Union chief says prison closure would cause problems

By Keith M. Phaneuf
Journal Inquirer
Published: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 10:09 AM EST

HARTFORD — Closing one state prison in an already overcrowded system would cause a host of problems for guards, inmates, and their families, the head of the correction officers union said.
Jon T. Pepe, president of the Connecticut State Prison Employees Union, also said in an interview Tuesday that he fears a closure would escalate overtime costs and eat into much of the potential savings.
“We’re going to do everything we can to make things safe under any circumstances,” said Pepe, whose union represents 1,900 guards, treatment officers, counselors, and maintenance workers. “But I don’t see closing a prison now as creating the best environment.”

Gov. M. Jodi Rell last week directed Department of Correction Commissioner Brian K. Murphy to explore the possibility of closing one of the state’s 18 prisons, citing both a declining inmate population and a growing state budget deficit.
The prison population, which had peaked at about 19,900 in February 2008, has declined steadily since then to 18,500, due in part to expanded re-entry programs.

Rell and lawmakers also overhauled the parole process in late 2008 and early 2009. That overhaul included establishment of an expanded Board of Pardons and Paroles with five full-time members with professional experience in criminal justice or psychology. That has enabled the board to more closely review parole cases without slowing down processing of the overall caseload.

But while a detailed analysis of prison capacity never has been presented to the legislature, lawmakers frequently have said in recent years that the system was designed to house about 17,000 inmates.
Connecticut prisons now have about 1,700 inmates assigned across various facilities to temporary beds in nonresidential areas, such as program space. Pepe said closing another facility, even a low-security site, simply will force the reassignment of inmates into other areas where the limits already are being tested.

And the strain wouldn’t just involve sleeping space, but everything from toilets and other facilities to counseling, treatment, and other support services, he said.
According to the union, the recent retirement incentive program and an ongoing state hiring freeze, coupled with attrition, have combined to lower guard ranks by about 400 posts. A new class of correction officers just added about 125 people to the ranks, but staffing remains tight, he said.
“I’m sure there would be some savings” if one prison is closed, but with many key positions already vacant, more overtime assignments likely would be needed, Pepe said. “I don’t know how long that savings would last.”
The prison guard just was one of just two state employee unions that refused to provide wage concessions, such as canceling raises or accepting furlough days, during negotiations last spring with the Rell administration. That means its members aren’t exempt from layoffs.
“I would hope nobody would play with people’s lives” to exact some political payback, Pepe said. “I can’t see layoffs working well.”

This fiscal year’s $18.64 billion state budget is running $624 million in deficit according to Comptroller Nancy Wyman.
Democrats, who control both the state House and the Senate, had argued last spring that state government could achieve big savings within its prison system.
One budget bill adopted by lawmakers yet vetoed by Rell last summer would have closed two prisons. The estimated annual savings by 2010-11 was about $10 million.

Governor Rell: State Exploring Prison Consolidation

It's amazing to me how the Correctional Staff at Northern has been pleading for Governor Rell to stop housing 2 inmates to cell at Northern for years, and she refuses.  This practice of housing dangerous Level 5 inmates together is a serious hazard to Correctional Staff Safety, and Inmate Safety at Northern Correctional.  Several serious Staff and Inmate assaults, and the murder of an inmate at Northern has done little to sway the current direction of the Connecticut Department of Corrections.  What is it going to take before her administration takes a serious look at this problem?

Governor M. Jodi Rell today announced she has directed the Department of Correction to consider closing a prison, citing a decline in the inmate population, the agency’s success with a number of post-release programs and the need to find savings and efficiencies in state government.

“The fact that we are at a point to realistically consider closing a prison is a testament to DOC’s effectiveness in carrying out its mission, one of the most difficult in state government,” Governor Rell wrote in a letter today to Acting DOC Commissioner Brian K. Murphy. “However, consolidating operations must be done – first and foremost – with the safety of the staff, the public and the inmates as a priority.”

According to the DOC, the inmate population is currently about 18,500, down from a record high of nearly 19,900 in February 2008. The agency attributed the decrease, in part, to the success of some re-entry programs that allow offenders to return to productive lives and the stepped up pace of the now full-time parole board.

“Because of the agency’s efforts and re-entry initiatives, comprehensive and timely reviews by a full-time Board of Pardons and Parole and a new class of 125 Correction Officer graduates, we have an opportunity to build on those successes,” the Governor wrote.

