Yesterday, January 16th, I had the opportunity to speak before the Utah Prison Location Committee Consultant and several of the committee members. This is what I presented.

"I am the founder of the Utah Prison Support group, an organization whose mission is to assist Offenders’ Families with problems they might be having navigation the UDC system. Another main focus for my organization is Sentencing Reform and the need to revamp the way Offenders are sentenced here in Utah.

Utah does not need to move their prison. Utah needs to re-evaluate what is needed to assist these Offenders to make them productive members of society once they are released.

Several Correctional Officers testified at the September 16^th meeting of this committee. At this time, they voiced their concerns about moving the prison to another location. Not only would a move affect these officers’ careers, it would have a huge impact on their family. Quality Officers are at a premium and Utah needs to do everything they can to keep them. If they leave because they cannot afford to travel to a remote site in all kinds of weather, than shame on you the Utah Law Makers!

Volunteers, the backbone of the programming at UDC would also face a hardship and dwindle. These people unselfishly give of their time, and money, to assist the Offenders. Without these Volunteers, the cost of incarceration would skyrocket even higher. Or on the other side of the scale, the Offenders would once again become nothing more than a barcode in a warehouse.

We cannot let this happen.

The recidivism rate in Utah is one of the highest in our country and we should be ashamed of that. According to an article published in the Salt Lake Tribune, a study, conducted between 2002 and 2012, 67% of new commitments to UDC were repeat offenders. Utah ranks second in the nation in sending parole violators back to prison. Many parole violators are returned to prison on technical infractions. Is sending them back to prison and creating an “overcrowded facility” on paper the answer? I say no.

At the September meeting, Mayor Ben McAdams spoke about the need to explore sentencing reform. I agree with him. Moving the prison is NOT the answer. The answer is reformation of the manner in which these Offenders are sentenced. Someone with numerous commitments during their lifetime is being paroled and the Offender who is a first time offender is being held far longer than the Sentencing Commission guidelines matrix.

Moving the prison is NOT the answer. UDC and the Legislature need to take a long hard look at the way the Board of Pardons is handing down sentencing. Indeterminate sentencing is not always the answer. A letter went out to every member of the Criminal Justice Subcommittee with a well written Dual Mode Sentencing proposal attached. I hope and pray that these members read the information that was sent.  And does it make sense financially, to keep Offenders in the prison at the cost of around $30,000 per year if there is an Immigration detainer on them?

Unfortunately, this all boils down to the mighty dollar! UDC makes money from these repeat offenders. Keeping a supply coming through the “revolving doors of UDC” is job security. Rather than spend money….the Utah taxpayers’ money --- to actually rehabilitate these Offenders, they give them band aids rather than a major dressing over their gaping wound. This has to stop.

Rather than moving the prison, update what is already there.

In December, an Offender was transported from Gunnison to Draper for a medical appointment. This was during one of the biggest snow storms of the season. Not only was the heat not working in A-West, there was snow actually coming in through a missing vent in the ceiling. Why not fix what is already there?  If it is beyond repair, replace it. Do not move the prison.

There has to be a better use of all of this money the Committee wants to spend. Educate the Offenders, do not just patch them up and hope for the best. Give them a marketable skill. Help them understand the why of their incarceration. But do not spend our hard earned money to move something that will only benefit those who sit on this committee. Several committee members have taken the “hurry up and let’s get this done” attitude and in researching these members, it was found that these same members are the ones who will benefit financially from this proposed move.

Even the cost of this consultant is extreme. A half of a million dollars of OUR money….for what? Add this cost to the already high mounting costs of the investigation of the former Attorney General, the cost to stay the same gender marriages and I can see Utah becoming bankrupt very quickly.

Please, look at what we already have. If something needs to be fixed physically… a building needs to be updated, torn down, or expand the Gunnison facility whatever… do it. Do not move this prison. We, the taxpayers do not want it. Use the proposed budget money to expand the educational programming at the prisons."

December 20, 2013 (The Huffington Post)
CAN WE WAIT 88 YEARS TO END MASS INCARCERATION?

Nazgol Ghandnoosh, research analyst, and Marc Mauer, executive director of The Sentencing Project write that while “there is a growing momentum for criminal justice reform…any optimism needs to be tempered by the very modest rate of decline.”

In 2012, the decline was 1.8 percent.  If that rate continues, the two conclude that “it will take until 2101 -- 88 years -- for the prison population to return to its 1980 level.

