After Meeting with New BOP Director, Norton Asks for Follow Up on Numerous Critical Issues Impacting D.C. Inmates
WASHINGTON, D.C.—The office of Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) today released Norton's letter to Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) Director Mark Inch following up on their meeting in December, where Norton raised several issues of concern to the District of Columbia regarding BOP, which houses D.C. Code felons. Norton also agreed to take Inch up on his offer to tour Rivers Correctional Institution, a privately contracted BOP facility in North Carolina that primarily houses D.C. Code felons (along with non-citizens convicted under federal law). Norton asked for specific follow up from BOP on the several issues that follow and explained the reasons in the attached letter.
1. Whether Inch supports BOP's response issued in 2016 to an inquiry by Norton and Senators Tom Carper (D-DE) and Cory Booker (D-NJ), which said, "The Bureau is now open to considering the possibility of concentrating DC inmates in a Bureau-operated low security facility in reasonable proximity to DC."
2. Whether reports are correct that BOP is not observing the agreement to keep juvenile offenders convicted of D.C. Code felonies in a D.C. facility until they are 18, and whether there are juvenile D.C. Code felons at Garza County, Texas, or any other BOP facility.
3. Urging BOP to make video conferencing available for D.C. Code felons and their attorneys and D.C. Code felons and their families.
4. Urging BOP to allow D.C. Code felons to be housed 90 days prior to their release at the D.C. Correctional Treatment Facility so that they can begin the reentry process more effectively.
5. Whether BOP is willing to honor its prior agreement with the D.C. Department of Corrections (DOC) to allocate and utilize 200 DOC beds for short-term sentenced D.C. Code felons to keep them closer to D.C.
6. Reactivating a program run by the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency to prepare inmates for reentry 190 days before their release.
7. Making available rehabilitation programs for drug and alcohol use, which D.C. Code felons are often required to complete before they can be released, but are not offered at the facility where they are currently housed, in time for the inmates' release.
8. Placing a "point person" within BOP to handle D.C.-specific issues. Such an employee could help consolidate the unique requests of D.C. Code felons, who are unlike most federal prisoners, and their families.
Norton's full letter is below.
Mark Inch
Director
Federal Bureau of Prisons
320 First Street NW
Washington, DC 20534
Dear Director Inch:
First, I wanted to express my condolences on the loss of your father. I appreciate your meeting with me so quickly after your loss.
Thank you for coming in to discuss important issues of particular concern to the District of Columbia regarding the federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP). I write to follow up on several of the issues we discussed.
As you know, D.C. Code felons are the only state inmates housed in BOP facilities. While accommodating them fully within the usual BOP procedures, Congress expected the BOP to recognize the unique circumstances and needs of these particular state felons. Below are some outstanding questions to which I request a response.
My first concern is the urgent need for a BOP facility located close to the District that would house all male and female D.C. Code offenders. No other state inmates are spread throughout the country. While I appreciate the rule that BOP inmates should be placed within 500 miles of their release residence, many D.C. Code felons are not placed within that range, and even 500 miles is too great a distance for inmates' loved ones. The only consistent data showing an effect on reduced recidivism and successful adjustments to civil society indicate the importance of proximity to and visits from family. State inmates are most often felons whose crimes have involved violence and who have incurred long sentences, making these contacts with loved ones all the more important. Therefore, a September 6, 2016, letter from Senators Tom Carper (D-DE) and Cory Booker (D-NJ) and me requested that an existing BOP facility close to D.C. be converted to house all D.C. Code felons. The BOP responded, "The Bureau is now open to considering the possibility of concentrating DC inmates in a Bureau-operated low security facility in reasonable proximity to DC." This response was much appreciated. Do you support this response to Senators Carper and Booker and me?