Noting that other states are spending millions of dollars to build more prison because of ballooning inmate population, the Governor said Connecticut has an opportunity to set itself apart from its neighbors in terms of efficiencies

The Governor requested that the DOC, over the next few weeks, study the feasibility of closing a prison and make its recommendation to her by November 27. In her letter, however, the Governor underscored her intention to reopen any shuttered prison should the need arise.

“With troubling deficit estimates still a reality, it is incumbent upon us to thoroughly examine any and all savings in state spending, but if we again need the space and must reopen a prison, we absolutely will,” the Governor said.

H1N1 vaccine: Should inmates move up in line?

States are providing the H1N1 vaccine to high-risk groups, and in some cases that includes parts of the prison populations.

By Tracey D. Samuelson
Contributor to The Christian Science Monitor
from the November 7, 2009 edition

Should those in prison and jails across the country receive priority status for getting the H1N1 vaccine?
With vaccines in short supply, it's become a difficult issue for public health departments and correctional facilities across the country.

Earlier this week, the White House had to rebut erroneous reports that the vaccine had been given to detainees at the Guantánamo prison camp in Cuba.
"There is no vaccine in Guantánamo and there's no vaccine on the way to Guantánamo," said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs at a press briefing.

But a cohesive national strategy seems lacking. Local departments of public health are deferring to federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for establishing high-priority groups. According to the CDC, vaccination planning is a state issue.
The nation's top public health agency issues recommendations, but "states are in charge of vaccinations," says CDC spokesman Tom Skinner.

Though the CDC has acknowledged that certain settings – including prisons, schools, day care centers, and universities, among others – may increase the risk of contracting the H1N1 virus, they do not give vaccine priority to those groups.
Instead, they limit priority to those with individual risk factors, including pregnant women, those who care for young children, individuals younger than 24, healthcare workers, or people with certain underlying health conditions.
"Certain settings may increase the risk of infections, but we haven't prioritized vaccinations for those settings," says Mr. Skinner. "Our recommendations are based on population risk factors."

Many states, including Massachusetts and Ohio, have decided to prioritize those at high risk in the general population over those in prison.
In Texas, the Department of State Health Services says it will vaccinate all high-risk individuals at the same time, regardless of whether or not they're incarcerated. But while they have begun vaccinating the high-risk general population, they have not done the same for high-risk inmates.

"It's all a question of vaccine availability," said John Jacob, a spokesperson with the Massachusetts Department of Public Health in an e-mail. "As soon as significant enough quantities have arrived in the state and have begun to be distributed to high-risk groups in the general population such as adults 25-64 with underlying conditions, some vaccine will begin to be distributed to those same high-risk populations within prisons."
Though high-risk inmates will be prioritized over some in the general prison population, in Massachusetts, as in Texas, they will not receive the vaccine at the same time as their non-incarcerated peers.
For example, the state "will be getting vaccine to pregnant women who are incarcerated as soon as we have been able to vaccinate a significant percentage of pregnant women overall" writes Mr. Jacob.
The idea that high-risk people inside prisons would be treated differently from those outside is "invidious and discriminatory," says Nancy Stoller, coordinator of the American Public Health Association's jail and prison health group.

Incarcerated individuals are at a higher risk for H1N1 than the general population, Ms. Stoller says, and therefore should receive vaccination priority.
Inmates' higher risk is largely due to the close proximity in which they are confined. They also tend to be more susceptible to H1N1 because of their age (the average jail population is under 30), and also because they tend to come from poorer backgrounds and therefore are less likely to have received regular medical attention.

"Not only do they have a higher risk of getting the flu, but they're more likely to have a more serious case," says Stoller.
Ohio has developed a tiered priority system within its correctional facilities once vaccination becomes available. The first wave of vaccinations will include pregnant women, those who have given birth while incarcerated, healthcare staff, 10 percent of the general staff, juveniles, and inmates with compromised immune systems. A second tier will provide for the rest of the prison staff and inmates.

But Ohio hasn't yet distributed any vaccinations for that first, high-risk tier. So despite having distributed 984,700 vaccinations thus far, Ohio has yet to vaccinate the 66 pregnant women currently in its prison system, or its healthcare staff.
Neither the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction nor the Ohio Department of Health had any estimates on when vaccination might begin, due to its limited supply.
"Sometimes, there's a lot of pressure on health departments to think of the health needs of prisoners as less important than the health needs of people outside," says Stoller.

