To read reports like Nancy Remsen’s, one would think that the transition of the 160 or so female inmates from the Windsor and Northwest prisons to the Chittenden Regional Correctional Facility was a bit bumpy, but more-or-less going OK. One could even conclude that everything’s peachy, despite some whining from inmates.

Not so.

When the move was proposed, it was pitched as both a money-saver and a positive for the women. They would have more access to services and programs, by virtue of being in Chittenden County. At this point, though, it is proving to be yet another case where government seeks to balance its books on the backs of its most vulnerable citizens; in this case, a small population of generally working class women who are ofttimes afflicted with addiction issues and histories of domestic abuse.

It was only a year ago that the state still approached this population as one worthy of rehabilitation, rather than simply being locked up in a holding tank and dumped out to possibly re-offend when their sentence is complete. But once the state saw a chance to make money at their expense, the change was fast-tracked by political professionals who didn’t understand the issues, even though the hubbub is that many in the Corrections Department considered it a bad idea.

After the flip to get a glimpse of Vermont’s new paradigm for incarcerating women offenders, including ways that the state may not be keeping its promises.

Cast Into the Pit

The Northwest Correctional Facility and the Windsor Correctional facility – where women inmates had been housed – in many ways were doing it right. There was outside space for inmates. More significantly, there was opportunity for employment. There were jobs in the print shop, in auto repair, in maintenence and the kitchens – there was even a modular home-building program in the St. Albans facility that could lead to certifications in any number of skilled trades. The inmates not only learned skills that could help them find employment (and not re-offend upon release), they also learned to work together.

It’s important to remember that women inmates are different than their male counterparts. Many of these women have zero work experience, from having kids early and staying home with them. Many have been financially dependent on boyfriends or spouses – in some cases, abusive ones. Many of these women will end up back in bad situations when they are released, simply because they see no other option. Supporting them in breaking out of these cycles and providing them education and hands-on skills to be self-sufficient are crucial goals, and should be the measure of any serious corrections system.

As far as the physical space went in the previous facilities, some of the rooms were like bad dorm rooms with sets of bunkbeds accomodating as many as 6 inmates. Some rooms were singles and even had televisions. All the women had ready access to outside space. Inmates could mingle freely. Although they were prisoners, and their freedoms and privilege were rightfully restricted, they afforded a measure of fundamental respect and privacy as an obviously necessary precondition for meaningful rehabilitation.

Now, it’s a different story.

The Chittenden Facility is a jail that was not designed for long-term sentences – and while most inmates are in for around 40 days or less, there are long termers sentenced to several years. There is 1 small classroom, a weightroom and a gym.

There is almost no employment, besides a handful of jobs in the kitchen and maintenence. No facilities for skills training and development.

There is also no meaningful outside space. “Outside” consists of a small stretch of grass with a basketball hoop. Inmates can go outside 3 times a week (if it’s not raining) but are strip searched everytime they re-enter, as drugs could conceivably be passed over the fence to them. Interaction between prisoners is restricted to those within their unit (20-40 inmates), meaning inmates in some cases have been cut off from important friendships they had developed in the previous facility.

Since bleach is not allowed, the inmates are sleeping under sheets soiled and yellowed by the previous male occupants. Women have to approach guards for each individual tampon or pad, since the paper could conceivable be used to roll cigarettes. Inmates cannot flush toilets without asking guards.

The women are crammed into rooms holding double the capacity they were intended for. Despite a specific clause in the legislation authorizing the move which specified that inmates would not be housed in the gym, that is precisely what is happening while improvements are being made.

As far as educational programs, they have dwindled to a trickle. There are plans for basic workplace training, possibly some motorcycle maintenence – but nothing on the scale of what was done at the St. Albans facility. Legislators and advocates were assured that they would have access to programs outside the facility in Chittenden County, but at this point it’s unclear which inmates would even be allowed to leave and under what circumstances.

It’s ugly – and according to scuttlebutt, the political interests that pushed this change were warned by Corrections professionals that there would be this kind of trouble.

Understand two things: one, of course this is prison, so it’s not supposed to be fun, but these women have had their physical and rehabilitative situations radically changed. It’s bad enough to start out in a shithole, but these women were being worked with and rehabilitated. Trained. Educated, given a basic degree of respect and dignity on which they could rebuild themselves into better people. Now, that has been pulled out from under them.

Just stop and consider for a moment the psychological effect that must be having.

There are promises, sure; programs in the community, a greenhouse. Some of these things are paid for, some are not. There is money for plumbing, window and gym improvements. There is a grant being written to find federal money for another building to give these women something to do by returning and expanding programs and easing the crowding issues that have already emerged.

Considering the budget situation in Washington, however, hanging hopes for improvement on federal money strikes me as a pipe dream. The fact is, this is not going to get meaningfully better soon, given the simple fact that this facility was never appropriate for the purpose for which it is now being used, and never will be. Period.

It’s All About the Money

Publicly, the Shumlin administration sold the move as a good opportunity for the inmates, but also as a financial boon to the state. By consolidating the women and opening up more space elsewhere, more of Vermont’s male prisoners (currently housed in Kentucky prisons at an extra cost to the taxpayer of somewhere in the low-$20ks per bed) could be returned to Vermont to serve their sentences. In this way, it was pitched as a moral, not simply a financial, good.

In fact, I’m told that the number of inmates who have been returned from Kentucky is no greater than the number that could already be absorbed by pre-existing vacancies in the Windsor facility.

So, who is filling up the other beds? What wasn’t discussed in public statements, but did come up in the House Institutions Committee was the opportunity to lease space too the US Government to house federal prisoners to the tune of about $55k per bed. That’s a big, big incentive to get the women out and leave a few more Vermont prisoners in Kentucky facilities.

But sadly, it was never an either/or scenario. Clearly, federal beds could have been completely seperated from the women’s facility in St. Albans, making the move unnecessary. It just would’ve cost some of that money they were bringing in.

Bottom line: 160-some working-class, sometimes-addicted, women criminals weren’t worth spending the money on – or even worth making less money to accomodate.

Yuck. As a Vermonter, I’m ashamed.

It’s time for the Legislature’s Corrections Oversight Committee to get serious. The deference to the administration is unseemly. They can make noise, ask tough questions. This is a good group (Reps. Emmons, Haas, Heath, Lippert, and Sens Sears, Ashe, Fox, Hartwell and Snelling), they know better – they just need to understand that it’s past time to demand accountability. When the adminsitration makes a claim about money that is being saved by warehousing women this way, dig into those numbers. How much less would we net if we put some of that money back into the population of inmates bearing the burden of that savings, all in order to return to a paradigm of rehabilitation?

I encourage folks to contact your elected  officials on this. Use the little “raise your voice” icon below for an email form keyed to your Representatives and Senators.

Not the end of this. Stay tuned.