Too Vulnerable
For Work Camp

The main problem with the proposed prisoner work camp, that Randolph voters will soon be asked to weigh in on, lies with the fact that the state corrections officials can give the Town of Randolph no guarantee that the proposed 100-bed, minimum-security facility for nonviolent offenders wouldn’t evolve into a larger, higher-security facility in the future.

Indeed, state corrections officials at a recent informational meeting were very forthright in explaining that even if the Randolph Selectboard were to draw up some sort of contract aimed at ensuring that the facility would not change in scope or nature, such a contract would be nonbinding, as it is the Vermont legislature that has the final say regarding corrections facilities. In other words, state law regarding the facility would trump any contract drawn up with the Town of Randolph.

And there is precedent for a state corrections facility starting out as a minimum-security facility and then evolving into a higher security one. One example is the correctional facility in St. Albans Town, which started out as a minimum-security facility for youthful offenders, but then evolved into the maximum-security Northwest State Correctional Facility.

As small towns go, Randolph is vibrant, but it is also vulnerable—too vulnerable right now to take on the risks associated with accepting a correctional facility that could evolve into something that is more than we bargained for at the start. Part of our downtown burned down and was rebuilt not all that long ago. We finally got it together to invest in a much-needed elementary school building, after years of debate and procrastination. With good schools, Chandler, Kimball, some nice shops and restaurants downtown, a decent grocery store close enough to be convenient, as well as a thriving Boys & Girls’ Club, a skating rink, and a great summer recreation area, we are now in a fairly good position to attract young families and desirable new businesses.

Our property tax burden is high—and that does need to be addressed—but the work camp facility is not the answer to the revenue problem. As it is now, despite our high property taxes, young families looking for housing can and do see Randolph as an affordable alternative to the Montpelier or Hanover areas. Would these sorts of young families be drawn to Randolph if it were to house what could become a medium- or high-security correctional facility? It seems disingenuous not to admit that a correctional facility could very well alter the shape of growth in the town, and it may not take on a path that we would hope for.

In fact, a convincing case has not been made that the proposed prisoner work camp would benefit the town financially. Even with the PILOT monies (payment in lieu of taxes) that the town would receive for having the facility, it is doubtful that Randolph would end up ahead economically. There would be costs associated with accepting the facility, since infrastructure would likely have to be extended to build it. At the recent informational meeting, the state corrections officials could make no promises up front about economic incentives if Randolph were to accept the facility.

Financial issues aside, some people see the work camp as a way to fulfill a sense of social responsibility. But Randolph voters should keep in mind that this community is already brimming with individuals and organizations that devote countless hours to bettering not just this town, but also the state, the country, and the world at large. For example, people in Randolph are already involved in programs that keep youth busy with sports and other creative activities, which in turn lowers their risk of getting involved with drugs and concomitant crime in the first place.

Rather than building a town economy that hinges on the corrections system, let’s continue to keep youth active and engaged. Let’s support our local police, and let’s continue to explore ways to grow and attract businesses that provide families with jobs, while also preserving our small-town feel. This would be the wisest path in the long term, for it would allow us to prevent crime in the first place and make Randolph even more livable.

Suzanne Sakai

Randolph

____________