1] (citing Matter of Santos, 19 I. & N. Dec. 105, 1 Immig. Rptr. B1-99 (BIA 1984)).

(23) See Montilla v. INS, 926 F2d 162, 168 (2d Cir. 1991); Castaneda-Delgado v. INS, 525 F2d 1295 (7th Cir. 1975). See also 1 Gordon, Mailman and Yale-Loehr, supra note 8, at Sec.4.01[1]. (24) Application by Department of Correctional Services for Innovations Awards 1995, Council of State Governments, at 1. (25) Brandeis, J., in Ng Fung Ho v. White, 259 U.S. 276, 284 (1922).

(26) See generally Hiroshi Motomura, ``Immigration Law After a Century of Plenary Power: Phantom Constitutional Norms and Statutory Interpretation,'' 100 Yale L.J. 545 (December 1990). I am grateful for the patient assistance of several persons in providing me with information on deportation hearings for inmates in New York's correctional facilities, and the background to the New York statute discussed in this article. Among them are Anthony J. Annucci, Deputy Commissioner and Counsel of the New York Department of Correctional Services; Ruth Cassell and Robert Selkov, Prisoners' Legal Services; Linda Kenepaske, current chair, American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), N.Y. Chapter, Pro-Bono Committee; and Judy Rabinovitz, Staff Counsel, ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project. While I hope I got the facts right, I expect none of these people to agree with all of the conclusions reached or suggested here.

Posted by lois at 06:25 PM | Comments (0)

CA: $600 million to build new "mental health" beds

"The receiver, Robert Sillen, said outside of Karlton's courtroom this week that it was possible that the mental health system could also be placed under his control. Peter Farber-Szekrenyi, the state's top corrections health care official, also said that was a possibility. On Thursday, Karlton accepted an administration proposal that will lead to a smaller-scale construction boom during the next five years. The state built 22 prisons in the past 25 years." __________________
San Francisco Chronicle
------------------------------------------------------------------------

695 new beds to be added in response to class action suit

Mark Martin, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau
Friday, April 28, 2006

Sacramento -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's administration has committed to spending more than $600 million to build new mental health facilities for inmates, continuing a prison building boom that has lasted for more than two decades.

U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence Karlton approved a long-range administration plan to add 695 new beds for mentally ill inmates Thursday as part of an 11-year-old class action lawsuit against the state. Karlton approved the plan at the end of a two-day hearing in which he called the state's lack of progress in providing constitutionally required mental health care for prisoners shocking and noted that fixing the problem will ultimately be "horrifically expensive.''

Karlton also ordered corrections officials to make several other short-term moves to provide more mental health treatment. The immediate fixes are needed in part because of a population explosion in the prison system that has left authorities with no room to house or treat troubled inmates.

One inmate at San Quentin State Prison who was described as psychotic by prison staff went 20 days without any contact with a mental health specialist and was temporarily kept naked in a cell with no toilet or bed. He later gouged at his own eyes and is now blind, according to court documents filed by attorneys representing inmates. The same report noted that in February only 30 of 230 inmates who were referred for mental health crisis treatment got into a program within the required 24 hours.

The mental health lawsuit is one of many problems facing a prison system that has lost two leaders in the past two months. Schwarzenegger appointed an acting corrections secretary last week after Jeanne Woodford abruptly quit.

Amid overcrowding that has many prisons at more than 200 percent capacity, another federal judge, Thelton Henderson, has taken control of the system's other medical programs.

The move stripped the system of authority to set its health care budget and policies and gave the power to a receiver who began his job last week.

The receiver, Robert Sillen, said outside of Karlton's courtroom this week that it was possible that the mental health system could also be placed under his control. Peter Farber-Szekrenyi, the state's top corrections health care official, also said that was a possibility.

On Thursday, Karlton accepted an administration proposal that will lead to a smaller-scale construction boom during the next five years. The state built 22 prisons in the past 25 years.

The plan calls for new mental health facilities, run by the corrections system, to be built at several prison sites, including Folsom and Vacaville. Construction costs alone are projected to top $600 million, and staffing costs will add much more to the final bill of a prison system budget that has grown by more than 60 percent just in Schwarzenegger's tenure as governor. Taxpayers now spend more than $8 billion each year on corrections.

Michael Bien, the San Francisco attorney representing the inmates, called the plan an important step toward providing adequate care to the 20 percent of the state's inmate population estimated to need mental health care. But he noted the department faces an immediate crisis due to the current population surge.

"The problem is the next five years, and it's a big problem,'' he said.

Karlton ordered the state to provide more bed space during the next year to inmates, and he is expected to require the state to increase the salaries of psychiatrists and other mental health specialists to help increase staffing levels.

Karlton noted in court that due to the closure of state mental hospitals in the 1960s, "the prisons have become, in effect, mental hospitals.''

That policy change is partially responsible for the prison system's predicament, Karlton noted.

"The state has made that judgment, and now the state has to pay the piper,'' Karlton said. "And it's going to be horrifically expensive.''

E-mail Mark Martin at markmartin@sfchronicle.com.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/04/28/BAGN1IH44L1.DTL&
type=health

Posted by lois at 06:20 PM | Comments (0)

Fears of deportation raids spread among illegal immigrants nationwide

By LAURA WIDES-MUNOZ
Associated Press Writer

April 29, 2006, 8:42 AM EDT

MIAMI -- Thousands of illegals immigrants stayed home this week amid rumors of immigration roundups that federal officials say were unfounded, leaving some industries scrambling for workers.

Len Mills, executive vice president of Associated General Contractors of South Florida, estimated at least 50 percent of workers on construction jobs in the region had not shown up for work.

"This is costing millions of dollars a day, and I don't know who is going to pay for it," he said.

Rumors of random sweeps were rampant from coast to coast Friday, prompting many immigrants to stay home from work, take their children out of school and avoid church. Their absences added to immigrants' fears, as some thought their friends and co-workers had been arrested.

Mills said he believed even some legal workers were afraid.

"Everybody's edgy," said Chris Ruske, owner of a southern New Jersey nursery. "There's an awful lot of rhetoric, and you wonder what's true. You wonder if the immigration Gestapo are coming to get you."

Construction and agriculture were among the industries most affected. Katie A. Edwards, executive director of Florida's Dade County Farm Bureau, said nearly a third of farmworkers did not come to the fields this week. Mari Ramos, a Peruvian nanny whose tourist visa ran out in 2003, listened when friends warned her not to take public transportation or risk arrest. "That's when I became nervous. I stopped going to my night job," the 36-year-old Miami woman said.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesman Dean Boyd said the agency has received hundreds of calls about immigration raids in recent days. Such rumors are typical after a raid like the one last week in which more than 1,000 employees of pallet manufacturer IFCO were arrested at more than 40 company sites nationwide, he said.

"However, we don't conduct random sweeps," he said. "All our arrests are the result of investigations, evidence and intelligence."

ICE officials acknowledged they have stepped up arrests under their "Operation Phoenix," an existing program to find and deport fugitive illegal immigrants with criminal backgrounds.

Many wondered whether the rumors would deter people from national immigration protests planned for Monday.

The National Immigration Law Center called on organizations nationwide to sign a petition urging ICE to assure the public it won't make any immigration arrests during the protests.

The agency said its policy is not to discuss potential operations. "ICE will continue to operate as it does every day of the year," Boyd said.

The rumors affected a wide variety of businesses. In New Jersey and New York, day-laborer gathering sites drew only a trickle of workers.

"It is the ugliest of rumors because it has intimidated people who are already afraid. They are living in the shadows of society, wondering who is going to knock on the door," said the Rev. Allan Ramirez, pastor of the Brookville Dutch Reform Church in Long Island, N.Y.

Elias Bermudez, an activist and talk show host for a Spanish-language radio station in Phoenix, said many believe they are being punished for participating in recent protests in favor of legalizing the status of many illegal immigrants.

In the rural town of Homestead, Fla., more than a dozen parents lined up early to take their kids out of Redondo Elementary School on Wednesday for fear of a raid, said activist Jonathan Fried, who heads the nonprofit "We Count!"

"It's caused tremendous fear in our community, like I've never seen before," Fried said.

On Friday, ICE announced the arrests of 106 illegal immigrant fugitives and 19 immigration status violators throughout the Midwest over the last 10 days. Of those, 46 had criminal records, according to the department. Earlier this week, ICE announced the arrest of 183 fugitives in Florida alone.

The American Immigration Lawyers Association said Friday it believes some of the concerns may have been fueled by confusion over a widespread fugitive roundup by the U.S. Marshals Service. That roundup lead to more than 9,000 arrests of people wanted for a number of crimes, and ICE assisted in the effort but it said most of those detained were U.S. citizens.

ttp://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newjersey/ny-bc-nj--immigrationfears0
429apr29,0,5636290.story?coll=ny-region-apnewjersey___

Associated Press Writers Suzette Laboy in Miami, Bonnie Pfister in New Jersey, Amanda Lee Myers in Phoenix and Adam Geller and Pat Milton in New York contributed to this report.

Posted by lois at 06:16 PM | Comments (0)

Single-Faith Prison Program Questioned

By Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, April 29, 2006; A02

The Justice Department plans to set aside cellblocks at up to half a dozen federal prisons for an ambitious pilot program to prepare inmates for release. But it has produced an outcry by saying that it wants a private group to counsel the prisoners according to a single faith.

The plans do not specify what that faith must be, but they appear to rule out secular counseling or programs that offer inmates guidance in a variety of faiths.

The Washington-based advocacy group Americans United for Separation of Church and State charged in a letter to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales that the Justice Department's Bureau of Prisons has tailored its bidding requirements to fit one particular program: an immersion in evangelical Christianity offered by Charles W. Colson's Prison Fellowship Ministries.

Outlining 10 ways in which the Bureau of Prisons' request for proposals from private contractors dovetails with Prison Fellowship's "InnerChange" program, Americans United contended that the plan is unconstitutional and urged Gonzales to withdraw it. Gonzales has not responded to the April 19 letter, Americans United said.

Independent experts on constitutional law asked by The Washington Post to review the bidding documents also questioned the plan's legality.

"There are all sorts of gray areas in the interpretation of the Establishment Clause of the Constitution. This doesn't seem to be in the gray area," said Duke University law professor Erwin Chemerinsky. "This seems to favor religion over non-religion, and some religions over other religions. By wanting to fund only one religion, I think it runs afoul of what even the most conservative justices would be willing to tolerate."

Douglas Laycock of the University of Texas School of Law said he believes that "you can run religious programs in federal prisons" and that they "are highly promising." But he said the plan for taxpayer-funded counseling in a single faith, without any obvious provision for a secular alternative, is "problematic."

"One of the questions you have to ask is, 'Does the regular prison program do anything comparable to prepare prisoners for reentry?' " Laycock said. "I don't know the answer, but I've read that most prisons don't do much of anything. So in fact there may be no secular equivalent, and if the only way to get preparation for release is to go into a 'single-faith' program, that seems to be coercion of religion."

Department of Justice spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said the plan is noncoercive -- and constitutional -- because participation will be voluntary and the inmates who choose to take part will receive "no reduction in their sentence . . . no better facilities, same food, same privileges and disciplinary rules."

"In fact," Roehrkasse said in an e-mail, "chances are good that if they apply and are accepted for [the program] they must be moved farther away from home to participate, meaning they probably receive no family visits for the 18 month term of the program."

Roehrkasse said the bidding requirements were not tailored to Prison Fellowship Ministries. "Any and all organizations -- of any faith or none -- are eligible and invited to submit a proposal," he said.

On March 30, the Bureau of Prisons put out a formal request for proposals from private contractors to run the pre-release program, which it has named Life Connections. It held a meeting with possible bidders on April 18 and has set a May 16 deadline for proposals.

Bureau of Prisons spokeswoman Traci L. Billingsley said $3 million has been appropriated for the program. She said it is possible that he bureau could approve several proposals and set up, say, a Roman Catholic program at one prison, a Jewish program at another and an evangelical Protestant program at a third.

"It's early to speculate, but we hope we'll have multiple contractors and multiple locations," she said. She added that she did not know whether inmates would be allowed to transfer between prisons to participate in a program of their choice.

Several federal prisons currently have multifaith programs in which inmates can select the faith they wish to study. This is the first time that the Bureau of Prisons has attempted to set up reentry programs built around a single faith, Billingsley said.

The request for proposals said the government "intends to make multiple awards for the provision of single-faith, residential reentry programs at one or more pilot site locations."

It said the purpose of the program is to "facilitate personal transformation for the participating inmates, and thereby reduce recidivism." It required contractors to "match inmates with personal mentors" from a "faith community" or other support groups, and it listed 10 "goal areas," including "spiritual development."

Mark Earley, president of Prison Fellowship Ministries, said it operates single-faith residential prison programs in six states and is "very interested" in the federal program, but has not decided whether to submit a proposal. He said his organization did not have any advance input.

"We didn't even know it was going to happen -- we just heard about it through the grapevine," he said.

© 2006 The Washington Post Company

Posted by lois at 06:11 PM | Comments (0)

Florence L. Mars, 83, Who Was Spurned for Rights Work, Dies

April 29, 2006
By NADINE BROZAN

Florence Latimer Mars, who defied the society into which she was born to write a searing book about the effects of the 1964 killings of the civil rights workers Andrew Goodman, Michael Schwerner and James Earl Chaney on her hometown, Philadelphia, Miss., died on Sunday at her home there. She was 83.

The cause was congestive heart failure, said Dawn Lea Chalmers, a second cousin. She had been suffering from Bell's palsy and diabetes. An only child who never married, Miss Mars had no immediate survivors.

The author of "Witness in Philadelphia," published in 1977 by the Louisiana State University Press, she repeatedly spoke out against the Ku Klux Klan and other forces oppressing the black population of east central Mississippi. A fourth-generation resident of the area and a member of its landed gentry, she was also a significant source of information for the F.B.I. agents investigating the killings, and she testified before a federal grand jury.

Miss Mars paid dearly for her efforts. The Klan organized a boycott against the stockyard where she sold cattle, forcing it to close, and she was compelled to resign from posts at the First United Methodist Church.

"Less than 24 hours after I testified before a grand jury investigating those murders (and the church burning that preceded them), the Klan initiated a campaign to 'ruin' me, a WASP lady with eight great-grandparents buried in Neshoba County," she wrote in her book, completed with the assistance of Lynn Eden, now the associate director for research at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University.

Stanley Dearman, who was editor of The Neshoba Democrat from 1966 to 2000, said: "There was a lot of animosity toward her for being so outspoken. She had threats against her life, anonymous midnight phone calls, and people driving by her house throwing bricks and shouting obscenities. But she had a lot of moral courage and conviction and was not shakable."

In his foreword to her book, Turner Catledge, a former executive editor of The New York Times, who grew up in Philadelphia, wrote of her: "What a witness! She witnessed with her eyes, her ears and her heart. She saw, she heard, she felt and through her own involvement she bore witness to qualities of courage and goodwill that all but evaporated in the climate of passion that flowed from an unreasoning fear of change."

Florence Mars, a diminutive woman barely five feet tall, seemed an unlikely candidate for the defiant role she assumed. She was born on Jan. 1, 1923, to Adam Longino Mars, a lawyer, and Emily Geneva Johnson Mars, known as Neva.

She graduated from Philadelphia High School and attended Millsaps College in Jackson, Miss. She graduated from the University of Mississippi in 1944, and then worked as a reservations agent for Delta Air Lines in Atlanta. In the 1950's, she lived in New Orleans, where she photographed jazz musicians. In 1962, she returned to Philadelphia, raising cattle and owning and running the Neshoba County Stockyards.

She also stepped into the forefront of the battle for civil rights in her town. She allied herself with the Council of Federated Organizations, a consortium of groups like S.N.C.C., CORE and the N.A.A.C.P.

One of her more frightening encounters with the Klan occurred late one night in July 1965 when she was driving home from a party at the Neshoba County fair and was picked up by the sheriff, Lawrence A. Rainey, on trumped-up charges of drunken driving. He dragged her out of her car and jailed her. A member of the Klan, Mr. Rainey was later tried on charges of violating the civil rights of the three young civil rights workers killed outside Philadelphia, and was acquitted.

In June 2005, Miss Mars was in the courtroom in Philadelphia when Edgar Ray Killen, by then 80, mastermind of the ambush of the civil rights workers, was found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to 60 years in prison. (The verdict is being appealed.)

Miss Mars was vindicated not only by her friends but also by her foes. At her funeral service on Thursday, Mr. Dearman said, "People said, 'Florence was right.' People who don't remember how they acted."

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

Posted by lois at 09:34 AM | Comments (0)

April 28, 2006

‘Landmark’ study shows HIV spread in Ga. prisons

LOCAL NEWS | www.sovo.com

By DYANA BAGBY
Apr. 28, 2006

A study of HIV infection rates among Georgia prisoners released last week by the federal Centers for Disease Control & Prevention prompted AIDS activists to renew calls to make condoms available to inmates.

"This is the most in-depth study done within the U.S. prison system on HIV transmission, making it a landmark study," said Jeff Graham, senior director for advocacy and communications for Atlanta-based AIDS Survival Project.

L

"As advocates, we’ve always known anecdotally that HIV was spread in prisons," Graham said. "But without solid proof, it was hard to make a case for prevention measures. Hopefully we can use this study not only in Georgia but around the country."

The report, "HIV Transmission Among Male Inmates in a State Prison System - Georgia, 1992-2005," was published April 21 in the CDC’s Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report.

In October 2005, the Georgia Department of Correction housed 44,990 male inmates with 856 — nearly 2 percent — reported to be HIV positive. Of that 856 total, 780 (or 91 percent) were infected before incarceration, and 732 (or 86 percent) were black, the report states.

From July 1988 through February 2005, a total of 88 male inmates were HIV negative when sentenced but then contracted HIV while in prison, according to the report.

Not surprisingly, the CDC identified sex between male inmates and sharing needles for tattoos and drug use as the most common risk behaviors for HIV inside prison walls.

"CDC recommends that HIV education, testing, and prevention counseling be made available to populations at increased behavioral or clinical risk for HIV infection, including inmates in correctional facilities," the report said.

CDC epidemiologist Patrick Sullivan, who led the study, noted that the Georgia Department of Corrections offered voluntary HIV testing during part of the study period, from 2003 until 2005, but then stopped it. The CDC is recommending the prison system re-implement the voluntary HIV testing, Sullivan added.

"We know that most people who find they are HIV positive take steps to reduce risk to their partners," Sullivan said. "One-third of inmates said they used some kind of barrier — like rubber gloves or plastic wrap — which shows an interest on their part to want to have protected sex."

The CDC report notes that condoms are provided to some inmates in state prisons in Mississippi and Vermont and jails in Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C.

"Departments of corrections without condom distribution programs should assess relevant state laws, policies, and circumstances to determine the feasibility and benefits and risks of implementing such programs," the report states.

But Yolanda Thompson, public affairs director for the state Department of Corrections, said Georgia has no immediate plans to implement any new HIV initiatives, although the CDC study may spark future discussions.

"What this study will enable us to do is to identify and broaden our definition of public safety and public health," she said.

‘Contraband’ condoms

Thompson confirmed that condoms are considered "contraband" in Georgia prisons and sex between inmates is forbidden by both state law and prison policy.

But according to Graham of AIDS Survival Project, the state needs to reconsider its policies in light of the CDC findings.

"This study really challenges the corrections officials to recreate policy that will make sense in terms of protecting public health," he said.

John Cole Vodicka, director of the Prison & Jail Project, a statewide prisoners’ rights advocacy group, agreed that simply banning sex in prison is ineffective.

"You’d have more success stopping HIV in prison by having better education, better protection like condoms, and more attention to human rights than you would if you just said ‘no sex allowed,’" he said.

© 2006 The Southern Voice | A Window Media Publication
http://www.southernvoice.com/2006/4-28/news/localnews/gaprisons.cfm

Posted by lois at 11:09 PM | Comments (0)

Rush Limbaugh Arrested on Prescription Drug Charges

April 28, 2006

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla., April 29 (AP) — Rush Limbaugh was arrested today on prescription drug charges, with his lawyer saying he has reached a deal with prosecutors that will eventually see the charges dismissed if he continues treatment for drug addiction.

The subject of a three-year investigation by prosecutors, Mr. Limbaugh turned himself in to authorities on a warrant charging him with fraud to conceal information to obtain prescriptions, said Teri Barbera, a spokeswoman for the Palm Beach County Jail.

The 55-year-old conservative radio commentator came into the jail about 4 p.m. with his lawyer, Roy Black, and left an hour later after he was photographed and fingerprinted and he posted $3,000 bail, Ms. Barbera said.

"He just kind of came in and he left," Ms. Barbera said.

Mr. Black said his client and prosecutors had reached a settlement on a charge of doctor shopping filed today by the local State Attorney's Office, which Mr. Black said would be dismissed in 18 months if Mr. Limbaugh complied with court guidelines.

As a primary condition of the dismissal, Mr. Limbaugh must continue to seek treatment from the doctor he has seen for the last two and a half years, Mr. Black said.

Mr. Limbaugh entered a plea of not guilty in court today on the charge and Mr. Black maintained his client's innocence.

"Mr. Limbaugh and I have maintained from the start that there was no doctor shopping, and we continue to hold this position," Mr. Black said in an e-mailed statement. Doctor shopping is when a patient illegally deceives multiple doctors to receive overlapping prescriptions.

According to Mr. Black, Mr. Limbaugh also has agreed to make a $30,000 payment to the state to defray the public cost of the investigation. The agreement also provides that he must refrain from violating the law in the next 18 months, must pay $30 a month for the cost of supervision and comply with other similar provisions of the agreement.

Prosecutors did not immediately return a call for comment.

They began investigating Mr. Limbaugh in 2003 after the National Enquirer reported his housekeeper's accusations. He took a five-week leave from his radio program to enter a rehabilitation program and acknowledged he had become addicted to pain medication. He blamed severe back pain for his prescription drug abuse.

Prosecutors seized Mr. Limbaugh's records after learning that he had received about 2,000 painkillers, prescribed by four doctors in six months, at a pharmacy near his house in Palm Beach. The investigation was held up as the prosecutors and Mr. Black battled in court over whether the records had been properly seized.

Mr. Limbaugh reported five years ago that he had lost most of his hearing because of an autoimmune inner-ear disease. He had surgery to have an electronic device placed in his skull to restore his hearing. But research shows that abusing opiate-based painkillers can also cause profound hearing loss.

Before his own problems became public, Mr. Limbaugh had decried drug use and abuse and had mocked President Bill Clinton for saying he had not inhaled when he tried marijuana. He often made the case that drug crimes deserve punishment.

"Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country," Mr. Limbaugh said on his short-lived television program on Oct. 5, 1995. "And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs."

He added, "And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up."

On the same show, he commented that the statistics that show blacks go to prison more often than whites for the same drug offenses only illustrated that "too many whites are getting away with drug use."

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

Posted by lois at 10:56 PM | Comments (0)

New York Killers, and Those Killed, by Numbers

April 28, 2006
By JO CRAVEN McGINTY

The oldest killer was 88; he murdered his wife. The youngest was 9; she stabbed her friend. The women were more than twice as likely as men to murder a current spouse or lover. But once the romance was over, only the men killed their exes. The deadliest day was on July 10, 2004, when eight people died in separate homicides.

Five people eliminated a boss; 10 others murdered co-workers. Males who killed favored firearms, while women and girls chose knives as often as guns. More homicides occurred in Brooklyn than in any other borough. More happened on Saturday. And roughly a third are unsolved.

At the end of each year, the New York Police Department reports the number of killings — there were 540 in 2005. Typically, much is made of how the number has fallen in recent years — to totals not seen since the early 1960's. But beyond summarizing the overarching trends, the police spend little time compiling the individual details.

The New York Times obtained the basic records for every murder in the city over the last three years, and while the events make for disturbing reading, the numbers can hint at trends, occasionally solve a mystery and in at least some straightforward way answer for the city the questions of who kills and who is killed in the five boroughs.

From 2003 through 2005, 1,662 murders were committed in New York. No information, beyond an occasional physical description, is available on the killers in the unsolved cases.

Of the rest, men and boys were responsible for 93 percent of the murders; they killed with guns about two-thirds of the time; their victims tended to be other men and boys; and in more than half the cases, the killer and the victim knew each other.

The police said they were more interested in disrupting crime patterns. "We're looking for things with operational implications — time of day, day of the week — to see that we deploy officers at the right times and in sufficient numbers," said Michael J. Farrell, deputy commissioner for strategic initiatives.

The offender and victim were of the same race in more than three-quarters of the killings. And according to Mr. Farrell, they often had something else in common: More than 90 percent of the killers had criminal records; and of those who wound up killed, more than half had them.

"If the average New Yorker is concerned about being murdered in a random crime, the odds of that happening are really remote," Mr. Farrell said. "If you are living apart from a life of crime, your risk is negligible."

Criminologists confirm that assessment. "People will be shocked to see how safe it is to live in New York City," said Andrew Karmen, a sociology professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and an expert on victimology. "Victims and offenders are pretty much pulled from the same background. Very often, young victims have young killers. Very often, the victim and killer knew each other."

But plenty of times, events diverge from the norm.

At least a quarter of the city's murders in these three years, were committed by strangers, and in those instances, most were the result of a dispute. Stranger homicides now happen at almost twice the rate of 50 years ago, when, according to a classic study by Marvin Wolfgang, a criminologist, about 14 percent of murders were committed by strangers.

"Homicide used to be regarded as an acquaintance phenomenon with relatively rare incidents involving strangers," said Steven F. Messner, a homicide expert and a professor of sociology at the State University of New York at Albany. "It's still characteristically an acquaintance event. But the stranger homicides are now nontrivial."

After four years as commander of the Brooklyn North homicide squad, Lt. John Cornicello said the murders in his section of the borough had begun to run together. Yet from memory, he rolled off the details of several: The good Samaritan shot for his Lincoln Navigator after offering a ride to a group of stranded people. The ".40-caliber killer," a serial murderer who shot and killed but did not rob four shopkeepers because he believed they were Middle Eastern.

"More and more, they seem to be the result of stupidity," Lieutenant Cornicello said. "Take the Potato Wedge Killer."

In that recent case, a customer at a KFC restaurant became incensed when he did not receive enough starch with his fried chicken order. After demanding both a refund and an order of potato wedges, he later confronted the cashier with whom he had argued and stabbed him to death.

Among all the city's victims, the oldest was 91; she died during a robbery. Whites and Asians, who seldom murdered, were also infrequently killed: Together, they represented 75 or fewer victims each year. Most homicides occurred outdoors. The deadliest hour was 1 to 2 a.m.

And a small but unsettling number of children were among the victims, including 21 infants and 32 children ages 1 to 10, most of whom died at the hands of a parent.

According to Professor Karmen, 10 is the safest age. "You're too old to be abused or neglected as a child," he said, "and you're not old enough to be out on the streets."

An interesting, though uncommon, group of murders that made it into the police accounting in these years involved a handful of victims who died of injuries they had first suffered in crimes committed one or more years before.

Stabbed, shot, beaten or burned, they survived long enough to be counted as murder victims in another calendar year.

Sixty-nine victims fit this description.

In some instances, they were injured decades ago. The medical examiner alerts the police when such deaths occur, according to Sgt. Edward Yee of the Police Department's crime analysis unit, and the police add the victims to that year's murder tally.

For example, 21 deaths that were counted as murders in 2005 resulted from injuries that occurred in earlier years.

The oldest involved a shooting in 1975, when a man attacked his brother in a domestic dispute. That raised the murder toll to 540, the lowest figure recorded by the city in four decades, but only 519 murders were committed last year.

Subtracting these belated deaths makes the recent decline in the number of homicides — which has grabbed headlines — seem even more stunning. But for the purpose of generating the annual murder tally, the police do not distinguish between fresh and delayed murders.

"No one does," Mr. Farrell said, referring to other police departments.

Within the city, 40 percent of the murders occurred in Brooklyn. The 75th Precinct, with 90, had the most of any precinct, but there were hot spots scattered throughout the city, in Brooklyn's 73rd, 79th and 83rd Precincts, for example, and in the 44th and 46th Precincts in the Bronx. In and around the 32nd Precinct in Harlem could be dangerous, too.

No one is certain what explains the recent decreases in the overall number of homicides, but many criminologists believe social factors may help explain why, and where, most murders continue to occur.

"The problem of crime and violence is rooted in neighborhood conditions — high rates of poverty, family disruption, failing schools, lack of recreational opportunities, active recruitment by street gangs, drug markets," Professor Karmen said. "People forced to reside under those conditions are at a greater risk of getting caught up in violence, as victims or as perpetrators."

The police are generally unimpressed by such theories, as well as the minutiae surrounding the deaths.

"Crime is concentrated," Mr. Farrell said. "Who knows why? We're looking at what we can affect."

The roughly one-third of the homicides that remain unsolved create one of the larger categories of murder. Typically, 50 to 55 percent of murders are solved in the same calendar year in which the crime is committed, according to Paul J. Browne, a deputy police commissioner in New York.

The police clear an additional number of murders from previous years, for an overall annual clearance rate of about 70 percent. That beats the national average, which is closer to 62 percent, according to F.B.I. statistics.

In New York, several things may contribute to the number of open cases, according to the police and criminologists. A significant number may have been stranger murders, which are particularly hard to solve. It can take months to collect witness statements.

And sometimes, detectives just cannot get the right person to talk.

"The big secret of detective work," Lieutenant Cornicello said, "is that you've got to get somebody else to tell you what happened."

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

Posted by lois at 11:56 AM | Comments (0)

western MA: Don't sink more money into jails for women

Thursday, April 27, 2006
Don't sink more funds into jails for women

To the editor:

Hampden County Sheriff Michael Ashe says his new women's jail will be full when it opens next year, so he wants another $6 million to add 56 more cells. Our local leaders should say no. The new women's jail will hold women from all four counties of western Massachusetts.

Building bigger jail after bigger jail is not the solution to crime and it might even make things worse. Adding extra capacity to a jail should be a last resort, because those empty cells will reduce the pressure for judges and legislators to consider cost-effective and rehabilitative alternative sentences for people who pose no threat to the community.

Rather than build now, the prudent thing to do is to force Sheriff Ashe to ''make do'' for a few years with the 240 cells already under construction.

Before lawmakers grant Ashe's request, they should remember that 56 cells will cost $2.4 million a year to operate. That money will no longer be available to fund schools, drug treatment or other far more beneficial programs.

Bringing more state investment to western Massachusetts is a good goal, but dumping it into jails is the last thing we can afford.

Peter Wagner
Northampton

To the editor:

Eighty-five percent of women incarcerated in Massachusetts are in jail for crimes relating to addiction. On April 17, the San Diego Union-Tribune, reported on Proposition 36, enacted by Californians in 2000. Proposition 36 allows people convicted of first- and second-time drug possession the opportunity to receive substance abuse treatment instead of incarceration.

Two studies find that taxpayers are saving nearly $2.50 for every dollar invested in the program. In the first year alone, Proposition 36 saved state and local government $173 million.

We are paying for the Chicopee jail to incarcerate women, including those from Hampshire County. We must ask ourselves and our elected officials how building more and bigger jails came to be the answer to drug addiction, lack of housing, poor education and no or low-paying jobs.

Please contact our state representatives and senators and ask them to take the lead in demanding real alternatives to incarceration.

Lois Ahrens
Northampton

Posted by lois at 09:43 AM | Comments (0)

York County, Pennsylvania to Pay U.S. $16 Million for Inflating Immigrant Detention Figures

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 2006
WWW.USDOJ.GOV

WASHINGTON – York County, PA, will pay the United States $16 million to settle allegations that it inflated claims to the Immigration and Naturalization Service for housing INS detainees, the Justice Department announced today. York County, which operates York County Prison, is one of the largest providers of detention services in the nation.

The settlement arises from an intergovernmental services agreement between York and INS to house detainees in York County Prison. The parties entered into the agreement in 1995, at a rate of $50 a day per detainee. In 2000, INS agreed to increase the rate to $60 a day based on York’s certified statement of prison operating costs and its representation of the inmate population of the prison. York represented that the average daily population of the prison was 996 inmates for the applicable period, rather than 1,544 as the county reported separately to the state. The United States alleges that the reduced number of inmates resulted in an inflated rate charged to the United States for detainees housed from October 1999 through March 2003.

On March 1, 2003, INS, formerly an agency within the Department of Justice, was reorganized as the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement within the Department of Homeland Security.

