Making Them Pay

Valley sheriffs buck their colleagues over a proposal to charge inmates for their room and board.

Comments (20)
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Illustration By Mark Roessler

In 2002, Bristol County Sheriff Thomas Hodgson instituted what was, from his perspective at least, a successful new policy: he began charging inmates under his authority a daily fee of $5 to help cover the cost of their incarceration.

The policy—called the "Inmate Financial Responsibility Program"—also included fees for specific services: $5 for medical visits, $3 for prescription medicines, $5 for haircuts, $12.50 to take a GED test. The money came from prisoners' "canteen accounts," individual accounts used to buy incidentals like snacks and typically stocked by their families or significant others. Prisoners who qualified as indigent were exempt, and those who owed fees upon release would have their unpaid fees forgiven after two years—if they stayed out of jail during that time.

Hodgson described the program as a way to instill responsibility in prisoners. "Look, having inmates come to prison and telling them that you don't need to worry about the costs associated with running the prison is, I don't think, a good message for them," Hodgson told the Boston Globe earlier this year.

Hodgson's program collected about $750,000 in fees before it was halted in 2004, when a Superior Court judge, in response to a lawsuit filed by inmates, found that the sheriff lacked the legal authority to institute the policy.

Hodgson appealed the decision, and in January of this year, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court upheld the lower court's ruling, saying that it was the Legislature's role, not the sheriff's, to create such a policy.

Undaunted, Hodgson vowed that he would appeal to lawmakers to grant that authority to the sheriffs. Late last month, in the last-minute scramble of its budget process, the state House of Representatives passed a budget amendment that would allow the state's 14 sheriffs to charge inmates a "daily custodial fee" of $5, as well as fees for certain medical and other services. A similar amendment is now pending in the Senate's version of the budget; at deadline, the Senate had not yet voted on the measure. The fee system would also need the approval of the governor.

The House amendment passed with strong bipartisan support, by a vote of 93 to 62. To some supporters, the appeal lies in Hodgson's notions of inmate responsibility; for others, it's a more practical desire to raise funds for the state wherever possible. But critics predict that the policy will backfire, saddling inmates with debt that would make it that much harder to make a successful re-entry to society after their release. They also warn that prisoners' families would end up footing the bill, adding an additional financial burden to families already under extreme stress.

Interestingly, it's not just prison reform advocates who are critical of the bill. While a number of sheriffs from the eastern part of the state embrace the fee idea, it's met with opposition from Valley sheriffs, including Hampshire County's Robert Garvey, who described it as a "a terrible, terrible idea" that would, in fact, work against what he and other sheriffs are supposed to be accomplishing in their work with inmates.


The House amendment was sponsored by Rep. Betty Poirier, a North Attleboro Republican whose district includes Hodgson's Bristol County, who described it as a way to save money for taxpayers.

The amendment allows sheriffs to charge inmates fees, including a daily room-and-board fee of no more than $5, plus $5 fees for medical and dental visits, $3 for prescriptions and $5 for eyeglasses. Exemptions are made for medical exams upon admission, emergency care, hospitalization, prenatal care for pregnant women, and treatment for contagious or chronic diseases. Inmates could not be denied medical care for lack of funds.

As in the system Hodgson had established in Bristol, prisoners who owe money upon their release would carry a debt that would be forgiven if they are not reincarcerated for two years after release. The law also calls for a process that would allow inmates to appeal fees. In addition, sheriffs who want to institute a fee system would need to prepare a report, to be approved by the Secretary of Public Safety, demonstrating its "financial feasibility."

The Senate version of the bill, which was introduced by Sen. Steven Baddour (D-Methuen), calls for a similar fee schedule and includes the appeals and debt forgiveness provisions and a guarantee that inmates would not be denied health care for lack of money. In addition, it calls for a financial feasibility report, as well as annual reports to the Legislature detailing the program's statistics.

Some backers of the bill are, no doubt, motivated by the notion that hard-working, law-abiding taxpayers are underwriting the plush lives of spoiled inmates—a notion Hodgson fed into in a 2009 interview with the Globe, where he disputed the idea that most prisoners are poor.