“We hear less ‘tough on crime’ rhetoric and budget-conscious conservatives are embracing sentencing reforms. The Attorney General has criticized aspects of the criminal justice system and directed federal prosecutors to seek reduced sanctions against lower-level offenders.

“In light of this, one would think we should celebrate the new figures from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) showing a decline in the U.S. prison population for the third consecutive year. This follows rising prisoner counts for every year between 1973 and 2010. BJS reports that 28 states reduced their prison populations in 2012, contributing to a national reduction of 29,000. Beset by budget constraints and a growing concern for effective approaches to public safety, state policymakers have begun downsizing unsustainable institutional populations.

“The break in the prison population's unremitting growth offers an overdue reprieve and a cause for hope for sustained reversal of the nearly four-decade growth pattern.

“But the population in federal prisons has yet to decline. And even among the states, the trend is not uniformly or unreservedly positive. Most states that trimmed their prison populations in 2012 did so by small amounts -- eight registered declines of less than 1 percent. Further, over half of the 2012 prison count reduction comes from the 10 percent decline in California's prison population, required by a Supreme Court mandate.

“Given recent policy changes, why has there been such a small reduction in the number of people held in prisons? First, many sentencing reforms have understandably focused on low-level offenders.

“But most significantly, policymakers have neglected the bulk of those who are in state prisons: an aging population convicted of violent crimes or repeat offenses.

“Certainly the changing climate, new policies, and recent prisoner counts offer reason for encouragement. But unless we want to wait 88 years to achieve a sensible prison population, we need to accelerate the scale of reform.”

November 5, 2013……

A day that will forever be etched in the life of Ronald Faulkner.

This is the day that Mr. Faulkner will finally see the outside of the razor wire he has looked at since May 1998. You see, the Utah Board of Pardons charged Mr. Faulkner with an additional crime during his Parole Hearing. They were convinced that Mr. Faulkner THOUGHT about committing the additional act.

Now, for those of you who don’t know, the Board of Pardons and Parole is a committee of five people, appointed by the Governor to oversee the “sentencing” phase of Utah’s Indeterminate Sentencing. In Mr. Faulkner’s case, he was given a sentence of five years to life by his trial judge. This was for a 1^st Degree Felony for Aggravated Burglary.

In September of 2009, Mr. Faulkner had his Board Hearing. At this hearing, the hearing officer, a Mr. Sullivan, decided that Mr. Faulkner was guilty of a crime of Sexual Aggravated Assault. The trial judge DID NOT sentence him on this….he was NEVER even charged with this offense!(The police report even stated that "no sexual intercourse took place".) Then the hearing officer gave a rehearing date to be held in twenty years! AND, he added that the Board would consider an early release if Mr. Faulkner completed the Sex Offender Treatment Program at the prison.

Now, this would be all well and good but in order to get into this program, the Offender has to CONFESS to committing the crime. And Mr. Faulkner was not CHARGED or CONVICTED of Sexual Aggravated Assault. So here begins the Catch 22 situation for Mr. Faulkner.

After many, many petitions to be heard, Mr. Faulkner finally won his opportunity for a rehearing which took place just a few weeks ago. Mr. Sullivan was not the Hearing Officer at this hearing and low and behold, the Board found that Mr. Faulkner had served his time and should have his Inmate Sentence TERMINATED IMMEDIATELY!

So, those who sit on the Board, take this as a lesson that you are not gods! You cannot and will not charge someone with something YOU think they might have THOUGHT about doing. In order for this system to work, the Board MUST NOT STAND AS JURY to those who come before them. They have already been adjudicated. IT IS NOT YOUR JOB TO ADD charges to those that brought the Offender before you in the first place.

Mr. Faulkner, good luck and thank you for being persistent!

VISITATION FAVORITES???

This past weekend, I went to visit with my loved one at Central Utah Correctional Facility. When the guard, (oh, excuse me, officer), admitted him to the visiting room, he stopped and spoke with him. When my loved one reached our assigned table, he told me that he had to sit across from me.   I looked around and saw no less than five other Offenders visiting with their wife, girlfriend, etc. and they were not sitting across from one another. One couple was almost sitting on TOP of one another. Nothing was said to them.

Why is it that some Offenders have one set of rules and there is another set for others? Should there not be consistency among the Officers? It seems that this “rule” is only being taunted by one Sergeant. If he feels “threatened” by the outspokenness of the visitors, the rule comes into play. Why the favoritism? Why?