The government’s investigation was conducted by the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General. The OIG’s Fraud Detection Office and Philadelphia Regional Audit Office collaborated in developing the evidence which formed the basis for the government’s claims. The OIG’s audit can be found at http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/grants/g7001005/index.htm

Posted by lois at 09:39 AM | Comments (0)

April 27, 2006

Second Chance Labor Project

Second Chance Labor Project

March 29, 2006

Major U.S. Cities Adopt New Hiring Policies Removing Unfair Barriers to Employment of People with Criminal Records

Several major cities across the United States, including Boston, Chicago and San Francisco, have adopted significant new policies to limit discrimination in city jobs against people with criminal records. As Mayor Richard Daley explained when he announced Chicago's new hiring policy, "Implementing this new policy won’t be easy, but it’s the right thing to do. . . . "We cannot ask private employers to consider hiring former prisoners unless the City practices what it preaches."

N

U.S. cities are ground zero for the record numbers of people with a criminal record who are now struggling to find work and contribute to their communities. More cities are taking on this "reentry" challenge by adopting a new "smart on crime" agenda which promotes public safety by creating more employment, housing and drug treatment opportunities. In the process, more cities are also evaluating local policies that create unnecessary barriers to employment of people with criminal records. As summarized below, several major U.S. cities have also taken the critical first step by removing unfair barriers to employment in their city hiring policies.

Boston City Council Ordinance

Of special significance, Boston's City Council ordinance (which takes effect July 1, 2006) applies not only to hiring in city jobs, but also to the hiring decisions of an estimated 50,000 private vendors who do business with the City. The successful campaign to reform Boston's hiring policy was backed by broad community coalition called the Massachusetts Alliance to Reform CORI (MARC).

According to the ordinance, the City of Boston and its vendors cannot conduct a criminal background check as part of their hiring process until the job applicant is found to be "otherwise qualified" for the position. This critical protection ensures that everyone is first considered for employment based on their actual skills and experience before the employer takes into account the presence or absence of a criminal record. The ordinance also requires that the final employment decision, which includes information about the individual's criminal record, also considers the age and seriousness of the crime and the "occurrences in the life of the Applicant since the crime(s)." In addition, the Boston ordinance creates important appeals rights for those denied employment based on a criminal record and the right to present information related to the "accuracy and/or relevancy" of the criminal record.

Resources:
-Boston City Council Ordinance, click here.

Local Contacts:
Horace Small
Union of Minority Neighborhoods
UMNUnity@att.net
www.unionofminorityneighborhoods.org

Fran Fajana
Massachusetts Law Reform Institute
ffajana@mlri.org
www.mlri.org

City of Chicago Hiring Policy

In May 2004, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley created the Mayoral Policy Caucus on Prisoner Reentry, bringing together government and community leaders to address the challenges facing 20,000 people each year who return to Chicago after being released from prison. In January 2006, the Caucus issued a major report calling for broad ranging reforms of City policy. With regard to city hiring, the report recommended that the Mayor "Adopt internal guidelines for the City of Chicago's personnel policies regarding criminal background checks, and advocate for fair employment standards."

At the same time that the report was released, Mayor Daley announced several major "reentry" initiatives, including reform of the City's hiring policies as recommended by the Caucus. The Mayor's press release described a new hiring policy requiring the City to "balance the nature and severity of the crime with other factors, such as the passage of time and evidence of rehabilitation . . . . Put more simply, this change means that City hiring will be fairer and more common sense." The Mayor added, "Implementing this new policy won't be easy, but it's the right thing to do . . . We cannot ask private employers to consider hiring former prisoners unless the City practices what it preaches."

Implementing the Mayor's new hiring policy, the City Department of Human Resources has issued guidelines imposing standards on all city agencies regulating hiring decisions related to people with criminal records. For the first time, the City of Chicago now requires all agencies to take into account the age of an individual's criminal record, the seriousness of the offense, evidence of rehabilitation, and other mitigating factors before making their hiring decisions.

Resources:
-Mayor Daley's Press Release (January 24, 2006), click here.
-Report of the Mayoral Policy Caucus on Prisoner Reentry (January 2006), click here.

Local Contact:
Michelle L. Light
Office of the Mayor
mlight@cityofchicago.org

San Francisco "Ban the Box" Initiative

The campaign to "ban the box" on San Francisco's applications for public employment was led by All of Us or None, a community-based organization of formerly-incarcerated people and their families.

Like most government employers, the City and County of San Francisco required all job applicants to check off a box on their initial job application indicating whether they have been "convicted by a court." In addition, job applicants were required to list all their convictions, no matter the age or seriousness of the offense. All of Us or None's investigation of this hiring policy revealed that it unfairly discriminated against people with criminal records because it discouraged them from even applying for City and County jobs. The policy was also found to limit the hiring pool of qualified candidates for public employment.

In October 2005, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors approved a resolution initiated by All of Us or None which called on the City and County of San Francisco to eliminate hiring discrimination against people with criminal records by removing the requirement that criminal history information be provided as part of the initial job application for public employment. A new hiring policy has since been adopted by the Civil Service Commission of the City and County of San Francisco and the Department of Human Resources.

Like Boston's ordinance, San Francisco's new policy (which takes effect in May 2006) seeks to prevent discrimination on the basis of a criminal record by removing conviction history information from the initial application. Instead, an individual's past convictions will not be considered until later in the hiring process when the applicant has been identified as a serious candidate for the position. The only exception is for those jobs where state or local laws expressly bar people with convictions from employment. These applicants will still be required to submit conviction history information at the beginning of the hiring process. Unlike the Boston ordinance, San Francisco's policy only applies to public employment, not to private vendors that do business with the City or County of San Francisco.

Resources:
-San Francisco Board of Supervisors Resolution, click here.

Local Contacts:
Dorsey Dunn or Linda Evans
All of Us or None
dorsey@prisonerswithchildren.org
linda@prisonerswithchildren.org
www.allofusornone.org

For more information about city hiring policies that limit discrimination against people with criminal records, or for help developing similar policies for other cities, contact:

Maurice Emsellem
National Employment Law Project
Second Chance Labor Project
(510) 663-5700
emsellem@nelp.org
www.nelp.org

Glenn Martin & Roberta Meyers-Peeples, Co-Directors
National H.I.R.E. Network
(212) 243-1313
gmartin@hirenetwork.org
rampeeples@hirenetwork.org
www.hirenetwork.org

Posted by lois at 08:26 PM | Comments (0)

Prop. 36: Saving money and aiding drug users

The San Diego Union-Tribune
By Jason Ziedenberg and Rose Braz
April 17, 2006

New research on Proposition 36 shows that the initiative is successfully diverting people from prison to treatment – and is saving Californians money.

Enacted by 61 percent of voters in 2000, Proposition 36 allows people convicted of first-and second-time drug possession the opportunity to receive substance abuse treatment instead of incarceration. Since the initiative went into effect in 2001, $120 million has been spent every year to fund treatment for thousands of people who would otherwise be incarcerated for drug possession.

A new report out by UCLA shows California taxpayers are saving nearly $2.50 for every dollar invested in the program. Of people who successfully completed their drug treatment, nearly $4 was saved for each dollar spent. In the first year alone, Proposition 36 saved state and local government $173 million – translating into hundreds of millions of dollars in savings over the last five years.

As was echoed in a second report released last week by the Justice Policy Institute, the key to the savings was that fewer people are in jail or prison due to Proposition 36. The JPI report shows that, five years since the initiative passed, there are 8,700 fewer people in prison for a drug offense. By doubling what the state spent on drug treatment, Proposition 36 is successfully moving drug addiction out of the prison system and into the public health system, where it belongs. All of this has contributed to the state being able to bring the number of people in prison for drug offenses more in line with other large state prison systems.

Sadly, some in Sacramento want to reverse this success: Some are proposing “jail sanctions” be attached to Proposition 36, as a way of putting people with drug problems in jail during their recovery. While the proponents of jail sanctions say this will force people to complete treatment, according to the California Society of Addiction Medicine, there is no evidence that jailing people aids recovery. The UCLA report found, “The benefits of flash incarceration are not yet consistently confirmed in the research literature.” With state prison officials' newfound dedication to what it calls “evidence based research,” it is ironic that they would consider a sanction as severe as “flash incarceration” without evidence to support it.

Most concerning is the serious impact of the growing reliance on imprisonment on individuals, families and communities.

County spending on jails and corrections has grown to $3 billion a year. And swollen jail spending means there is less money for essential county services. San Diego County, for instance, already spends upward of $150 million a year on jails – more than it spends on roads or public health.

Additionally, Harvard and Princeton University researchers have shown that jail and detention significantly reduces future employment, further burdening communities.

Jails also make people sick. According to the National Association of Counties, jail incarceration “traumatizes persons with mental illnesses and makes them worse” – something that seriously impacts people with co-occurring mental health and drug treatment needs. Justice Department researchers have shown that the suicide rate in jail is almost three times the rate in the general population. The National Commission on Correctional Health Care recognized that jails significantly increase contact with infectious diseases. One study found that the infection rate for tuberculosis in jails was 17 times higher than the rate in the community.

Jailing people also affects the larger community, particularly families and children. The California Research Bureau has reported that 97,000 children have parents who are detained in jail. When the related expenses of placing children in foster care is considered, the cost of imprisonment more than doubles. In contrast, thanks to Proposition 36, fewer people were in jail for a drug offenses. Those people are, instead, paying taxes, being parents and contributing to their families and communities.

In a state that has failed to enact proven solutions such as sentencing reform, parole reform, or to join a growing number of states with falling prison populations, Proposition 36 stands out as a rare success in reducing prison populations and saving taxpayer money. Rather than throw that success away by throwing more people in jail, we must increase funding for this initiative and expand it to reach more people. Expanding Proposition 36 will save the state more money, reduce incarceration and give all Californians a chance at full recovery.

Braz is director of Critical Resistance. Ziedenberg is executive director of the Justice Policy Institute. Both organizations work to end society reliance on incarceration as a solution to social problems.

Posted by lois at 08:19 PM | Comments (0)

NY: New Jails proposed for the Bronx and Brooklyn

Old dump eyed for Bronx jail

$375M city plan unveiled

BY FRANK LOMBARDI
DAILY NEWS CITY HALL BUREAU

City officials disclosed yesterday they are negotiating to acquire a vacant industrial site in the South Bronx to build a $375 million detention center.

The proposed location of the new Bronx jail - a former dump in the Oak Point section of heavily industrial Hunts Point - was revealed during a City Council hearing on a plan to upgrade jail facilities at Rikers Island and move thousands of inmates into jails in the Bronx and Brooklyn.

In addition to building the Bronx jail, the plan calls for reopening the shuttered Brooklyn House of Detention after a $240 million expansion.

The Brooklyn facility would likely include residential and retail components, according to testimony before the Fire and Criminal Justice Committee.

John Antonelli, the senior deputy Correction commissioner, fielded a skeptical question on the proposed Bronx jail from Bronx Councilman James Vacca(D).

Antonelli said he didn't know details of the negotiations because they are being handled by the city's Economic Development Corp.

The EDC has been shepherding several major development projects in the Bronx, including the new Yankee Stadium and the more controversial redevelopment of the Bronx Terminal Market into a shopping center. An EDC spokeswoman had no immediate comment.

Details of the plans for the new Bronx jail emerged just months after the city turned over the site of the shuttered Bronx House of Detention to the Related Cos.

That company is headed by Stephen Ross, a friend and former business partner of Deputy Mayor David Doctoroff, who oversees economic development.

Related is developing the Gateway Center on the city-owned site of the Bronx Terminal Market, which, like the shuttered Bronx House of Detention, is near Yankee Stadium.

In exchange for the Bronx House of Detention property, Related gave the city a vacant waterfront portion of its tract that will be turned into a park.

EDC officials had testified the property swap benefited the city more than Related. But critics had called it part of a "sweetheart deal" with Related.

City officials had vehemently denied any favoritism.

"They left out at the time they gave away the Bronx House of Detention that they were also planning to build a $370 million prison in the South Bronx," said Richard Lipsky, a lobbyist who opposed the Related project.

The proposed location of the Bronx jail came as a surprise to Councilwoman Maria del Carmen Arroyo (D-Bronx), who represents the South Bronx.

"I was taken aback," Arroyo said. "We should have been given some of this" information.

Originally published on April 26, 2006

City Plans 2,000-Bed Jail on Landfill Site in the South Bronx

*
E-Mail
* Print
* Reprints
* Save

Article Tools Sponsored By
By WINNIE HU
Published: April 26, 2006

New York City plans to build a 2,000-bed jail on an abandoned garbage dump on the East River in the South Bronx, a site that was rejected by city officials in 1991 amid allegations that its previous owner had ties to organized crime.

The city's Economic Development Corporation is negotiating with the current owner, Oak Point Energy, to acquire the 28-acre tract near the Oak Point railyard. The project would cost $375 million, and ground could be broken as early as 2008, said John Antonelli, senior deputy commissioner for the Department of Correction.

The jail would be the first freestanding one built in the city since 1991, correction officials said. A floating jail barge, which holds 800 beds, was anchored at nearby Hunts Point in 1992. The new jail will be used to house men and women arrested in the Bronx and awaiting trial.

City correction officials are moving to replace some of the aging buildings at the Rikers Island complex that have been ordered closed by a federal court because of poor conditions. The city also plans to spend $240 million to expand a jail in Brooklyn and add retail businesses at that site.

At a hearing yesterday, Mr. Antonelli said the money for the Bronx and the Brooklyn projects would come from the department's capital budget. "Our analysis of the capital and operating costs," he said, "shows that building in the boroughs will be more efficient than building and operating new capacity on Rikers Island."

The land in the Bronx is one of the largest privately owned pieces of undeveloped commercial real estate in the city. In 1988 it was bought by Britestarr Homes Inc., which proposed creating a modular-housing factory that could revitalize the area. Instead, the site was used as a garbage dump and, in 1991, Britestarr was investigated for possible ties to John A. Gotti, son of the reputed Gambino crime family boss.

By May 2002 the company had filed for bankruptcy, leaving the property with more than $60 million in claims against it, including $17 million owed to the state for environmental cleanup costs and fines, and $10 million more in back taxes claimed by the city. Oak Point Energy bought the land later that year.

Several Bronx community groups and environmentalists said yesterday that they opposed the city's plan for a new jail, saying they preferred the land be used for a recycling plant or retail and business development. Oak Point Energy had also proposed building a power plant at the site, but did not follow through.

Elena Conte, a staff member for Sustainable South Bronx, said the community was keenly interested in the development of the site and urged the city to include them in the process. "Deals are being made," she said, "but there's very little transparency and no real opportunity for public participation, and that's a major concern."

Norris McDonald, president of the African American Environmentalist Association, a national group that has an office in the Bronx, said that jails and power plants were not the solution. "I mean, who wants a prison in their neighborhood?" he said. "It isn't smart growth, or sustainable development, and frankly, there are dangerous individuals housed there."

But Mr. Antonelli said a new jail would generate economic revenue for the borough. He said the Oak Point site was reconsidered after the current owner approached the city about selling it. The economic development agency would not provide details about the negotiations.

Mr. Antonelli said that the Correction Department had agreed earlier to give up another jail site for redevelopment as part of the Bronx Terminal Market, and in exchange the department was promised a replacement site.

At the hearing, Councilman James Vacca, who represents the northeast Bronx, urged Mr. Antonelli to listen to the concerns of Bronx residents. "I would anticipate opposition to this," Mr. Vacca said. "But I think that your agency is going to have to come forth with a more detailed plan than what we have today."

Posted by lois at 08:10 PM | Comments (0)

April 26, 2006

Student's Prize Is a Trip Into Immigration Limbo

April 26, 2006
Student's Prize Is a Trip Into Immigration Limbo
By NINA BERNSTEIN
A small, troubled high school in East Harlem seemed an unlikely place to find students for a nationwide robot-building contest, but when a neighborhood after-school program started a team last winter, 19 students signed up. One was Amadou Ly, a senior who had been fending for himself since he was 14.

The project had only one computer and no real work space. Engineering advice came from an elevator mechanic and a machinist's son without a college degree. But in an upset that astonished its sponsors, the rookie team from East Harlem won the regional competition last month, beating rivals from elite schools like Stuyvesant in Manhattan and the Bronx High School of Science for a chance to compete in the national robotics finals in Atlanta that begins tomorrow.

Yet for Amadou, who helps operate the robot the team built, success has come at a price. As the group prepared for the flight to Atlanta today, he was forced to reveal his secret: He is an illegal immigrant from Senegal, with no ID to allow him to board a plane. Left here long ago by his mother, he has no way to attend the college that has accepted him, and only a slim chance to win his two-year court battle against deportation.

In the end, his fate could hinge on immigration legislation now being debated in Congress. Several Senate bills include a pathway for successful high school graduates to earn legal status. But a measure passed by the House of Representatives would make his presence in the United States a felony, and both House and Senate bills would curtail the judicial review that allows exceptions to deportation.

Meanwhile, the team's sponsors scrambled to put him on a train yesterday afternoon for a separate 18-hour journey to join his teammates from Central Park East High School at the Georgia Dome. There, more than 8,500 high school students will participate in the competition, called FIRST (For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology) by its sponsor, a nonprofit organization that aims to make applied sciences as exciting to children as sports.

"I didn't want other people to know," said Amadou, 18, referring to his illegal status. "They're all U.S. citizens but me."

Most team members learned of his problem only yesterday at a meeting with Kristian Breton, 27, the staff member at the East Harlem Tutorial program who started the team, inspired by his own experience in the competition when he was a high school student in rural Mountain Home, Ark.

Alan Hodge, 18, echoed the general dismay. "We can't really celebrate all the way because it's not going to feel whole as a team without Amadou," he said.

Amadou's teammates have struggled with obstacles of their own. When Mr. Breton called a meeting of parents to collect permission slips last week, only five showed up. One boy's mother had a terminal illness, Mr. Breton learned. Another mother lived in the Dominican Republic, leaving an older sibling to manage the household. One of the six girls on the team said her divorced parents disagreed about letting her go, and her mother, who was willing to approve the trip, lacked the $4 subway fare to get to the meeting.

But Amadou's case stands out. As he tells it, with corroboration from immigration records and other documents, he was 13 and spoke no English when his mother brought him to New York from Dakar on Sept. 10, 2001. He was 14 when she went back, leaving him behind in the hope that he could continue his American education.

By then, he had finished ninth grade at Norman Thomas High School in a program for students learning English as a second language. But his mother left instruction for him to take a Greyhound bus to Indianapolis, where a Senegalese woman friend had agreed to take him in and send him to North Central High School there.

"It was the same thing when I was in Africa," he said, describing a childhood spent shuttling between his grandmother and the household of his father, a retired police officer with 12 children and three wives.

The woman in Indiana, who had four children of her own, changed her mind about keeping him after his sophomore year, and he returned by bus to New York in the summer of 2004. "I had to find a way to help myself for food and clothes, and to buy some of my school supplies," he said, recalling days handing out fliers for a clothing store on a Manhattan street corner. "I ended up living with another friend — I'm under age and I can't live alone."

Taking shelter with a taxi driver, a friend of the family who could sign his report cards, Amadou enrolled in 11th grade at Central Park East. Under longstanding Supreme Court decisions, children have a right to a public education regardless of their immigration status, and in New York, as in many other cities, a "don't ask, don't tell" approach to legal status has prevailed for years.

But after the 9/11 attacks, practices around the country changed. On a rainy highway in Pennsylvania on Nov. 7, 2004, Amadou met a very different attitude when he had the bad luck to be a passenger in a car rear-ended by a truck. The state trooper who responded questioned his passport and school ID, and summoned federal immigration officers, who began deportation proceedings.

There is no right to a court-appointed lawyer in immigration court, and though Amadou's friends hired one for him at first, records show that the lawyer soon withdrew. "We really couldn't afford to pay," Amadou explained.

By the time the case was finally sent to a special juvenile docket in federal court after several adjournments, Amadou had already turned 18, closing off some legal options that can lead to a green card for juveniles, said Amy Meselson, a Legal Aid lawyer who took on the case last week.

At this point, she said, his best chance is probably a long shot: a measure included in an amendment to many Senate immigration bills, known as the Dream Act, which offers a path to citizenship to young people of good character who have lived in the United States for five years, been accepted to college, or earned a high school diploma or the equivalent.

Opponents say the measure will encourage illegal immigrants, and subsidize their education at the expense of American children and their taxpaying parents.

But mentors for Amadou's team, which calls itself "East Harlem Tech," seem to have no ear for such arguments.

"He's been a hard-working and diligent student with mathematical ability and a scientific mind," said Rhonda Creed-Harry, a math teacher at Central Park East. But though he has been accepted at the New York City College of Technology in Brooklyn, he said he could not attend because he does not qualify for financial aid.

Ramon Padilla, a team mentor who stopped a year short of a college degree himself and now works in the audio-visual department at Columbia University, called the news that Amadou faced deportation "overwhelming."

"I'm telling you, he's a great kid, a very talented kid," he said, adding that Amadou played an important role in building the robot, with help from Frank Sierra, a buddy of Mr. Padilla who repairs elevators. Starting from a standard set of parts, each team had six weeks to design a robot that could move down a center line and throw balls into a goal. In the last round of the competition, Amadou helped his team form a winning alliance with teams from Morris High School in the Bronx and Staten Island Tech, which both advanced to the finals as well.

Mr. Breton, who made last-minute trips to the Bronx to gather parental permissions, said he was determined not to leave Amadou behind. "I started with 19 people, and I want to take 19 people to Atlanta," he told the student. "I want to make sure that everybody has the full opportunity, because I feel you've earned it."

Amadou returned the compliment. "Because of him, it happened," he said.

Yet on the train to Atlanta, accompanied by another staff member, Amadou was still worried. Bloomberg L.P., which is underwriting the full cost of the team's trip to Atlanta, plans to display its robot at the company's headquarters in New York and invite the team up to celebrate their achievement. He said he was afraid that for lack of the right ID he might be turned away from the building.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

Posted by lois at 08:50 AM | Comments (0)

Jane Jacobs, Social Critic Who Redefined and Championed Cities, Is Dead at 89

April 26, 2006

By DOUGLAS MARTIN
Jane Jacobs, the writer and thinker who brought penetrating eyes and ingenious insight to the sidewalk ballet of her own Greenwich Village street and came up with a book that challenged and changed the way people view cities, died yesterday in Toronto, where she moved in 1968. She was 89.

She died at a Toronto hospital, said a distant cousin, Lucia Jacobs, who gave no specific cause of death.

In her book "The Death and Life of Great American Cities," written in 1961, Ms. Jacobs's enormous achievement was to transcend her own withering critique of 20th-century urban planning and propose radically new principles for rebuilding cities.

At a time when both common and inspired wisdom called for bulldozing slums and opening up city space, Ms. Jacobs's prescription was ever more diversity, density and dynamism — in effect, to crowd people and activities together in a joyous urban jumble.

Her critique of the nation's cities is often grouped with the work of writers who in the 1960's shook the foundations of American society: Paul Goodman's attack on schooling; Michael Harrington's stark portrait of poverty; Ralph Nader's barrage against the auto industry; and Malcolm X's grim tour of America's racial divide, among others. And it continues to influence a third generation of students.

"Death and Life" made four basic recommendations for creating municipal diversity: 1. A street or district must serve several primary functions. 2. Blocks must be short. 3. Buildings must vary in age, condition and use. 4. Population must be dense.

Ms. Jacobs's thesis was enlarged by her deep, eclectic reading. But most compelling was her description of the everyday life she witnessed from her home above a candy store at 555 Hudson Street, near 11th Street.

In that description, she puts out her garbage, children go to school, the dry cleaner and the barber open their shops, women come out to chat, longshoremen visit the local bar, teenagers return from school and change to go out on dates, and another day is played out. Sometimes, odd things happen: a bagpiper shows up on a February night, and delighted listeners gather around. Whether neighbors or strangers, people are safer because they are almost never alone.

"People who know well such animated city streets will know how it is," Ms. Jacobs wrote. "I am afraid people who do not will always have it a little wrong in their heads, like the old prints of rhinoceroses made from travelers' descriptions of rhinoceroses."

Robert Caro, the historian, said in an interview yesterday that Ms. Jacobs was far from the first urban theorist to stress the importance of neighborhood and community. "But no one had ever said it so brilliantly before," he said. "She gave voice to something that needed a voice."

Some critics used adjectives like "triumphant" and "seminal" to describe "Death and Life." Others, not a few of whom with an ax to grind, were less kind. Lewis Mumford, the critic and social historian whom Ms. Jacobs eviscerated in the book, suggested in a review in The New Yorker that she had displayed "aesthetic philistinism with a vengeance."

The battles she ignited are still being fought, and the criticism was perhaps inevitable, given that such an ambitious work was produced by somebody who had not finished college, much less become an established professional in the field.

Indisputably, the book was as radically challenging to conventional thinking as Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring," which helped engender the environmental movement, would be the next year, and Betty Friedan's "The Feminine Mystique," which deeply affected perceptions of relations between the sexes, would be in 1963.

Like those two writers, Ms. Jacobs was able to summon a freshness of perspective. Some dismissed it as amateurism, but to many others it was a point of view that made new ideas not only thinkable but suddenly and eminently reasonable.

"When an entire field is headed in the wrong direction, when the routine application of mainstream thinking has produced disastrous results as I think was true of planning and urban policy in the 1950's, then it probably took someone from outside to point out the obvious," Alan Ehrenhalt wrote in 2001 in Planning, the magazine of the American Planning Association.

"That is what Jane Jacobs did 40 years ago," he said.

Action, Not Just Words

Ms. Jacobs did not limit her impact to words. In 1961, she and other protestors were removed from a City Planning Commission hearing on an urban renewal plan for Greenwich Village that they opposed, after they leapt from their seats and rushed the podium.

In 1968, she was arrested on riot and criminal mischief charges for disrupting a public meeting on the construction of an expressway that would have sliced across Lower Manhattan and displaced hundreds of families and businesses. The police said she had tried to tear up the stenographer's transcript tape.

The battle against that highway pitted Ms. Jacobs in an uphill fight against Robert Moses, the autocratic and immensely powerful master builder of that era. The expressway's opponents won.

Ms. Jacobs moved to Toronto in 1968 out of opposition to the Vietnam War and to shield her two draft-age sons from military duty, and quickly enlisted in Toronto's urban battles. No sooner had she arrived than she led a battle to stop a freeway there.

She became a beloved intellectual pioneer characterized by a dumpling face, an impish smile, sneakers, bangs and owlish glasses. But Roger Starr, a former New York City housing administrator and sometime opponent of Ms. Jacobs, keenly noted the steel just beneath her folksiness.

"What a dear, sweet character she isn't," he said.

After she was removed from the Planning Commission hearing in 1961, her own words underlined her feistiness. "We had been ladies and gentlemen and only got pushed around," she said.

But fighting with government, even being arrested with Susan Sontag and Allen Ginsberg in an antidraft protest, was something she said she had repeatedly been forced into by "outrageous" governmental actions.

What she hated most about those actions was that they took time away from her writing, which she said was her way of thinking. And in at least five fields of inquiry, she thought deeply and innovatively: urban design, urban history, regional economics, the morality of the economy and the nature of economic growth.

Each of her major books led naturally to the next. From writing about how people functioned within cities, she analyzed how cities function within nations, how nations function with one another, how everyone functions in a world of conflicting moral principles and, finally, how economies grow like biological organisms.

A small book in 1980 arguing for Quebec separatism created a stir in Canada, while a 1996 memoir of her great-aunt's experience as a schoolteacher in rural Alaska, which she edited, impressed reviewers with its homespun wisdom.

But it is "Death and Life," published by Random House, that rocked the planning and architectural establishment.

On one level, it represented the first liberal attack on the liberal idea of urban renewal. At the same time, the New York Times critic Brooks Atkinson saw an old-fashioned vision of community that he compared to Thornton Wilder's fictional Grover's Corners. Ms. Jacobs herself thought the book's continuing appeal was that it plumbed the depths of human nature like a good novel.

In 2003, Herbert Muschamp, the Times's chief architecture critic, wrote that Ms. Jacobs's book was "one of 20th-century architecture's most traumatic events," in part because Ms. Jacobs was dismissive about the importance of design.

In recent years, she became an inspiration to architects and planners who espouse what they call the New Urbanism, an effort to promote social interaction by incorporating such Jacobean features as ground-floor stores in suburban developments.

Patrick Pinnell, an architect associated with this school, said "Death and Life" represented almost the last expression of optimism about American cities. As early as 1974, John E. Zuccotti, then chairman of the New York City Planning Commission, called Ms. Jacobs a prophet and himself a "neo-Jacobean" when he announced a smaller-scale, more sensitive urban planning approach. Ms. Jacobs was born Jane Butzner on May 4, 1916, in Scranton, Pa. Her father was a physician and her mother a schoolteacher. She remembered being something of a troublemaker in school, engaging in pranks like exploding inflated paper bags in the lunchroom. She preferred reading books surreptitiously to listening to the teacher.

In an interview in Azure magazine in 1997, Ms. Jacobs recounted her habit of carrying on imaginary conversations with Thomas Jefferson while running errands. When she could think of nothing more to tell Jefferson, she replaced him with Benjamin Franklin.

"Like Jefferson, he was interested in lofty things, but also in nitty-gritty, down-to-earth details," she said, "such as why the alley we were walking through wasn't paved, and who would pave it if it were paved. He was interested in everything, so he was a very satisfying companion."

Years later, she realized that she had developed her talent of working through difficult ideas in simple terms by practicing them on her imaginary Franklin. She also acquired another inner companion through Alfred Duggan, an English historical novelist. He was Cerdic, a Saxon chieftain. Years later, she continued to chat with him while doing housework.

"There were only two things in the entire house that were familiar to him," she wrote; "the fire (although he didn't understand the chimney) and the sword," a Civil War souvenir. "Everything else had to be explained to him."

Not wanting to go to college, she took an unpaid position as assistant to the women's editor at The Scranton Tribune. In 1934, she moved to New York to join her sister, who was six years older and had a job in the home furnishings department of Abraham & Straus, the Brooklyn department store. The sisters lived on the top floor of a six-story walkup in Brooklyn Heights.

Subways Lead to Jobs

Each day, Ms. Jacobs got on the subway and arbitrarily chose a stop at which to get off and look for a job. Because she liked the sound of Christopher Street, she got off there and found an apartment in Greenwich Village and soon after, a job as a secretary in a candy manufacturing company.

She worked as a secretary for five years. The sisters did not have much money and sometimes lived on Pablum and bananas, Ms. Jacobs said in an interview with Metropolis Magazine in 2001.

She began writing articles then, first for a metals-trade paper. She sold a series of articles about different areas of the city, like the fur district, to Vogue, earning $40 for each at a time when she was making $12 a week as a secretary. She wrote Sunday features for The New York Herald Tribune and articles for Q Magazine on manhole covers, among other things.

While working full time, she attended Columbia University's School of General Studies for two years and took courses in geology, zoology, law, political science and economics. In 1944, Ms. Jacobs, who was then working for the Office of War Information, and her two roommates had a party in their apartment. One guest was Robert Hyde Jacobs Jr., an architect who specialized in hospital design. They met in April and married in May.

Ms. Jacobs told Azure that she would not have written any books without her husband's encouragement. It was he who decided that the family should move to Toronto in 1968 after their sons said they would go to jail rather than serve in Vietnam. Mr. Jacobs died in 1996. Ms. Jacobs is survived by her sons, James, of Toronto, and Ned, of Vancouver; her daughter, Burgin Jacobs, of New Denver, British Columbia, and one granddaughter.

Suspicions Aroused

In 1952, Ms. Jacobs got a job as an editor at Architectural Forum, where she stayed for 10 years. That gave her a perch from which to observe urban renewal projects. On a visit to Philadelphia, she noticed that the streets of a project were deserted while an older, nearby street was crowded.

"So, I got very suspicious of this whole thing," she told The Toronto Star in 1997. "I pointed that out to the designer, but it was absolutely uninteresting to him. How things worked didn't interest him.

"He wasn't concerned about its attractiveness to people. His notion was totally aesthetic, divorced from everything else."