"In fact, we have some that leave our facilities in limousines," the sheriff said. "If they have money to buy candy and cookies and higher grade sneakers . . . it is my belief they certainly have enough money to first pay for the cost of their care."

Even stripped of such rather inflammatory images, public debate over a prisoner-fee system relies on a financial argument. Indeed, Republican gubernatorial candidate Charlie Baker has included it as one of his "Baker's Dozen" list of reforms that he says would save the commonwealth $1 billion. Baker calls for charging "a nominal daily room and board fee" to inmates both in state and county facilities (the House amendment applies only to the county facilities run by the sheriffs). Baker also proposes that "inmates [who] are unable to pay should have their bills forgiven for good behavior after they are released."

Baker's campaign materials claim his idea would generate $10 million to $40 million but don't specify how that wide-ranging figure was reached.


Across the country, struggling governments are turning to the criminal justice system as a source of potential revenue. "There is a trend in the states to add more categories of fees, and to raise the amounts of existing fees," Rebekah Diller, a deputy director at New York University's Brennan Center for Justice, told the Advocate. Often, she added, these policies, much like the amendment passed by the Massachusetts House, come about as a quickly hatched effort to save some cash, with little if any thought about what she called the "hidden costs" of imposing these fees of a population that's already overwhelmingly poor.

This summer, the Brennan Institute will release a report looking at the national trend toward increasing fees in court and prison systems. The institute has already looked at policies in individual states, including a March study, authored by Diller, on court "user fees" in Florida. That state, the report notes, "relies so heavily on fees to fund its courts that observers have coined a term for it—'cash register justice.'"

In Florida, which provides no exemption for the indigent, the fees are often uncollectible, according to the report. Those who fail to pay the fees also face more penalties, including added fines or a suspension of their drivers' licenses, which makes it harder for them to find or keep a job.

"At their worst, collection practices can lead to a new variation of 'debtors' prison' when individuals are arrested and incarcerated for failing to appear in court to explain missed payments," Diller's report found.

The purported financial benefits of these kinds of fee systems can be undercut by administrative costs, Diller told the Advocate. "You end up spending a lot of money just to collect these fees," she said.

You also end up creating one more weight around the neck of a newly released prisoner trying to re-acclimate to life outside, she added. "When you burden someone with debt coming out of prison, it's yet another barrier to successful re-entry, and yet another factor that can contribute to recidivism. Very often you create a debt that won't be paid but stays with the person and has consequences."


In Massachusetts, prisoners'-rights advocates are braced to fight a new prisoner-fee system. The American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts has a number of objections, said communications director Chris Ott, including constitutional concerns about applying it to current inmates who've never had to pay the fees in the past. "It would essentially amount to a second punishment," Ott said.

In addition, he said, since most prisoners would end up paying the fees from accounts funded by their families, "it amounts to a sort of back-door tax on those families."

Lois Ahrens, director of the Northampton-based Real Cost of Prison Project, calls the House budget amendment "bad in every way."

Most people locked up in county jails, Ahrens noted, are categorized as "presentenced"; they're awaiting their day in court there because they couldn't make bail. "They're there because they're poor. If they weren't so poor, they wouldn't be there," she said. "And then to top it off, they could end up with $150 a month they're being assessed."

The budget amendment, Ahrens said, was a rush job; it includes no provision for how debts owed by inmates upon release would be collected, and it's not backed by any documentation supporting the purported financial benefits.

Activists have spent years pushing reforms aimed at making it easier for released inmates to find a stable, productive path after prison, such as efforts to reform the criminal record system, commonly known as CORI. What small advances have been made would be dramatically undercut if the House budget amendment becomes law, Ahrens said. "These things are not separate issues," she said. "It will hurt people and then slow down any tiny, tiny progress."

Ahrens compared the amendment—with its quick passage and absence of debate about its larger consequences—to mandatory minimum sentencing laws that passed decades ago on a wave of tough-on-crime sentiment and that have since been widely recognized as failed policies.

"This is a perfect example of one of these horrible, bad, punitive ideas that end up causing negative consequences forever, that could happen overnight with no one knowing about it, and then it takes 30 years for us to undo it," she said.