I was, candidly, shocked to learn that, at least recently, there are no fewer than six D.C. Code juvenile inmates (younger than 18) who are housed in locations far from the District. I understand that at least four are in the Garza County, Texas, facility and two are in the South Dakota prison, as of a few weeks ago. I appreciate your indicating that you would confirm whether these reports are true. There is an agreement between the D.C. Department of Corrections (DOC) and the BOP to keep juveniles who are D.C. Code felons in a DOC facility in the District until they reach 18. Particularly considering the distance of most BOP facilities from the District, it was understood to be important to keep these children in contact with parents and relatives as long as possible. It is my understanding, however, that this agreement has been breached and that U.S. Marshals move juveniles at random times, making family, and even attorney, visits difficult, if not impossible. Failing to notify attorneys of where their clients are held is likely a violation of their constitutional rights under the Sixth Amendment. Is the BOP observing the agreement to keep juvenile offenders convicted of a D.C. Code violation in a D.C. facility until they are 18? Are there juvenile D.C. Code inmates at Garza County, Texas, or any other BOP facility?
I request that you increase the use of video conferencing for inmates to meet with their attorneys and their families. As noted below, I understand from several community organizations that inmates often face difficulties in meeting with their attorneys in BOP facilities, and video conferencing could prove one solution. While I understand that the BOP now makes limited use of video conferencing, more video conferencing with families and D.C. facilities would also make transitioning after release more effective for the inmates and their families, especially if the family is not able to travel a great distance for an in-person visit. At another level, I personally have held several town hall meetings through video conference, and they can be very successful in allowing my constituents to more easily be in contact with families and D.C. programs. Will the BOP make video conferencing available for D.C. Code inmates and their attorneys and D.C. Code inmates and their families?
I strongly urge the BOP to move D.C. Code inmates back to the District 90 days prior to their release so that they can begin the reentry process. This is necessary so that inmates can learn what services are available upon their release. For example, having D.C. Code inmates here would help them obtain driver's licenses, which, in turn, could help them as they seek employment upon reentry. I previously asked that these inmates be placed in the D.C. Correctional Treatment Facility (CTF). The BOP has refused this request, arguing that halfway houses are the appropriate placement for such offenders and that it would impose high administrative costs on BOP to have the inmates located at the CTF. However, the BOP's position did not take into account that one-third of D.C. Code offenders refuse placement in a halfway house or are not considered appropriate for such placements, which would make it impossible for these inmates to be close to D.C. prior to their release. Many inmates prefer to stay in the CTF because they can complete their sentences in a more structured facility close to home. Although there is a slight increase in cost per night to house offenders in the CTF, as opposed to a BOP facility, BOP already pays this small difference for offenders with shorter sentences who are housed at the CTF instead of in a BOP facility. Will the BOP reconsider this policy and place inmates at the CTF, especially immediately prior to their release?
I also understand that BOP and DOC had an agreement that 200 DOC beds would be allocated to BOP D.C. Code inmates to keep them closer to D.C. However, not all of the beds allotted for D.C. inmates at the DOC facilities are being utilized. Is BOP willing to observe fully this agreement to ensure that D.C. residents can be housed closer to their homes?
In a related matter, I understand that the program run by the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA) to prepare inmates for reentry 190 days before their release has largely been ignored. Will the BOP work with CSOSA to reactivate this program?
I also understand that some D.C. Code felons are mandated to complete certain programs, such as rehabilitation programs for drug and alcohol use, under an order from the U.S. Parole Commission before they can be released, but sometimes such programs are not offered at the facility where they are currently housed or they are moved before they can complete the programming. Because D.C. Code inmates are state felons who have often served long sentences, such preparation is important for them to live in civil society again. Will the BOP make the mandated programs available in time for the release date for the D.C. Code inmates? I hope that this can be resolved so that inmates can be released at the time they expect and deserve to be released.
In light of the unique status of D.C. Code inmates as the only state felons in the BOP system, I strongly urge you to place a "point person" within BOP to handle D.C.-specific issues. Such an employee could help consolidate the unique requests of D.C. inmates and their families, who are unlike most federal prisoners. I have attached summaries of specific problems identified by D.C. advocacy groups and agencies. I ask that you look into these specific concerns and indicate their status.
I very much appreciate your offer to have me accompany you on a visit to the Rivers Correctional Institution. I look forward to that trip with you. Please have your staff work with mine to arrange the details of that visit.
Sincerely,
Eleanor Holmes Norton