Her doubts increased after William Kirk, the director of the Union Settlement in East Harlem, taught her new ways of seeing neighborhoods. She came to see the prevalent planning notions, which involved bulldozing low-rise housing in poor neighborhoods and replacing it with tall apartment buildings surrounded by open space, as a superstition akin to early 19th-century physicians' belief in bloodletting.

"There is a quality even meaner than outright ugliness or disorder," she wrote in "Death and Life," "and this meaner quality is the dishonest mask of pretended order, achieved by ignoring or suppressing the real order that is struggling to exist and to be served."

William H. Whyte, the editor of Fortune magazine and the author of books about urban life as well as his celebrated "Organization Man," asked Ms. Jacobs to write an article for Fortune on urban downtowns in 1958. Her essay, which was reprinted in "The Exploding Metropolis" (Doubleday, 1958), turned out to be a trial run for her book.

"Designing a dream city is easy," she concluded. "Rebuilding a living one takes imagination."

The Fortune article caught the attention of the Rockefeller Foundation, which offered her a grant in 1958 to write about cities. Two grants and three years later, she produced her manuscript for "Death and Life" on the Remington typewriter that she used until her death.

Her seemingly simple prescriptions for neighborhood diversity, short blocks, dense populations and a mix of buildings represented a major rethinking of modern planning. They were coupled with fierce condemnations of the writings of the planners Sir Patrick Geddes and Ebenezer Howard, as well as those of the architect Le Corbusier and Lewis Mumford, who championed the ideal of graceful towers rising over exquisite open spaces. Mr. Mumford held his fire for a year before replying in a New Yorker article, sardonically titled "Home Remedies for Urban Cancer."

"Like a construction gang bulldozing a site clean of all habitations, good or bad," Mr. Mumford wrote, "she bulldozes out of existence every desirable innovation in urban planning during the last century, and every competing idea, without even a pretense of critical evaluation."

Form Over Substance?

Even the architecture critic Paul Goldberger, while expressing profound admiration for Ms. Jacobs in a New York Times article in 1996, suggested that she may have overstated the importance of the physical form of cities.

"Sometimes big, ugly high-rise towers work just fine," he wrote.

Ms. Jacobs next book, "The Economy of Cities" (Random House, 1969), challenged the ideas that cities were established on a rural economic base; rather, she suggested, rural economies have been built directly through city economies. After that came "The Question of Separatism: Quebec and the Struggle for Sovereignty" (Random House, 1980). It argued that Canada and Quebec would be better off without each other, on the general grounds that smaller is better.

She delved more deeply into economics and cities with "Cities and the Wealth of Nations: Principles of Economic Life" (Random House, 1984), in which she contended that national governments undermine the economy of cities, which she saw as the natural engines of economic growth.

Her "Systems of Survival: A Dialogue on the Moral Foundations of Commerce and Politics" (Vintage, 1994) looks at the moral underpinnings of work by examining different value systems. "The Nature of Economies" (Modern Library, 2000) likens economic activity to an ecosystem. Her last book, "Dark Age Ahead" (Random House, 2004), argues that North American culture is collapsing, then suggests ways to reverse the trend.

During her last years, Canadians held conferences to honor Ms. Jacobs. For New Yorkers, she lived on in the famous photo of her with a beer and a cigarette in the White Horse Tavern in Greenwich Village, as well as memories of her plotting municipal mischief at another Village hangout. To generations of planners, architects and students of cities, Ms. Jacobs remains a seminal influence.

She perhaps perceived herself as an intellectual adventurer ready and able to follow her quixotic, often brilliant instincts into ever more fascinating terrain.

In "Systems of Survival," one of her characters worried that he was not qualified.

"Why not us?" replied the man who had invited the group together. "If more qualified people are up to the same thing, more power to them. But we don't know that, do we?"

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

Posted by lois at 08:47 AM | Comments (0)

April 24, 2006

Removing America's Blinders by Howard Zinn

Removing America's Blinders
By Howard Zinn, The Progressive
Posted on April 24, 2006, Printed on April 24, 2006
http://www.alternet.org/story/34984/
Now that most Americans no longer believe in the war, now that they no longer trust Bush and his Administration, now that the evidence of deception has become overwhelming (so overwhelming that even the major media, always late, have begun to register indignation), we might ask: How come so many people were so easily fooled?

The question is important because it might help us understand why Americans -- members of the media as well as the ordinary citizen -- rushed to declare their support as the President was sending troops halfway around the world to Iraq.

A small example of the innocence (or obsequiousness, to be more exact) of the press is the way it reacted to Colin Powell's presentation in February 2003 to the Security Council, a month before the invasion, a speech which may have set a record for the number of falsehoods told in one talk. In it, Powell confidently rattled off his "evidence": satellite photographs, audio records, reports from informants, with precise statistics on how many gallons of this and that existed for chemical warfare. The New York Times was breathless with admiration. The Washington Post editorial was titled "Irrefutable" and declared that after Powell's talk "it is hard to imagine how anyone could doubt that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction."

It seems to me there are two reasons, which go deep into our national culture, and which help explain the vulnerability of the press and of the citizenry to outrageous lies whose consequences bring death to tens of thousands of people. If we can understand those reasons, we can guard ourselves better against being deceived.

One is in the dimension of time, that is, an absence of historical perspective. The other is in the dimension of space, that is, an inability to think outside the boundaries of nationalism. We are penned in by the arrogant idea that this country is the center of the universe, exceptionally virtuous, admirable, superior.

If we don't know history, then we are ready meat for carnivorous politicians and the intellectuals and journalists who supply the carving knives. I am not speaking of the history we learned in school, a history subservient to our political leaders, from the much-admired Founding Fathers to the Presidents of recent years. I mean a history which is honest about the past. If we don't know that history, then any President can stand up to the battery of microphones, declare that we must go to war, and we will have no basis for challenging him. He will say that the nation is in danger, that democracy and liberty are at stake, and that we must therefore send ships and planes to destroy our new enemy, and we will have no reason to disbelieve him.

But if we know some history, if we know how many times Presidents have made similar declarations to the country, and how they turned out to be lies, we will not be fooled. Although some of us may pride ourselves that we were never fooled, we still might accept as our civic duty the responsibility to buttress our fellow citizens against the mendacity of our high officials.

We would remind whoever we can that President Polk lied to the nation about the reason for going to war with Mexico in 1846. It wasn't that Mexico "shed American blood upon the American soil," but that Polk, and the slave-owning aristocracy, coveted half of Mexico.

We would point out that President McKinley lied in 1898 about the reason for invading Cuba, saying we wanted to liberate the Cubans from Spanish control, but the truth is that we really wanted Spain out of Cuba so that the island could be open to United Fruit and other American corporations. He also lied about the reasons for our war in the Philippines, claiming we only wanted to "civilize" the Filipinos, while the real reason was to own a valuable piece of real estate in the far Pacific, even if we had to kill hundreds of thousands of Filipinos to accomplish that.

President Woodrow Wilson -- so often characterized in our history books as an "idealist" -- lied about the reasons for entering the First World War, saying it was a war to "make the world safe for democracy," when it was really a war to make the world safe for the Western imperial powers.

Harry Truman lied when he said the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima because it was "a military target."

Everyone lied about Vietnam -- Kennedy about the extent of our involvement, Johnson about the Gulf of Tonkin, Nixon about the secret bombing of Cambodia, all of them claiming it was to keep South Vietnam free of communism, but really wanting to keep South Vietnam as an American outpost at the edge of the Asian continent.

Reagan lied about the invasion of Grenada, claiming falsely that it was a threat to the United States.

The elder Bush lied about the invasion of Panama, leading to the death of thousands of ordinary citizens in that country.

And he lied again about the reason for attacking Iraq in 1991-- hardly to defend the integrity of Kuwait (can one imagine Bush heartstricken over Iraq's taking of Kuwait?), rather to assert U.S. power in the oil-rich Middle East.

Given the overwhelming record of lies told to justify wars, how could anyone listening to the younger Bush believe him as he laid out the reasons for invading Iraq? Would we not instinctively rebel against the sacrifice of lives for oil?

A careful reading of history might give us another safeguard against being deceived. It would make clear that there has always been, and is today, a profound conflict of interest between the government and the people of the United States. This thought startles most people, because it goes against everything we have been taught.

We have been led to believe that, from the beginning, as our Founding Fathers put it in the Preamble to the Constitution, it was "we the people" who established the new government after the Revolution. When the eminent historian Charles Beard suggested, a hundred years ago, that the Constitution represented not the working people, not the slaves, but the slaveholders, the merchants, the bondholders, he became the object of an indignant editorial in The New York Times.

Our culture demands, in its very language, that we accept a commonality of interest binding all of us to one another. We mustn't talk about classes. Only Marxists do that, although James Madison, "Father of the Constitution," said, 30 years before Marx was born that there was an inevitable conflict in society between those who had property and those who did not.

Our present leaders are not so candid. They bombard us with phrases like "national interest," "national security," and "national defense" as if all of these concepts applied equally to all of us, colored or white, rich or poor, as if General Motors and Halliburton have the same interests as the rest of us, as if George Bush has the same interest as the young man or woman he sends to war.

Surely, in the history of lies told to the population, this is the biggest lie. In the history of secrets, withheld from the American people, this is the biggest secret: that there are classes with different interests in this country. To ignore that -- not to know that the history of our country is a history of slaveowner against slave, landlord against tenant, corporation against worker, rich against poor -- is to render us helpless before all the lesser lies told to us by people in power.

If we as citizens start out with an understanding that these people up there -- the President, the Congress, the Supreme Court, all those institutions pretending to be "checks and balances" -- do not have our interests at heart, we are on a course towards the truth. Not to know that is to make us helpless before determined liars.

The deeply ingrained belief -- no, not from birth but from the educational system and from our culture in general -- that the United States is an especially virtuous nation makes us especially vulnerable to government deception. It starts early, in the first grade, when we are compelled to "pledge allegiance" (before we even know what that means), forced to proclaim that we are a nation with "liberty and justice for all."

And then come the countless ceremonies, whether at the ballpark or elsewhere, where we are expected to stand and bow our heads during the singing of the "Star-Spangled Banner," announcing that we are "the land of the free and the home of the brave." There is also the unofficial national anthem "God Bless America," and you are looked on with suspicion if you ask why we would expect God to single out this one nation -- just five percent of the world's population -- for his or her blessing.

If your starting point for evaluating the world around you is the firm belief that this nation is somehow endowed by Providence with unique qualities that make it morally superior to every other nation on Earth, then you are not likely to question the President when he says we are sending our troops here or there, or bombing this or that, in order to spread our values -- democracy, liberty, and let's not forget free enterprise -- to some God-forsaken (literally) place in the world.

It becomes necessary then, if we are going to protect ourselves and our fellow citizens against policies that will be disastrous not only for other people but for Americans too, that we face some facts that disturb the idea of a uniquely virtuous nation.

These facts are embarrassing, but must be faced if we are to be honest. We must face our long history of ethnic cleansing, in which millions of Indians were driven off their land by means of massacres and forced evacuations. And our long history, still not behind us, of slavery, segregation, and racism. We must face our record of imperial conquest, in the Caribbean and in the Pacific, our shameful wars against small countries a tenth our size: Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Afghanistan, Iraq. And the lingering memory of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It is not a history of which we can be proud.

Our leaders have taken it for granted, and planted that belief in the minds of many people, that we are entitled, because of our moral superiority, to dominate the world. At the end of World War II, Henry Luce, with an arrogance appropriate to the owner of Time, Life, and Fortune, pronounced this "the American century," saying that victory in the war gave the United States the right "to exert upon the world the full impact of our influence, for such purposes as we see fit and by such means as we see fit."

Both the Republican and Democratic parties have embraced this notion. George Bush, in his Inaugural Address on January 20, 2005, said that spreading liberty around the world was "the calling of our time." Years before that, in 1993, President Bill Clinton, speaking at a West Point commencement, declared: "The values you learned here ... will be able to spread throughout this country and throughout the world and give other people the opportunity to live as you have lived, to fulfill your God-given capacities."

What is the idea of our moral superiority based on? Surely not on our behavior toward people in other parts of the world. Is it based on how well people in the United States live? The World Health Organization in 2000 ranked countries in terms of overall health performance, and the United States was thirty-seventh on the list, though it spends more per capita for health care than any other nation. One of five children in this, the richest country in the world, is born in poverty. There are more than 40 countries that have better records on infant mortality. Cuba does better. And there is a sure sign of sickness in society when we lead the world in the number of people in prison -- more than two million.

A more honest estimate of ourselves as a nation would prepare us all for the next barrage of lies that will accompany the next proposal to inflict our power on some other part of the world. It might also inspire us to create a different history for ourselves, by taking our country away from the liars and killers who govern it, and by rejecting nationalist arrogance, so that we can join the rest of the human race in the common cause of peace and justice.

Howard Zinn is the co-author, with Anthony Arnove, of “Voices of a People’s History of the United States.”

© 2006 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/34984

Posted by lois at 09:19 AM | Comments (0)

April 23, 2006

CO: Must Use Alternatives to Save State Budget

For those who don’t know, Cañon City is the prison capitol of Colorado, home to about 7 prisons, and a few miles away from Florence (which is home to the federal correctional complex that includes the federal supermax). A promising editorial, except for the favorable mention of “meth prisons.”
Cañon City Daily Record
Publish Date: 4/22/2006

Must use prison alternatives to save state budget
It doesn’t require an advanced degree to see the problems that law-and-order legislators have created for the state of Colorado.

Without intervention, the state’s cost to operate the prison system will literally eat the lunch of every other state-funded program.

And it is all because elected officials are too timid to tell the public that there are other ways to protect people from crime besides throwing away the key every time someone is convicted of a felony.

The director of Justice Policy Initiatives at the conservative Independence Institute recently wrote a newspaper column about the topic. His numbers speak for themselves.

Meanwhile, county jails are also full all over the state.

Costs to keep people in jail are already stripping money from other important programs in a growing state. With primary and secondary educational funding constitutionally protected, highway funding, for example, becomes a primary target when it comes to balancing the state budget.

Solutions exist, but they will require willingness to break out of the mold that legislators perceive that voters want.

Voters really want safety AND efficient use of taxpayer money. Both are possible to achieve.

As the Independence Institute notes, giving judges more latitude in sentencing is one solution. For example, not all felony offenses are created equal. Some are non-violent, which open themselves to alternative sen-tencing arrangements.

Not all parole violations are equally as bad either. Someone late for a parole appointment is not the same as someone who skips the state. Penalties for those offenses should not be the same.

Drug crimes also present opportunities for a more creative approach to sentencing. Some states are having success with special prisons for criminals hooked on methamphetamine. Keeping them out of standard prisons keeps them away from career criminals and gives them a chance to clean up their habit and avoid future criminal offenses.

Studies also show, as the Institute notes, that spending money on drug treatment instead of incarceration results in large savings to the public and a better result. Also, tightly supervised parole is far less expensive than prison and more effective at keeping people from returning to crime.

Of course, not every alternative works with every law violator, and in those cases prison will still be there.

The key is thinking innovatively and with less emotion when passing laws intended to protect the public.

The public’s pocketbook also needs protecting.

Posted by lois at 11:51 AM | Comments (0)

More Prisons for CA:

Some of you might recall that when Delano II opened last Spring, the head of the CDCR, Rod Hickman, said it was the last prison California would build. Look where that got him. These figures come from the official CDCR population projections, revised every 6 months. The CDCR's methodology was very severely criticized by the State Auditor this year and in Fall 05 CDCR did not release a report.

For the CDCR report, see: http://www.corr.ca.gov/ReportsResearch/OffenderInfoServices/PopulationReports.asp and click Population Projections, Spring 2006.

Packed Prisons Brace for New Crush
Another 23,000 inmates will crowd into state facilities within five years, a forecast says. By Jenifer Warren Times Staff Writer

April 22, 2006

SACRAMENTO - Already bulging with inmates wedged into gyms and hallways, California prisons must make room for 23,000 more felons over the next five years, according to new projections that are forcing managers to explore still more unusual options - even tents - to house bunks.

The forecast, which outlines much steeper growth than numbers released just six months ago, predicts enough new convicts to fill five prisons. California would have more than 193,000 inmates by 2011.

The growth is being driven by increases in new prison admissions and by parolees who either commit new crimes or violate the terms of their release and are re-incarcerated for short stays.

Though a recent report showed a decline in California's recidivism rate, officials said the state's overall population expansion inevitably means more people breaking the law.

The crowding is intensifying during a time of management turmoil. This week, the acting corrections secretary quit - the second top official in two months to leave amid concerns about the guard union's influence over prison management.

On Thursday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger named a temporary replacement who told reporters that crowded conditions were a safety hazard and were among his top concerns.

In January, Schwarzenegger proposed building 83,000 more cells - some in county jails, some in state lockups - with bond sales totaling $13.1 billion. But that idea, part of his sweeping public works plan, stalled in the Legislature, and corrections officials are scrambling to create bed space.

Already, they say, most of the state's 33 prisons are at twice their intended capacity, jammed with about 170,000 people - enough to fill the Rose Bowl more than two times over.

"Legally, we don't have the ability to say there's no room at the inn," said John Dovey, chief of adult institutions for the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. "And every week the population keeps going up."

Last fall, Dovey wrote a memo to the corrections secretary warning of a "population crisis" in the prisons.

"We believe that an imminent and substantial threat to the public safety exists requiring immediate action," he wrote.

Since then, 3,970 more convicts have arrived, and officers who walk the tiers say tensions are alarmingly high.

The cost of housing the growing numbers is also straining the $8.2-billion corrections budget, already taxed by rising medical and mental healthcare costs.

And by forcing wardens to convert classrooms and vocational workshops into living quarters, the crunch is undermining Schwarzenegger's stated goal of rehabilitating - rather than merely incarcerating - California felons, Dovey and other officials acknowledge.

"Some of these places look like prisons I've seen in Alabama, or in Texas during its worst days," said Craig Haney, a professor of psychology at UC Santa Cruz who has studied corrections for more than 20 years and recently visited the men's prison in Chino. "The department is overwhelmed by numbers, and for the inmates that means terrible living conditions, idleness and virtually no meaningful programs to make their transition back to free society a successful one."

Prison officers say the crowding creates conditions ripe for unrest.

At many locations, inmates are stacked in triple-decker bunks crammed into makeshift dorms that resemble refugee camps. Long waits for showers, meals and medical care cause tempers to flare. Overloaded toilets and inescapable noise - from radios, yelling and the constant drone of televisions - add to the strain.

"It's a caldron, and at some point it's just going to boil over," said Chuck Alexander, executive vice president of the California Correctional Peace Officers Assn., the union representing prison guards. "We're at the edge, and this administration and this Legislature need to do something before we lose [control of] a prison."

One way to control population is changing sentencing laws. Other states, Ohio among them, have cut inmate numbers - even closed prisons - by diverting thousands of drug offenders, check forgers and other nonviolent criminals into community correctional facilities.

California lawmakers have shown little interest in that approach. Over the last decade, nearly two dozen bills have been introduced by Democrats - most of them focused on easing the three-strikes law or reducing sentences for inmates who work or attend drug treatment programs. But virtually none of them passed; many legislators are reluctant to support measures viewed as soft on crime.

Like many other states, California has experienced rapid growth in its correctional system in recent decades - a sevenfold increase in the population since the early 1980s. Still, two years ago, corrections leaders predicted a decline in the numbers and the possible closure of three prisons.

At that time, early in the Schwarzenegger administration, officials said their new approach to parole - diverting some violators into community programs or electronic monitoring at home instead of sending them back to prison - would dramatically thin the population.

But after criticism from the guards union and victims groups, the department halted the diversions. A judge ordered the programs reinstated, but so far they serve only a tiny fraction of the state's 115,000 parolees.

Meanwhile, parole violators continue to account for a huge chunk of those behind bars. In 2005, there were 62,000 such violators sent to prison - almost half the total number admitted that year.

To cope with the population bulge, managers are housing a growing proportion of inmates in "ugly beds," or spaces not designed as living quarters. Throughout the system, there are more than 14,500 convicts in ugly beds. Officials say they can fit 7,500 more before such space is exhausted, probably sometime next year.

In the interim, the governor has proposed shifting 8,500 inmates into community correctional facilities - privately run centers for low-risk offenders that were being phased out under the Davis administration. And Dovey hopes to "fast track" the building of housing units at existing prisons.

As a last resort, officials are exploring the possibility of modular buildings - and giant tents. If tents were added to the mix, it would not be the first time. In 1983, more than 900 inmates were housed in a tent city just outside the walls of San Quentin State Prison until a lawsuit shut it down. The reason: overcrowding.

"It was horrible - hot in the summer, cold in the winter, and mud everywhere," UC Santa Cruz professor Haney recalled. "If they are considering tents again, that's shocking."

Legal scholars say inmates have little hope of challenging the crowded conditions in court.

Though overpopulation may create discomfort and even danger behind bars, the U.S. Supreme Court has found it unconstitutional only if it inflicts wanton pain or if basic human needs are not met.

Copyright 2006 Los Angeles Times

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-prison22apr22,1,4009221.story?coll=la-headlines-california

Posted by lois at 11:48 AM | Comments (0)

Immigrant Workers Find Support in a Growing Network of Assistance Centers

April 23, 2006
By STEVEN GREENHOUSE, NY Times
When Mulugeta Yimer, a taxi driver from Ethiopia, thought his employer was cheating him several years ago, he did not complain to the government; he went instead to a worker center called Tenants and Workers United.

The center helped Mr. Yimer and other drivers in Alexandria, Va., win the right to keep more of their fares. Not only that, it has helped child care workers win a 70 percent raise and day laborers win back pay for minimum-wage violations.

Tenants and Workers United is one of a fast-growing number of centers that are helping the nation's 20 million immigrant workers. In many ways, these centers are doing what labor unions, fraternal organizations and settlement houses did decades ago for newcomers to the United States.

"We are all from different countries and our English is broken and nobody understands us," said Mr. Yimer, who has driven a taxi for eight years. "But the workers center was willing to listen to us. They provide us expertise. They provide us a lawyer. They support us."

There are more than 140 worker centers nationwide, up from roughly 25 a decade ago. The centers played a pivotal role in getting tens of thousands of workers to the giant demonstrations seeking a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants and protesting a House bill that would turn illegal immigrants into felons.

Some of these centers focus on a particular nationality, like Korean Immigrant Worker Advocates in Los Angeles and the Chinese Staff and Workers Association in Manhattan, while some focus on an industry, like the Mississippi Poultry Workers' Center and the New York Taxi Workers Alliance.

Many illegal immigrants — day laborers, gardeners, laundry workers, restaurant deliverymen — have asked these centers for help on wage problems because the nation's legal services offices are barred from representing them. Moreover, the centers often fill the role once held by labor unions, which represent less than 6 percent of low-wage workers.

"You have a vacuum created by the decline of organized labor," said John Liss, executive director of Tenants and Workers United. "What we're seeing is a new immigrant working class creating their own voice."

The centers teach immigrants English and how to file wage complaints. They have persuaded communities to build shelters for day laborers, who often stand in the rain and cold without bathroom facilities. They have helped push for higher minimum wages in several states, and some centers have won more than $1 million in back pay for immigrants who were cheated.

"These centers have taken off because we're seeing an increase in the number of workers in precarious employment situations," said Janice Fine, a professor of labor relations at Rutgers and author of "Worker Centers: Organizing Communities at the Edge of the Dream" (2006).

"Over the past decade we've seen the biggest influx of immigrants in our nation's history and at the same time a decline in resources for wage and hour enforcement at the state and federal level," Professor Fine said. "These centers have become a safety net that's tried to enforce the laws."

Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that supports stricter immigration controls, voiced ambivalence about these centers.

"The bad part is these groups become lobbies for illegal aliens," Mr. Krikorian said. "On the other hand, they help people stiffed out of their wages. That can serve a purpose because it raises the price of hiring illegal aliens, and the more it costs to hire illegal aliens, the more employers might turn to legal workers."

Many centers survive hand to mouth, relying on foundation money, government grants, grass-roots fund-raising and, to a small degree, dues. The Chicago Interfaith Worker Rights Center charges its 150 members $5 each to join.

"These centers have gotten smarter over the years," said Jennifer Gordon, founder of the Workplace Project in Hempstead, N.Y., one of the first worker centers. "They are turning victories that would have just been a back-pay award into something more."

After accusing a chain of sneaker stores of wage violations, Make the Road by Walking, based in Brooklyn, helped the chain's 95 workers unionize. The Coalition of Immokalee Workers, a Florida-based group of farmworkers, pressed Taco Bell into making its tomato growers pay their workers more, and has begun a similar campaign against McDonald's. The Restaurant Opportunities Center pressed two fashionable Manhattan restaurants, Cité and the Park Avenue Cafe, to pay $164,000 in back wages and give workers three days of sick pay and one week of vacation each year.

At Tenants and Workers United, Sylvia Portillo, the group's health coordinator, assists immigrants who ran up large medical bills when they went to emergency rooms with broken bones or severe illnesses. Ms. Portillo, a nurse who left El Salvador in the 1980's, has persuaded several charities and hospitals to reduce immigrants' bills.

Each year, she oversees a health fair that attracts several hundred immigrants who receive free tests for blood pressure, H.I.V. and diabetes. Similarly, the Taxi Workers Alliance provides free medical tests to drivers as they wait in line at Kennedy Airport.

"Five years ago everyone went to the emergency room for everything," Ms. Portillo said. "Now we educate the people. We tell them the emergency room is only for emergencies, maybe a broken leg."

Tenants and Workers United has helped persuade the Alexandria City Council to give Mr. Yimer and other drivers the right to change taxi companies. The group also persuaded the City of Alexandria to raise wages for several hundred child care workers, and it has tracked down employers when immigrants were not paid the promised amount or when their paychecks bounced.

"Often all it takes is a phone call to employers to get back pay," Professor Fine said. "Because there is so little government enforcement in low-wage industries, many employers are counting on nobody to be there to stop them."

Leaders of many worker centers say they doubt they will ever achieve sweeping legislative or economic change because their finances are so weak and because so many of their members are illegal immigrants who are scared to speak up.

"It's a mistake to think of the workers center movement as being a replacement for organized labor," said Bill Beardall, a co-founder of the Central Texas Immigrant Worker Rights Center in Austin, Tex., which began as a legal services office that helped farmworkers.

Professor Fine's research found that ethnic organizations established one-fourth of the centers, while churches and religion-based organizations founded another fourth.

The Chicago Interfaith Worker Rights Center recently helped a Chinese worker who said he had been held in virtual slavery by a Michigan restaurant, and a Mexican roofer who said his employer left him for dead in a Dumpster after he fell.

The center has printed brochures in Spanish, Russian and Polish that tell workers their rights. It also gives leadership classes.

"We try to get workers to think more systematically," said Jose Oliva, the center's executive director. "That means creating some workers' organizations that have power and can negotiate some changes."

The four worker centers in Chicago helped push through a state law that requires agencies that use day laborers to register and pay workers' compensation and unemployment insurance taxes. The centers also advised a state commission that examined the higher fatality rate for Hispanic workers.

"These centers have brought some serious labor violations to the attention of the Department of Labor," said Esther Lopez, deputy chief of staff to Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich of Illinois. "Without their help, some of these workers would not come forward."

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

Posted by lois at 11:45 AM | Comments (0)

April 21, 2006

CORI Rally in Boston and how much punishment is enough

Controversy on criminal records intensifies
By Maria Cramer and Megan Tench, Globe Staff | April 21, 2006
Boston Globe
Hundreds of people rallied on Boston Common yesterday calling for reforms of criminal background checks, as organizers of the event were criticized for one of the public faces of their cause -- a man who was an accomplice in a robbery 43 years ago that led to the shooting death of a city police officer.

Bobby Dellelo, now 64, was charged with first-degree murder after his partner in a 1963 jewelry store heist shot and killed Detective George Holmes on Washington Street in Downtown Crossing. The shooter, Nicholas Yasaian, killed himself days after the assault. Dellelo served 40 years before being released from MCI-Cedar Junction in Walpole in November 2003.

Robert Kenney, president of the Boston Police Detectives Benevolent Society, said yesterday that Dellelo is in no position to advocate for reform.

''I think it's a little disgusting," he said in a telephone interview. ''I think it's shocking we're supposed to feel sorry for a guy who killed a police officer. . . . There is no reason for him to be walking the streets."

Yesterday, Dellelo was among the overhaul advocates that included other former offenders as well as politicians such as Councilor Chuck Turner, Councilor at Large Sam Yoon, state Representative Gloria Fox, and US Representative Major Owens of New York.

Rally organizers saw Dellelo, a Revere man struggling to find work, as an ideal representative for their movement, and offered his story as an example of why the Criminal Offender Record Information system should be overhauled. CORI reform advocates contend that some information on criminal backgrounds should be shielded to prevent discrimination against former offenders.

''Think about all the wrong and shameful things you've done over the course of 40 years," said Jackie Lageson of the Massachusetts Alliance to Reform CORI. ''Now imagine that every time you go for a job, you have to disclose it to everyone no matter how ashamed and sorry you feel.

''The reality is that Bobby isn't the only murderer who is out on the streets trying to make a living," Lageson said. ''You tell me, what do we do with them? Deny them access to jobs?"

The clash underscored the tension in the debate to overhaul the CORI system, which was originally established in 1972 to allow law enforcement officials to check criminal records. The system restricted the public's access to the records, but over the years, the limits were relaxed. Now, employers, landlords, and media can see them, and critics contend that such access has kept many former convicts from making a fresh start.

Opponents of changing CORI, such as the Massachusetts District Attorneys Association, however, argue that employers have the right to know applicants' backgrounds to determine whether a potential worker poses a threat.

Someone like Dellelo, who escaped from prison three times, should not get a clean slate, said Robert Faherty, retired superintendent of the Boston Police Department. He knew Holmes when they were patrolmen in Roxbury.

Dellelo ''wants a second chance? Georgie never got a second chance," Faherty said in a telephone interview. ''He never got a chance to be with his wife and kids one more day."

During the rally, Dellelo, who wants to become a paralegal, pointed toward Washington Street, where the crime took place, and defended himself.

''My partner, he committed suicide," Dellelo said. ''So there was me. . . . No one can ignore that a cop got killed, and yes, I was involved in the robbery. I'm stuck with that for the rest of my life."

At about noon on Nov. 6, 1963, Dellelo and his partner, Yasaian, tried to rob A. Koppelman and Sons jewelry store on Washington Street, according to court transcripts and newspaper accounts. Carrying loaded guns, their faces covered with nylon stockings, the men charged into the store and told about 15 people, including a young child, to stay put. Someone tripped the alarm, forcing the men to flee. They split up and went in opposite directions. Dellelo ran toward Winter Street, pointing his gun at the crowd to force them out of the way, and pushed his way into a cab, where police caught up with him.

Yasaian ran the other way and straight into Holmes, who was off-duty and dressed in plainclothes. The detective, a 41-year-old father of four, told the thief to stop. Yasaian drew his gun and shot him three times. Then he disappeared into the crowded street. Three days later he killed himself in a Somerville railroad yard.

Yasaian may have been the triggerman, but Dellelo is just as culpable, Faherty said.

''They both went into the jewelry store to cause violence," he said. ''Whether it wasn't his gun doesn't matter. . . . He was part and parcel of it."

Dellelo was released from prison in November 2003, he said, after he was granted a new trial and he pleaded guilty to manslaughter.

Carol Carpenter, 64, Holmes's cousin, said she cannot fault Dellelo for wanting a new start. Other family members could not be reached yesterday.

Carpenter recalled her cousin's funeral at St. Patrick's Church, where Cardinal Richard J. Cushing said Mass. Hundreds of uniformed police officers followed the casket from the funeral home to the church. ''I can remember it like it was yesterday," she said. ''It appeared that the entire Boston Police Department was there."

Since those painful days, she has thought of the men responsible for Holmes's death and has found it difficult to be bitter.

''Do we want to be judged for what we did at 21 even if it was a horrible thing?" she asked. ''It was just a bank robbery gone bad. Forty years have gone by. [Dellelo's] lost his youth."

Maria Cramer can be reached at mcramer@globe.com.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/04/21/controversy_on_criminal_records_intensifies?mode=PF
© Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

Posted by lois at 09:50 AM | Comments (0)

Western MA: More funds sought for more cells for women

More funds sought for new jail
Friday, April 21, 2006
By ETTA WALSH
ewalsh@repub.com

CHICOPEE - The Hampden County Sheriff's Department wants an additional $6 million for its new regional women's jail, saying that without the extra money, the jail will be at near capacity when it opens.

