Reforming Our Prisons in 2008: Can California Get Rational Sentencing and Parole Reforms in the Crucible of the Budget Crisis?

This is so sensible. I think we need to be just as vocal as the tough-on-crime folks. The only disagreement I have with this article is the quote about spending more on prisons than education. In the governor's proposed budget, he is allocating $10.3 billion for corrections and $43.7 billion for k-12 education with another $14.6 billion for higher education. The $10.3 billion for corrections is additionally augmented with the $7.2 million from AB900.
The tough-on-crime folks always fail to recognize the simple fact that inmates are going to be released one way or the other: either by the 3-judge panel... or the governor.
I hope our democrats can demonstrate political courage and do the right thing.

Frank, I think you missed an important factor that sets California apart. That is California's Three Strikes Law.One of every four inmates is a striker.About 26% of the inmate population.California incarcerates 4 times as many strikers than all the other three strikes states in the nation combined.Proof how out of step California is compared to the rest of the nation. 688 persons are serving 25 years to life for simple drug poessession.under CDCR policy none are eligable for a substance abuse program until two years before the end of their sentence.This handful of drug users cost California almost 30 million dollars each year.Re-sentencing and treating this small group of inmates would save California over a half billion dollars.

Eileen, I think the "more on prisons than education" is related to higher education not K-12.

One major flaw in the parole system is that very few, if any, parolees are discharged from parole supervision even those who have successfully completed one year of continuous parole. Many parole officers say :business is good. And they are correct. Business is booming and the procedure for discharge, enumerated in the Penal Code, evaporates when a parole officer decides a parolees' prior conviction(s) precludes eligibility for discharge. The concept of "summary parole" is reasonable because it provides a procedure to keep in place a framework of law enforcement. Public safety is not compromised one iota. The State of California should not be compelled to reform felons on the street. The State of California has compromised rehabilitation and in its place is punishment. The prison apparatus should require that a parolee obtain a marketable skill before being released into the community. A series of programs could train felons in 90 days instead of 270 days or one year. While many will decry that 90 days is insufficient, the idea is to communicate a work ethic. A felon preparing for release would be required to submit a "release study plan" to a Correctional Counselor. This plan differs significantly from mere participation in a classroom. A potential parolee shall be required to formulate a workable strategy. This plan is looked at by the parole agent. In this regard, both parolee and parole agent can now share a common goal and objective. Presently, a parole agent looks for technical rule violations and there is only one rule. "Testing". A parole agent does not have a clue as to what a parolee aspires for or what "makes a parolee tick". The "release study plan" gives a parole agent a glimpse at what a parolee looks for. A parole agent and a parolee are two strangers tied together by a file made by the parole agent when the parolee is released. The parole agent snaps a picture of the parolee, punches holes in the "rap sheet" and then an entry is made and conditions reviewed. Nothing is in the file about the plan? The parole agent is lost as to what the parolee intends to do because the requirement of a "release study plan" is missing. The parole agent's responsibility: Registration Requirement and Testing. The parole agent and the parolee are essentially odd bed-fellows because they share nothing in regards to a plan or objective to be reached. In retrospect, if a parole agent had in the file a release study plan, a line of communication is open and the approach for reintegration or the transition back into the commmunity and society at large has meaning. The parole agent has a tool to help shape the parolees aspirations. Rehabilitation is more than a concept, more than a dream, it is a practical and reasonable outlook embracing responsibility for good citizenship. Give the parole agent a handle and reformation begins. T^his is better than a parole agent working with a newly constructed file with a photo and a rap sheet. All potential parolees' have a file and the file contains information about the committment offense. Although many parolees' are successful, there are far too many who fail in the transtion phase. There are are host of reasons for the failure to obtain gainful employment. The objective to assist a parolee can be achieved. This method communicates a vision attainable. The parole agent has something to talk about that is meaningful that the parolee concieved. Crime is not going to be solved by the "release study plan". However, the release study plan is a correctional tool that enables the odd bedfellows to work together. The simplicity of the reintegration plan is that it operates as a mirror because the parole agent becomes law enforcement officer and a concerned person interested in rehabilitation. A parolee taking little steps to reach the goal outlined in the release study plan is real, and the goals are not something hidden secretly within, but a reaonable idea discussed and hopefully realized between them. A release study plan might begin with obtaining food stamps or a bus pass. Each idea communicated opens the door for progress. While criminals will lie, and connive, and venture into waywardness, some parolees will be reached and be discharged from parole. Yes, business can be good and the good can be visualized as it unfolds. Certainly, many plans will be impractical, impossible, and yet many parolees will discover that they can do it. The failures on parole can be reduced. The workload on the parole agent is no greater than it would be if a release study is required of a parolee. Parole agents require assistance and the parolee can be cooperative especially when they understand what responsilities belong to them. Today, parole agents cow parolees into submission because they lack a open line of communication. It is equally important that some training occurs in the prison environment. Nobody is saying that the prison environment is theraputic at all, prison gangs and the number of years imposed as punishment rackle the individual. But our present discussion centers upon rehabilitation. There is no one solution or formula and experts in peneology got agendas which are full of hope and statistics. The prison experiment at massive housing for public safety is successful at massive housing only. I trust I have been successful at articulating a viable approach for understanding the complex problem of parole and the parolee and the parole agent.

