August/September FCL Newsletter

Ratio: number of poor renters for each low-rent unit (poor renters = three-person households with annual incomes of $12,000 or less; low-rent units = monthly rent of $300 or less).

30%: percentage of poor renters paying 30% or more of income for rent and utilities.

50%: percentage of poor renters paying 50% or more of income for rent and utilities.

Subsidized: percentage of poor renters residing in subsidized housing.

Source: Housing California, from a study by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Prison Misdeeds

[FCL N/L 8/98]

For years ugly disclosures about mistreatment of prisoners hovered like storm clouds over the California Department of Corrections. In 1991 the storm finally hit when a Federal Judge investigated and condemned the isolation, violence, and terror endemic to the Pelican Bay Prison. Pelican Bay represented a so-called "state-of-the-art" response to prison gang problems; it had accepted its first prisoners in 1989.

The complaints and criticisms of prison conditions intensified when the press, in 1995, relying on Corcoran State Prison personnel sources, broke the story that correctional officers had set up and wagered on the outcomes of "gladiator matches," between inmates some of whom, it was said, died in the process.

It soon became clear that these news accounts were just the tip of the iceberg. Moreover, the Department was squandering millions of dollars every year answering litigation alleging staff misconduct. It developed a reputation among lawyers for reflexive use of "stonewall" tactics, regardless of the merits of a claim. Then, in 1996, it underscored its resistance to reform and to responsiveness to criticism by adopting regulations that prevented inmates from sending confidential mail to journalists and denied journalists the right to interview certain prisoners. In 1997 Governor Wilson vetoed SB 434, (Q. Kopp, I., San Francisco) a bill that would have restored access to inmates by journalists.

The beat goes on. This year, FBI investigators charged that, rather than trying to clean up the institutions, prison officials engaged in a cover-up of staff misbehavior. News accounts have drawn Legislative attention to evidence that the cover-ups went all the way up to the offices of the Governor and the Attorney General.

Commentators attribute the failure of prison administrators to correct these conditions to various factors, including the isolation of the institutions, explosive growth of California's inmate population, public indifference toward inmates, gang culture in the institutions, and the political clout of the California Correctional Peace Officer's Association. Witnesses at the recent Little Hoover Commission hearings on the high cost of imprisonment pointed out that a major problem stems from denial, by officials, that encouragement of rehabilitation of inmates is any part of their responsibility. Because of the atmosphere created by this retributive stance, education and job training programs are under-funded and offered grudgingly if at all, staff lose sight of their duty to be humane, and public safety is impaired over the long haul.

It has long been common knowledge that some guards regard all prisoners as incorrigible, calling them "animals," or "scum." Leaders of the prison guards' union use such denigrating language freely. Highly placed officials including Joe Sandoval, the former Secretary of the Youth and Adult Correctional Agency, seem oblivious to the negative effects of such labeling, and have categorically described state prisoners as "the worst of the worst." Inmates getting ready to return to the streets are often told by their guards, "You'll be back."

After serving a term of years in such an atmosphere, it is a tribute to the resiliency of the human spirit that as many as 30 percent of ex-prisoners who should have completed parole last year were actually able to do so. But the percentage of successful parolees has been falling in recent years, as the Board of Prison Terms has moved to return parolees to custody for more and more minor violations. It is now forecast that, in future years, as many as 80 percent of parolees will be returned to prison before completion of parole.

An often overlooked element of this story is the corrupting effect illegal street drugs play in the institutions. During the Little Hoover Commission hearings, attention turned briefly to this illegal drug problem. While it was acknowledged that some drugs would always find their way into institutions, the experts warned that when more than 25 staff members at a prison become involved in drug trafficking, the entire institution is in danger. Staff connections with drug distribution, illegal income, and connection with gang behavior on both sides of the wall spawn a host of collateral issues which destroy effective prison administration.

How many California institutions are at risk? We do not know, but it is common knowledge among CDC staff that drugs are freely available in many California prisons. The problem is so widespread that when prison administrators conducted surprise drug tests on 200 inmates in a rehabilitation program at the relatively well-regarded R.J. Donovan Correctional Facility prison in San Diego, they expected to find as many as 20 percent of them using illegal drugs. The fact that only one inmate tested "dirty" was enough to convince them of the value of the drug rehabilitation program.

Senator Richard Polanco (D., Los Angeles) thought prison officials could begin to address the contraband problem with random searches of employees. He introduced SB 2016, which directs the Department to make random searches of all staff members. Prison guards, with straight faces, asserted that visitors, not staff members were responsible for most drug deliveries into prisons. They complained that it would destroy their professional status to subject them to random searches. The bill's future is in doubt.

The present chain of events, and the legislative inquiry that it has provoked may offer the best opportunity in years to bring about necessary change in California corrections policy. It is important that those of us who care about inmates encourage public interest in these past and continuing misdeeds, and encourage that a thorough housecleaning take place. Truth, finally coming to light, may bring about unforseen and greatly needed reforms. Among such reforms might be acceptance of the FCL's venerable suggestion of the appointment of an independent Ombudsman to whom prisoners and staff could bring problems regarding the operation of our penal institutions.

Finally, we cannot close without stating our firm belief that the vast majority of prison employees just want the opportunity to a difficult and dangerous job competently and that most inmates just want to do good time. There are many opportunities for the prisons to make substantial improvements. If the people (both inmates and staff) who seek such improvement take hold, and their leaders are willing to back them up, change can happen. Of course, some individuals in the prison environment will want to sabotage these efforts, and not all of the nay-sayers are inmates. Continuing oversight is vital to reform.

-Steve Birdlebough

FCL Welcomes New Intern

[FCL N/L 8/98]

Muoi Trinh will be graduated from CSU, Sacramento with a degree in Government this coming December. After graduation Muoi will take a break from her studies, but in the spring of 1999 she plans to go on either to graduate work at CSUS or legal studies at University of the Pacific's McGeorge School of Law. Muoi has been working to update and improve the FCL homepage. (Check it out at http://.webcom.com/~peace/). She is also doing research on and analysis of the ballot propositions scheduled for the fall general election. We count ourselves fortunate at this opportunity to capitalize on her enthusiasm and her manifold skills.