If the inmate-fee system does become law, it will be thanks, in part, to the hard-line sentiment that once buoyed the mandatory sentencing laws. In a recent article in the Quincy Patriot-Ledger, Hodgson, the Bristol sheriff, described arguments that the fees were unfair to inmates as "red herrings."

"Nobody ever says, 'What about the poor taxpayer who's being victimized and didn't do anything?'" Hodgson told the newspaper.

In the same article, Norfolk County Sheriff Michael Bellotti—who's president of the Massachusetts Sheriffs' Association, and who supports the fee system—said the proposal has the support of a "vast majority" of the commonwealth's 14 sheriffs. But that majority does not include Hampshire County Sheriff Robert Garvey, who described the policy as "very shallow thinking."

"I think it's very shallow thinking to think that the people who are here, number one, can afford [the fees]," Garvey told the Advocate. "Most of the people that I encounter in this facility usually come from the very lowest part of our socioeconomic climate."

Even more important, he added, the fees would really be a burden on inmates' families. "It's going to be taking away from them, and they are already in a poverty situation," he said.

"It's easy for legislators to pass this law who have not been witness to what goes on in these facilities," Garvey added. "Obviously, in this political climate, it's easy to be hard on anyone—'lock them up and throw away the key.' Nobody has told the Legislature that the population we're dealing with doesn't have any money [or] they wouldn't be here.

"People who have money don't go to jail," Garvey added; they have the money to make bail and hire attorneys. "We might read a lot about their crimes, but they don't actually spend any time locked up."

Legislators may be out of touch, but what about his fellow sheriffs who support the idea of inmate fees?

"I think it's based on philosophy, to be honest with you," Garvey said. "I think people are sent to us as punishment, not for [further] punishment. ... Their penalty, obviously, is the loss of their freedom coming here. This [fee system] is double jeopardy to me."

Garvey sees his role as preparing inmates for a productive life after their release.

"People don't like to hear me say this, but there are an awful lot of people incarcerated here who are already victims of our society," he said. "We have to provide an environment where change can take place, to provide opportunities to change so when we release someone they're in better shape than when they came [here]. ... That philosophy is not shared by all the sheriffs in the commonwealth."

It is shared by Hampden County Sheriff Mike Ashe, who also opposes the fee proposal. "We really see it as an impediment to successful community re-entry," said Rich McCarthy, spokesman for Ashe's department. "With everything else that works against an individual as he's trying to re-enter society successfully, if he's got this other debt, it's a tremendous financial challenge. For someone to return to their family and try to be self-sustaining and support their family, to add this on just makes it that much more difficult."

Inmates already have jobs, working in areas like food service, maintenance and the jail laundry, McCarthy added. Through that work, he said, "they are accomplishing the very things this bill would want to accomplish. They are paying for their room and board by providing work, very needed work. ... That's accomplished without loading on this extra debt."

In addition, inmates who hold community-based jobs through the prelease program already pay 15 percent of their wages toward their expenses.

McCarthy also questioned the creation of fees for medical appointments, which would create a disincentive for inmates to get care. (According to the Globe, when Hodgson began charging fees in Bristol, inmate medical visits dropped from 350 a month to 100 a month.)

Many people who end up behind bars have not had proper health care, McCarthy said; for them, the corrections system represents an opportunity to finally deal with long-neglected medical issues. "Incarceration actually becomes a chance to save a lot of health difficulties for these people, and resulting health costs in the community," he said.

The Hampden Sheriff's Department, McCarthy said, might have a reputation as progressive, "but we don't have our heads in the clouds. ... If we thought it was going to be an effective, sensible measure, then we'd support it." But the department already looked into the idea of charging fees years ago, he said, and concluded it would be counterproductive. "It's not practical, it's not effective, it's not going to produce the results people would hope it would. ...

"There's nothing sinister about this bill," continued McCarthy. "The goal of everyone is that offenders become productive citizens of society—contributing, productive, paying, if you will, citizens of society. ... But examined under the light of whether it would be effective or not, the real fiscal truth of it, then you see that it is not going to contribute to inmates being paying, positive, productive members of society."