The $26.1 million jail, under construction on a 20-acre site at 701 Center St., is designed to hold 240 female prisoners from Hampden, Hampshire, Berkshire and Franklin counties who are sentenced to terms of 2½ years or less. It is scheduled to open in spring 2007.

Originally, Hampden County Sheriff Michael J. Ashe Jr. wanted to build a 352-inmate jail when the project was proposed in 1996. But delays brought the cost of the project up, so the facility's capacity was decreased.

Now, corrections officials are asking state legislators and the state Department of Administration and Finance for extra money to add another 56 cells to the project - bringing it back to the originally proposed 352-inmate capacity. That would be a 47 percent increase in capacity over the existing construction plan.

Lawrence J. Lajoie, assistant deputy superintendent for the Hampden County Sheriff's Department, said yesterday that his department desperately needs to build an extra 56-cell wing to accommodate the burgeoning population of female inmates in surrounding counties.

"We will be overcrowded on opening day, without that (extra) wing," he said.

The Stony Brook jail in Ludlow currently houses 195 female inmates from Hampden, Hampshire and Franklin counties, with another 30 held in Berkshire County, Lajoie said.

Female inmates at the Ludlow jail are outnumbered 11 to 1 by male prisoners, according to Lajoie, and there is no room there for rehabilitation programs for them.

Ashe has said the new jail would offer female inmates comprehensive services, including substance-abuse treatment, job and educational training and "re-entry" preparation.

The Ludlow jail currently is 171 percent above capacity, Lajoie said, with 1,635 male prisoners in a medium-security facility designed to hold 962.

"As soon as the women leave Ludlow, those cells will be filled with males," he said. Since Feb. 18, 2005, he said, the Ludlow inmate population has experienced a "dramatic" 19.4 percent increase - 348 prisoners.

The extra prisoners require the jail to add 20 overtime correctional officer positions to the payroll, Lajoie said.

Area state legislators "have been dynamite" in supporting the request for the extra $6 million, Ashe said, including state Sens. Stephen J. Buoniconti, D-Springfield, and Michael R. Knapik, R-Westfield, and Reps. James R. Welch, D-West Springfield, Thomas M. Petrolati, D-Ludlow, and Joseph F. Wagner, D-Chicopee.

Wagner said yesterday that he has filed an amendment to the state's proposed 2007 budget asking to raise the state's borrowing limit by $6 million for the jail project. The current debt ceiling for prison and jail projects is already "maxed out," he said.

Even if the Legislature raises the debt ceiling, the state Department of Administration and Finance would have final say on whether the jail project would get money, Wagner said.

Lajoie said officials from the state agency have assured him "they would look favorably" on efforts to bring the women's jail project back to its original 352-inmate capacity.

"It makes sense to do it right the first time," he said.

"We feel it's been part of our permanent plans, right from the beginning," Ashe said. "This is something that is greatly important for us."

©2006 The Republican

© 2006 MassLive.com All Rights Reserved.

Posted by lois at 09:33 AM | Comments (0)

April 20, 2006

Ellen Kuzwayo; writer fought apartheid

By Alexandra Zavis, Associated Press | April 20, 2006
Boston Globe

JOHANNESBURG -- Ellen Kuzwayo, an author and women's rights and antiapartheid champion, died yesterday after a long illness, her family said. She was 91.

Ms. Kuzwayo was admitted three weeks ago to Soweto's Lesedi Private Clinic, experiencing complications associated with chronic diabetes, her son Bobo told the South African Press Association.

Ms. Kuzwayo was the first black writer to win South Africa's premier CNA Literary Prize for her 1985 autobiography, ''Call Me Woman," a book that made her a spokeswoman for the suffering and triumphs of black women under apartheid.

''My motivation for writing the book was born out of the negative image about black women in South Africa, promoted by the general community of white people of this country, in particular the women . . . who employed African work as domestic workers," Ms. Kuzwayo said.

In 1996, she published a collection of short stories, ''Sit Down and Listen: Stories From South Africa." She also collaborated on films.

Born in rural Free State, Ms. Kuzwayo inherited her family's farm, only to lose it when the area was declared for whites only.

Trained as a teacher and social worker, she moved to the sprawling Johannesburg township of Soweto, where she became an active opponent of the white-minority regime after police gunned down students in 1976 protests against the introduction of Afrikaans as the language of instruction in black schools. Arrested for her political activities, she spent five months in detention in 1977.

Ms. Kuzwayo was elected to Parliament in South Africa's first all-race elections in 1994, serving five years. She was also active in projects to educate women and improve living conditions in Soweto, becoming an institution in the township, where her advice was sought by schools, church groups, welfare agencies, and others.

Ms. Kuzwayo leaves two sons, six grandchildren, and three great-grandchildren.

Posted by lois at 05:17 PM | Comments (0)

April 19, 2006

NY Times: Study Fuels a Growing Debate Over Police Lineups

April 19, 2006

By KATE ZERNIKE
The police lineup is a time-honored staple of crime solving, not to mention of countless cop movies and television shows like "Law and Order." Each year, experts estimate, 77,000 people nationwide are put on trial because witnesses picked them out of one.

In recent years many states and cities have moved to overhaul lineups, as DNA evidence has exposed nearly 200 wrongful convictions, three-quarters of them resulting primarily from bad eyewitness identification.

In the new method, the police show witnesses one person at a time, instead of several at once, and the lineup is overseen by someone not connected to the case, to avoid anything that could steer the witness to the suspect the police believe is guilty.

But now, the long-awaited results of an experiment in Illinois have raised serious questions about the changes. The study, the first to do a real-life comparison of the old and new methods, found that the new lineups made witnesses less likely to choose anyone. When they did pick a suspect, they were more likely to choose an innocent person.

Witnesses in traditional lineups, by contrast, were more likely to identify a suspect and less likely to choose a face put in the lineup as filler.

Advocates of the new method said the Illinois study, conducted by the Chicago Police Department, was flawed, because officers supervised the traditional lineups and could have swayed witnesses.

But the results have empowered many critics who had worried that states and cities were caving in to advocacy groups in adopting the new lineups without solid evidence that they improved on the old ones.

"There are people who'd say it's better to let 10 guilty persons free to protect against one innocent person being wrongfully convicted," said Roy S. Malpass, a professor at the University of Texas at El Paso and an analyst for the Illinois study, who served on a research group on eyewitness identification for the National Institute of Justice in 1999.

"I'm fine with that when we're dealing with juvenile shoplifters," Dr. Malpass said. "I'm not fine with that for terrorists. We haven't figured out the risk there."

The new lineups lack some of the drama of the old. In some places, witnesses view lineups on laptop computers to make them completely "blind" to influence from someone administering the process.

Psychologists who favor these so-called sequential double-blind lineups say that showing witnesses people one at a time makes lineups more difficult for the witness, and therefore better. Witnesses have to compare the person in front of them against their memory of the crime, rather than simply against the other faces in the lineup.

"It turns a lineup into a much more objective, science-based procedure," said Gary L. Wells, a professor of psychology at Iowa State University and a prominent proponent of blind sequential lineups. "The double-blind is a staple of science; it makes as much sense to do it in a lineup as it does in an experiment or drug trial."

In classroom studies by Dr. Wells and others, the sequential method was found to reduce the number of times witnesses chose an innocent person, without reducing the number of times they chose the right one.

The movement to change lineups took off in the 1990's after a growing number of DNA exonerations. New Jersey was the first state to adopt the sequential method, in 2001. The Wisconsin Legislature recently recommended the same approach, as did commissions in North Carolina, Virginia and, last week, California. Boston and Hennepin County, which includes Minneapolis, use sequential lineups, and Washington, D.C., is studying them in one district.

Still, lineup methods remain an open debate: law enforcement officials in California and New York have resisted changes, arguing that the evidence in favor of the sequential approach is not firm.

A guide for prosecutors produced in 1999 by the National Institute of Justice study group said "there is not a consensus" and declined to recommend sequential lineups as a "preferred" method.

But before the Illinois study, released last month, no one had compared the two methods in the field.

The experiment was part of an overhaul package recommended in 2002 by the Governor's Commission on Capital Punishment, set up by former Gov. George Ryan of Illinois after DNA evidence exonerated several death row inmates. It tested the two methods for a year in three dissimilar cities; half the lineups were conducted sequentially and half were done simultaneously.

"Surprisingly," the study said, the sequential lineups proved less reliable than the simultaneous ones.

Out of 700 lineups, witnesses in those using the simultaneous method chose the correct suspect 60 percent of the time, compared with 45 percent of the time for the sequential lineups. Witnesses in the sequential lineups were more likely to pick the wrong person — someone brought in as filler — choosing incorrectly 9 percent of the time, versus just 3 percent in the simultaneous lineups.

And witnesses declined to make a pick in 47 percent of the sequential lineups, compared with 38 percent of the simultaneous ones. (Percentages were rounded.)

"If you are going to take officers outside their comfort zone, you have to be able to sell them on the reasons you are doing it," said Sheri Mecklenburg, general counsel to the superintendent of the Chicago Police Department and director of the experiment. "Based on this study, I think we'd have a difficult time having them believe this is a way to get more reliable eyewitness identifications."

Prosecutors elsewhere say the results make them less inclined to move to sequential lineups.

"This is very powerful because it's real," said Patricia Bailey, an assistant district attorney in Manhattan who has considered lineup changes for New York City. "This isn't a classroom study where people are watching a 30-second video of a crime that happened to someone else."

Paul A. Logli, president of the National District Attorneys Association, said that his group would discuss lineups at its convention this fall, but that many prosecutors were doubters.

"I think many prosecutors think doing it sequentially runs contrary to human nature," Mr. Logli said. "Human nature tells me that having the ability to compare is more helpful than destructive. Doing it sequentially is almost like this is a trick question."

Dr. Wells of Iowa State said the Illinois study had not validly compared the two lineup methods because simultaneous lineups had not been done "blind."

But Dr. Malpass of the University of Texas and Ms. Mecklenberg said the point was to study the new method against the status quo.

The new study will be the focus of a conference Friday at the Loyola University Chicago School of Law. Thomas P. Sullivan, a former United States attorney in Chicago and the co-chairman of the governor's commission that recommended the study, said that already, the results had "changed the debate."

"It has put a cloud over the sequential system," Mr. Sullivan said. "I think it will retard the system throughout the country until this gets sorted out."

But others say changes to lineups should focus on other elements that studies have shown produce more reliable picks: reducing pressure on witnesses by advising them that they do not have to pick someone; making sure that "fillers" strongly resemble the suspect; and recording what the witness says upon choosing a suspect, so juries can hear how certain they were about a pick.

"I don't understand why the rest of these reforms shouldn't be adopted immediately," said Barry C. Scheck, a co-director of the Innocence Project, a legal clinic that uses DNA evidence to try to overturn wrongful convictions. "The controversy over sequential blind has obscured the fact that all the other reforms are not in dispute."

Ms. Mecklenburg, in Chicago, said, "There are no sides in this debate."

"We all want the same thing," she said. "Whether you are a prosecutor or police or defense counsel, we all want reliable eyewitness identifications."

Posted by lois at 08:42 AM | Comments (0)

April 18, 2006

MA: Gov. Romney's $460 million DOC proposed 07 budget

http://budget.mass.gov/budget/2007budrec/dept/hdoc.htm
This is from:
Vol III Issue 3 April 2006. Criminal Justice Policy Coaltion
563 Massachusetts Ave., Boston, MA 02118 www.cjpc.org / email:admin@cjpc.org

Gov. Romney’s $460 Million DOC Budget Proposal: Line by Line
By Angela Antoniewicz

Below is an analysis of Governor Romney’s proposed FY07 budget for the Department of Corrections. Each section begins with a description of the account to which each portion of Romney’s proposed budget would be allocated, and each request is analyzed with respect to the recommendations of the Advisory Council. Tables detailing, when available, the budget history and breakdown of expenses for each account, from FY01 through the proposed FY07.

Account: Operations
Lines: 8900-0001

The Operations account funds administrative and staff salaries and benefits, facility operations and maintenance, utilities, medical treatment, educational programming, and contract services such as psychological counseling for certain prisoners, social services, and other pre-release and re-entry programming. These funds also are used to administer the parole board and sex offender registry board.
The budget has increased at a fairly steady rate – between 2.8% and 3.8% from FY01-FY04 – with a slow-down the last three fiscal years. The FY07 request of $451,497,512 represents a 4.5% increase from the FY06 budget. The FY07 request represents a 4.5% increase over FY06. In FY06 Governor Romney recommended $435,882,293 for this line item, but it was reduced by $4,915,968 by the end of the budget process.

The 4.5% increase Governor Romney has requested most likely reflects, in large part, rising medical and fuel costs. Inmate Health Services were the largest single line item in the FY02 Operations budget, accounting for more than 16% of the Operations total. Though more recent figures have not been made available, developments suggest that healthcare will continue to consume a significant portion of the Operations budget. The combination of inmates with long sentences getting older and older offenders entering prison has resulted in increasing medical costs. As of January 1, 2005 (the most recent statistics available), the average age of the prison population was 37.6 years and the median age 36.0 years, with a range from 17 to 89. On January 1, 2000, in contrast, the mean age was 35.6 years and the median 34.0, with a range of 16 to 84. Additionally, the percentage of those aged 40 and older at commitment for present offense has increased from 15% in 1995 to 24% in 2004, and older inmates are more likely to receive longer sentences due to the likelihood of having committed more offenses in their lifetimes. 1

In addition to being older, offenders are increasingly entering prison with mental health problems, substance abuse problems, or both. “The total managed care contract for fiscal year 2005 [was] in excess of $56 million, which account[ed] for approximately 15% of DOC’s total budget, [making the DOC] one of the state’s largest institutional providers of mental health, health care, psychiatric, substance abuse, and long-term care services.” 2

Problems such as these are also affected by staffing patterns and the unavailability of treatment facilities and equipment. For example, “at Lemuel Shattuck, the principal hospital utilized by the DOC, there is no protective custody and an insufficient number of secure beds.” 3 Inmates with health care problems requiring treatment on a daily basis are also unable “to be classified to lower security facilities” due to the lack of appropriate staff, treatment facilities, and equipment. 4 The Advisory Council recommended the hiring of a consultant to evaluate staffing patterns, the training of correction officers in mental health and substance abuse issues, the modernization of medical equipment, and the relocation of health services.

In November 2005, the DOC requested an additional $12.8 million for Operations expenses to accommodate increasing fuel and medical costs and a 4% increase in the inmate population. Without this increase in funding, they said, more than 300 correction employees could be laid off January 1, 2006. Currently there are approximately 5,400 full-time and contractual employees supported by the almost $431 million Operations budget. Union officials and at least one lawmaker have blamed poor management, rather than rising costs or a growing inmate population, for the budget shortfall. Senator Barrios (D-Cambridge) pointed to this request for additional funds as “a Band-Aid solution” that “ultimately . . . documents the failure in criminal justice leadership.” 5

The architectural design of many of the antiquated prisons plays a role in making the 1:2 officer-to-inmate ratio in Massachusetts the third highest in the country.6 Officers cannot be spared: in November 2005, Steve Kenneway, president of the Massachusetts Correction Officers Federated Union, claimed there were 650 vacancies for his bargaining unit (nearly 80% of state correction officers). Laying off officers would only increase the amount of overtime used, since a minimum number of officers is needed to maintain a secure facility and to oversee inmate programs. Some grant programs, including inmate re-entry programs, have been modified because there were not enough officers to supervise participants As a result of this situation, Governor Romney recommended a $20,531,187 increase from the FY06 final allocation, which is unlikely to find support in the legislature, if last year’s results are any indication.

There are many recommendations of the Advisory Council, such as training correction officers to recognize and deal with inmates’ mental health issues, that would fall under the Operations line item. However, considering that money is allotted to the Operations line item as a lump sum and that there is a general lack of transparency in DOC operations, it is difficult to say whether a boost in funding would go towards supporting these Advisory Council recommendations.

Accounts: Prison Industries & Other
Lines: 8900-0010, 8900-0011, 8900-0015

Since FY03, this account has been broken down into the Prison Industries and Prison Industry Retained Revenue accounts. The Prison Industries account provides for a modicum of prison training programs and farming services, covering certain salaries, equipment, and materials. Funds in the Prison Industries Retained Revenue account come exclusively from the sale of products made by the prisoners. Spending from the revenue pool is limited to $2,600,000, and is restricted to additional equipment, materials, maintenance of facilities, and prisoner employee compensation. These additional items are provided only as such revenue is generated.

After a 27.4% decrease from FY01-04 for the Prison Industries program and a 22.8% decrease from FY01-03 for the Prison Industry Retained Revenue, the account amounts have remained steady. The Governor’s proposal would allot the same amounts as last year to each: $2,783,521 and $2,600,000, respectively.

Increasing the Prison Industries programs line item would be beneficial to re-entry, since it would give more inmates the opportunity to participate in training programs, something the DOC Advisory Council advocated. This would require changes in law, though. More than three-quarters of inmates are restricted by law from participating in programs such as the Prison Industries programs. Since revenue is earned from the Prison Industries programs, presumably in a somewhat parallel manner, a reduction in the Prison Industry budget could not be completely justified. Of course, if the Operations budget were reduced, without other reforms being made, and officers were laid off, fewer would be available to supervise inmates participating in the Prison Industry programs. The emphasis on re-entry that the Advisory Council recommends requires that programs like these be available.

ACCOUNTS: REIMBURSEMENT FOR FEDERAL INMATES & PRISON INDUSTRY CHARGEBACK
LINES: 8900-0045, 8900-0021

The Reimbursement for Federal Inmates account holds funds that the DOC is allowed to spend up to $3,000,000 for the care of federal inmates. This amount is a portion of the total amount billed to the federal government for federal inmates. Included is language requiring the first $900,000 received from the federal government be retained by the state for the General Fund.

ACCOUNT: FEDERAL GRANTS
LINE: 8900-0027, 8900-0029, 8903-6202, 8903-9709

In FY05-06, the DOC received several Federal Grants under Section 2D to fund specific programs. In the proposed FY07 budget, these funds would be designated for “the purposes of a federally funded grant entitled, Incarcerated Youth Workplace and Community Transition.” At the time of publication, how these grant monies are used to supplement existing programs is unknown, but the $110,000 allocated by the Governor’s proposal represents a sharp decline from the last several years’ budgets for this account.

ACCOUNTS: INMATE PROGRAM FUND
LINE: 8900-9000

The Advisory Council recommended the budget better reflect the DOC’s priorities, of which re-entry should be the primary focus. However, Governor Romney recommended the Inmate Program Fund be reduced by 45%. In the final FY 06 budget, $550,000 was allocated to this account; the Governor's proposed FY 07 budget asks only for $300,0000. As stated above, due to some inmate programs (e.g., Educational Services, 8900-0009) being included in the Operations line item with no breakdown, it is impossible to tell whether the part of the increase in Operations is meant to counteract the significant reduction in the Inmate Program Fund.
______________________________

1 Robert J. Tenaglia, Jr. (November 2005). January 1, 2005 Inmate Statistics, Report #440. p. iii;

2 Lisa Lorant Sampson. (May 2000). January 1, 2000 Inmate Statistics, Report # 413. p. iii

3 DOC Advisory Council Final Report (October 25, 2005), p. 10. Available: http://www.mass.gov/Eeops/docs/doc/doc_final_report.pdf

4 Ibid, 13.

5 Ibid, 14.

5 Amy Lambiaso, STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE, 11/29/05

6 The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Governor’s Commission on Corrections Reform. (June 30, 2004). p. 23, footnote. Available: http://www.mass.gov/Eeops/docs/eops/GovCommission_Corrections_Reform.pdf

Posted by lois at 08:37 PM | Comments (0)

Iowa: New Justice Center Just A Start

New justice center just a start
DI Editorial Board
Posted: 4/18/06
The tornado damage to the venerable Johnson County Courthouse did harm to a historic Iowa City structure but also added another reason for pursuing the proposed "justice center," which would incorporate a new courthouse and jail. While the courthouse should be restored and we support building a new facility, more creative options need to also be explored to solve the county's law-enforcement problem. Instead of hauling all offenders off to jail without regard for their crimes, Johnson County officials should seek more appropriate solutions.

There can be no question the current court and jail facilities are inadequate. The 92-bed jail is not large enough to house all its prisoners; our county has been forced to ship extra inmates to other facilities, such as Linn County jail, paying $65 per head. For its part, the courthouse is too old to accommodate critical security measures, including metal detectors. Someone with a knife or gun could easily evade security in the current courthouse. A new, modern courthouse and a sustainable long-term solution to the prison population problem are critical to the safety and effectiveness of Johnson County law enforcement.

In their zeal to avoid appearing "soft on crime," many opposed to new facilities deny overcrowding is a serious problem. But not only are packed jails less than ideal for the inmates, they create a dangerous situation for the employees. Prisoners who are packed in like sardines are more difficult to safely manage. By resisting funding for prisons, opponents aren't being tough on criminals - they're being tough on law-enforcement workers.

But officials do not only need a new facility - they need new ideas: The county's sentencing priorities should be reworked. Instead of being thrown in with the general prison populace, people picked up for public intoxication should be put in a detox center. They could be monitored and, if necessary, treated by trained staff while they sleep it off. By taking a less punitive attitude toward these nonviolent offenders, the county will actually be putting less stress on the prison system.

In 2000, residents rejected a bond issue for a new jail, and the problem has only worsened since. This shortsightedness is false economy: Investing in a new justice center now will end the need to rent Linn County's jail space and curtail law-enforcement costs that are spiraling out of control.

Capt. Gary Foster, the chief deputy for Story County - home of Iowa State University and Ames - told The Daily Iowan that he "can't imagine" law enforcement running a detox center for intoxicated people. So far, Johnson County has displayed a similar lack of creative vision. Sheriff Lonny Pulkrabek has proposed many sensible alternatives for sentencing of drug and alcohol offenses - only to have them shot down. Johnson County should be investing in a new justice center, but, more importantly, it should be investing in a new kind of thinking about criminal justice.
© Copyright 2006 Daily Iowan

Posted by lois at 01:04 PM | Comments (0)

NY Times Editorial: Counting Noses in Prison

Counting Noses in Prison -- New York Times editorial
by New York Times, April 18, 2006 http://www.prisonersofthecensus.org/news/fact-18-4-2006.shtml

The Census Bureau tends to stamp its feet and shake its head no when asked to do things differently than it has in the past. It has been running true to form since late last year, when Congress ordered it to study the common-sense idea of counting inmates at their homes rather than at prison.

Prison inmates are denied the vote in all but two states, but are nonetheless counted as "residents" of prisons when the state legislatures draw up election districts based on the census data. This inflates the political power of prison districts, which are often in rural areas of the states, while diminishing the voting strength of the urban districts where the inmates actually live. It also causes some prison districts to collect more than a fair share of federal dollars earmarked for the poor.

Asked by Congress to consider remedies for this problem, the bureau responded with an obtuse and evasive report that supports the bad old status quo. The report sets up a straw man by suggesting that the desired change might require the costly and invasive procedure of interviewing every inmate. All that is really necessary is to treat inmates like everyone else. That means giving them questionnaires that ask, among other things, for their home addresses and interviewing them only when a form is not returned or when some other problem occurs.

The bureau could also ask corrections officials to begin collecting the information it needs. As was suggested recently by the Brennan Center for Justice, such a request would probably have the byproduct of improved record keeping among state corrections bureaus.

Congress should keep hounding the bureau until it stops stonewalling and fixes what is clearly a flaw in the census collection process.

Posted by lois at 01:02 PM | Comments (0)

Sex crime disclosure questions: Maine killings refuel debate over registries

Boston Globe

Sex crime disclosure questioned
Maine killings refuel debate over registries

By John R. Ellement and Suzanne Smalley, Globe Staff | April 18, 2006

One of the two Maine sex offenders killed by an apparent vigilante was listed in the state's online registry because of a 2002 conviction for having sex with a minor when he was 19.

The death of William Elliott, 24, is reigniting the national debate over sex offender registries. His anguished mother said yesterday that he should not have been on the same list as criminals who preyed on children.

He had been convicted of having sex with a girlfriend who was two weeks shy of her 16th birthday, the mother said. ''My son was not a pedophile," said Shirley Turner. ''He shouldn't have been labeled that. . . . He just wanted to love that girl and make a family; that's all he wanted to do."

Without the registry, ''he'd still be alive today," Turner said. ''I'd still have him."

In Massachusetts, information on only the most serious sex offenders is posted online, but in Maine everyone convicted of a sex crime is listed with an address and picture in a database accessible to anyone with an Internet connection.

Stephen A. Marshall looked up details on Elliott and Joseph L. Gray, 57, whom he is also suspected of shooting, along with 32 others on Maine's registry, state public safety officials said yesterday.

Shut down on Sunday while authorities searched for Marshall, who killed himself aboard a bus outside South Station in Boston as police closed in, Maine's online registry was reactivated yesterday afternoon. It still included information on Gray and Elliott, including their photographs and home addresses.

According to state records, Elliott pleaded guilty in 2002 to two misdemeanor counts of sexual abuse of a minor, the equivalent of statutory rape in Maine, where the age of consent is 16. He served four months in jail.

According to Gray's posting, he was convicted in Bristol County in Massachusetts in 1992 of indecent assault and battery on a child and rape of a child and was sentenced to four to six years in state prison.

Gray's daughter, Wendy Colby, 33, of Attleboro, said her father registered as a sex offender because authorities told him to do so. ''He was just being a good citizen," she said. ''And look where it got him."

Stephen McCausland, a spokesman for the Maine Department of Public Safety, said police were able to track Marshall's searches of the offender list because users have to register to gain access to details of offenders' listings. Because Marshall registered with his real name and address, investigators could see which profiles he viewed, McCausland said.

McCausland said that about 2,200 sex offenders are listed in the registry, which he said is so popular that it crashed the state government website when it was first put up about five years ago. He said the site currently generates about 100,000 hits a month.

''It has been an informational tool that has worked for what it was intended to do: to provide the public information about convicted sex offenders," he said.

McCausland said officials will discuss making changes to the site as the investigation proceeds, including possibly restricting how much and what type of information about offenders is put online.

Representative Patricia A. Blanchette, cochairwoman of the Maine Legislature's Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee, said yesterday that the state may need to reconsider posting the names of those convicted of statutory rape, having sex with those younger than 16.

She said, however, that she would resist any effort to shut down the site. ''Because two people that were on that website were horribly killed doesn't take away the need for that website," she said.

Blake Harrison of the National Conference of State Legislatures said many states list all sex offenders in their online registries. Others, including Massachusetts, restrict the listings to the offenders considered at the highest risk to commit more crimes.

The online registries mushroomed after Congress passed a law in 1996 requiring states to disclose such information. More than 500,000 sex offenders are listed nationwide. All but four states offer at least the name and address of some sex offenders online.

Critics say that is dangerous not only for sex offenders, but the public at large.

''The strange thing about these lone vigilante cases is it's the address that's guilty," said Jack King, a spokesman for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in Washington. ''The person inside that home may or may not be the target, and the vigilante doesn't care.

A New Hampshire man, Lawrence Trant, is in prison for the attempted murders in 2003 of two convicted sex offenders whose names he found on the state's sex offender registry. In Washington state, 35-year-old Michael Anthony Mullen was sentenced last month to more than 44 years in prison for shooting to death two convicted child rapists whose names he found on a sex offender website.

State Senator Scott P. Brown, a Wrentham Republican, introduced legislation late last year to expand the Massachusetts registry to include all defendants convicted of sex offenses involving a child. The bill is still in committee, but Brown said the killings in Maine have not changed his mind about its importance. ''The public's need for information outweighs any potential risks," he said yesterday.

Carol Rose, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, disagreed.

''If someone registered on the Internet is murdered, it's much less likely people will continue to register, and they will be driven underground," Rose said. ''And that will make it harder to seek treatment for their problem."

Maria Cramer of the Globe staff contributed to this report. Ellement can be reached at ellement@globe.com; Smalley at ssmalley@globe.com.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/maine/articles/2006/04/18/sex_crime_disclos
ure_questioned/?page=full

Posted by lois at 12:57 PM | Comments (0)

April 17, 2006

NH & VT: Senators should resist playing politics with punishment

Concord Monitor (NH)
Valley News

April 07. 2006

Politicians who value sound bites over sound policy are urging lawmakers in New Hampshire and Vermont to address sexual abuse with get-tough postures instead of thoughtful solutions. If legislators yield to the pressure, they will squander an opportunity to be leaders - instead of lockstep followers - in a debate that is sweeping the nation.

Thus far, lawmakers have shown restraint and reason in tackling the emotionally charged issue of sex crimes. The Vermont and New Hampshire Houses each rejected calls for widespread mandatory minimum sentences. They did so after hearing warnings from leading prosecutors and victims' advocates that such sentences can actually cause victims more pain, by thwarting the plea bargains that yield convictions without putting victims through public trials.

As the debates shift to the state senates, however, some leaders are renewing their drumbeat for a one-size-fits-all solution. In Concord, Gov. John Lynch and Attorney General Kelly Ayotte urged lawmakers to reinstate potential mandatory 25-year sentences for first-time offenders in the most serious cases. "The punishment that sexual predators face should be commensurate with their crimes and the lasting damage that they inflict," Lynch said.

In Vermont, Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie pitched senators on "10 action steps to protect Vermont's children,"including mandatory minimum sentences. Said Dubie, "We need laws in our corrections system that separate those that we're mad at and those that we're afraid of."

Such talk comes, perhaps not coincidentally, from ambitious politicians. Their words appeal to fears about strangers lurking in our neighborhoods, ready to prey on children until they are locked away for a long, long time. The rhetoric does not, however, do justice to the facts.

The facts show that nearly all sex offenders in Vermont and New Hampshire are not strangers to their victims, but are instead relatives, neighbors and friends. While rigid minimum sentences hold political appeal, most victims in such cases want judges to have the flexibility to impose a mix of punishment and rehabilitation that gets offenders back home and onto the right path.

The facts show that while harsh sentences may be appropriate for the small group of hard-core criminals, the majority of offenders benefit from treatment programs that aim to reintegrate them into families, neighborhoods and workplaces. A study of Vermont offenders who underwent treatment, for instance, found that 5 percent committed new sex crimes after being released from prison. Even as some politicians strive to lock offenders away for longer periods, however, they say precious little about what to do with them once they return - as most do - to society.

The facts show that an alarming number of sex offenses are committed by juveniles. The good news is that young offenders respond particularly well to treatment. The bad news is that Lynch, Ayotte and Dubie have devoted little energy in this debate to finding ways to help misguided youths before they become hardened adult offenders.

Political leaders in New Hampshire and Vermont stand at a crossroads. They can pander to fear and pad their political resumes with laws that yield sound bites but few real solutions. Or they can continue to pursue a responsible course, crafting laws that do justice to the complex challenge of sexual abuse - and to the people who live with its consequences.
http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060407/REPOSITORY
/604070314/1027/OPINION01

Posted by lois at 05:30 PM | Comments (0)

CA: Saving money and aiding drug users

San Diego Tribune.
By Jason Ziedenberg and Rose Braz
April 17, 2006

New research on Proposition 36 shows that the initiative is successfully diverting people from prison to treatment – and is saving Californians money.

Enacted by 61 percent of voters in 2000, Proposition
36 allows people convicted of first-and second-time
drug possession the opportunity to receive substance
abuse treatment instead of incarceration. Since the
initiative went into effect in 2001, $120 million has
been spent every year to fund treatment for thousands
of people who would otherwise be incarcerated for drug possession.

A new report out by UCLA shows California taxpayers
are saving nearly $2.50 for every dollar invested in
the program. Of people who successfully completed
their drug treatment, nearly $4 was saved for each
dollar spent. In the first year alone, Proposition 36
saved state and local government $173 million –
translating into hundreds of millions of dollars in
savings over the last five years.

As was echoed in a second report released last week by
the Justice Policy Institute, the key to the savings
was that fewer people are in jail or prison due to
Proposition 36. The JPI report shows that, five years
since the initiative passed, there are 8,700 fewer
people in prison for a drug offense. By doubling what
the state spent on drug treatment, Proposition 36 is successfully moving drug addiction out of the prison system and into the public health system, where it belongs. All of this has contributed to the state being able to bring the number of people in prison for drug offenses more in line with other large state prison systems.