ME

Yep the parole system is all screwed up. I am on parole I have been out for one year. I do not have one single mark against me in my period of parole. Convicted of a DUI in 2005 I served two years in prison (this due to a prior that made the ten year rule by three days), tonight my 'agent' calls me and informs me that the 'board' has decided to retain me on parole for another year. I asked when the hell did that happen? when did I go in front of the board? Why haven't I gotten any notice? as required by law? She states she will call me back, she does and then says that the word isn't official, it wont be until the board makes it official. I ask her how the hell did she come this conclusion? "because my supervisors are reccomending retention". I stated then, that I am entitled to due process and that I have the right to see any and all documnets/reports etc. submitted, further, I am also to be given notice. I also pointed out that we are not in the 13th month so I can't be reviewed until the 13th month which is February. So lets look at something here, I have been gainfully employed since minute one of my release, I have maintained steady housing since day one of my release, I have had full custody of my teenaged son, I have NOT HAD ONE SINGLE mark against me while on parole and to top it all off I purchased my mothers estate (who passed while locked up)of 60 acres with two homes on it for 440 thousand dollars, I have enrolled in the DUI program, I do attend and record weekly AA meetings...what else am I supposed to do? I am actively involved with local and state goverment (to small degree) due to the nature of my job. I have had no involvement with law enforcement prior to this incident (8 years)...so one must wonder? I agree with the above writer, business is indeed good for parole. When I was relaeased my agent told me that I was sleeping on the streets. Isnt that interesting and while incarcerated I fought fires and saved Californians homes, lives, property and livelyhood and in the course of that service to the fine citizens of the state I had an accident with a saw and lost half of my index finger and pretty much made my thumb useless. This while being directly responsible for saving a home on a fire.
This is my reward? another year of you have to pee here, go there, bend over here and can't leave the county? They wonder why the damn prisons are so full? Am I whining? yep, do I deserve to whine? yep, I think so. Given my truthful statements above does it really look like I have a penchant to return to criminal behavoiur? Hope the citizens enjoy paying for my supervision. Hell after the news I got I guess it's a wonder I am remaining sober? or maybe thats the idea. My story is a prolific look at how the CDCR doesn't care. They should be indicted for mafia type of behavoiur. Thanx

when are the prisoners going to start getting released?