One can just look at the shoes of the Offenders to see who gets “preferred” treatment. How is wearing $200.00 Jordan’s approved by UDC? I know they cannot be ordered via commissary. How do they come in? They are being allowed to be ordered from outside somehow.

 Is the prison system so afraid of contraband being brought into the prison? Are they afraid that drugs are will be brought in? Better that they look at other avenues for these illegal substance entering the facilities because they are still coming in

.

 Visitors have gone through the main gate, the front desk, metal detector, x-ray machine for their shoes, gone through the locking doors and then to the visiting desk. The loved one has gone through similar security checkpoints....as well as a pat down search before entering the visiting room. They are not even allowed to bring in their reading glasses! What is sitting beside a loved one going to do to compromise the security of the facility?

 It is a proven fact that Offenders who have constant contact…including close physical contacts... fair better in their rehabilitation. It is just INHUMANE to deny these people the touch of a loved one during the visit. I know, you will say, "We allow a hug and a kiss at the beginning and end of a visit.", but can you survive on only touching your loved one that little? Most of the people I have observed at CUCF are all respectable people. They are respectful of the family oriented atmosphere and act accordingly.

 Something is most definitely wrong. We, the visitors, do have common sense....for the most part. Please do not insult us by thinking otherwise!

http://youtu.be/Wzhfa6wqNRU

Thoughts on Offenders and their lack of legal libraries!

HELP WANTED: PROGRAM CONSULTANT WANTED. SALARY JUST INCREASED FROM 200K to 500K!

That got your attention? It would me too. But the sad thing is that this is a real offer from the Utah Prison Relocation Authority Committee. They just voted on September 16th to increase the monetary offer!

And this is YOUR tax money at work!  It affects YOUR pocketbook! Wouldn’t it be nice to see this 500K spent on something else? Think about how this money could help the programming at the state prison in Draper and Gunnison. Think about how this money could help the public school system. Teachers could, and would, find a good way to spend this money!

Why is it that this committee, PRADA, is so hell-bent on rushing through all of this? To spend 800 million (again, YOUR money) to rebuild something that, in reality, is not broken, is ludicrous! The only thing I can think of is that the ones who are pushing this are builders themselves with a huge interest in this pot of gold.

Rep. Brad Wilson, R- Kaysville is challenging the committee’s “slowness”. This is interesting that he is pushing this to move faster. He is, as he said at the most recent public meeting, “a home builder”.  Is it that he hopes to add “builder of prisons” to his vitae?

Salt Lake County Mayor Ben McAdams, another member of the committee, said he has still not decided whether the cost of moving the prison is worth it to taxpayers.  Finally, someone is thinking about the taxpayers!

Taxpayers….you need to make your voice heard! Do not let this committee take money out of your pockets to pay for this position!

UDC - You Do Not Own Them!

“We provide food, clothes, medicines, everything. They now belong to us.” Words uttered at a recent Family Orientation meeting for the Utah Department of Corrections. 

Interesting! Yes, our loved one is in your care, your custody. But, I disagree with the blanket statement that you now own them!

Our loved ones will NEVER be owned by the UDC! You might have them in your facility but contrary to what the officers think and feel, YOU DO NOT OWN THEM! They are our brother, uncle, sister, aunt, daughter, son, mother, father, husband, wife! They belong to us - their families.

Each and everyone who is a “guest” of the UDC have someone, somewhere. Now there might be those whose families have given up on them. But, I think that for the majority of the “guests”, this is not the case. Family members provide support beyond the walls.

Many of the Offenders are trying to fight their conviction, for whatever reason. Help from with the walls is almost nonexistent. Contract attorneys are available but from my understanding, they do the bare minimum in the way of helping get legal information to the Offender. With no law books available to those inside the walls, this battle is almost always a losing one. Deadlines to file are missed because the necessary information is not received in time. There are delays in the mail room; briefs are not mailed out in a timely manner. All of this makes it almost impossible for the Offender to help him/herself.

With family and friends supporting them and doing the necessary “legwork”, briefs do get filed. Challenges are written and submitted. Medical care is followed up on by the family. All of these things are done by those who care….by those who OWN that human being….the FAMILY.

So please, do not say that you, the UDC, OWN our loved ones….you do not. Please remember that!