Sadly, some in Sacramento want to reverse this
success: Some are proposing “jail sanctions” be
attached to Proposition 36, as a way of putting people
with drug problems in jail during their recovery.
While the proponents of jail sanctions say this will
force people to complete treatment, according to the
California Society of Addiction Medicine, there is no
evidence that jailing people aids recovery. The UCLA
report found, “The benefits of flash incarceration are
not yet consistently confirmed in the research
literature.” With state prison officials' newfound
dedication to what it calls “evidence based research,”
it is ironic that they would consider a sanction as
severe as “flash incarceration” without evidence to
support it.

Most concerning is the serious impact of the growing
reliance on imprisonment on individuals, families and communities.

County spending on jails and corrections has grown to
$3 billion a year. And swollen jail spending means
there is less money for essential county services. San
Diego County, for instance, already spends upward of
$150 million a year on jails – more than it spends on
roads or public health.

Additionally, Harvard and Princeton University
researchers have shown that jail and detention
significantly reduces future employment, further
burdening communities.

Jails also make people sick. According to the National Association of Counties, jail incarceration “traumatizes persons with mental illnesses and makes them worse” – something that seriously impacts people with co-occurring mental health and drug treatment needs. Justice Department researchers have shown that the suicide rate in jail is almost three times the rate in the general population. The National Commission on Correctional Health Care recognized that jails significantly increase contact with infectious diseases. One study found that the infection rate for tuberculosis in jails was 17 times higher than the rate in the community.

Jailing people also affects the larger community,
particularly families and children. The California
Research Bureau has reported that 97,000 children have
parents who are detained in jail. When the related
expenses of placing children in foster care is
considered, the cost of imprisonment more than
doubles. In contrast, thanks to Proposition 36, fewer
people were in jail for a drug offenses. Those people
are, instead, paying taxes, being parents and
contributing to their families and communities.

In a state that has failed to enact proven solutions
such as sentencing reform, parole reform, or to join a
growing number of states with falling prison
populations, Proposition 36 stands out as a rare
success in reducing prison populations and saving
taxpayer money. Rather than throw that success away by
throwing more people in jail, we must increase funding
for this initiative and expand it to reach more
people. Expanding Proposition 36 will save the state
more money, reduce incarceration and give all
Californians a chance at full recovery.

Braz is director of Critical Resistance. Ziedenberg
is executive director of the Justice Policy Institute.
Both organizations work to end society reliance on incarceration as a solution to social problems.

Posted by lois at 05:26 PM | Comments (0)

April 16, 2006

Medicaid Hurdle for Immigrants May Hurt Others

April 16, 2006

By ROBERT PEAR
WASHINGTON, April 15 — More than 50 million Medicaid recipients will soon have to produce birth certificates, passports or other documents to prove that they are United States citizens, and everyone who applies for coverage after June 30 will have to show similar documents under a new federal law.

The requirement is meant to stop the "theft of Medicaid benefits by illegal aliens," in the words of Representative Charlie Norwood, Republican of Georgia, a principal author of the provision, which was signed into law by President Bush on Feb. 8.

In enforcing the new requirement, federal and state officials must take account of passions stirred by weeks of national debate over immigration policy. State officials worry that many blacks, American Indians and other poor people will be unable to come up with the documents needed to prove citizenship. In addition, hospital executives said they were concerned that the law could increase their costs, by reducing the number of patients with insurance.

The new requirement takes effect on July 1. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that it will save the federal government $220 million over five years and $735 million over 10 years.

Estimates of the number of people who will be affected vary widely. The budget office expects that 35,000 people will lose coverage by 2015. Most of them will be illegal immigrants, it said, but some will be citizens unable to produce the necessary documents. Some Medicaid experts put the numbers much higher, saying that millions of citizens could find their health benefits in jeopardy.

State officials are trying to figure out how to comply. Many said the requirement would result in denying benefits to some poor people who were entitled to Medicaid but could not find the necessary documents.

"This provision is misguided and will serve as a barrier to health care for otherwise eligible United States citizens," said Gov. Chris Gregoire of Washington, a Democrat.

Ms. Gregoire said the provision would cause hardship for many older African-Americans who never received birth certificates and for homeless people who did not have ready access to family records.

Hospitals and nursing homes are expressing concern. "The new requirement will result in fewer people being eligible for Medicaid or enrolling in the program, and that means more uninsured people," said Lynne P. Fagnani, senior vice president of the National Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems. "They still need care, but are more likely to wait until their condition becomes more severe and more costly to treat."

The new requirement will come as a surprise to most Medicaid recipients. The law said federal officials should inform them "as soon as practicable" after Feb. 8. But the education campaign, to be conducted in concert with states, has yet to begin.

Under the law, the Deficit Reduction Act, states cannot receive federal Medicaid money unless they verify citizenship by checking documents like passports and birth certificates for people who receive or apply for Medicaid.

In a draft letter providing guidance to state officials, the Bush administration says, "An applicant or recipient who does not cooperate with the requirement to present documentary evidence of citizenship may be denied eligibility or terminated" from Medicaid.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal research and advocacy group, estimates that three million to five million low-income citizens on Medicaid could find their coverage at risk because they do not have birth certificates or passports.

Representative John Lewis, Democrat of Georgia, said: "Many older Americans do not have birth certificates because their parents did not have access to hospitals, and so they were born at home. In the last century, all over the South, because of segregation and racial discrimination, many hospitals would not take minorities."

In Georgia, Medicaid officials began enforcing a similar requirement in January. Dr. Rhonda M. Medows, commissioner of the state's Department of Community Health, said it had not caused serious problems.

In Arizona, the governor's health policy adviser, Anne M. Winter, said the federal requirement would "reduce or delay enrollment for eligible individuals, mostly U.S. citizens." In many cases, Ms. Winter said, "Native Americans — the first Americans — do not have the documents" required to show citizenship. In addition, she said, older Medicaid recipients with Alzheimer's disease or other mental impairments may not understand the requirement and may be unable to retrieve the documents they need.

In New Jersey, Ann Clemency Kohler, the Medicaid director, said: "There are lots of reasons why people born here may not have copies of their birth certificates. And many people in their 80's and 90's just don't have a driver's license or a passport because they're not driving or traveling overseas."

In general, Medicaid is available only to United States citizens and certain "qualified aliens." Legal immigrants are, in many cases, barred from Medicaid for five years after they enter the United States. Under a 1986 law, applicants for Medicaid have to declare in writing, under penalty of perjury, whether they are citizens and, if not, whether they are "in a satisfactory immigration status."

State Medicaid officials were already required to check the immigration status of people who said they were noncitizens. But until this year, when applicants claimed United States citizenship, states had discretion: they could choose whether to require documentation.

More than 40 states accepted the applicants' written statements as proof of citizenship unless the claims seemed questionable to state eligibility workers.

In a study last year, Daniel R. Levinson, inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services, said that federal Medicaid officials had "encouraged self-declaration in an effort to simplify and accelerate the Medicaid application process." Mr. Levinson recommended additional safeguards, including spot checks of Medicaid recipients to verify citizenship claims.

Dr. Mark B. McClellan, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, agreed, but said he was unaware of any fraud. "The report does not find particular problems regarding false allegations of citizenship, nor are we aware of any," Dr. McClellan said at the time.

In an interview on Saturday, Dr. McClellan said, "We are working with states to develop a policy to accommodate the needs of special groups of Americans who may not have traditional government-issued birth certificates." Federal officials said that after consulting such groups, they might find other documents that could prove citizenship.

Jennifer M. Ng'andu of the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic group, said, "A likely consequence of the new requirement is that a number of people will be cut off Medicaid even though they are eligible."

The law specifies documents that can be used to establish citizenship. A United States passport by itself is enough. Or a person can use "a certificate of birth in the United States," together with a document that confirms identity, like a driver's license with a photograph.

The new requirement is causing alarm in Indian country. Representative Rick Renzi, an Arizona Republican whose district includes more than 145,000 Navajos and Apaches, is urging the Bush administration to let people qualify for Medicaid by showing "certificates of Indian blood" and other forms of tribal identification.

Kathleen Collins Pagels, executive director of the Arizona Health Care Association, said "some nursing home residents could lose Medicaid coverage" because they could not produce the documents required to prove citizenship.

Home
World U.S. N.Y. / Region Business Technology Science Health Sports Opinion Arts Style Travel Jobs Real Estate Autos Back to Top
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

Posted by lois at 09:56 AM | Comments (0)

April 15, 2006

For Immigrants and Business, Rift on Protests

April 15, 2006
NY Times
By MONICA DAVEY
In Bonita Springs, Fla., 10 restaurant workers were fired this week after skipping their shifts to attend a rally against legislation in Congress cracking down on illegal immigrants. In Tyler, Tex., 22 welders lost their jobs making parts for air-conditioners after missing work for a similar demonstration in that city.

And so it went for employees of an asbestos removal firm in Indianapolis, a restaurant in Milwaukee, a meatpacking company in Detroit, a factory in Bellwood, Ill.

In the last month, as hundreds of thousands of people around the country have held demonstrations pressing for legal status and citizenship for illegal immigrants, companies, particularly those that employ large numbers of immigrants, have found themselves wrestling with difficult and uncharted terrain.

They worry about how to keep their businesses operating, fully staffed, but also not to appear insensitive to a growing political movement that in many cases sustains their work force.

Some fired workers have complained that they were being singled out for their political views, and a few have filed formal complaints with the National Labor Relations Board. Other protesters have cut deals with their employers to work extra shifts in exchange for time off, or to close down their small businesses entirely, in deference to the sentiment behind the demonstrations.

In at least one instance, nearly 200 fired workers in Wisconsin were reinstated, demonstration leaders said, after the leaders met with employers, discussed the significance of the protests and threatened to identify the companies publicly.

"I have no problem with the demonstration, but this is a business," said Charley Bohley, an owner of Rodes restaurant and fishmarket in Bonita Springs, who fired the 10 workers there after posting a note warning employees that they could not miss work for a rally on Monday. "Couldn't they have protested in the morning before work? Couldn't they have protested in their hearts?"

Though the number of workers who have lost their jobs across the country, estimated in the hundreds, is small compared with the numbers marching in the streets, some protest organizers say word of the firings spread rapidly and might have a chilling effect on many more workers and on students, some of whom also say they have faced discipline for missing school for rallies.

The firings have also forced some organizers to rethink how best to plan future demonstrations, and some are considering opting out of events now in the works.

In Washington, Jaime Contreras, the president of the National Capital Immigration Coalition, said his coalition voted on Thursday night not to take part in a proposed national boycott or strike set for May 1. Jose I. Sanchez, an organizer in Texas, said his group was considering holding a rally on the Sunday before May 1 instead, just to avoid such strains.

"We shouldn't put our progress in jeopardy," Mr. Contreras said. "That is a tool you use when you have to, but you have to be completely prepared for backlash and repercussions."

In many cities, rally organizers said, plenty of businesses, many of which have pushed for efforts to give legal status to immigrants, cooperated with the demonstrations and allowed workers time off. In Indianapolis, one company went so far as to let 2,000 people leave their jobs for Monday's demonstration downtown, said Ken Moran, an organizer.

"The firings we've seen were an anomaly," Mr. Moran said, "but it's a sad situation."

In complaints filed with the government in one case, Mark A. Sweet, a lawyer for two fired restaurant workers in Milwaukee, said the restaurant had violated the National Labor Relations Act by firing the workers for what he considered legally protected activities: efforts to assist in the mutual aid and protection of themselves and other immigrant workers.

Other legal experts, however, questioned whether such a provision would apply to a public rally, and suggested that the workers had few remedies. For the most part, "at-will" employees may be fired at any time, for any reason, said Charles B. Craver, a professor at The George Washington University Law School.

"For private employers, there is normally no special First Amendment right to get out of work to engage in a protest," said Rodney A. Smolla, the dean of the University of Richmond School of Law. "A company might decide that it's good for morale to accommodate the exercise of freedom of speech on an issue that is very important to people, but that's an employment judgment not law."

In Tyler, Tex., Maria Rodriguez described on Friday how she and others had lost their jobs putting together equipment for air-conditioners for Benchmark Manufacturing Inc. Ms. Rodriguez, 32, who said she had made $6.75 an hour after several years with the company, said she had always been given time off in the past for personal appointments. This time, though, she was fired, she said.

"To me it seemed unfair," Ms. Rodriguez said. Even as she was being fired, she said, she saw applicants arriving at the company to replace her.

Benchmark Manufacturing issued a statement outlining the company's absence policy, and adding, "This issue is not about going to the rally, it is about following the company policies that govern every employee."

Against the backdrop of the broader immigration debate, the firings raised another tangled issue for some of the companies and for the workers: the legal status of those employees removed. Ms. Rodriguez, a native of Mexico, said she moved to the United States 14 years ago and did not have legal status. Some other advocates for those fired in other states said they did not know the legal status of the workers.

Elsewhere, after advocates intervened, some workers were rehired this week. At Wolverine Packing in Detroit, company officials said they invited 21 fired workers — 20 of whom were considered temporary workers — to return to their jobs, with back pay, on Monday. The company, meanwhile, issued a statement saying it planned to recheck employment documentation "due to reports that some of the temporary staffers may have been illegal."

Elena Herrada, who met with the company on behalf of the workers, said she did not know if any of them were in the United States illegally. The employees were already unhappy with their working conditions, Ms. Herrada said, and none were planning to return.

Gretchen Ruethling contributed reporting from Chicagofor this article.

Posted by lois at 06:43 PM | Comments (0)

April 14, 2006

Path to Deportation Can Start With A Traffic Stop

April 14, 2006, NY Times
Path to Deportation Can Start With a Traffic Stop
By PAUL VITELLO
While lawmakers in Washington debate whether to forgive illegal immigrants their trespasses, a small but increasing number of local and state law enforcement officials are taking it upon themselves to pursue deportation cases against people who are here illegally.

In more than a dozen jurisdictions, officials have invoked a little-used 1996 federal law to seek special federal training in immigration enforcement for their officers.

In other places, the local authorities are flagging some illegal immigrants who are caught up in the criminal justice system, sometimes for minor offenses, and are alerting immigration officials to their illegal status so that they can be deported.

In Costa Mesa, Calif., for example, in Orange County, the City Council last year shut down a day laborer job center that had operated for 17 years, and this year authorized its Police Department to begin training officers to pursue illegal immigrants — a job previously left to federal agents.

In Suffolk County, on Long Island, where a similar police training proposal was met with angry protests in 2004, county officials have quietly put a system in place that uses sheriff's deputies to flag illegal immigrants in the county jail population.

In Putnam County, N.Y., about 50 miles north of Manhattan, eight illegal immigrants who were playing soccer in a school ball field were arrested on Jan. 9 for trespassing and held for the immigration authorities.

As an example of the uneven results that sometimes occur in such cross-hatches of local and federal law enforcement, the seven immigrants who were able to make bail before those agents arrived went free. The one who could not make bail in time, a 33-year-old roofer and father of five, has been in federal detention in Pennsylvania ever since.

"I took an oath to protect the people of this county, and that means enforcing the laws of the land," said Donald B. Smith, the Putnam County sheriff. "We have a situation in our country where our borders are not being adequately protected, and that leaves law enforcement people like us in a very difficult situation."

Other local law enforcement officials expressed similar frustration at the apparent inability of the federal government to stem the rise in illegal immigration. It is a frustration they say has been growing in the last few years, and is now reaching a point of crisis.

During that time, a number of coinciding trends may have added to the sense that there has been a breach in the covenant between the local and federal authorities, according to interviews with immigration officials, police and advocates. These trends include a housing boom that attracted growing numbers of illegal workers, especially to distant suburbs and exurbs, where federal resources are especially thin; an apparent stagnation in the size of the federal immigration police force, which has remained at about 2,000 for several years; and increasing local opposition to illegal immigration, again, especially in the suburbs.

George A. Terezakis, a Long Island immigration lawyer, said that in his practice, he had seen a trend. "The heat is definitely getting turned up. Not just on criminals, but against people I would consider charged with relatively minor offenses: Having an invalid driver's license, a fake Social Security card. A person with a job and a family can end up sitting in jail for months, and then being deported."

Federal statistics do not measure the number of immigration arrests and deportations that occur because of local intervention. Officials with the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency said the roughly 160,000 illegal immigrants deported last year represented a 10 percent increase over the year before — and a national record — but they could not say how many had been referred by the local authorities.

Until fairly recently, it was viewed as inappropriate, even unconstitutional, for the local or state authorities to be involved in the enforcement of federal law. In Los Angeles, the police still operate under an internal rule that says "undocumented alien status is not a matter for police enforcement." Similar policies apply in San Francisco and New York City.

But that may be changing, partly because the local authorities have decided to play a more active role and partly because of an unabashed call from the federal government seeking help from states and localities.

"The untold story of immigration law is that there are just not enough federal immigration officers to enforce the immigration laws we have," said Kris W. Kobach, a law professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City who as a counsel in the Justice Department worked on several cooperative agreements with state and local law enforcement agencies.

"The only way our programs can work is with help from local law enforcement, and we're expecting to see that happening more and more," he said.

To make that happen, law enforcement officials have increasingly been looking to a federal statute, the 1996 Immigration and Nationality Act. It allows the local and state authorities to reach agreements with the federal immigration and customs agency to train their officers — in a four-week crash course — to be virtual immigration agents, able to conduct citizenship investigations and begin deportation proceedings against illegal immigrants.

The law went nearly untried in its first five years on the books. Then Florida had 60 state agents and highway officers trained in 2002, and Alabama did the same for about 40 state troopers in 2003. In the next two years, the Arizona corrections department and the Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties in California each had a few dozen officers trained.

Indicating a new sense of urgency, though, 11 additional state and county jurisdictions have applied to enter the program in the past year alone, according to a spokesman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Michael W. Gilhooly. He would not specify which they were, but public officials in Missouri, Tennessee, Arizona and about a dozen additional counties in California, Texas and North Carolina have publicly expressed interest in the program.

Local officials involved in these initiatives say they are mainly targeting hardened criminals in the immigrant population — people like gang members and sexual predators who have been the recent target of sweeps by federal immigration agents.

But many of those affected by the new home-grown vigilance are immigrants arrested for minor traffic violations, or charged with unlicensed driving, possession of forged green cards and other offenses that are virtually synonymous with the undocumented life, say immigrant advocates and lawyers.

In Springfield, Mo., for example, a furor erupted recently when a star player on the high school soccer team, Tobias Zuniga, was arrested and jailed after a routine traffic stop because he admitted to the officer that he was an illegal immigrant. Officers at the Christian County Jail notified immigration agents, and Mr. Zuniga, an 18-year-old senior, was held for a weekend before being released on bail.

"He was stopped for having excessively tinted windows," Tom Parker, the father of a friend and classmate of Mr. Zuniga, said in a telephone interview. "And he spent three nights in jail with drug dealers." Mr. Zuniga faces deportation hearings this month.

Federal immigration officials, however, maintain that the vast majority of illegal immigrants detained and deported are people convicted or charged with serious crimes. There are simply not enough immigration agents to respond every time a suspected illegal immigrant is arrested for driving with an invalid license, said Marc Raimondi, a spokesman for the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.

Daniel W. Beck, the sheriff of Allen County, Ohio, 100 miles northwest of Columbus, said calling immigration agents is no guarantee of action.

"When people drive without licenses, when they are in this country illegally, it's really a right and wrong issue. I will arrest them," Mr. Beck said. "Unfortunately, by the time a federal agent gets here, they are sometimes already bailed out of jail."

But Marianne Yang, director of the Immigrant Defense Project of the New York State Defenders Association, a lawyers' group, said a recurring problem for immigrants, legal and illegal, is the high bail set for them if they are arrested, no matter how minor the crime.

"What we see in the increasing collaboration between local authorities and I.C.E. is situations where a person would normally be released in his own recognizance, and instead is held on high bail," she said of the agreements with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.

The arrests of the men playing soccer in Putnam County in January might illustrate that phenomenon. Sheriff's deputies went there in response to a complaint about safety by the administrator of the elementary school, which was in session as the men played.

Mr. Smith, the Putnam sheriff, said deputies arrested the men that day only after they refused the school administrator's request for them to leave. They were charged with criminal trespass, a class B misdemeanor, and a Brewster village judge set bail at $1,000 for seven of the eight. Bail for the eighth man, Juan Jimeniz, a roofer, was set at $3,000 because he was not able to provide his home address.

Mr. Smith said federal immigration agents were called to the jail because deputies suspected the men were illegal immigrants and "because we are trying to uphold the law for the citizens of this county."

When they arrived, seven of the men had made bail and Mr. Jimeniz, who was not able to pay his bail, was taken by the immigration agents to a federal detention wing of the Pike County Jail in Hawley, Pa., where he has remained since, fighting deportation.

"He has no criminal record," said Vanessa Merton, director of the Immigration Justice Clinic of the Pace University Law School, which represents Mr. Jimeniz. "He is a roofer. He is supporting five children."

"There is no way you could describe his detention as anything but haphazard, random and completely arbitrary," she said.

Mr. Kobach, the former Justice Department official, said "unevenness has been endemic to the nature of immigration enforcement in recent years."

But efforts by local and state authorities to pursue illegal immigrants, he said, are at least in part, "an effort to deal with that unevenness."

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

Posted by lois at 10:44 AM | Comments (0)

The Devastation of School Zone Mandatory Minimums

The devastation of school zone mandatory minimums..
Two Years in Jail for a Joint?
By Anthony Papa, AlterNet
Posted on April 14, 2006, Printed on April 14, 2006 http://www.alternet.org/story/34814/
The war on drugs reached the pinnacle of cruelty when 18-year-old Mitchell Lawrence was sentenced to two years in jail for selling a teaspoonful of marijuana to an undercover police officer for $20.

On June 30, 2004, detective Felix Aguirre, employed by the Drug Task Force, was assigned the duty of going undercover to buy drugs from kids who hung out in a parking lot in Berkshire County in Massachusetts. Merchants had complained to police about the kids. Mitchell Lawrence was there with his pipe and a few buds of marijuana. He had no idea the parking lot was less than 1,000 feet from a preschool located in the basement of a church, nor did he know this parking lot was the site of a police sting operation.

Aguirre approached Mitchell and asked him if he had any weed. Mitchell pulled out a small bag of marijuana. The cop offered him $20. Mitchell hesitated; Aguirre insisted. Mitchell, who had seen Aguirre hanging out with other kids, motioned the cop to follow him up the street where he intended to smoke with him. Aguirre waved the $20 in his face. Mitchell, who was broke at the time, took the money, the first time he had ever accepted money in exchange for marijuana.

In the months that followed, Aguirre approached Mitchell again for marijuana. This time, however, Mitchell refused. Weeks later, a crew of undercover cops stormed Mitchell's home and placed him under arrest. Mitchell was found guilty of distribution of marijuana, committing a drug violation within a drug-free school zone and possession.

On March 22, 2006, Mitchell Lawrence was sentenced to two years in prison.

While this outrageous case happened in a sleepy burg in Massachusetts, the case of Mitchell Lawrence is one of countless tales of drug war madness that takes place on America's streets daily.

Mitchell Lawrence's story was eerily familiar to me. In 1985, I was the subject of a police sting operation after passing an envelope containing four ounces of cocaine to undercover officers in Mount Vernon, New York. I was set up by someone who offered me $500 to transport the package. The individual who introduced me to the cop was an informant facing life in prison. He was offered a deal -- the more people he helped ensnare, the less time he would serve. I received a sentence of 15 years to life under New York's draconian Rockefeller Drug Laws.

Mitchell Lawrence's disproportionate sentence was handed down one day before the release of a national report by the Justice Policy Institute (JPI) titled, "Disparity by Design: How Drug-free Zone Laws Impact Racial Disparity and Fail to Protect Youth," which includes research from Massachusetts.

The JPI study, commissioned by the Drug Policy Alliance, found that drug-free zone laws do not serve their intended purpose of protecting youth from drug activity. The Massachusetts data on drug enforcement in three cities found that less than one percent of the drug-free zone cases actually involved sales to youth. Additionally, Massachusetts researchers found that nonwhites were more likely to be charged with an offense that carries drug-free zone enhancement than whites engaged in similar conduct. Blacks and Hispanics account for just 20 percent of Massachusetts residents, but 80 percent of drug-free zone cases.

"School zone laws have remained unchanged in Massachusetts because the legislature has been promised that prosecutors use discretion," said Whitney A. Taylor, executive director of the Drug Policy Forum of Massachusetts. "Unfortunately, the life of a young man has been sacrificed, proving that discretion is not being used, and that the law must be changed."

Mitchell Lawrence was not the only person arrested in an undercover drug operation in the summer of 2004. There were a total of 18 others, including five young people who are still awaiting trial for alleged sales that took place at the same Great Barrington parking lot.

District Attorney David F. Capeless is the man behind Berkshire County enforcement and entrapment. Capeless is a hard-nosed drug war zealot, who insists that these laws are effective in combating drug use -- even if it means ruining a young man's life in the process.

Mitchell Lawrence was set to graduate from high school this spring. Instead, he will watch his fellow classmates graduate from his prison cell.

The common thread between my case, Mitchell's case and drug-free school zones nationally is the abuse of power from the prosecutors through the application of mandatory minimums. These laws handcuff judges and force them to impose harsh sentences.

Mitchell Lawrence's conviction inspired a group of concerned Berkshire County residents to seek Capeless' ouster in the upcoming district attorney race. Defense attorney Judith Knight answered the call to fill this role. Knight, a former assistant district attorney for Middlesex County, said Mitchell Lawrence's conviction was "the tipping point" for her decision to run against Capeless in the upcoming Democratic primary election in September.

"A tough prosecutor is tough on crime and also has the ability to demonstrate compassion and insight when the case calls for it," Knight says. She hopes to follow in the footsteps of David Soares, who ran for district attorney and defeated Paul Clyne in Albany, New York, in 2004. Soares ran a race primarily on the platform of Rockefeller Drug Law reform. He easily defeated the sitting district attorney, who refused to change his views on the draconian drug law legislation of New York.

It is heartening that communities like Berkshire County are fighting back and attempting to hand reckless district attorneys and other politicians the pink slip. Choosing to destroy lives and indiscriminately apply laws does more harm than good, ultimately, and it doesn't make our streets any safer.

Anthony Papa is the author of "15 To Life: How I Painted My Way To Freedom " (Feral House).

C 2006 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/34814/

Posted by lois at 10:38 AM | Comments (0)

April 13, 2006

NY Times Editorial: Cities That Lead the Way

Of course, there hundreds of thousands of people barred from jobs by "statute" and there is no enforcement procedure...but a first step.
Lois
EDITORIAL DESK
Cities That Lead the Way
(NYT)
Published: March 31, 2006

Crippled by soaring corrections costs, states and municipalities are re-examining policies that drive ex-offenders right back to prison by barring them from employment. Locked out of the mainstream, ex-felons become burdens to their families, their communities and the nation as a whole. Three cities -- Boston, Chicago and San Francisco -- have taken groundbreaking steps aimed at de-emphasizing criminal histories for qualified applicants for city jobs, except in law enforcement, education and other sensitive areas where people with convictions are specifically barred by statute.

The Boston plan, which becomes effective this summer, deserves to be widely emulated. It covers not just city employees but also the companies that do business with the city. Those companies, which employ hundreds of thousands of workers, will be required to make their employment policies consistent with those put forth by the city.

Under the new policy, the city will not conduct a criminal record review at all, except in special circumstances or when it is required by law. Even then, the search will come near the end of the process, after the applicant has proved to be qualified and is about to be hired. If the city then changes its mind about the job offer, the applicant is entitled to a full explanation and a chance to rebut the criminal records reports, which sometimes contain errors.

Taken together, the recent developments in Boston, Chicago and San Francisco symbolize a step forward in terms of fairness for law-abiding ex-offenders, who are often barred from entire occupations because of youthful mistakes and minor crimes committed in the distant past. It should be clear to all of us by now that confining those people to the ranks of the unemployed makes it more likely that they will commit new crimes, return to prison and become a permanent burden to society.
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

Posted by lois at 05:59 PM | Comments (0)

The "Policing-to Prisons" Track

The “Policing-to-Prisons” Track
Bay Area Organizers Oppose Operation Impact
by Sitara Nieves

Imagine the scene: you and your family are driving down a street in your neighborhood, when you hear sirens. You pull over and a police officer approaches your car. “Your back taillight doesn’t seem to be working, ma’am,” he says. This is news to you, but you figure he’s pulled you over just to let you know, for your safety.

You’re wrong. The officer asks for your license and insurance information. Moments later, he orders you and your small children to step outside, and begins searching your car. More police arrive. A few moments after that, while you and your family are on the sidewalk, a police officer gets in your car and drives it away. The rest of the police officers drive away too, leaving you and your children on the side of a desolate road in the middle of the night to somehow make your way back home.

Can’t believe this occurred? This story actually happened, witnessed by me and other Critical Resistance Oakland members while copwatching (or observing and documenting police actions and procedures in the community). In Oakland, the scene above recurs every weekend night. We have documented hundreds in incidents in which people’s cars are taken from them, literally stranding them in the cold for nothing more than small vehicle infractions. The Oakland police and the California Highway Patrol perpetrate these actions using a program called “Operation Impact.”

Operation Impact Profiles, Intimidates
The Oakland Police Department bills Operation Impact as “supplemental law enforcement assistance to combat violent crime through minimum tolerance, proactive traffic law enforcement and arrest warrant operations directed in violent crime areas identified by OPD crime trend analysis.” The police claim that they are pre-empting crime by addressing what they refer to as “precursors to violent crime and gang-related activity, namely reckless driving, DUI, weapons possession, narcotics, vandalism, and loitering.”

To translate in plain English: the police department is using these so-called precursors to harass and criminalize entire neighborhoods and communities while circumventing racial profiling laws. Since the Operation Impact checkpoints and blockades are set up only in primarily black and brown neighborhoods, the only people the police can pull over are black and brown people.

The police target people based on their skin color, on the music they listen to, and on their zip code. They use a variety of petty vehicle infractions (broken taillights or loud music seem to be the most common) to stop people –– and they use those infractions as a pretext to do further searches. On weekends, police use minor vehicle infractions to tow people’s cars, resulting in a nice wad of cash for the city and creating a hefty “poor tax” for the residents of East Oakland, who often pay upwards of $500 to get their cars back. Proponents of Operation Impact tell the public that these tactics—essentially pulling random people over, interrogating them and towing their cars—prevent violent crime.

Operation Impact is being used in cities around the country, and reflects the national trend of curtailing civil liberties and freedoms. We are increasingly seeing paramilitary models of policing in the many neighborhoods and cities where Critical Resistance operates, resulting in quasi-martial law for certain zip codes and ethnicities. The public is told that these actions are justified by ‘criminal activity’ in the neighborhood. The amount of public outrage determines when and where our constitutional rights apply.

Police brutality and misconduct in poor communities and communities of color has been well documented. According to a 1998 report from Human Rights Watch, “Abuse by law enforcement officers in the United States is one of the most serious and divisive human rights violations in the country. Police have engaged in unjustified shootings, severe beatings, fatal chokings and unnecessarily rough treatment.” An internal review by the Oakland Police Department itself found that African Americans were 3.3 times as likely as whites to be searched during a traffic stop.

Independent monitors of the Oakland Police Department last year found that Oakland police frequently conduct public strip searches of suspects that result in the exposure of their genitalia. Findings from the American Civil Liberties Union and Human Rights Watch also show that police oversight in Oakland and across the country often is either nonexistent or is poorly managed, under-funded and politically weak. Policies such as Oakland’s recently adopted 10 p.m. curfew for parolees and probationers also contribute to increased racial profiling and civil liberties violations.

Critical Resistance Challenges Policies
Critical Resistance is a national, grassroots organization in 10 cities across the country that challenges the belief that prisons and policing keep our communities safe, and organizes for alternatives. Our members in Oakland chose to organize against Operation Impact because we know that these types of policing programs directly funnel low-income people and people of color into the prison and jail system. As part of our organizing around policing and prisons, members have been copwatching for a year, particularly observing police checkpoints in East Oakland.

Through campaigns opposing Operation Impact and Oakland’s 10 p.m. curfew, Critical Resistance organizes to increase support for community-based alternatives to policing and prisons. We know that neither policing programs like Operation Impact nor prisons themselves keep our communities safe. In fact, the devastating effects of imprisonment and policing make the lives of people targeted by the prison industrial complex more disordered and less safe. Widespread evidence, along with common sense and experience, shows that when people have what they need in terms of education, job opportunities, healthcare and hope, long-term personal and community safety follow.