I'm for the early release of non-violent inmates. Our inmate population is breaking America and hardening our men and women who really don't need to be. Drug users in the prisons who did 3 strikes, they are addicts! Being an addict in my opinion does not make a person a criminal, alcohol is another addiction that even judges, attorneys, doctors face. It's what they do during their addiction that can cause the criminal activity. What has it all come to? Those men and women in prison because of drug addiction, they need to come out and seriously get help. Many addicts have seeked help and gone back out again and again, these people need to keep getting their recovery and working their recovery. Eventually they may get it. But life in prison is a waist of life and money. That money would be better spent on their recovery and while having them in recovery, why not put them to work in the society doing community service while on disability. We need a seperate disabilty program for these people. Theirs should help them while in recovery but still require them to work doing community service while still being supervised. Our money is going to the wrong places. Thank you for allowing me to state my opinion.

I'm for the early release of non-violent inmates. Our inmate population is breaking America and hardening our men and women who really don't need to be. Drug users in the prisons who did 3 strikes, they are addicts! Being an addict in my opinion does not make a person a criminal, alcohol is another addiction that even judges, attorneys, doctors face. It's what they do during their addiction that can cause the criminal activity. What has it all come to? Those men and women in prison because of drug addiction, they need to come out and seriously get help. Many addicts have seeked help and gone back out again and again, these people need to keep getting their recovery and working their recovery. Eventually they may get it. But life in prison is a waist of life and money. That money would be better spent on their recovery and while having them in recovery, why not put them to work in the society doing community service while on disability. We need a seperate disabilty program for these people. Theirs should help them while in recovery but still require them to work doing community service while still being supervised. Our money is going to the wrong places. Thank you for allowing me to state my opinion.

The reality is that some prisoners will have to be released early and sentences need to be brought more in line with what is needed to protect Californians. This is either going to happen through a Federal Court order because of overcrowding or through action by the state—in the form of executive orders of the Governor or legislation.
---------------
Samflutch
California Dui

The reality is that some prisoners will have to be released early and sentences need to be brought more in line with what is needed to protect Californians. This is either going to happen through a Federal Court order because of overcrowding or through action by the state—in the form of executive orders of the Governor or legislation.
---------------
Samflutch
California Dui

Put these facts together with some statistics about the California penal system and the problem becomes clearer:

No court or jury put any parole violator back in prison. That happens solely by non-judicial parole officers, upheld by parole committees also composed of correctional officers. All of the state employees involved, other than in the BPT's administrative appeals, are members of the California Correctional Peace Officers Association - the CCPOA, better known as the prison guard's union.

The CCPOA is, at present, the most politically powerful union in California, and has pushed hard for new prisons and tougher laws to fill them.

California's prisons have held about 50% more people than designed capacity for many years. This leads to lawsuits and demands for more prisons. California's prison system is larger than the US Federal prison system.

About half the people currently in California state prisons are parole violators.

California's parole system eventually issues violations (and re-incarcerates) 70% of parolees, twice the national average.

In other words, CCPOA members - who directly benefit from overcrowding and more prisons - are the ones who decide on parole violations. If they did so at the national average rate, California would instantly (or at least within one year) drop the prison population by about 25%, probably at no risk to anyone.

Many California inmates actually dread parole, because they know that their parole officers will find some way to "violate" them, as it's called. They won't be able to keep a job or start anything long-term because they know, at a moment's notice, a parole officer who doesn't like them or who they pissed off (while not violating the rules) can have them re-jailed for up to a year. By law, it can continue for up to three years even on a one-year sentence. If you're sentenced to 16 months in a California prison, you can actually serve more time on parole violations than you did on your sentence - even more than 16 months total. It's not like that in other states, but it is in California.

