Governor Josh Shapiro and the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections have proposed closing two state prisons, saving the state over $100 million annually.
If done right, closing the prisons will not only save money in the short-term, it will benefit all Pennsylvanians.
“There are fewer people in prison since before the pandemic, enabling prison closures. If done right, closing two state prison could save Pennsylvania taxpayers resources that can be reinvested to make all of us safer,” says Claire Shubik-Richards, the Prison Society’s executive director.
There are a number of important factors to consider when deciding which prisons to close, including which facilities will require more repair, which facilities offer important programming, which facilities expose staff and residents to environmental hazards, distance from incarcerated people’s families, and staff culture.
More efficient prisons can increase access to programming
Criminal justice reforms to address mass incarceration have led to a steady decline in the prison population over the last decade, with Pennsylvania’s state prison system now at 82% capacity overall. In the DOC’s latest monthly population report, 8 prisons were at less than 80% capacity. Consolidating into fewer facilities would create a more efficient prison system while still operating safely below capacity.
Prisons often struggle to recruit specialized staff that provide services like reentry support and mental health counseling. Concentrating these staff in fewer facilities would help ensure that such resources are available without the interruptions that sometimes occur when a specialized employee leaves their job, leaving a vacancy that can take months to fill. In addition, increasing the overall staff complement at the remaining prisons would mean more corrections officers were available to facilitate getting incarcerated people to educational programs, religious services, or addiction recovery groups. Currently, in some facilities that have programming, incarcerated people miss classes if there aren't enough security guards to escort them to programs.
Important considerations for choosing which prisons to close
Older facilities in poorer physical condition should be prioritized for closure. State Correctional Institution (SCI) Rockview, which is one of the two prisons the DOC has recommended to close, meets this criterion. Parts of SCI Rockview are more than a century old and in serious disrepair, with crumbling walls, rust, and leaky plumbing. The DOC calculates that SCI Rockview needs $74 million in renovations over the next five years to keep the facility in liveable condition.
Exposure to environmental hazards by incarcerated people and staff should also be considered. SCI Fayette in southwest Pennsylvania, for example, is surrounded by a coal waste dumping ground, and for years, the Prison Society has received numerous concerns about exposure to contaminated air and water among incarcerated people. An investigation by The Human Rights Coalition (HRC), Center for Coalfield Justice (CCJ), and the Abolitionist Law Center (ALC) found “a pattern of symptomatic clusters consistent with exposure to toxic coal waste” at the prison, including respiratory conditions, rashes, cancer, and cognitive impairment. Incarcerated people at SCI Mahanoy and SCI Frackville, neighboring prisons in the vicinity of abandoned coal mines in Schuylkill County, have also complained about chronic water contamination.
It’s also important to consider how closing the prisons would affect ease of visiting for families whose loved ones would be transferred to other facilities. The Prison Society is pleased that the DOC took this into consideration in making its recommendations, given the importance of family visits in reducing recidivism. The steering committee that recommended closing SCI Rockview found that less than 7% of the prison’s population came from neighboring counties, meaning that most families with a loved one incarcerated there likely live farther away.
Finally, the staff culture of the prisons should be taken into account. The state should try to preserve institutions that have a culture of mutual respect between corrections officers and incarcerated people. Unhealthy staff cultures can lead to high rates of violence and the arbitrary enforcement of rules.
“Prisons with entrenched, unhealthy staff cultures should be among the first considered for closure,” says Shubik-Richards.