The “tough on crime” initiatives—fueled by police associations and opportunistic politicians—have led all levels of government agencies across the country to call for more police and prisons to “solve” their cities’ social, economic and political problems. Those calls are often accompanied by the further expansion of the prison industrial complex that already numbers over two million people locked in cages. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, nearly 7 million people were on probation, in jail or prison, or on parole at yearend 2004—3.2% of all US adult residents, or one in every 31 adults.

Through grassroots organizing, movement building, policy work, and aggressive media campaigns, Critical Resistance challenges the use of prisons and policing tactics like Operation Impact that funnel people into our growing prison system. Our members across the country work to shift society’s investment from prisons and policing to lasting forms of safety through grassroots organizing, movement building, coalition building, public education, media work, and developing leadership among communities most impacted.

Policing and prisons, used as answers to social, political, and economic problems, result in the marginalization and disenfranchisement of people of color, both producing and anchoring structural and institutional racism. We do not believe you can make the prison industrial complex “less racist,” but rather that we need new, explicitly anti-racist, public safety mechanisms. We also believe that such policy changes are only as secure as the movement of people behind them.

Sitara Nieves is an Oakland-based national organizer with Critical Resistance, which received a grant from Resist last year. For more information, contact Critical Resistance, 1904 Franklin St Suite 504, Oakland, CA 94612; www.criticalresistance.org.

Copyright © Resist, Inc., 2006

Posted by lois at 05:55 PM | Comments (0)

Rev. William Sloane Coffin Dies at 81: Fought for Civil Rights and Against War

April 13, 2006, NY Times
Rev. William Sloane Coffin Dies at 81; Fought for Civil Rights and Against a War
By MARC D. CHARNEY
The Rev. William Sloane Coffin Jr., a civil rights and antiwar campaigner who sought to inspire and encourage an idealistic and rebellious generation of college students in the 1960's from his position as chaplain of Yale University, then reveled in the role of lightning rod thrust upon him by officials and conservatives who thought him and his style of dissent dangerous, died yesterday at his home in Strafford, Vt. He was 81.

The cause was congestive heart failure, said his daughter, Amy Coffin. She said he had recently been under hospice care.

Dr. Coffin, a believer in the power of civil disobedience to bring social and political change, was arrested as a Freedom Rider early in the 1960's and was an early admirer of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

An ordained Presbyterian minister, he embraced a philosophy that put social activism at the heart of his clerical duties. In the late 1970's, when he became senior minister of Riverside Church in New York — an institution long known for its social agenda — he used his ministry to draw attention to the plight of the poor, to question American political and military power, to encourage interfaith understanding, and to campaign for nuclear disarmament. Courage, he preached over the years, was the first virtue, because "it makes all other virtues possible."

In his later years, he devoted himself to antiwar crusades, advocating a nuclear freeze, opposing the 1991 war in the Persian Gulf and speaking out against the invasion of Iraq in 2003. But he did not consider himself a pacifist, and when genocide broke out in Bosnia, he asserted that there were times when international intervention with force was justified.

But it was as the outspoken chaplain at Yale in the tumultuous years when the Vietnam War was escalating that Dr. Coffin's name became known across America. While he questioned the wisdom of the war almost from the start, he came only slowly to a decision to apply to this cause the same tactics of civil disobedience he had already engaged in on behalf of the struggle for integration in the South.

Yet when he did, the spectacle he created — the chaplain of an Ivy League university counseling students that they were right to resist the draft, and accepting their draft cards to be turned in to the Justice Department — so infuriated the Johnson administration that Attorney General Ramsey Clark, himself a prominent liberal, sought to imprison him.

In one of the most celebrated trials of the day, Dr. Coffin, Dr. Benjamin Spock and three others were accused of conspiracy to encourage draft evasion. Dr. Coffin, Dr. Spock and two others were convicted, but the verdicts were overturned on appeal. The case became a cause célèbre for the antiwar left and civil libertarians, who considered the prosecution's eventual failure an incomplete vindication of the right of free speech.

Dr. Coffin had a distinctive view of his own role as a dissenter. His argument with American social practices and political policies, he said, was that of a partner engaged in a "lovers' quarrel." It was a position he could claim almost as a birthright, considering his lineage and the patrician positions he held.

His forebears traced to the Pilgrims, and his father, also named William Sloane Coffin, was a vice president of W. & J. Sloane, the furniture manufacturers, and president of the board of trustees of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. His uncle, the Rev. Henry Sloane Coffin, was president of Union Theological Seminary and the principal influence on his entry into the ministry.

And for almost all of Dr. Coffin's adult life, his service was performed in one or another institution near the heart of power and prestige: the Central Intelligence Agency, Andover, Williams College, Yale, and then Riverside Church, which had been built as an interdenominational house of worship with financing from John D. Rockefeller Jr.

So if Dr. Coffin preached on behalf of the poor and the downtrodden, he did so to the most prominent and talented of parishioners.

His enthusiastic ministry to the Vietnam generation at Yale prompted a Yale alumnus of those years, the cartoonist Garry Trudeau, to gently lampoon him as the offbeat Rev. Scot Sloan ("the thoroughly modern minister/enabler") in "Doonesbury."

Another Yale man of the time, President Bush, has spoken of a less affectionate memory: After Mr. Bush's father lost a Senate race in 1964 to Senator Ralph Yarborough, Dr. Coffin told the young man, then a freshman, student that he knew his father and that the better man had won. (Dr. Coffin disputed the anecdote.)

After Dr. Coffin left Yale, disgust on the part of alumni with his political activities was often blamed for a decline in alumni contributions. But Yale was not the only university to deal with that problem in the 1970's.

Moreover, Dr. Coffin made the case that by addressing the anger, fears and frustrated idealism of the students, the Yale administration may have helped the university avoid the kind of fractures that left far deeper scars at Columbia and other universities.

William Sloane Coffin Jr. was born on June 1, 1924, in Manhattan. His father and his mother, Catherine Butterfield Coffin, were rearing him, a brother and a sister in a penthouse that occupied the 15th and 16th floors of a building on East 68th Street when the father died of a heart attack in December 1933. He had slipped and fallen on the steps of the Metropolitan Museum of Art.

With money less plentiful, Mrs. Coffin took the three children to Carmel-by-the-Sea in California. She also took them to Paris, where young William studied harmony in hopes of becoming a classical pianist. The interest in music continued at Phillips Academy at Andover, from which he graduated in 1942, and for a year at Yale's music school. Then he entered the Army and was sent to Europe as an infantry officer.

Because of his facility with languages, he was made a liaison to the French and, later, the Russian Army. In 1946, he took part in operations to forcibly repatriate Soviet citizens who had been taken prisoner and who, once repatriated, were never heard from again. The deceptions in which he took part to gain the prisoners' trust before handing them over, he wrote in his memoir, "Once to Every Man" (Atheneum, 1977), "left me a burden of guilt I am sure to carry the rest of my life."

"Certainly," he added, "it influenced my decision in 1950 to spend three years in the C.I.A. opposing Stalin's regime."

His reference was to the years of the Korean War, which he spent in the C.I.A. after being recruited by a brother-in-law who was a top agency official. In Germany, he helped send anti-Soviet Russians back into Russia; they would parachute in by night and work against the Soviet regime in paramilitary teams.

"I had seen that Stalin could occasionally make look Hitler look like a Boy Scout," Dr. Coffin explained last year to a reporter for The New York Times, Tim Weiner, who was preparing a history of the C.I.A. "I was very anti-Soviet but very pro-Russian." But Soviet intelligence detected nearly all of the efforts, and Dr. Coffin said the missions nearly always ended in disaster. "It didn't work," he said. "It was a fundamentally bad idea. We were quite naïve about the use of American power."

The years in the spy agency, it turned out, were only an interlude. Before joining it in 1950, he had left the Army as a captain in 1947, returned to Yale and earned a degree in government. In 1949, he was captivated by the possibilities of a religious vocation when, at the urging of his Uncle Henry, he attended a conference at Union Theological Seminary and heard Reinhold Niebuhr and prominent ministers from Harlem speak.

So when he returned to the United States in 1953, it was to study for the ministry at Yale Divinity School. When he graduated in 1956, he returned to Andover as the school's acting chaplain.

That year he also married Eva Anna Rubenstein, an actor and dancer who was the daughter of the pianist Artur Rubenstein. The couple had three children before the marriage ended in divorce in 1968.

After spending a year at Williams College as chaplain, Dr. Coffin was named to the chaplain's post at Yale in 1958. The civil rights struggle was heating up, and he was arrested three times when he went south to join it. The arrests came in 1961, while taking part in a Freedom Ride in Montgomery, Ala.; in 1963, while protesting segregation at an amusement park near Baltimore; and in 1964, at a St. Augustine, Fla., lunch counter that he and others were trying to integrate.

Dr. Coffin said aides to Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy had tried to dissuade the Freedom Riders from making their trip in 1961. That first arrest caused some surprise at Yale. But Dr. Coffin said he was only setting a moral example.

"Every minister is given two roles, the priestly and the prophetic,"' he said later that year. "The prophetic role is the disturber of the peace, to bring the minister himself, the congregation and entire moral order some judgment."

The athletic and voluble Dr. Coffin became a familiar figure on Yale's campus, riding his motor scooter, joking with students and challenging them to stand up for what they thought. But by 1967, the campus that had largely welcomed him back from Montgomery as a man of courage was convulsed with the passion surrounding the Vietnam War.

Much of the turmoil was over the draft, from which young men in college were exempt but which was waiting for them as soon as they left academia. Dr. Coffin, a critic of the country's war policy since 1965, had been a founder of a group called Clergy and Laity Concerned About Vietnam. But he had concluded that letter-writing and seeking out policy makers and members of Congress were having no effect.

In 1967, he chose a course of civil disobedience. First, he offered the chapel at Yale as a sanctuary for those who were refusing to serve in Vietnam.

Then, on Oct. 16 of that year, as a major demonstration at the Pentagon itself was being planned, Dr. Coffin helped preside at a service at the Arlington Street Church in Boston at which young men who were resisting the draft turned over their draft cards to him for delivery to the Justice Department. Dr. Coffin and three others left about 185 draft cards and 175 classification notices at the Justice Department in Washington on Oct. 20, a Friday, even as the capital braced for a weekend of demonstrations.

Dr. Coffin told James Reston, a Times columnist, that his effort was intended to mount a "fair and dignified" legal challenge to the draft, and his statement to the Justice Department made it clear that the protesters were courting arrest as a symbolic act — a position in accord with his statements that civil disobedience required confronting the draft and accepting the legal consequences.

There was no immediate arrest, however, as the capital focused on the confrontations in the streets between radical protesters and helmeted troops outside the Pentagon. But on Jan. 5, 1968, the Justice Department came back with a far more serious charge than the defendants had expected. It indicted Dr. Coffin, Dr. Spock and the three others on charges that they had engaged in a conspiracy to counsel draft evasion.

Dr. Coffin said he had not pushed the thought of draft evasion on anyone who did not already have it, but the government argued that this defied common sense, given the persuasive power that someone of his standing would have when he took a position or set an example.

Dr. Coffin, Dr. Spock and two of the other three were convicted of conspiracy, but the verdicts were overturned on appeal, largely because of errors made by the judge. Dr. Coffin could have been retried, but the government chose not to do so.

The case left him a national figure of protest — lionized by the left, vilified by the right, and puzzled over by his superiors at Yale.

Kingman Brewster Jr., an expert on constitutional law who would himself fall afoul of the Nixon administration, was Yale's president, and his reactions said a great deal about the difficulties Dr. Coffin's brand of conscience could present.

Eight days after Dr. Coffin turned in the draft cards in Washington, Mr. Brewster gave a speech to parents of Yale students and said, "I disagree with the chaplain's position on draft resistance, and in this instance deplore his style."

Two years later, after Dr. Coffin's conviction was overturned but before the government dropped the case, Mr. Brewster stood before entering freshmen and held up Dr. Coffin and Mayor John V. Lindsay of New York as two men who were "wholly unashamed of their high purpose."

He drew applause when he criticized the draft as "a system of conscription which makes the campus a draft haven and distorts career choices in an effort to avoid service in a war nobody wants to fight."

If the draft issue proved a political minefield for those seeking to hold Yale together, the pattern became only more complex as the war dragged on into the Nixon administration and another incendiary issue came to the forefront: the prosecution of Black Panthers in New Haven on kidnapping and murder charges.

In the spring of 1970, a constellation of spokesmen for the radical left — among them Tom Hayden of Students for a Democratic Society, David Dellinger of the antiwar movement, Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin of the Yippies, the poet Allen Ginsberg and Black Panther leaders — convened a giant rally just outside the Yale campus to protest both the prosecution of the Panthers and the conduct of the war. Officials throughout the Northeast feared an explosion of violence at Yale's doorstep. National Guard troops were sent into New Haven.

Among Yale's students and faculty, political sympathy for the left ran high, but so did a concern to prevent violence. Students organized a group of marshals to keep tempers cool.

Dr. Coffin met with rally organizers, who chose to put the most fiery speakers on in the morning and the more boring ones on as night, with its potential for disruption, was about to fall. He served on a committee of monitors. And on the one night when events threatened to get out of hand, he helped persuade a National Guard commander to keep his troops inconspicuous.

In the end, the gathering proceeded largely peacefully, and when it was over many at Yale basked briefly in self-congratulation that the threat of serious violence had been averted.

Then came news that four young protesters had been killed when troops opened fire at Kent State University in Ohio, where a remarkably similar stage had been set that week — tense national guardsmen facing angry students — but with less success at controlling tempers and fears.

In September 1972, Dr. Coffin was a member of group of clergy and peace activists who went to Hanoi to accompany three released prisoners of war on their return to the United States.

He remained chaplain of Yale until 1976, when he stepped down to work with world hunger programs and write his memoir. A few months later, he separated from his second wife, Harriet Gibney, whom he had married in 1969. That marriage, like his first, ended in divorce and he remarried once more, to Virginia Randolph Wilson, who survives him.

Besides his daughter, by his first marriage, Amy, of Oakland, Calif., Dr. Coffin is survived by a son by his first marriage, David Coffin, of Gloucester, Mass.; his brother, Ned Coffin, of Strafford; his sister, Margot Lindsay, of Newton, Mass.; three grandchildren; two stepchildren, Jessica Tidman, of Strafford, and Wil Tidman, of San Francisco; and four stepgrandchildren. Another son by his first marriage, Alexander, died in 1983.

Dr. Coffin was appointed to the ministry at Riverside Church in 1978. There, he promoted international arms control and mobilized congregants to work on local issues like unemployment and juvenile delinquency.

In 1979, he was one of three American clergymen who, along with a fourth from Algeria, went to Tehran at their own expense to help the American hostages held there celebrate Christmas. In the 1980's, after leaving Riverside, he was a leader of Sane/Freeze, an organization that campaigned for disarmament and a freeze on nuclear testing.

Dr. Coffin's activities slowed considerably in the 1990's, and in 1999 he suffered a stroke. But he continued to write and speak out from his home in Strafford. In the spring and fall of 2003, he spoke out repeatedly in criticism of the war President Bush was leading in Iraq. Last October, he founded an organization of religious leaders calling for the elimination of nuclear arms.

In the fall of 2003, he preached at Riverside Church again, on World Communion Sunday, after being introduced by Kofi Annan, the secretary general of the United Nations. His voice resonant, even though his speech was slow and somewhat slurred, Dr. Coffin told the congregants that there was "a huge difference between patriotism and nationalism."

"Patriotism at the expense of another nation is as wicked as racism at the expense of another race," he declared, adding: "Let us resolve to be patriots always, nationalists never. Let us love our country, but pledge allegiance to the earth and to the flora and fauna and human life that it supports — one planet indivisible, with clean air, soil and water; with liberty, justice and peace for all."

Posted by lois at 10:54 AM | Comments (0)

April 11, 2006

Provision in 2005 Budget Deficit Reduciton Act Requires Proof of Citizenship for Medicaid Benefits

Kaiser network. April 11, 2006

Provision in 2005 Budget Deficit Reduction Act Requires Proof of Citizenship for Medicaid Benefits

Individuals seeking care through Medicaid beginning on July 1 will be required under federal law to show proof of U.S. citizenship -- such as a birth certificate, passport or another form of identification -- the Boston Globe reports. The requirement was included in the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, which President Bush signed into law earlier this year. The provision's intent is to prevent undocumented immigrants from claiming to be citizens in order to receive benefits only provided to legal residents, according to the Globe. Under federal law, undocumented immigrants can receive only emergency care through Medicaid. Some health care specialists are concerned that with the new citizenship requirements, many Medicaid beneficiaries, including those who are mentally disabled or homeless, will not be able to produce documentation and will have difficulty receiving health services.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities earlier this year issued a report saying the law will affect almost 50 million people and will "almost certainly create significant enrollment barriers for millions of low-income citizens who meet all Medicaid eligibility requirements." Massachusetts Medicaid Director Beth Waldman said, "This shouldn't take away from people's access to health care. All you need to do is show that you're a citizen." She noted that many Massachusetts Medicaid beneficiaries already must show proof of citizenship to register for other federal programs. Health care providers said they will continue to treat patients who cannot prove their citizenship, but the law could make it more difficult for providers to receive federal reimbursements. Another concern is that states have not been notified about how the law will be enforced, according to the Globe. CMS spokesperson Mary Kahn said the agency is writing the regulations (Helman, Boston Globe, 4/11).

Emergency Care Law
In related news, a group of Oregon hospitals began asking emergency department patients to supply their places of birth in order to determine how many undocumented patients they were treating and thus their level of reimbursement from the federal government, the Oregonian reports. Under federal law, most hospitals must treat anyone who is seeking emergency care or who is in active labor. Section 1011 in the 2003 Medicare law gives U.S. hospitals $1 billion over four years to care for undocumented immigrants. The provision also instructs providers not to ask patients directly about their citizenship status. Legacy Health System's four Oregon hospitals decided to ask for places of birth because many officials "are loath to ask the probing questions needed to determine whether a patient is in the United States illegally," the Oregonian reports (O'Neill, Oregonian, 4/10).

Posted by lois at 12:42 PM | Comments (0)

Governors Seek Additional Federal Fund to Offset Costs of Incarcerating "Criminal Aliens"

OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
GAAS:214:06
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
04/05/2006
Governor Schwarzenegger and Other Governors Call on
Congress for More Federal Funding to Offset Criminal
Alien Prison Costs

Joined by the governors of 13 states, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger today called on Congress to provide $850 million in federal fiscal year 2007 funding for the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP). Governor Schwarzenegger today sent letters asking for additional federal funding to key House and Senate leaders on fiscal committees, as well as the California delegation. "Each year, thousands of undocumented immigrants who have committed crimes in California are incarcerated at state taxpayer's expense. Ensuring California receives every dollar possible for this federal obligation is a top priority for me," said Governor Schwarzenegger. "While the federal government works on improving border security, it is imperative that states receive financial assistance for the continued costs associated with the federal government's failure to secure the border." Similar efforts last year by Governor Schwarzenegger resulted in a $100 million increase in overall SCAAP funding, bringing the total 2006 federal appropriation to $405 million. In 2005, California received $121 million, almost half of total SCAAP funding. It is estimated that California spends more than $750 million each year for the incarceration of criminal aliens. SCAAP is a federal program that reimburses states and local governments for costs associated with the incarceration of criminal aliens. The SCAAP Program was created by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1990.
The 13 governors joining Governor Arnold
Schwarzenegger in asking Congress for SCAAP funding
include: Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano, Georgia
Governor Sonny Perdue, Texas Governor Rick Perry,
Washington Governor Christina Gregoire, Florida
Governor Jeb Bush, New York Governor George Pataki,
Iowa Governor Thomas Vilsack, Minnesota Tim Pawlenty,
Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski, New Mexico Governor
Bill Richardson, Nevada Governor Kenny Guinn, Illinois
Governor Rod Blagojevich, and New Jersey Governor Jon
Corzine.

Posted by lois at 10:03 AM | Comments (0)

KS: Private Prisons Prospects Improve in Trade-off for longer sentences for people convicted of sex offences

Private prison prospects improve
Tougher penalties for sex offenders also included in bill
By Scott Rothschild
Monday, April 10, 2006

Topeka - Gov. Kathleen Sebelius said she's willing to accept private prisons to get a bill that increases penalties for sex offenders.

"There are a lot of protections in place," Sebelius said of the measure that would authorize the state to enter into a contract for a private prison.

The prison proposal is contained in a bill that would increase prison sentences for sex offenders. While there is nearly unanimous support in the Legislature for the sex offender portion of the bill, there is less support for changing policy to allow private prisons.

The legislation is in a House-Senate conference committee and will be considered when lawmakers return to Topeka on April 26.

Sebelius said passage of the increased sex offender punishments was one of her priorities. She conceded the bill probably will reach her desk with the private prison provision attached.

Sen. Derek Schmidt, R-Independence, who has been pushing for approval of a private prison bill, said he was pleased that Sebelius supported the measure.

"It's not a new issue, and we've worked on it for four years now, worked with the secretary of corrections and crafted a bill that meets his concerns," Schmidt said.

Corrections Secretary Roger Werholtz has said he is opposed to private prisons but that if adopted by the Legislature he hopes safeguards now in the measure remain.

The provision would give the corrections secretary authority over the construction, licensing and oversight of a private prison.

In addition, under the measure, no private prison could be operated in a county without approval of the county commissioners and a vote of county residents.

But Frank Smith of Bluff City, an outspoken critic of private prisons, said the private prison industry has been plagued with problems such as prison riots, low wages for employees and substandard conditions for inmates.

"Other states have had terrible experiences with legislation such as this, which when passed seemed to provide certain guarantees," Smith said.

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2006/apr/10/private_prison_prospects_improve/?state_regional

Posted by lois at 10:00 AM | Comments (0)

CA: Study Shows Diversion Programs Work

New York Times
April 10, 2006
Editorial

A Victory for California
California took a leap of faith six years ago when it decided to offer nonviolent drug offenders the choice of going to jail or accepting probation and community-based drug treatment. Critics of the initiative predicted dire consequences if petty drug criminals were allowed to escape incarceration. But the data collected in California is beginning to show that nonviolent drug offenders are more effectively — and less expensively — dealt with when they are diverted into treatment.
A new study by researchers at the Integrated Substance Abuse Programs at the University of California, Los Angeles, shows that nonviolent offenders who complete drug treatment actually save the state money, even though the programs are costly. According to the study, Californians save $4 for every $1 they invest in drug treatment for people who actually complete the treatment regimen. The researchers estimate that the treatment option has saved California a huge sum — about $800 million — over the last five years.

The program is clearly worthy of emulation and worthy of greater support from the State Legislature and the localities. At the same time, however, the report makes clear that the program would benefit from more effective coordination among governmental departments and localities, as well as improved and expanded treatment regimens. Given the impressive findings so far, Californians would be wise to help the program reach its full potential.


Long Beach Press Telegram

Article Launched: 4/06/2006 12:00 AM

Passing the drug test

Prop. 36 shows benefits of treating addicts, instead of jail time.

A UCLA medical school study shows that California was wise to end its addiction to imprisoning non-violent drug offenders. Treatment costs less and works better. Proposition 36, which voters approved in 2000 to divert addicts from jail and into rehab, has saved the state $1.5 billion. Since the initiative took effect, 140,000 people have gotten get-out-of-jail-free cards and taken a shot and getting sober.

There is reason to pay attention to the success - and keep it coming. Funding for Proposition 36 is expected to expire June 30. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposed budget thankfully earmarks $120 million in fiscal 2006-07, and the Legislature ought to approve his request to save taxpayers money and, more importantly, because it works.

Voters deserve all the credit. They did what politicians - possibly out of fear of looking soft on crime - couldn't or wouldn't do: help drug addicts clean up their acts with the help of therapists and medical professionals. No one should do hard time for being addicted to hard drugs, unless they commit other crimes.

Addicts often cannot put down the powder, the needle or the pipe because they use street drugs to self-medicate mental illness, chemical imbalances, emotional distress, physical abuse and other afflictions that tend to run in families. Combine that with the difficulty of obtaining health insurance and it becomes a real challenge for them to live drug-free. Those who exploit these weaknesses by selling drugs to addicts are the ones who belong in prison.
Proposition 36 provides money to help troubled souls beholden to meth, crack, heroin, cocaine and other poisons find a better way. About 60,000 addicts should graduate from the initiative-funded program by the end of its fifth full year, but it's the voters who should toss their caps in the air for helping so many people.

The Associated Press State & Local Wire

April 5, 2006 Wednesday 8:13 AM GMT

SECTION: STATE AND REGIONAL

HEADLINE: Study: Drug treatment much cheaper alternative to prison time

BYLINE: By LOUISE CHU, Associated Press Writer

DATELINE: SAN FRANCISCO


The state saves more than twice the amount of money that it spends on nonviolent drug offenders who are sentenced to treatment rather than prison, according to a new study.

The report by UCLA's Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior found that taxpayers saved nearly $2.50 for every dollar invested in drug treatment in the first 30 months since implementation of a 2000 law allowing drug treatment as an alternative to imprisonment. Savings further increased if offenders actually completed their programs, with taxpayers saving nearly $4 per dollar spent, according to the study that was be released Wednesday.

The total savings in the first 30 months was more than $173 million, said researchers, who factored in money saved from such areas as housing inmates, probation, parole, re-arrests and future court fees.

Proposition 36 the so-called Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act allocates $120 million per year for nonviolent first- and second-time offenders to enroll in drug treatment programs.

Treatment advocates said the cost savings reported in the study would only increase over time, as the number of repeat offenders decreased after successful treatment.

"Even in that least efficient year, taxpayers realized enormous cost savings," said Daniel Abrahamson of the Drug Policy Alliance who co-authored Proposition 36. Advocates have projected the program would eventually save an average of $250 million per year.

The study also recommended improvements to the program to boost effectiveness, such as greater collaboration between state and local governments, better monitoring of offenders after treatment and improved screening methods to determine who's eligible.

"The cost savings are dramatic, but with increased system accountability measures and improved offender management ... they could rise even higher,"
study co-author M. Douglas Anglin said.

John Lovell, legislative counsel for the California Narcotics Officers Association, which opposed Proposition 36, said the recommendations support their view that the program currently lacks that accountability.

The majority of offenders eligible for treatment do not successfully complete it, making them more likely to re-offend, Lovell said, pointing to a 2004 UCLA study that showed only 24 percent of offenders ordered to get treatment actually completed it.

"We agree that if you have successful treatment, you will achieve cost savings. But the key there is successful treatment," he said.

With funding for Proposition 36 set to expire this year, several lawmakers have proposed legislation to renew the funding while applying certain restrictions, such as adding a short-term jail option for certain offenders.

Lovell said the jail option, as well as follow-up drug testing and probation, is what's needed to make the program fully effective.

Dave Fratello, another co-author of Proposition 36, said such restrictions would fundamentally change the program.

"There's really no rationale for making the changes they want, except to give in to law enforcement interests who always wanted this to be a punishment model rather than a treatment model," he said.

Posted by lois at 09:55 AM | Comments (0)

April 07, 2006

Review: Prison Nation- Posters on the Prison Industrial Complex at the Watts Towers Art Center

There’s power in these posters
The use of imagery in placards advocating prison reform is on display at the Watts Towers Art Center.
By Cindy Chang
Special to The Times

April 6, 2006

The United States puts more of its citizens behind bars than any other nation, according to the International Center for Prison Studies in London. The federal government's latest count pegs the American prison population at more than 2 million, a sixfold increase since 1970.

For advocates of prison reform, these statistics underscore the need for drastic change. But for others, they are proof of how well the system is working.

Sometimes only arresting visual images, like the photographs of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, have the power to speak across ideological lines. Indeed, the prison reform movement has long used images to convey what statistics alone cannot.

Whether it's a 1960s photo of Texas prisoners picking cotton or an iconic Abu Ghraib silhouette superimposed on a takeoff of an iPod ad, an exhibition at the Watts Towers Art Center traces the use of imagery on prison-reform posters through the decades.

The show, which runs through June 4, was curated by the L.A.-based Center for the Study of Political Graphics and partially funded by the city of Los Angeles' Cultural Affairs Department.

More often than not, posters advertise countercultural points of view, and the center has sponsored many exhibits devoted to left-wing causes, including an antiwar exhibit several years ago and a just-concluded exhibit of anti-death penalty posters. Titled "Prison Nation: Posters on the Prison Industrial Complex," this show presents a take on the American prison system that is loud and clear.

Opening day in late March included a panel discussion with local prison reform organizations. A Sunday afternoon film series presented in conjunction with the exhibition is screening prison-related movies. (This weekend's program features films about juveniles in the criminal justice system.)

Some of the posters were created especially for the exhibition, but many were used to draw people to a rally or to issue a call to action with maximum effect.

"There's evidence that when a campaign has graphics and visuals to promote its mission, it has more success. You need a powerful image to convey a message, something that people can pull in with a glance. Then you can give them more information," said Mary Sutton, the center's program director and a co-curator of the exhibition.

Not surprisingly, the American flag is a common motif in the show, with the stripes often standing in for prison bars.

One poster from 1976 comments on the American bicentennial by invoking Betsy Ross' name as an ironic juxtaposition to a set of anonymous female hands sewing a flag behind cell bars. "1976 — what are we celebrating?" asks the accompanying text.

Cedomir Kostovic, a professor at Missouri State University who emigrated from Bosnia in 1990, designed another of the American flag posters after watching a television news program about the United States' high incarceration rates.

Kostovic's computer-generated image of a Stars and Stripes formed with keyholes and prison bars was the final installment of his trilogy of American flag posters. (The first was a homage to Sept. 11 victims and had stripes composed of many candles; the second, a comment on the power of American corporations, used Coca-Cola cans as stripe components.)

"I saw a magazine program about how the government can't build enough jails, how private people are building jails and it's become a big business. I was just shocked, and I thought, 'I have to say something.' I'm a visual artist, this is how I speak, so I did a poster about it," Kostovic said.

Some of the posters in the "Prison Nation" exhibition are aimed at inner-city youths. In her work at the Los Angeles-based Youth Justice Coalition, co-curator Kim McGill uses images to communicate with a generation that was raised on MTV and hip-hop and has little patience for the written word.

"You can get posters and stickers into places where you can't get any other information — schools, bus stops, in people's cells," McGill said. "We can't begin to afford the billboard space that corporations can pay for, so posters become our advertising, our way to take back public space in an environment of commercial messages."

One youth-oriented poster, from a Bay Area collective, speaks to teenagers by describing the unpleasant facts of life in prison. Written on a blackboard in white chalk is a list of the meager items issued to an inmate: three pairs of jeans, three shirts and on down the line. The simple message? "This is not a camping trip. Choose education, not incarceration."

The show also includes several posters by European artists who live in countries with low incarceration rates and who seem to be aghast at the relatively large proportion of American citizens behind bars as well as the way the United States is treating its prisoners abroad.

Amnesty International in Switzerland designed a poster showing police mug shots of the Statue of Liberty and noting in French, "Liberty and equality? It depends on for whom."

A stenciled poster by the Swedish artist Sixten looks like an advertisement for a luxury resort called Guantanamo Bay — but if the name itself isn't enough of a giveaway, barbed wire lurks in the background and a drop of blood besmears the palm-treed island.

Taken together, the 80-some posters provide an overview of the issues that have concerned prison reformers over the last half-century.

Some, like living conditions behind bars and prison guard brutality, have stayed more or less constant. Others, like Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, are newer.

Because failed efforts at change are often forgotten, posters such as these can preserve an alternative take on history, which often concentrates on the movements that did take hold, organizers say.

"Usually, you get a seamless version of history — then came this and this and this. History is written by the victors," said Carol Wells, the graphics center's executive director.

"Posters are produced by people who are involved in struggles and give their point of view, which is rarely told in history books."

http://www.calendarlive.com/galleriesandmuseums/cl-wk-gallery6apr06,0,6901186.story?coll=cl-art-top-right

Posted by lois at 09:13 PM | Comments (0)

Over and Over Again: The Staggering Failure Rate of Parole

Over and Over Again
April6, 2006
Spending half a billion dollars on new prisons won't solve the state's biggest crime problem: the staggering failure rate of parole.

