CUT PRISON COSTS VIA REHABILITATION

Thank you for the two excellent March 18 editorials ("Prisons: State must
honor its commitments," "And . . . Alternatives exist to cut costs"):

a.. "The Legislature cannot be two-faced about this, mandating that
(Corrections Commissioner) Johnson carry out programs and then refuse to
fund what it ordered," and

a.. "Alternatives exist to cut (prison) costs (by lowering) inmate
numbers," specifically mentioning community based rehabilitation programs
suggested by Johnson and drug courts proven effective by Circuit Judge
Keith Starrett. Last year, California voters overwhelmingly approved
Proposition 36, a drug court alternative similar to Judge Starrett's, which
is expected to result in 24,000 people getting treatment instead of prison
time at a prison cost savings of about $200 million a year.

Many agree that the prison budget cuts imposed by the Legislature should be
matched by parallel legislative in order to prevent the public dangers
which flow from underfunding a large state prison system.

The most efficient and cost-effective way to reduce the prisoner population
and cost substantially, if not also retroactively, is to increase for each
activity the amount of "trusty" and "meritorious earned time" (met)
sentence reductions awarded "best prisoners" to 30 or more days for 30
served - and to remove the current 180-day cap on met credits. The "best
prisoners" are working a job, going to school, in rehabilitation programs,
and staying out of trouble while in prison.

Sentence reduction credits will not only result in substantial
incarceration cost savings, they will also result in higher inmate turnover
in and, thus, higher utilization of the current limited number of jobs,
school and rehabilitation positions.

Ron Welch

Jackson