Counterpoints. 1. Cheaper options are a myth? We are told that adding beds to current facilities would cost too much, as told by the construction manager that wants the build contract for the new prison. Another firm, Elevatus Architecture claimed doing smaller projects like building 300 bed units at Springfield would be cheaper. DOC keeps bringing up the 192 beds adding a second floor. That was one option. Another option was to utilize the space between the old building and the Jameson, DLR group suggested a 200 bed unit there for low level offenders. There was a suggestion to build a 400 bed intake unit on the 28 acres of bare ground north of the current pen. You decide.
2. Since the task force was established, DOC has been presenting to the group how great the current programming is, and how many counselors they have and they have a new program call SAFER, a reentry program they started over a year ago - all sounds great. but wait...Corrections officers and inmates say the current classrooms sit empty, in SF and Springfield. Some recently released inmates say they were never in a classroom for addiction or reentry. What happened to all the programming we were doing 4 years ago? 15 years ago?
3. They want to tie the rehabilitation task force to the prison vote and it would be for the programming at the new prison. Seems wrong. Let's say it passes, the prison is 4 years away, What about programming at the other DOC locations now? We have classrooms sitting empty, why are we doing virtually nothing now. I totally agree we need programing for addiction, mental health and reentry, plus industrial training. Why do we need a vote on the prison to start?
4. Showing God's love through action? Why have almost all religious visitations been restricted? They say it is for safety reasons. Corrections officers tell me it's not the building that is unsafe, it is policy changes that make it unsafe.
5. Today I heard they think the $30 million annual operating increase could be offset by the new rehabilitation programs by creating lower recidivism. May want to read that again. If we can reduce $30 million in expenses by lowering the prison population, how do we justify the 1500 new beds. Lets try the programs first. Keep in mind reducing population does not have a direct correlation to reduction in operations cost. You still need staff, heat, lights, maintenance, etc
There are always two sides to every debate. This isn't an argument, just another point of view.
According the DOC's stats as of February 2023 (little old), 49% (1,333 offenders) of male prisoners were non-violent offenders, 25% (716 offenders) for drugs. We need to punish people who break the law.
If someone makes the personal choice to do drugs, or sell drugs to other people making a personal choices, our taxes need to pay to make sure those people are held responsible for their personal choices. Its called personal responsibly! We cannot, as a society, let people make their own choices. We need the loving and heavy hand of government to guide us in our lives. We cannot be left to our own devices. We need to be guarded.
As much as we need government to watch over us, we must also remember that government is not here to help. Its not its role to help make society better, or less hard. We South Dakotans must relearn that life is fair, much like in board games we all start out at the same place, with the same resources. So its completely our fault if our lives are hard. We must be reeducated to learn that the government's (our tax dollar's) job is to punish us when we stray, that its not the government's (our tax dollar's) job to ensure hungry kids are fed, that small governments are good because businesses will always have our best interests at heart.
After all, we all know the only thing stopping each of us from being drug users is the prospect of prison! Right?
But for real, there are plenty of reasons we need a prison. People need to quit being NIMBYs or decide that those resources should be put into prevention. We can't have it both ways.
Counterpoints. 1. Cheaper options are a myth? We are told that adding beds to current facilities would cost too much, as told by the construction manager that wants the build contract for the new prison. Another firm, Elevatus Architecture claimed doing smaller projects like building 300 bed units at Springfield would be cheaper. DOC keeps bringing up the 192 beds adding a second floor. That was one option. Another option was to utilize the space between the old building and the Jameson, DLR group suggested a 200 bed unit there for low level offenders. There was a suggestion to build a 400 bed intake unit on the 28 acres of bare ground north of the current pen. You decide.
2. Since the task force was established, DOC has been presenting to the group how great the current programming is, and how many counselors they have and they have a new program call SAFER, a reentry program they started over a year ago - all sounds great. but wait...Corrections officers and inmates say the current classrooms sit empty, in SF and Springfield. Some recently released inmates say they were never in a classroom for addiction or reentry. What happened to all the programming we were doing 4 years ago? 15 years ago?
3. They want to tie the rehabilitation task force to the prison vote and it would be for the programming at the new prison. Seems wrong. Let's say it passes, the prison is 4 years away, What about programming at the other DOC locations now? We have classrooms sitting empty, why are we doing virtually nothing now. I totally agree we need programing for addiction, mental health and reentry, plus industrial training. Why do we need a vote on the prison to start?
4. Showing God's love through action? Why have almost all religious visitations been restricted? They say it is for safety reasons. Corrections officers tell me it's not the building that is unsafe, it is policy changes that make it unsafe.
5. Today I heard they think the $30 million annual operating increase could be offset by the new rehabilitation programs by creating lower recidivism. May want to read that again. If we can reduce $30 million in expenses by lowering the prison population, how do we justify the 1500 new beds. Lets try the programs first. Keep in mind reducing population does not have a direct correlation to reduction in operations cost. You still need staff, heat, lights, maintenance, etc
There are always two sides to every debate. This isn't an argument, just another point of view.
According the DOC's stats as of February 2023 (little old), 49% (1,333 offenders) of male prisoners were non-violent offenders, 25% (716 offenders) for drugs. We need to punish people who break the law.
If someone makes the personal choice to do drugs, or sell drugs to other people making a personal choices, our taxes need to pay to make sure those people are held responsible for their personal choices. Its called personal responsibly! We cannot, as a society, let people make their own choices. We need the loving and heavy hand of government to guide us in our lives. We cannot be left to our own devices. We need to be guarded.
As much as we need government to watch over us, we must also remember that government is not here to help. Its not its role to help make society better, or less hard. We South Dakotans must relearn that life is fair, much like in board games we all start out at the same place, with the same resources. So its completely our fault if our lives are hard. We must be reeducated to learn that the government's (our tax dollar's) job is to punish us when we stray, that its not the government's (our tax dollar's) job to ensure hungry kids are fed, that small governments are good because businesses will always have our best interests at heart.
After all, we all know the only thing stopping each of us from being drug users is the prospect of prison! Right?
But for real, there are plenty of reasons we need a prison. People need to quit being NIMBYs or decide that those resources should be put into prevention. We can't have it both ways.