But there's a concern that without vaccinations, correctional facilities may experience H1N1 epidemics. With the flow of visitors, staff, and inmates through prisons, that could put the general population at risk.
"Prisons are not sealed institutions," says Stoller. "Whatever happens in prisons will leak out."

Correctional Staff Health and Safety Subcommittee

The Correctional Staff Health and Safety Subcommittee Criminal Justice Policy Advisory Commission meets today, Wednesday, November 4, 2009 State Capitol, Room 410, Hartford at 1:00 pm.  State Representative Jarmoc drafted the legislation that created this Committee.  This is our chance to make all CT Prisons safer for all staff.  I am serving on this Committee and I will keep all of you updated. 

A Small Measure of Justice

In July I was assaulted by a self admitted HIV positive inmate. http://correctionalofficersafety.blogspot.com/2009/07/assault-with-deadly-consequenses.html  This inmate intentionally spit in my face in order to infect me with HIV. The Connecticut Department of Corrections refused to pay me 100% workers compensation; instead they chose to only pay me 75% of my workers compensation benefits. Their reasoning was because, "I was not physically injured, I could only receive 75% of my pay". The side effects from the anti-HIV medication made it impossible to work. It was like being assaulted all over again. I retained an attorney, and today I won. The Department of Corrections paid me 100%. It's not a great sum of money, but it's the principal. Why should it cost me any money to recover from an assault by an inmate? Now on to the criminal trial. Stay tuned…..

CT. Correctional Staff Health and Safety Subcommittee

I have the honor being appointed by Representative Mike Lawlor to serve on the Correctional Staff Health and Safety Subcommittee Criminal Justice Policy Advisory Commission. Representative Karen Jarmoc drafted the legislation that created this committee. This is the first time in state history that Correctional Officers & Correctional Staff have a voice in the executive side of our state's government. Our first meeting November 4th 2009. My question to all of you is: What do you want me to advocate for that will make your jobs safer? Each facility has its own unique safety issues. I work at Northern, so our issues differ from those at Gates (that doesn't make Northern's issues more important) but I need your input. I can't get you a raise, or a shorter work week, but I can be a strong voice to change Departmental Policy, or come up with new ideas that will help make you safer at work and increase your odds of returning home to your families safely.  I can't do it with out your help.


If you haven't done so already, please become a follower of the blog on Facebook.
You can e-mail your suggestions to bandsofbrothers@gmail.com

Thank you,
Kevin Brace

Correction Department completes removal of metal lockers from inmate cells

By Laura F. Alix

Journal Inquirer
Published: Thursday, October 22, 2009 9:10 AM EDT

SOMERS — The state Department of Correction has completed the removal of metal lockers from inmates’ cells at Northern Correctional Institution, fulfilling a promise it made in March to state lawmakers.
Correction Department spokesman Brian Garnett said today that maintenance staff had finished the task of removing the lockers last week, not an easy task since the lockers were bolted into cells and correctional staff had to first remove the inmates.
The department began removing the lockers in early September and has replaced them with non-rigid plastic collapsible boxes, which inmates can use to store their personal items.

“The department is committed to making sure its staff goes home safe at night,” Garnett said. “When issues such as this develop, we’re going to do everything in our power to resolve them.”
The metal lockers and the potential threat they pose to prison staff was brought to public attention by a March 16 incident at Northern, in which two inmates using weapons made from the lockers attacked a third inmate, resulting in a lockdown of the facility.

“I’m just so grateful that it’s complete, and I’m really pleased the DOC responded to this issue,” Rep. Karen Jarmoc, D-Enfield, said. “It was a serious concern, and I’m just glad that when correctional staff are going to work, it’s one less thing they need to worry about.”
Following the attack in March, Jarmoc, along with Reps. Kathleen M. Tallarita, D-Enfield, and Michael P. Lawlor, D-East Haven, sent a letter to then-Correction Department Commissioner Theresa Lantz, asking her to have the lockers removed as quickly as possible from inmate cells at the facility.

Jarmoc had said she learned the two inmates involved in the attack had fashioned 6-inch and 11-inch metal knives from the lockers, with which they were able to stab their victim six times.
Today, she said, “Clearly, inmates were taking apart these lockers and making weapons. I’m just glad we know that’s not a possibility any longer.”

Larry Dorman, a spokesman for the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Council 4, said that the completion of the locker removal “is certainly a positive development for the overall safety of the staff.
“I think it reflects well on the process, in terms of having a safety task force and making sure these issues are front and center and dealt with as expeditiously as possible,” Dorman said. “The DOC management certainly responded.”