It's something like this: by law, the parole term is a maximum of three years from the date of initial parole, but that clock stops running while you're in prison on a violation, but only for one year. So if you're paroled on July 1, 2003, but "violated" on September 1, 2003, for a period of six months, you've completed two months of the parole, and the clock starts again on March 1, 2004, when you're released again. If you're then violated again for a one-year term on May 1, 2004, the clock starts ticking again on November 1, 2004, even though you're still in prison on the violation. Since you'd completed four months "outside," then when the clock resumes on November 1, 2004, your parole must be discharged by law 32 months later, on July 1, 2007, even if you spend every day of that time in prison on various violations. If you spend no time in custody (as only 30% of parolees do), your term is a maximum of three years. If you spend a year or more in custody on violations, it's four years.

Now, as it turns out, California law provides for a "presumptive discharge" of parolees after one year. If you haven't caught a parole violation after 12 months, your parole officer has to fill out a form explaining why you shouldn't be discharged from parole. If BPT doesn't disagree with it, then after 13 months, you're discharged from parole and your sentence is completely over. This doesn't happen as often as it should, though, as the California Department of Corrections (CDC) pretty much assumes that certain classes of people don't deserve early discharge, like "people who were in prison." Don't think that running is the answer, either: by law, the three-year clock halts the day you abscond from parole, and it only starts again when you're rearrested, even if that's 20 years later.

I agree with the early release plan. The CDCR has become too invested in locking up non-violent offenders, the courts have turned a blind-eye, and the citizens of California have been bamboozeled into believing that it serves the public good to punish just about any act done by our residents.

Please check out this article. http://www.mnn.com/business/green-jobs/blogs/green-jobs-for-prisoners

Please check out this article. http://www.mnn.com/business/green-jobs/blogs/green-jobs-for-prisoners

Please check out this article. http://www.mnn.com/business/green-jobs/blogs/green-jobs-for-prisoners

Wow, there are some really misinformed people in this world, or at least on this site anyway.

Morri1, your post kills me. It smacks of socialism. The problem with this ideology is it removes responsibility from the person who committed the crime and tends to place it on everyone else as a failure of the "system" to correct and rehabilitate this poor disenfranchised soul. This is just plain nuts. To address the rest of your post and this is for those other posters who posted something similar; Parole Agents do not, cannot and have never retained someone on parole. That is done by the Board of Prison Hearings (BPH). Agents can recommend all they want but unless they have a nexus for their recommendation, it will be overruled by the BPH. Point of fact; for all of the cases I have recommended discharge on (and there have been quite a few), about 60% get retained by the BPH despite my recommendation. This is part and parcel for most DAPO Agents. Second, felons cannot be reformed by any outside influence. Sure, they can be shown the error of their ways and offered other choices, but to suggest that the California Department of Corrections (CDCR) and Division of Adult Parole Operations (DAPO) can "reform felons" be it in the institutions or on the street is ridiculous in the extreme. In the vein of your "reform" idea, the suggestion of having a release plan is already being done. Inmates are interviewed by a PA II in the institution and encouraged to provide input into their goals and plans to attain those goals. They come to the parole units in a Release Program Study (RPS) packet and prior to parole, the inmates are given a copy of the contact information of the service providers that will help them attain their goals. To compound that, parolees are referred to a one time "class" within 30 days of parole which puts them face to face with most service providers in the community. You can lead a horse to water.....

NEALIE, what you fail to note in your post is that if you were convicted of DUI in 05, you must have had a minimum of 2 other DUI convictions within the last 7 years of that conviction in order to get sentenced to state prison. What you and many people fail to realize is that it isn't the CDCR, BPH or DAPO that orders your parole period, it's the court. While I believe (based on what you noted in your post) you are doing a good parole period, it's not the only thing the BPH reviews before deciding on discharging a case. They also look at previous convictions (to see if there is a pattern of violence, sex offenses and the like), prior incarceration behavior and other social factors (like if restitution is still owed as most times it is). The last part of your post reminds me of the mentality of most Californians, quote taken from Janet Jackson, "What Have You Done For Me Lately?".