By Alan Prendergast

Having been deep in it most of his life, John "Jake" Johnson can smell trouble coming. So last year, when the fifty-year-old inmate found out he would be paroling from a private prison in Trinidad to a homeless shelter in downtown Denver, the news smelled very bad indeed.

"I told my case manager,'I can't go back to a shelter,'" he recalls. "You put me in that atmosphere, people drinking and shooting dope and smoking crack, and man! I can't help what I am."

What Johnson is, among other things, is an alcoholic and a thief. He started drinking heavily in his teens, around the time his father died and his large family had to move from an upper-middle-class neighborhood in east Denver to a housing project on the west side. "That changed my life right there," he says. "I'm not using it as an excuse, but it might have been a defining moment. My dad died, we went to the projects, and that was it." He dropped out of high school, picked up a juvenile record, then an extensive adult rap sheet -- burglary, robbery, auto theft -- that has kept him weaving in and out of the prison system for most of the past three decades.

Throughout his erratic criminal career, Johnson has been consistent in one area: He's been a thoroughly unsuccessful parolee. Each time he received parole, he'd get a job, start drinking -- and end up going back to prison on a parole violation. The first few times that happened, he'd complete his sentence behind bars ("kill his number," in convict lingo), then return to the streets.

But in 1993, Colorado lawmakers decided to add up to five years of mandatory parole that prisoners must complete, whether they serve their full sentence or not. For thousands of cons like Johnson, battling drug and alcohol problems and with few outside resources to help them make it back on the streets, the practical effect of mandatory parole was to tack years of additional incarceration onto their sentences, even if their crime was relatively minor.

Johnson's current sentence dates back to 1999, when he helped himself to $1,500 that belonged to his employer, a bail bondsman. He was originally sentenced to four years of probation. He completed seven months in a halfway house, then was supposed to move into his own place -- but he took off for Utah instead. After that, he was sent to prison for six months, served four months on parole, then absconded again. This time he got another six months in prison, followed by six months of intensive supervision parole (ISP), during which he wore an electronic ankle bracelet and his urine was regularly tested for alcohol. The ISP program "worked like a charm," Johnson says, but after it ended, he was off on another drinking binge -- and on his way back to prison for another six months.

Last June, almost six years after his four-year sentence began, Johnson learned that the Colorado Department of Corrections was preparing to put him on the streets yet again. This time he was told to report to New Genesis, a Denver homeless shelter. "I wanted to go to the Salvation Army drug-and-alcohol program," he says. "It's away from all that. But they said I had to go to New Genesis. That's where they had room for me."

Johnson arrived in Denver with eleven dollars to his name. He was issued a pager at a parole office and told to call in every time it beeped. He signed up for food stamps. The state paid his first two weeks' rent at New Genesis, but after that, he was on his own.

"The first thing you got to do is get working, no matter where," Johnson says. "Got to get the drug-and-alcohol classes, too. That's 25 bucks a week. And the UAs [urinalysis]. They want your restitution paid, too. You got all these bills mounting up the minute you hit the street."

New Genesis wasn't as bad as Johnson feared. "It was just a nasty place," he says. "You got people going in and out drunk and shit like that. The regular crowd is pretty much all DOC, and they're drinking, too. There was a heroin overdose in the shower the week I got there. But a guy could probably make it down there if he really puts his mind to it."

Johnson tried to do just that. He found day-labor and temp jobs right away. His pager went off three or four times a day, and each time he dropped whatever he was doing and headed for a phone. But his job-hunting range was restricted by his lack of a car or a bus pass, and he was reluctant to leave the shelter phone number as a contact for potential employers. After three weeks, the dead-end grimness of it all put his mind to having a drink. He left the shelter and didn't look back.

For a few days he continued to answer his pager -- until he lost it. Drinking every day and living on the streets began to catch up with him. He knew that sooner or later the DOC would catch up with him, too. He was arrested last September and, just as he expected, the hearing officer revoked his parole and handed him another 180-day "turnaround" behind bars.

But that wasn't all. A few days later, Johnson was brought into a Denver courtroom and informed that he was being charged not only with a parole violation, but with a new crime: escape. Until that moment, he insists, nobody told him that the pager meant he was again on intensive supervision parole. Walking away from ISP carries an automatic felony escape charge. Although calling his supervision "intensive" might be a stretch -- Johnson says he had only one brief meeting with his parole officer during his three weeks at the shelter -- he was now facing four to twelve years in prison for failing to follow the rules.

"I was shocked," he says. "There were all these guys in county [jail] with me who were charged with escape, too, guys who'd been living in shelters or at home with pagers. I couldn't believe it. When the judge told me I was looking at another twelve years, I couldn't even speak. I just about shit my pants."

His back against the wall, Johnson readily accepted a plea deal that added one year to his sentence for the escape. He's now in the Sterling Correctional Facility, serving the rest of his drawn-out time. With good behavior, he should be back on the streets by this time next year, with another two years of parole to do. Assuming he actually finishes his parole this time, his theft of $1,500 will have cost him nearly a decade of his life -- and cost Colorado taxpayers roughly a quarter million dollars in incarceration costs, court appearances and other expenses related to his incessant parole failures.

Multiply Johnson's situation by several thousand similarly situated inmates, and you can see how Colorado's troubled parole system is punishing everyone in the state. The population of parolees is skyrocketing in Colorado; so is the failure rate. And most of the failures are chronic, low-level offenders like Johnson -- many of them homeless, all of them caught in a complex and exceedingly expensive revolving door.

In January, DOC officials stunned state legislators with a request for more than half a billion dollars in additional funding to keep up with the projected growth rate of the prison population. The number of Colorado inmates has grown at more than twice the national average over the past decade and now stands at more than 21,000; it's expected to increase to 29,000 by 2011. Just providing beds for that influx will require $386 million to build new prisons and an additional $168 million in operating costs for those prisons over the next five years, DOC officials say. This, of course, is on top of the department's $600 million annual budget.

Lawmakers were appalled by the DOC's pronouncement and scrambled to come up with alternatives. But department spokesmen defended their hefty request, arguing that it was a logical outcome of anticipated population growth and neglect of prison-expansion needs during the recent years of budget cuts. Missing from the discussion, though, was any acknowledgement that the bed shortage is a direct result of the parole logjam.

No one talked about the inmates who have technically been "paroled" but will remain in prison until their mandatory release date; the inmates whose paroles have been postponed or denied because there's no place to put them once they're released; and, most costly of all, the hordes of parolees who are winding up right back in the system again, heaped with parole violations or serving time for "new crimes" that, in many cases, are directly related to the conditions of their parole.

More than half of all parolees fail to complete parole the first time around, and the numbers are getting worse. In the last fiscal year, 6,443 Colorado prisoners were released on parole. During the same twelve-month period, 3,473 parolees returned to prison, after an average stay on the streets of ten months. Of the 9,415 "new" inmates entering the state's prisons last year, one in three was a parole violator going back to serve more time on an old sentence. If current trends continue, within a few years the figure will be one in two.

Defenders of the current system say parole isn't supposed to be easy and that there will always be failures. But reformers contend that parole in Colorado has become unduly complicated, onerous and unworkable; they'd like to see the system scrapped or substantially overhauled. By investing even modest sums in additional resources for parolees -- including crucial but politically unpopular programs that provide transitional housing, job training and substance-abuse treatment -- the success rate could change dramatically, they suggest, freeing up prison beds for more serious criminals and saving tens of millions of dollars now sought for more prisons.

"There are a lot of people going back to prison intentionally because they can't make it out here," says Christie Donner, co-director of the Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition. "We just haven't built a very good re-entry system in Colorado. Paroling homeless is not a parole plan."

But fixing parole won't be easy, either. Three years ago Donner's group helped pass legislation designed to ease the parole backlog. But the new law seems to have had some unintended consequences, including more revocations and a sizable leap in the number of new felony charges filed against parole violators. And no one has come up with a simple answer for the growing ranks of homeless parolees such as Jake Johnson.

"I've brought all my trouble on myself," Johnson says. "I don't deny that. But I can't get into that shelter environment and be expected to succeed. It seems like there's no place for a homeless parolee to go but downtown. And when a guy gets downtown, he's just lost."

The Colorado Board of Parole holds more than 16,000 hearings a year to consider applications for parole. Last year it also held more than 9,000 hearings to consider revoking inmates' parole. That works out to more than seventy hearings a day, but only parole hearings involving violent offenders require a review by the full seven-member board. Most hearings are conducted by a single boardmember or an attorney serving as a hearing officer, and they last just a few minutes.

A frequent stop for the ever-roaming board members is the Denver Reception and Diagnostic Center, which houses inmates just coming into the prison system on a new sentence -- or returning from somewhere else. On this particular morning, board chairman Allan Stanley starts reviewing parole applications at a table on one side of the visiting room, while his colleague Verne Saint Vincent, a former Aurora police chief, conducts revocation hearings on the other side. Inmates are escorted to the room one at a time. Between them, Stanley and Saint Vincent make it through close to twenty cases in under two hours.

Stanley, a former Englewood police officer and ex-deputy director of the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, interviews the applicants with brisk efficiency. The inmates offer the usual explanations for their crimes ("I was just in the wrong place at the wrong time; the guy who forged that check got it from the lady I was seeing at the time") and the usual responses to the question of why they should be paroled ("I just want to get out and rehabilitate myself as soon as possible"). Stanley has heard it all before.

More than half of the state's prisoners are past their parole-eligibility date, the day on which they can first appear before the parole board. To Stanley, it's a meaningless statistic; the board isn't obliged to release someone just because he's eligible. Of greater concern to the chairman is the number of short-term prisoners he sees at Denver Reception who've spent months in county jails awaiting trial, just arrived in the DOC, and are already approaching their mandatory release date. In those cases, the board is simply rubber-stamping a release for someone who's had no chance to enroll in drug treatment or other prison programs that are supposed to help alter criminal behavior.

"You just got here, and it looks like you're going out on the 28th of this month," Stanley says, thumbing through one inmate's paperwork. "What do you want to say to me?"

Stephen O'Hara, a 21-year-old doing time for possession of marijuana, shrugs and smiles faintly. "I don't think there's anything I can say to you that you don't already know," he replies.

"Good luck to you," Stanley says.

Prior to 1993, parole in Colorado was essentially a form of early
release: Prisoners who exhibited good behavior and completed programs were rewarded with parole. But since the advent of mandatory parole, the number of prisoners granted "discretionary parole" has declined drastically. Last year, less than 10 percent of parole hearings resulted in an early release; in most cases, the board either denied the application or ordered parole at the time of mandatory release -- which allows those inmates to be counted as "paroled" when, in fact, they're doing the maximum amount of time in prison that the law allows, less the "good time" computations the DOC routinely shaves off their sentences.

Knowing they're not likely to get an early release reduces prisoners' incentive to take the programs that are supposed to equip them for life on the streets; consequently, the recidivism rate for mandatory parole is significantly higher than that of discretionary parole. Of the inmates released on mandatory parole in 2001, roughly two out of three were back in prison for a new crime or a parole violation within three years, compared to 52 percent of those granted early release. Still, Stanley is a strong advocate of mandatory parole. Prior to 1993, he points out, dangerous offenders such as rapist Brent Brents could kill their number in prison and emerge with no supervision at all.

"Repeat offenders don't want to come out under supervision," he says. "They'd rather do their time. The mandatory parole is an important transition."

Early release can have its disappointments, too. One of the applicants Stanley sees today is Joseph Deaguero, 41, a heavily tattooed convict with a history of escapes, thefts and substance abuse. Stanley recommended his early release two years ago and took his case to the full board, only to see him fail on parole.

"I'm really disappointed in you," Stanley says, eyeing Deaguero's file.

"I'm disappointed in myself," says Deaguero. Behind him sits his wife of seven months and his stepdaughter, who have come to support his latest parole bid.

Stanley asks him what happened. Foot-dancing nervously under his chair, Deaguero launches into an explanation about violating parole conditions in order to "bond" with his mother, who was moving out of state; the account shows he's picked up some of the self-help jargon tossed around DOC classes. "I just used some poor decision-making," he says. "I did some negative thinking. I accept responsibility for my mistake.... I just ask the parole board to give me another chance to be a productive member of society. I have a family now. I got strong support, a good job. I know I can make it."

But there's no early release for Deaguero this time. His case is deferred until next year, when his mandatory release date (MRD) comes up. Of all the inmates Stanley sees this morning, every one will be released effective on his mandatory release date or deferred, most likely until an approaching MRD makes parole inevitable. Given the board's view that almost every inmate can "benefit" from more time inside, and the fact that the inmates all have to do mandatory parole anyway, early release just isn't an option for most prisoners any more
-- which raises the question of why Colorado still has a parole board at all.

The knock on the current boardmembers, all appointed by Governor Bill Owens, is that they have a lock-'em-up mentality and seldom parole anyone they don't have to. Under state law, the board is supposed to be composed of two representatives with a law enforcement background, one former parole or probation officer, and four citizens. Stanley's board has two citizens, an ex-parole officer, an ex-police chief, an ex-state trooper, a former corrections officer and Stanley himself, who has thirty years in law enforcement. That's a lot of cops, but Stanley says they happen to be "citizens," too.

"We were going through a number of citizens who would only stay on the board a matter of weeks," he explains. "And they're all supposed to have a working knowledge of the criminal justice system. That's very hard to find. Verne Saint Vincent had been retired three years. He argued successfully with the governor that he didn't give up his citizenship when he retired."

And while changing the makeup of the board might have a modest impact on the early release numbers, it's unlikely to have much effect on the miserable failure rate of parole overall. "There are two things I have noticed that impact recidivism," Stanley says. "One of them is simply age. They get too old to commit a crime or mature out of it. The second thing is the ability to make a living -- and meaningful programs that help them with their addiction problems. They need more programming, but a lot of them can't make enough money to pay for all the programs they're supposed to take. So they're really not getting what they need."

Stanley says the most encouraging development he's seen in years is the Cheyenne Mountain Re-Entry Center, a privately operated, medium-security prison in Colorado Springs that opened last summer and focuses on educational, vocational and treatment programs for inmates who are headed for parole. The operation is far more intensive than the DOC's previous pre-release facility in Cañon City, which couldn't handle the growing crunch of parole-eligible inmates. The department had been seeking a private contractor for years and settled on Community Education Centers of New Jersey, which boasts studies that show a drop in recidivism attributed to similar efforts in other states.

"That's just exactly what they need," says Stanley. "It's a wonderful transition out for people who have been in DOC for a long time."

Three years ago, the state legislature decided to create more options for dealing with parole violators. Senate Bill 252, which Christie Donner's reform group helped to write, limits the amount of time low-level offenders must serve on a technical violation to 180 days. Instead of simply shipping nonviolent parolees back to prison for a year or more because they did something stupid, the parole board is now required to send them to one of five "return-to-custody facilities" in the community -- a kind of halfway house where parolees can focus on programs stressing "relapse prevention" and prepare to finish their parole successfully.

"The intention was to do a better job of working with people in the community," explains Donner. "People were going back to prison for things that were not inherently criminal in nature -- not having a job, not having a place to live. When two-thirds of the people on mandatory parole are being revoked -- and at the time we wrote 252, the vast majority were on a technical violation -- that should send up red flags. We can't simply throw people back into prison and have them come out in the same boat they were in before. It's a ridiculous waste of money."

The new law was expected to save the state millions of dollars over the next few years by freeing up prison space. However, DOC officials claim that any savings from S.B. 252 have been greatly reduced by a 33 percent increase in revocation hearings; apparently, more parolees are failing now that the penalties for failure seem less severe. At the same time, more parole violators are facing charges for new crimes than ever before, further complicating the revocation process and possibly adding more prison time than they would have had under the old system.

"Some of these guys are on their third or fourth revocation now," says Stanley, who agrees with certain features of S.B. 252 but laments that it's taken some discretion away from the board. "They go in for six months and come right back out."

Jeaneene Miller, director of the DOC's division of adult parole, says S.B. 252 has allowed more flexibility in dealing with minor parole violators. There are now 212 offenders in the return-to-custody beds, and she expects that number to reach 300 by the end of the year. But she, too, says that 180 days isn't enough time for some of them.

"For certain populations, it should be a longer return to DOC," she says. "Their background warrants that level of intervention. You might have someone whose current conviction is a class 5 or 6 [felony], but he has a history of aggravated robbery and a severe drug dependency and needs to go back for a longer period of time."

The idea that parole violators "deserve" more time than S.B. 252 allows might help explain why the number of parolees going back to prison on new felony convictions has jumped a whopping 83 percent in the past year, from 450 to 824. Before S.B. 252 came along, Stanley says, many violators would self-revoke -- they'd simply admit to a parole violation and ask to be returned to prison. New charges pending for, say, doing drugs or walking away from a shelter would be routinely dismissed because they were going back to prison anyway. But now the board rarely allows self-revocation, and prosecutors, at the urging of parole officers, are filing more felony charges on top of the parole violations.

"When they self-revoked, it would show up statistically as a technical parole violation rather than a new crime," Stanley says. "Now you're seeing the truth."

Donner views the hike in new felonies as a DOC tactic to do an end-run around the intent of the law. "New crimes aren't always what they seem," she says. "You can be late coming back to a halfway house, and that can be considered an escape. I know of a woman who was sent back last week for having a cell phone -- that's contraband. If [the DOC is] satisfied with how much time they're getting for technical violations, then they don't file for new crimes."

But heaping more charges on offenders for what are essentially parole violations is wrongheaded, Donner insists: "Let's recognize that re-entry is extremely, extremely difficult. We need to provide greater support for the people coming out. When you revoke someone for a minor violation, all you've done is obliterate what they've been able to put together in their life. The more appropriate response for someone who's on the edge -- maybe they're starting to use drugs, maybe they're hanging out with people they shouldn't be around -- is to use intermediate sanctions in the community."

When the DOC presented its king-sized budget request to the legislature three months ago, Representative Bernie Buescher, a Democrat who once ran for lieutenant governor, demanded to know what the agency was doing to reduce recidivism. DOC director Joe Ortiz replied that he had no control over how many prisoners the courts send him or how long they're expected to stay.

The answer failed to impress Buescher. He intimated that the agency should stop automatically expanding to accommodate its caseload and start looking at its performance. He wanted the DOC to come up with a plan to improve the success rate of its clientele, rather than simply feed on its failures.

He's still waiting for that plan. "The silence has been deafening," Buescher says. "Some of the departments don't believe they can actually control their budgets. This is a classic example."

Buescher's no expert on prisons, he adds, but he believes that the DOC needs to set goals for reducing recidivism and then make management changes to achieve them. "They have a recidivism rate that's dropped slightly over the last four years, from 52 to 49 percent," he notes. "But how does that compare with other states? We need to look at that, yet they're complaining about their caseload. If it wasn't so sad, it would be comic."

When prisoners do get paroled from the Denver Reception and Diagnostic Center, the chances are pretty good that, a few weeks or months later, they'll wind up 200 yards down Smith Road from where they started -- at the Denver County Jail, awaiting a parole revocation hearing and the trip back to the DRDC.

Administrative hearing officer Tom Waters conducts revocations at the jail with a kind of tightly controlled urgency that makes parole hearings seem almost leisurely by comparison. There are plenty of obligatory advisements and procedural niceties to follow, and an ever-shifting cast of inmates, parole officers and manila files, but Waters, an attorney who's been doing revocations for the parole board for three years, manages to keep it all moving along. He averages 180 hearings a month.

The accused parole violators are men and women, black, white and brown. Mostly, they are resigned, their voices faint in the cavernous visiting room.

"I understand why I should be violated -- revoked," says one woman, who's been charged with failing to report to her parole officer and has a new conviction for possession of drug paraphernalia. "I'm just ready to get back on the right track."

"I been doing good," says another, arrested on a charge of solicitation. "I just went on Colfax, and I shouldn't have. I ended up following my mind and not doing the right thing."

"I ate a burger, and I got really sick," says a ponytailed male who's picked up municipal court convictions for disturbing the peace, trespassing and unlawful public indecency, all over one bad night on downtown's mean streets. "I was crapping, was what I was doing. I was in the bathroom of a hotel for three hours. They kicked me out of there, so I had to go somewhere else.... Since I got off ISP, it's been a nightmare. I got kicked out of New Genesis for someone else's stupidity."

If the parolee has already been found guilty of a new crime, that simplifies Waters's job. A new crime is a self-evident parole violation that almost always warrants revocation. In other instances, new charges are still pending; Waters postpones action on those cases until later, lining up three inmates at a time to grant continuances. Over the course of a morning, he continues eight cases, sends two inmates back to prison (including Mr. Bad Burger) and allows another to proceed on parole.

"It's never a great joy to revoke someone's parole," Waters says later, when he has a few moments to reflect on his work. "It's a tough business. These are individuals who we're trying to get back into the world. But it's not just a litany of failure that is being brought before me. You'd be surprised at the number of times the parole officer says good things about how hard this individual has been trying. Sometimes the individual is going to be continued on parole, with new conditions."

Parole chief Miller says that despite caseloads well in excess of recommended levels, her officers work hard to keep nonviolent parolees from going back to prison. "I don't think people realize how many things we do to work with a client before sending them back," she says. "Typically, we have multiple parole violations before they go before the board. We go through positive drug test after drug test, we increase treatment and supervision. We go in and ask for modifications to the parole agreement. There are so many intermediate steps you can take -- unless you have a new crime, a weapon, or someone who is truly a public-safety risk."

But how many of the new crimes actually consist of a drug relapse, walking away from a shelter or some other offense that would hardly merit prison time for someone who wasn't on parole? The DOC doesn't keep statistics on such matters, but Waters acknowledges that a "significant" number of the new crimes that pop up in revocation hearings are simply escape charges. Failing to report to a parole officer, to maintain a stable residence or to refrain from alcohol or drugs are the most common technical violations he sees, but if the same incident has resulted in criminal charges, it becomes a quick trip back to the slammer.

"The commission of a crime while on parole is a serious matter," he says. "If it's a felony, there's virtually no chance the individual is going to continue on parole."

Sara Steen, a sociology professor at the University of Colorado at Boulder, has been following revocation hearings for months as part of a long-term study of state parole policy. Although her data is still being collected, Steen has formed preliminary impressions of why some parolees seem to succeed while others fail. Some of it depends on the type of offender or even the type of parole officer assigned to the case, she suggests; less experienced officers push harder to revoke on more minor violations. But a key indicator is homelessness.

"The major obstacle for most of these people is housing," Steen says. "It's virtually impossible to succeed if you don't have a place to stay."

Some parolees arrive on Smith Road without even a shelter placement. All they have when they alight from the prison bus that drops them there is a state check for a hundred bucks (cashable at a nearby liquor store, which charges a 10 percent fee), a box containing whatever worldly goods they've managed to hang on to in prison, and some vague directions to a cut-rate motel that will devour the balance of their funds in two or three days. If they're lucky, they might also have a phone number for someone like Rose Herrera, who's worked with homeless parolees for nine years through an outreach program at the Denver Inner City Parish.

Herrera is now the parish office manager, but parolees still seek her out, hoping she can help them negotiate the bewildering world of the streets. She tries to find a place for them to stay, knowing the first few weeks on parole are critical.

"The majority of them get revoked," she says. "A lot of them commit a crime so they can self-revoke and go back to prison. They know they can't make it out here."

According to Herrera, it's not uncommon for parolees to go back to prison on technical violations alone, including the common offense of "association" -- hanging out with other ex-cons. "I had one guy go back because the parole office found out his dad was in prison twelve years ago," she says. "They didn't find out about it until he'd been living with his dad for two months. He's back in county right now. Another went back because at his job he worked with two other guys who were on parole."

There are more resources for parolees now than there were a decade ago, Herrera says, including programs developed by faith-based groups such as her parish. But state-funded parole services -- such as the John Inmann Work and Family Center, a key resource for job-hunting and treatment programs -- were hit hard by the budget cuts of the past few years. And Herrera doesn't think re-entry programs are as keen a priority for the corrections bureaucracy as, say, building a second supermax prison.

"The case manager has to do a lot of work before someone comes out to make sure they're going to make it," she says. "It seems to me that DOC, community corrections, all these people are not interested in what happens to these guys when they get out. Everything is set up to fail. They don't pay their rent on time, they go back. How can a guy be on ISP, have no job and be expected to pay for three UAs a week?"

Miller insists her "re-entry specialists" do their best to hook up parolees with an array of assistance, from bus tokens to drug programs to even springing for initial therapy sessions. Housing remains one of the biggest problems.

"With mandatory parole, you tend to have a group that comes out without resources," Miller says. "Especially the long-term offenders. We have an increase in those who are coming out to homeless shelters. We're aware of that. We're trying to develop more transitional services. But they may abscond just because they're looking for a place to live."

According to Tim Hand, assistant director of operations for the parole division, 85 percent of the parolees assigned to the Sherman Street office, a few blocks south of Colfax, are coming out homeless. Although that office isn't as large as some others in the metro area, it handles the bulk of the Denver cases.

"A lot of these guys have a tendency to burn bridges along the way, even with their own families," says Hand. "It's quite a challenge for us. Our officers do everything they can to keep them on track."

Miller believes the parole division has a "pretty good system" for helping to stabilize its errant clients. The tough part of the job, she says, is overcoming community opposition to having parolees in their midst at all; battles over the siting of halfway houses and neighborhood parole offices have become increasingly acrimonious. Getting employers, landlords and others to support the return of thousands of felons, many of whom will fail, isn't easy, either.

"Unless they have a death sentence or life without parole, everybody's going to come back some day," Miller notes. "The community has to reach out to them, mentor them -- not just tolerate them, but engage them, make them a part of the community. That's critical. It's very unrealistic for the public to believe that someone who has a drug or alcohol problem can go into prison, get cured, come out and never use drugs or alcohol again. These are people who are going to need support services for a lifetime."

Jake Johnson doesn't want to go downtown again. The thought of being stuck in a shelter -- with a pager and no money and the bills piling up, competing for pissant jobs and services against men much younger than him...men who don't have his criminal record...tired, angry men lining up at five o'clock to get a shot at a mat on the floorS It's all more horrible than anything he's experienced in prison.

"I'm scared to death to go down there again," he says.

So Johnson has a plan. He has reconnected with one of his sisters and wants to parole to her place in Arvada next time. He's been learning a trade in prison, graphic arts, and has visions of meaningful employment ahead. First, of course, there's the matter of parole, which he expects to be as difficult as possible.

"They'll probably throw me an ankle bracelet and keep an eye on me all the time," he says. "With my track record? You bet."
From westword.com

Originally published by Westword 2006-04-06
©2005 New Times, Inc. All rights reserved.

Posted by lois at 09:05 PM | Comments (0)

CA: Plan to fix juvenile prisons unveiled

Tue, Apr. 04, 2006
Plan to fix juvenile prisons unveiled
TOP PRIORITIES: CUT VIOLENCE, GIVE TREATMENT
By Brandon Bailey- Mercury News
* Special Report: California Youth Authority

SACRAMENTO - State officials on Monday unveiled a new set of detailed recommendations for fixing California's troubled juvenile prison system, promising to push forward on reforms despite skepticism from legislators and other critics.

A panel of outside experts made the recommendations in a 90-page report that lays out steps toward reducing violence and providing intensive treatment for some of California's worst juvenile offenders, using programs that have proved effective in Washington and other states.

But the report also identified a number of obstacles, including an entrenched prison culture, managers who mostly react to crises, and a recent administrative reorganization that placed juvenile institutions under control of a corrections bureaucracy that is geared toward adults.

For years, the state's juvenile system has been criticized as unsafe and poorly run. A Mercury News series in 2004 found that wards receive little of the education or treatment required by state law. Instead, they are housed in prison-like dorms or cell blocks, where violent gangs and guards vie for the upper hand.

Still, the state's top juvenile official said the new report was cause for optimism. It includes recommendation on issues such as staffing levels, housing wards according to their risk of violence, and assigning managers to develop new policies and procedures.

``Can we do it? The answer is yes,'' said Bernard Warner, chief of the state correction agency's Division of Juvenile Justice, formerly known as the California Youth Authority. He stressed that the effort will need cooperation from the Legislature and others, including reform groups.

But attorney Don Specter of the non-profit Prison Law Office said success will depend heavily on the state's commitment to recruiting managers and staff who will focus on helping troubled youths change their behavior, rather than simply acting as guards.

Officials commissioned the report after Specter complained that earlier plans, which the state produced under a legal settlement with his office, were too vague.

While Specter called the new report an improvement, he said he wasn't sure if the administration has budgeted enough money to follow its recommendations. Warner said his agency will seek more funds in next year's budget, on top of $55 million the administration has already proposed to hire hundreds of new staffers and begin reducing the size of living groups, to provide more individualized treatment.

Meanwhile, one outspoken legislator dismissed the new report as a ``half-fix'' because it did not address the prospect of putting juvenile facilities under the management of the state health department or some other agency.

``It's a promising blueprint, but it doesn't go to the bigger fixes that I believe are needed,'' said state Sen. Majority Leader Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, who has scheduled a hearing on the state's plans later this month.

State officials have argued that it makes more sense to keep the juvenile and adult institutions under a single correctional agency. But the expert panel, led by consultant Christopher Murray of Olympia, Wash., reported that most states have separated the two.

Most juvenile-justice experts say young offenders have different needs and will respond differently to rehabilitation programs than adults.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/states/california/nort
hern_california/14258618.htm

Murray's report offered some evidence the system can improve. It said violence has dropped recently at the notorious N.A. Chaderjian Youth Correctional Facility in Stockton, after officials began reducing the size of living groups there.

Posted by lois at 09:01 PM | Comments (0)

Cost Effective Corrections: Rationalizing the Fiscal Architecture of Juvenile Justice Systems

Cost Effective Corrections: Rationalizing the Fiscal Architecture of Juvenile Justice Systems.

A publication by the Justice Policy Institute,
available at www.justicepolicy.org

In most states, juvenile delinquency is handled at the county-level, youth charged in local courts. In many places, the counties have to pay for services such as drug treatment, mental health counseling, or community service. State secure confinement, on the other hand, costs little to the county—creating a financial incentive for counties to send youth to the most restrictive environment, even though alternatives cost less, are more effective, and better promote the health of young people and communities.

In “Cost-Effective Youth Corrections: Rationalizing
the Fiscal Architecture of Juvenile Justice Systems,”
the Justice Policy Institute profiles several states
that have altered the fiscal architecture of their
juvenile justice systems to reduce the inefficient,
ineffective and sometimes damaging affect of fiscal
incentives that make it cheaper to send youth to state
secure care then to treat them at home. Pennsylvania, California, Wisconsin, Ohio and Illinois have demonstrated that, by rethinking how they fund their juvenile justice systems, states and localities can succeed in keeping more youth at home, reduce the number of youth incarcerated, and promote better outcomes for young people.

Posted by lois at 08:58 PM | Comments (0)

Springfield MA: Teen Career Fair-a choice between being caged and being the enforcer

This is one of the most infuriating announcements I have received in a long time. It is a notice forwarded to me about a teen "career" fair in Springfield, MA. A city gutted by lost manufacturing jobs, in a state despite its reputation, where more money is spent on prisons/jails than public higher education, where the whole city is a school zone with 2 year mandatory minimum "enhancements" which packs the Hampden County Jail, etc. etc. A choice between being the caged or being the enforcer. Lois

TEEN CAREER EXPLORATION FAIR AT LIBRARY-Springfield, MA


Teens can explore some of the different careers available to them when the Forest Park Branch Library hosts a Teen Career Expo. Learn from people in the workforce what it takes to succeed as a registered nurse, a state trooper, a counselor, or a computer tech. You will also hear what courses to take at school and other qualifications for the job. Ask questions and find out about all the resources available to you for free at the library to explore career, college, training, financial aid, and other options.

The Teen Career Expo will take place at the Forest Park Branch, 380 Belmont Avenue, Springfield, on Wednesday, April 12, from 3:30 to 5:30 p.m.
Invited speakers include Juan Falcon, a counselor with the Hampden County Sheriff's Department; Bryan Foster, a probation officer with the Trial Courts of Hampden County; William Blatch, a Massachusetts State Police lieutenant; Jim Beane, of the Springfield Technical Community College Computer Center for Business and Technology; and Almanetta Lee, R.N., a hospital nurse; Jackie Rodriguez, R.N., a community health nurse.

For more information about this free program, visit or call the branch; 263-6843.

========================

Where are the teachers, librarians, mechanics, electricians, carpenters, doctors?

