A better way to close prisons

By Jason Bloom

When the state Department of Corrections moved to close prisons in Greensburg and Cresson without warning, it set a precedent that should concern communities that host state prisons across the state.

On the evening of Jan. 8, state legislators were notified of the closings to come the following day. Several media outlets reported the closings that night. How did many of the corrections officers in those prisons learn of the closings?

From inmates.

That's right: Officers learned the news from inmates at Greensburg and Cresson who saw the TV reports.

On Jan. 9, one hour before the state made its official announcement, the state finally notified the Pennsylvania State Corrections Officers Association, which represents 600 employees in both prisons.

During testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, corrections officials acknowledged that department officials started internal discussions on closing facilities as early as last June. Yet, they kept it to themselves until January.

Had the department chosen to work with us, we could have helped to ease the impact on our members. Don't we owe the people who handle our state's most violent criminals at least that much?

Our members are in danger every day. Some have been brutally beaten; others are "gassed" - that's when an inmate throws a bag of urine or feces at an officer or spits on him or her. Some inmates suffer from various diseases, including HIV, so officers must be tested after every "gassing."

The state didn't need to blindside its corrections officers. It knew what was happening, yet even allowed an officer to transfer into the Cresson facility as late as December.

As bad as the harm is to those who worked in Greensburg and Cresson, there is now an additional fear and concern among other officers and their families. What facility is next? Under the current system, no one will know about a closing until it's too late.

The state is currently building a new prison at Graterford to replace the current facility. Will this new jail be an opportunity to close others without warning?

There's a model for how to handle closures that includes all stakeholders.

In 2005, the federal government implemented the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission, which provided an open process to carefully and thoughtfully evaluate the closing of military bases. The commission recognized that while the military value of a base was of compelling importance, so too was the impact upon host communities and personnel. The commission's mission statement reads:

"While giving priority to the criteria of military value, the commission will also take into account the human impact of the base closures and will consider the possible economic, environmental, and other effects on the surrounding communities."

The commission held community meetings in the locations that had been identified for possible closure. It solicited comments and suggestions from community leaders, area businesses, and employees. When the closures were announced, the communities and employees at least had fair warning. They had a chance to make a case for keeping their base open. As important, community leaders were able to plan for the worst-case scenario.

Was it too much to ask that our state government demonstrate the same compassion and concern for its employees and the impacted communities? Seldom is the best decision made in a vacuum.