SAMFLUTCH, your opening paragraph is one of the most uneducated posts I have read in all of this liberal drivel. "No court or jury put any parole violator back in prison. That happens solely by non-judicial parole officers, upheld by parole committees also composed of correctional officers. All of the state employees involved, other than in the BPT's administrative appeals, are members of the California Correctional Peace Officers Association - the CCPOA, better known as the prison guard's union." Nope, sorry, wrong answer. Again for the learning impaired, the BPH and only the BPH can retain someone on parole. Not the Agent, Correctional Officer or any other dues paying member of CCPOA. BTW, the BPH is NOT represented by CCPOA. They are appointed positions by the Governor's office. So if you want to cry foul, go cry to them. Next, "California's parole system eventually issues violations (and re-incarcerates) 70% of parolees, twice the national average." Wrong again. Violations are not issued. The poor parolee signs his conditions of parole 6 months prior to his/her release. They are issued a copy when they parole. Upon arrival to the parole unit, they re-review the parole conditions with the Parole Agent, re-sign and are given another copy (because maybe they lost it before their release). Now, they choose to make a bad decision and violate one or more of their parole conditions and in about 70% of these cases, the violations are also a violation of LAW. Further, the national average is less in most states because of their sentencing laws which are indeterminate, unlike ours. The rest of your post is a pity party that I don't wish to attend. I hope you have gained some knowledge from my post as I have from each of yours. I know now that the entitlement ideology is strong in California.

Hello to All,

It is great to see so much discussion about this issue. In the words of Congresswoman Jackie Speier, "The Correctional Budget is the greatest threat now confronting California taxpayers." Today our annual budget is 10.6 billion dollars, almost half the deficiet. In 1980 our annual budget was $300 million and we housed only 15,000 prisoners. A statistic that completely shocked me came from Frank Russo's article, Reforming our Prisons in 2008..., California is housing 1 out of every 5 new inmates in the country. I work in Education and am shocked at our willingness to cut more and more educational funding while we stay committed to our "get tough on crime," policies here in CA, that are clearly not working and bankrupting CA. I have been contacting many in Sacramento trying to find some way to bring this issue to the forefront. It was suggested to me to propose a rough draft of a bill to the Committee on Public Safety, whose primary purpose is the penal code, focusing on sentencing reform. Our current budget woes demand that we finally come out of the closet on this issue and take action. I very recently created a yahoo group site to gather information - please join and post your ideas, links, and suggestions. I was informed early October is when the committees begin working earnestly on new bills for the next year.... You can find the group under prison reform - yahoo groups: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/caprisonreform/links?yguid=407150459

Sincerely, Shakati

Hello to All,

It is great to see so much discussion about this issue. In the words of Congresswoman Jackie Speier, "The Correctional Budget is the greatest threat now confronting California taxpayers." Today our annual budget is 10.6 billion dollars, almost half the deficiet. In 1980 our annual budget was $300 million and we housed only 15,000 prisoners. A statistic that completely shocked me came from Frank Russo's article, Reforming our Prisons in 2008..., California is housing 1 out of every 5 new inmates in the country. I work in Education and am shocked at our willingness to cut more and more educational funding while we stay committed to our "get tough on crime," policies here in CA, that are clearly not working and bankrupting CA. I have been contacting many in Sacramento trying to find some way to bring this issue to the forefront. It was suggested to me to propose a rough draft of a bill to the Committee on Public Safety, whose primary purpose is the penal code, focusing on sentencing reform. Our current budget woes demand that we finally come out of the closet on this issue and take action. I very recently created a yahoo group site to gather information - please join and post your ideas, links, and suggestions. I was informed early October is when the committees begin working earnestly on new bills for the next year.... You can find the group under prison reform - yahoo groups: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/caprisonreform/links?yguid=407150459

Sincerely, Shakati

Sorry, comments are temporarily disabled. We're doing a bit of server maintenance on the commenting area. We'll be back up and running shortly. Thank you for your patience.