Posted by lois at 08:56 PM | Comments (0)

April 06, 2006

MI spends 1/5 of its budget on corrections

"A decade ago, Michigan spent $1.3 billion on the Corrections Department, about 15 percent of the state budget. This year, the agency's budget is about $1.9 billion, or 20 percent of everything Michigan spends. Only the Department of Community Health receives more -- $3 billion this year -- than Corrections."

Monday, April 03, 2006

Felon ranks overwhelm parole staff

Since 2000, state gained 5,000 parolees while number of probation officers remained flat. Ronald J. Hansen / The Detroit News

Despite adding 5,000 felons to probation and parole since 2000, the Michigan Department of Corrections has kept the number of agents supervising them relatively flat, at fewer than 1,100, state records show.

A recent consultant's report found Michigan needed 350 more probation and parole agents to adequately monitor the criminals they had as of last summer, when the review was completed.

While lawmakers continue to hammer out next year's state budget, the prison agency and the union that represents the agents agree they need more people to keep the public safe. But, the two sides disagree about how many agents are needed.

Barry Wickman, who oversees the agency's budget, said the Corrections Department wants to add 46 agents and a technology infusion to better oversee the growing numbers of people on probation and parole. Alan Kilar, the financial secretary for the United Auto Workers Local 6000, said the state should go along with the 350 hires identified in the February consultant's report

The state's supervised release program finds itself under greater scrutiny in the wake of the Patrick Selepak case. Selepak was paroled last summer and, despite apparent violations of his release, remained on the streets until he was charged with three slayings in February.

The prison agency has suspended five parole officials in Lansing and Macomb County while it investigates how the Selepak case slipped through the cracks.

As the Selepak case demonstrates, the stakes are high. Michigan has the eighth-largest parole population in the nation, according to the U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics. And, about half the people released on parole in Michigan wind up back in prison within two years, usually for new crimes.

Kilar said probation and parole agents find themselves doing more with fewer resources.

"They have to cut corners," Kilar said. "They may only spend five minutes with a parolee instead of spending more time with him and getting to know his situation better."

Adding an average of five extra cases to every agent over the past six years while cutting support staff only aggravates the problem, Kilar said. The Corrections Department has cut the support staff for probation and parole by 348 employees, or 15 percent, since 2000. At the same time, the number of case agents dipped to 1,053 two years ago and has peaked at 1,092 today.

Probation and parole agents help ensure their clients are reforming their lives. Typically, this means checking for additional arrests, collecting fines and fees for past crimes and checking for employment and substance abuse.

The 2007 budget approved in the state Senate, but not in the House, would add 46 agents next year and another 10 with specialized responsibilities, Wickman said.

Additionally, the agency intends to provide agents with laptops and put computerized kiosks in state offices to reduce routine clerical duties, he said.

The technological changes, Wickman said, will allow the state to add fewer than the 350 agents called for in the consultant's report to safely manage the probation and parole caseload.

"Hopefully, the 46 agents will be enough," he said, adding Patricia Caruso, the Corrections director, "wouldn't allow these changes to go if it wasn't going to keep the public safe."

But, the state's staffing estimates have been wrong before. Wickman said the state added agents after a 1991 review of caseloads. "We thought we were pretty darn close," he said of the changes made after that report.

By the time of last summer's review of caseloads, the National Council on Crime and Delinquency found Michigan needed 350 more agents. That's about 30 percent more than the state had at the time.

The review came about after the UAW and the Corrections Department agreed that a new workload review was needed.

Kilar wasn't surprised at the results. He said the Corrections Department has made other technological changes, but the systems have proven cumbersome.

"Technology has not shown itself to relieve the agent's stress," he said. Staffing for probation and parole is only a part of the budget consideration for the agency.

A decade ago, Michigan spent $1.3 billion on the Corrections Department, about 15 percent of the state budget. This year, the agency's budget is about $1.9 billion, or 20 percent of everything Michigan spends. Only the Department of Community Health receives more -- $3 billion this year -- than Corrections.

Probation and parole has been under special stress in recent years as the Corrections Department has looked to slow the growth of the prison population.

Today, Michigan has about 49,300 prisoners. The population grew 1.7 percent last year, the first annual increase since 2002.

Corrections officials expect the state will run out of bed space in March 2008. They are trying to push that back to 2010 by diverting more criminals into alternative programs and by improving prisoners' performance on release. Another tactic includes trimming the number of parolees sent back to prison for violating their release.

In 2003, the state sent about 3,200 felons back to prison for parole violations, records show. Last year, about 300 fewer violators went back to prison.

Selepak was to have his parole revoked, but parole officials failed to complete the process and, in January, he returned to the streets. Five weeks later, police found him and his fiancee napping in a truck with a frozen corpse in the back of their truck.

The department has not completed an investigation of problems exposed in the Selepak case, but Kilar and other agents interviewed by The Detroit News say high caseloads lead to lapses.

"My concern is that people are playing politics," Kilar said. "This deals with public safety. If our streets are not safe, new businesses are not going to come to Michigan. The bottom line is: hire more staff." You can reach Ronald J. Hansen at (313) 222-2019 or rhansen@detnews.com.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060403/METRO/604030374/1
003

Posted by lois at 10:26 AM | Comments (0)

New Mexico: Law Calls for Some Women Who Are Incarcerated to be Released

Law calls for some inmates to be released
By Steve Terrell The New Mexican
April 6, 200
http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/41900.html

Because the state women’s prison in Grants has been filled over capacity for months, the state might have to start releasing nonviolent female offenders.

State District Judge Jim Hall on Wednesday signed documents declaring that the state Corrections Department has “breached” its duties to comply with the Corrections Population Control Commission Act, a law signed by Gov. Gary Johnson in 2002.

That law calls for the state to release some nonviolent inmates who have six months or less left on their sentences when prisons are overcrowded for more than two months.

The state has “mandatory, nondiscretionary duties” to follow that law, said a legal document signed by Hall.

The women’s prison for the past six months has had as many as 60 inmates more than its 597-inmate capacity, Peter Simonson, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union in New Mexico, said Wednesday.

“The sewage is backed up so bad that guards have to wear masks to protect them from the fumes,” Simonson said. The overcrowding has severely impacted medical and dental services at the prison, he said.

Hall set an April 18 hearing to give the state a chance to show why it shouldn’t start releasing inmates.

Corrections spokeswoman Tia Bland said Wednesday that the overcrowding at the women’s prison will be alleviated by late June, when the department opens Camino Nuevo, a facility in Albuquerque that used to house juvenile offenders.

Initially, Camino Nuevo — which is to be operated by the Tennessee-based Corrections Corporation of America — will house 48 female inmates, Bland said. Eventually, the new prison will hold 198 female inmates.

Simonson said June is too late. “The (Grants) prison has been overcrowded for more than a year. The problems need to be addressed right now,” he said.

The ACLU was one of the parties that filed the legal action to force the state to comply with the law. Another was Rep. Mimi Stewart, D-Albuquerque , who sponsored the bill that eventually became law.

“We are specifying and targeting nonviolent offenders who are model
inmates,” Stewart said in an interview Wednesday. Anyone considered for early release would have to have a parole plan, she said.

“We can be intelligent about it, or we can build more prisons for the
benefit of private corporations who have a profit motive,” Stewart said.

The law requires the secretary of corrections to give the Corrections
Population Control Commission a list of nonviolent offenders who are
within 180 days of being released.

The commission, according to the law, is required to approve people from the list for emergency release to relieve the crowded conditions.

Stewart’s bill passed the Legislature with bipartisan support and was
signed by a Republican governor, Stewart noted.

Nevertheless, releasing inmates early could become a political hot potato in an election year.

Last month several state Republican leaders blasted Gov. Bill Richardson, a Democrat, for not building enough prisons — which, they claimed, contributed to the killing of a Bernalillo County sheriff’s deputy allegedly by a paroled inmate.

State GOP Chairman Allen Weh claimed Richardson “put into place a board and a policy directed at releasing prisoners , rather than building new prisons, as the solution for New Mexico’s increasing inmate population.”

Corrections Secretary Joe Williams responded that there is no
early-release program in place — even though prison officials considered such a plan in the early days of the Richardson administration.

Posted by lois at 10:20 AM | Comments (0)

Report Faults Prisons Bureau on Chemicals

April 5, 2006, NY Times
Report Faults Prisons Bureau on Chemicals
By KATE ZERNIKE

The federal Bureau of Prisons failed to address concerns that inmates and staff members at several prisons were exposed to toxic chemicals in recycling programs where inmates use hammers to smash discarded computers, according to the agency that handles whistle-blower complaints.

In a letter to President Bush and Congress on Monday, the agency, the Office of Special Counsel, called for an independent investigation into the complaints, which were brought to the federal government by a whistle-blower from a California prison in 2004.

The office criticized the Bureau of Prisons for not investigating the accusations thoroughly, saying the agency's review was deficient and "appears to be cursory at best."

The inmates dismantled the computers as part of the federal prison industries program, or Unicor, which has become one of the nation's largest recyclers, providing low-cost recycling to government agencies, schools and private companies.

The whistle-blower, Leroy A. Smith Jr., the former safety manager at Atwater Federal Prison outside Merced, Calif., said factory workers in the recycling facility there and at four other federal prisons in the country were exposed to hazardous materials including lead, cadmium, barium and beryllium when the inmates took hammers to cathode ray tubes from computers.

According to federal health agencies, overexposure to the chemicals can cause cancer, kidney disease, damage to the reproductive and central nervous systems, and death.

Mr. Smith told federal officials that he had several times ordered a shutdown of the program at Atwater after air quality tests revealed the chemicals in the factory and in a nearby food service area, but that the prison's managers and federal prison industry officials routinely ignored his recommendations, resuming the recycling without the safety measures he recommended.

The Justice Department referred the complaints to the Bureau of Prisons, which produced two reports responding to Mr. Smith's complaints in June and August 2005, concluding that the bureau, the federal prison industries program and prison staff members "took appropriate steps" to make sure the programs were operating safely.

Mr. Smith disputed those findings, and in the letter this week, the special counsel, Scott J. Bloch, a Bush appointee, took his side, saying the agency's reports were "unreasonable" and relied "on strained interpretations of applicable rules and procedures in order to justify past actions."

The report faulted the Bureau of Prisons as failing to talk to staff members who knew about potentially toxic exposure at other prisons, and as ignoring documentary evidence that contradicted its findings.

It also criticized the bureau for dismissing exposure to the chemicals as not "imminently dangerous, as no immediate threat of death or serious harm occurred." The operations should have been shut down, Mr. Bloch said, if conditions "could reasonably be expected to cause death or serious physical harm."

"I am left to conclude that a thorough, independent and impartial investigation into recycling activities" at federal prisons is still required, Mr. Bloch said in his report.

A spokeswoman for the Bureau of Prisons did not reply yesterday to a request for comment.

In a statement, Mr. Bloch said yesterday: "This is a matter where real concerns exist that need to be addressed. Unfortunately, they have not been addressed, and we find ourselves at an impasse."

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/05/washington/05prison.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Posted by lois at 10:18 AM | Comments (0)

April 01, 2006

New Orleans: Down by Law- Orleans Parish Prison Before and After Katrina

Down by Law
Orleans Parish Prison before and after Katrina
Barry Gerharz and Seung Hong

This article is from the March/April 2006 issue of Dollars & Sense magazine.
When the levees broke in New Orleans, floodwaters flowed into Orleans Parish Prison (known to locals as "OPP"). During and after the storm, some prisoners were locked in first-floor cells as the waters slowly rose. Meantime, the eighth largest penal institution in the United States became even more crowded as smaller parish jails carried out emergency evacuations and sent their inmates to OPP. Guards were nowhere to be found. Prisoners spent days with little or no food and water. Many stood in sewage-filled water up to their waists or necks. Adults and juveniles were detained together, forcing youth to compete for resources with larger, stronger adults.

After eventually being rescued, or in some cases breaking free from their cells and tiers, the prisoners were moved to a nearby overpass to sit in the hot sun. From there, most prisoners--convicts imprisoned for violent offenses and pre-trial detainees alike--were transported almost 70 miles to the Hunt Correctional Facility in St. Gabriel, La., and deposited in an open field, some of them for two or three days. From Hunt Correctional, the prisoners were randomly placed in at least 35 facilities around the state, including other parish jails, private prisons, and state prisons.

New Orleans attorney and activist Phyllis Mann describes who was in OPP at the time of the hurricane:

"[O]ne young man who had been arrested for reading Tarot cards without a permit ... young women who were pregnant; young men and women who sadly chose the wrong weekend to try out an illegal drug; middle-aged soccer moms who just had not gotten around to paying that speeding ticket É and then there were the poor of New Orleans who were arrested for sleeping on the street (obstructing public passage), 'brother can you spare a dime' (begging)."

OPP had flooded before. When there was severe flooding in New Orleans in 1995, for instance, prisoners were moved out of OPP to Louisiana Department of Corrections (DOC) facilities. At least two days before Hurricane Katrina smacked into New Orleans, the DOC offered OPP assistance in evacuating the prison, according to a DOC spokesperson. OPP officials replied they were okay, that they would hunker down. When a Human Rights Watch investigator asked an OPP spokesperson why the facility did not take up the offer its neighboring parishes embraced, she replied that OPP had more inmates than the surrounding parishes that opted to evacuate their jails in advance.

The sheriff ostensibly had an evacuation plan, yet questions remain. Why weren't at least first floor prisoners moved to higher floors? Why didn't officials make the plan public? When asked about the evacuation plan, OPP's spokesperson told an investigator that the plan was on "this guy's computer" but believed the computer was flooded during Katrina. Weeks later the ACLU requested the evacuation plan under a public records statute. The group was given a scant two-page document (see p. 42) that does not address how OPP buildings would be evacuated in the event of an emergency; what responsibilities state and local agencies had to coordinate a response to an emergency; how food and potable water would be distributed to staff and prisoners during an emergency; or what training staff members and prisoners should receive on proper evacuation procedures.

The New Orleans criminal justice system in the aftermath of Katrina is not a pretty sight. Even before the hurricane the system was a failure. It violated the humanity and civil rights of thousands of people while doing little to make the streets safer. The money and resources that taxpayers poured into it were wasted by political patronage and outdated practices. However extreme, the New Orleans criminal justice system exemplifies trends that can be found across the United States. The explosive growth of incarceration since the 1970s; the substitution of financial for public-safety motives for mass incarceration; the racism of violent policing, inadequate indigent defense, and excessive and unnecessary pretrial detention; shockingly inadequate healthcare and little pretense of rehabilitation: these endemic problems were merely made more visible by Katrina. What is new in New Orleans is a concerted movement that is forming to rebuild a system that is humane and serves communities instead of undermining them.

The Prison that is a Jail that is a Prison
Orleans Parish Prison, a sprawling campus of facilities in the Mid-City section of New Orleans, near the Superdome, is unusual in a number of ways. Louisiana's parishes are equivalent to other states' counties. So despite its name, Orleans Parish Prison is actually a county jail, not a prison.

County jails typically house pretrial detainees and those serving short sentences for misdemeanors. From April 26, 1999, through January 15, 2001, 90,786 people were booked at OPP on attachments (warrants for failure to appear in court), traffic or municipal charges, or state charges not involving a felony offense. In many of these cases police could have issued citations rather than arresting the person.

Unlike most county jails, OPP also has contracts to house state and federal prisoners, serving as a de facto overflow prison for the DOC and the federal prison system. Thus, the facility mixes some people convicted of violent felonies with others awaiting trial on trivial misdemeanors.

OPP has one of the largest populations of any jail in the country, averaging 6,846 inmates at any one time. New Orleans is the thirty-fifth most populated city in America but has the eighth largest penal institution in terms of the total number of prisoners per day, giving it the honor of having the highest incarceration rate of any large city, with 1,480 prisoners per 100,000 residents. This is double the United States' incarceration rate, already the highest of any country. OPP is also the largest correctional institution in Louisiana, housing about 1,700 more people than the notorious Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola.

The head of the parish prison is the parish sheriff, an elected official whose official title is "Criminal Sheriff." Pre-Katrina, New Orleans had the twenty-second largest police force in the country, but ranked eighth in total number employed in law enforcement because of the enormous staff of the Criminal Sheriff's office.

OPP wasn't always the current behemoth. When Charles Foti was elected criminal sheriff for Orleans Parish in 1974, a seat he would hold for 30 years, OPP had a population of only about 800, despite the fact that the population of Orleans Parish was more than 100,000 higher then than just prior to Katrina. By the time Foti left after being elected state attorney general, he had expanded OPP's total capacity over tenfold to approximately 8,500.

NOPD: A Department In Crisis
"This police force has been chronically plagued with provable, demonstrated horrendous instances of corruption and brutality for ages," says Mary Howell, a local civil rights attorney who's worked on criminal justice reform for 30 years. "[There have been] cases of mock executions, rape, armed robbery. There was one officer who used to do bank robberies during his lunch breaks." In the six months since Katrina, NOPD has already been involved in several notorious incidents. Among them:

An alleged shootout with a "gang of snipers" on the Danziger Bridge that resulted in three deaths and several bullet wounds. An investigation by the Los Angeles Times revealed that those shot by NOPD were in fact not "snipers" but instead likely innocent unarmed families fleeing Katrina. Included in the casualty list was an unarmed 40-year-old African-American man with developmental disabilities, Ronald Madison, who was shot multiple times in the back and killed, as well as an unarmed, African-American teenage girl who was shot and injured.
The brutal beating of 64-year-old retired African-American schoolteacher Robert Davis, caught on tape by the Associated Press. Davis was seen having his head repeatedly slammed into a brick wall by police until he collapsed into a pool of his own blood.
The videotaped incident involving Anthony Hayes, a mentally ill, 38-year-old African-American man, who was armed with a three-inch knife and surrounded by sixteen NOPD officers. Officers fired nine bullets into Hayes after, officers claimed, he lunged at one of them. Critics and experts slammed the NOPD for unnecessary deadly force.
In only one of these three incidents, the Robert Davis beating, has any officer been formally disciplined. The department's lack of credibility with community members makes cooperation and witness testimony difficult to obtain. As a result, the department solves an astonishingly low share of the city's crimes, especially violent crimes. For example, following the multiple shooting at the Bring New Orleans Back Second Line Parade in January, where gunmen fired into a crowd of locals from close range, police expressed frustration over their stalled investigation. Three people were injured by the gunmen in front of large crowds of bystanders, yet no witnesses were willing to step forward to help identify suspects.
A History of Abuse and Neglect
The accounts from prisoners, including women and juveniles, of being abandoned in locked cells as floodwaters continued to rise during Hurricane Katrina are just a part of the history of cruel indifference and abuse in OPP.

Just a year and a half ago, two guards were indicted for beating an OPP prisoner to death after he was picked up on charges of public drunkenness. In 2004 OPP was one of the top five prisons with substantiated reports of sexual violence in the nation. It is perhaps for these reasons that the Orleans Parish criminal sheriff had a $17.3 million insurance fund in 2002, $4.9 million of which was designated for the payment of claim liabilities.

OPP has been under one of the longest federal court-ordered consent decrees in U.S. history. For over 35 years, a federal court has been monitoring OPP as a result of a 1969 case, Hamilton v. Morial. The prison is run under guidelines from various federal consent decrees that mandate upgrades in medical treatment, among other areas. Whether the consent decrees have been effective is another matter. Healthcare at OPP was horribly inadequate even before Katrina. A pregnant prisoner reported being left in shackles during labor and another claimed she was denied an examination by a gynecologist despite bleeding immediately after childbirth. In 2001, Shawn Duncan died of dehydration in the OPP psychiatric unit after being held in restraints for 42 hours. He was in jail on traffic charges. Prisoners have died from such treatable conditions as a peptic ulcer, meningitis and bacterial pneumonia. Paul Willis, 52, who died of a ruptured peptic ulcer in 2004, likely writhed in agony for 12 hours before he died. A prisoner died in each of the three months before Hurricane Katrina struck: one died while under medical observation for health problems; another hung himself while under suicide watch.

Both before Katrina and since, a day in OPP was wasted because of scant rehabilitative programs available to prisoners. Only 400 people could participate in the prison's adult literacy program at one time. Prisoners were often released without planning for housing and needed services, further contributing to recidivism problems. Both city and state prisoners were released into a city with only one fully functional re-entry program for ex-offenders. Last year, local programs that helped hundreds of former prisoners get jobs and stay out of trouble were forced to shut down because the state decided to reallocate the federal money that financed them. The re-entry programs that were closed were highly successful, with participant recidivism rates as low as 9%.

Financing a Fiefdom
There is no public safety reason for Orleans Parish Prison to be the largest correctional facility in the state. The jail has grown for other reasons. By agreement, the city of New Orleans pays the Orleans Parish criminal sheriff $22.39 per day for each local prisoner OPP houses--roughly $100,000 per day. (OPP receives even more money to house federal prisoners--about twice as much per prisoner.) For 2006, New Orleans projects it will spend over $50 million to house prisoners. The cost to the city has doubled since 1994, when it was just $22.5 million.

Such payments have led former Orleans Parish criminal sheriffs to discuss the trafficking of prisoners in business terms. Interim Sheriff Bill Hunter commented that "fewer inmates translates into less revenue for the jail." After a drop in state prisoners housed at OPP from 2000 to 2002, then-Sheriff Foti remarked, "If you were in the stock market, you would call this a slow-growth period."

The finances of the Orleans Parish prison empire are a mystery to local and state officials. In fact, the $75 million-plus annual budget presented to the City Council in 2005 was a meager two pages--the same length as the OPP evacuation plan. Personnel expenditures, which totaled $39,910,562, were listed on a single line; the sheriff didn't bother to break the figure down.

This lack of accountability also allows the Orleans criminal sheriff to have unparalleled control over the city's largest patronage base. In 2005, the sheriff had roughly 1,200 nonunion employees who served at his pleasure, exempt from the civil service protections enjoyed by other city employees. The New Orleans Times-Picayune remarked that the victory of current Orleans Parish Criminal Sheriff Marlin Gusman marked his evolution from political appointee to full-fledged politician with his own patronage base.

"OPP has long been a shameful centerpiece of New Orleans' broken criminal justice system with its history of human and civil rights abuses, fatal disease, and institutional violence. It's no coincidence that OPP has also emerged as a centerpiece of political power in New Orleans," says Shana Sassoon from the Orleans Parish Prison Reform Coalition, a group of reformers who have been advocating for positive change in the policies and conditions of OPP.

Prison Labor
The lack of accountability extends to prison labor. Orleans Parish prisoners working alongside roadways, erecting stands for Mardi Gras, setting Christmas lights for the city's Celebration of the Oaks, or working at a Halloween haunted house have long been common sights.

In 1989, the Times-Picayune reported that private citizens and companies could hire prisoners to perform work at minimum wage. From these wages the sheriff would deduct living expenses, travel expenses, support of the prisoners' dependents, and payment of the prisoners' debts, with any remaining money going to the prisoner. Recently OPP built an aquaculture facility--run entirely by prison labor--to raise about 600,000 to 700,000 pounds of tilapia per year. Prison laborers are often used as political tools. When running for office in 2003, Marlin Gusman told the League of Women Voters: "I will work with the city administration to reduce the burden on the general fund and provide more prisoner labor to augment city services."

Hurricane Katrina has not changed the prison's policy on the exploitation of prison laborers who are paid pennies on the dollar; in fact, it may have accelerated it. After the hurricane struck, Gusman promised to make prisoners available to assist in the recovery. Given the fact that the majority of prisoners had yet to be convicted or were convicted of minor offenses, this use of prisoners amounts to modern slavery--or a throwback to the notoriously racist convict-lease and state-use prison labor systems that proliferated in the South after Reconstruction.

Indigent Defense
Once arrested and detained in OPP, New Orleans' poorest citizens are left to an indigent defender system that is one of the worst in the country. Funded almost entirely by traffic ticket revenue, the indigent defender system has been so underfunded that one public defender was forced to file a motion to have a trial court declare him ineffective because of his overwhelming workload and lack of investigative and expert resources. The vast majority--88%--of all those charged in criminal cases in Louisiana qualify as indigent, yet on average prosecutors receive over three times as much funding per case as public defenders.

Those arrested are often the victims of what is called "police sentencing," which occurs when an arrested person spends up to nearly nine weeks in jail before even spurious charges are dismissed. Even then, these people are released only because a state law requires district attorneys to file an indictment or bill of information within 45 days of the arrest of a person for a misdemeanor and within 60 days for a felony. In contrast, the average waiting period in New York City is five days. If adequate indigent defense services allowed public defenders to meet with clients much earlier, many of these people would be released in days rather than losing weeks or months of their lives in jail.

How to Build a Truly Safe Community
Born in the hurricane's aftermath, New Orleans' Safe Streets/Strong Communities Coalition has articulated the following goals for the city's criminal justice system:

Goal 1: Transform the New Orleans Police Department

End corruption, misconduct and abuse;
Create a department accountable and transparent to the community it serves;
Create a department that improves community safety, supports crime prevention, and practices effective responses to crime.
Goal 2: Transform the Orleans Parish Jail System

Close Orleans Parish Prison and replace it with a physical structure and living conditions that are safe and humane for everyone;
Ensure that detention is only used to protect public safety or ensure court appearance;
Build, expand and support alternatives to incarceration;
Ensure that the operation, control and budgeting of the jail system is transparent and accountable to the community it serves and is not used as a mechanism for political power and patronage.
Goal 3: Transform the New Orleans' Criminal Court System

Ensure that the indigent defender system is politically independent, is adequately and equitably funded, and operates as a model client-centered defender system;
Ensure that courts are fair, efficient, and effective;
Ensure that the court system prioritizes and supports effective alternatives to incarceration.
Safe Streets strongly believes that there is a way to make the streets safer without an over-reliance on punishment, jails and brutality. There can be safe streets and strong communities free from violence for everyone in New Orleans, regardless of race or economics. Safe Streets also knows that this moment is a unique opportunity for a bold transformation of a badly broken system. Working with the impressive collection of organizations and individuals who have come together to seize this opportunity, we will pursue our goals strategically and build a public safety system worthy of the people of New Orleans.

Source: Safe Streets/Strong Communities
The Costs of a Damaged System
After Hurricane Katrina, the state DOC took custody of the incarcerated men, women and children trapped in OPP. Approximately 8,000 prisoners were then scattered throughout the state of Louisiana to different parish prisons. As the days and then weeks passed, many of these inmates began to complain because the date on which they were supposed to be released had passed. Prisoner advocates acquired a computer print-out from September 9, 2005, listing every single OPP inmate along with their charges and release dates. These records revealed that very few inmates were being released by DOC according to their set dates. Most continued to be held past their term.

Eventually a group of volunteer criminal defense lawyers filed habeas corpus petitions to free the inmates who were being held for no valid legal reason. Soon after judges from Orleans Parish began signing orders to release some inmates who were in prison on low-level charges for nonviolent offences, the DOC sent a memo out to all local jail wardens. This leaked memo addressed the fate of 280 prisoners; it details a plan to "release 35 inmates per day over a period of 8 days (excluding weekends)." It still is unclear why these 280 prisoners eligible for release--likely to be a small subset of those eligible for release, given that so many in OPP were pre-trial detainees--were being trickled out of prison so slowly.

Although the DOC might have been simply overwhelmed, there are other possible reasons why it released people at such a sluggish pace. The DOC currently receives financial assistance from the Federal Emergency Management Authority (FEMA) for each prisoner it holds. A spreadsheet obtained by criminal defense attorneys lists the reimbursements the DOC is requesting from FEMA. The projected reimbursement for just one day, December 19, 2005, was $146,495.42. At that daily rate, DOC was expecting to be reimbursed roughly $13 million dollars for holding 4,215 prisoners from September 1 until December 1, 2005. The most recent memo obtained estimates that FEMA will reimburse the DOC $120,735.94 for holding 3,716 prisoners on January 13, 2006. In other words, there is a serious financial disincentive for the DOC to move quickly on releasing prisoners.

In contrast, the New Orleans public school system learned in January that FEMA had denied its application for an $87 million loan to keep its schools solvent. "FEMA gives away $120,000 a day to already powerful and corrupt prisons but won't even loan a penny to poor struggling schools. Children always seem to be the ones being asked to pay the price while adults squander our children's futures," says Xochitl Bervera, prison activist and codirector of Families and Friends of Louisiana's Incarcerated Children.

During a recent special session on Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the state legislature passed a bill barring lawsuits by people kept in prison past their release dates. Prisoners in the custody of the sheriff or law enforcement agency who were evacuated during and immediately after the hurricanes and were not released within the time required by the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot sue the sheriff or law enforcement agency for damages. The primary beneficiary of this legislation is the DOC.

In New Orleans, OPP reopened in mid-October, housing a small population. In a November 10 letter to the New Orleans City Council, Sheriff Marlin Gusman reported: "Our current inmate population is approximately 600."

At the time, only two of OPP's twelve major units were operational. Gusman acknowledged that "even those two that are operational will still require additional repairs and improvements to be brought to pre-Katrina level." The sheriff's letter did not say whether the facility had been tested for toxins which are likely to have come into OPP with the flood waters.

Gusman is clear, however, about the urgency to reopen OPP. "Our main source of revenue is per diem payments for the care, custody and control of inmates," he wrote. "Our current inmate population is É a 90 percent reduction in revenue, but our fixed costs remain high."

At Stake: The Future of a City and Its People
Clearly, even before Katrina criminal justice policy in New Orleans was at a crisis point. But this is not just a public safety crisis. It is simultaneously a crisis of civil rights, education, and poverty. One in seven African-American men in Louisiana end up in the prison system, while only 1 in 35 end up in college. Arrest and detention policy is seemingly arbitrary and often nonsensical as NOPD arrests and detains citizens for offenses as minor as riding a bicycle with one hand. Meanwhile, violent crime skyrockets and cases are rarely solved. Police exercise minimal restraint, leaving communities fearing police even more than they fear street crime. The court system remains in disarray as public defenders are overwhelmed with massive caseloads resulting in inadequate indigent defense and prolonged incarceration for low-level non-violent offenders. Families and children lose breadwinning parents to frivolous arrests and incarceration, sending communities into a cycle of poverty. But the real costs of a broken criminal justice system cannot be measured in mere dollars. They include the damage that violence, substance abuse, and poverty do to schools, neighborhoods, and families.

The good news is that as the floodwaters receded, the city's system's failures were exposed both locally and nationally. Members of Families and Friends of Louisiana's Incarcerated Children, working on direct disaster relief, began hearing tales of terrible abuse and mistreatment at OPP and Camp Greyhound, the city's temporary makeshift jail at the Greyhound station. Stories of police brutality and abuse in the aftermath of Katrina followed. As a result, Safe Streets/Strong Communities was born, a new organization whose mission would be to transform the local criminal justice system into something safer, more humane, and less costly than it has been and to hold those in power accountable for corruption, abuse, brutality, and misconduct.

Safe Streets/Strong Communities emerged out of a common understanding among scores of progressive individuals and organizations that as New Orleans' criminal justice system is rebuilt, existing criminal justice institutions will use the fear of crime to increase and consolidate their institutional power. This drive by police, prosecutors, and the OPP to expand their power can only be counteracted by a strong, unified, community-driven campaign to rebuild a democratic and transparent criminal justice system that is focused on public safety rather than political power.

Barry Gerharz is an attorney and the legal coordinator for Safe Streets/Strong Communities. Recipient of a 2004 Reprieve Fellowship to work as an advocate for the wrongfully convicted in Louisiana, he successfully pushed for a state compensation statute. Before this statute was passed, Louisiana's wrongfully convicted were given just ten dollars upon their release.

Seung Hong is a freelance journalist and Communications Director for the Juvenile Justice Project of Louisiana, currently on loan as Communications and Policy Coordinator to Safe Streets/Strong Communities. He is a native of Bremerton, Wash., but was raised in New Orleans.

Resources: Safe Streets/Strong Communities (www.neworleansnetwork.org/node/358); Juvenile Justice Project of Louisiana (www.jjpl.org); Families and Friends of Louisiana's Incarcerated Children (www.fflic.org); ACLU Katrina press release (www.aclu.org/prison/gen/22370prs20051208.html).

This article is from the March/April 0306toc.html">March/April 2006 issue of Dollars & Sense: The Magazine of Economic Justice available at http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2006/0306gerharzhong.html

Posted by lois at 05:50 PM | Comments (0)