Diller, of the Brennan Center, agrees. "These budget gimmicks are very appealing on the surface, and when states are cash-strapped it can be very hard to fight them," she said. "But when people think it through, think about the limited money that it could raise and the problems down the road, they start to reconsider."

Comments (20)
Post a Comment

The fees will probably to be held unconstitutional, federally, eventually. That would be a good outcome. However, some fees might be good to institute. Instead of seeking fees for "living expenses", how about seeking modest fees from inmates who want to take advantage of an "on-line" educational service either for GED preparation or for beginning and advanced online technical school or college courses. Offering online training to individuals who show the maturity, responsibility and general ability to participate, who also want to learn, can be a good chance for them to seek further education even after incarceration or to work at a new trade or specialty. Then the fee assessed is one which reflects the purposes of what incarceration should offer at least some of the inmates. It also makes the participation in the educational opportunity something that is accessible, even to those who have no monies, as a way to get them going and looking positively to the future when they will be released.

Posted by TA on 5.25.10 at 14:46

I could not be more proud of Sheriff Garvey! Kudo's to him for taking the time to help explain why this draconian piece of leglislation can never function as anything other than further unneeded punishment.

Posted by tiedyeguy on 5.25.10 at 15:31

The government bureaucracy is always looking for ways to make money. Once it passes, the fees will go up, and the exemptions will be eaten away, a little each year. We have seen it all before, the institution of “reasonable fees.”

Some of the legislature sound like the criminals, they are saying anything is alright to make money for their friends.

The poor taxpayer? Some of us have been trying to tell people for years that the laws creating victimless crimes are expensive to enforce. It is time the “innocent” taxpayer get his head out of the sand and demand that they be abolished. Courts, police, and jails are expensive, we should only use them when we have to for the protection of society. In the case of marijuana smoking and prostitution where is the victim? On of the beneficiaries is the probation officer with his fees, they are living off prostitutes. The other beneficiaries are the guards.

Most of those convicted have plea bargained. That means that they half-literate has been arrested. His Public defender wants a promotion and will not get it by making waves. The public defender advised him that he will wait a long time in jail if he does not plead guilty to something. Already the Constitution has been violated. Of course the judges, who have have been involved in the legal system for years will deny all knowledge of this.

One of the accused witches died in Salem dungeon because she could not pay for her upkeep. Phase I will be the fees. Then little by little the law will be expanded to do things to those who cannot pay the fees. A few odd ball cases of wealthy prisoners will be used to justify the fees. Little by little the legal system will be used to create an under-class of unemployable people.

Posted by Robert Underwood on 5.25.10 at 22:25

There is no doubt that the fees are unconstitutional - you cannot be held accountable for fees incurred when you are held involuntarily by the state. These fees cannot be paid by working in the jail/House of Corrections, since in this state a wage of $0.15/hr. is commonplace. I personally worked in the Hampshire County HOC Kitchen for roughly a year and each week one gets $7.35 for waking at 4am each morning and working until noon, 7 days a week. Obviously, most inmates work simply because they "enjoy" passing the time slightly more "quickly".

The money in an inmate's account is henerally produced by family members - What is NOT mentioned is that ordinary items such as soap and toothpaste, toothbrushes, shoes, razors (face), MUST be purchased through commisary. If you are indigent the jail will provide these items - though they are of the lowest quality one can imagine. The indigent toothpaste for example, will leave your teeth coated in a "lifetime" of plaque in just a year.

Many people do not plan to go to jail, and a portion are there for an "honest" mistake - sometimes people's judgement is off.

What I can say is that Sheriff Robert Garvey is an incredibly smart man - and I would agree with any ideas he may have. He is ALWAYS looking out for what he feels is in the best interest of the community. His desire is to to make his inmates be more productive members of society and reduce recidivism as best he can. If he feels this is a terrible idea, it likely is.

Posted by Dave on 5.26.10 at 13:14

I am a correctional service provider in a foreign jurisdiction. For some reason the scandanavian system nets better results: which in essence is measured in lower recidivism. And it achieves this through providing posh prison conditions and lighter sentences. It is counter-intuitive to the American experience which is slowly bankrupting state governments such as California. A Norweigan prison just built, for example:

Posted by Andrew on 5.26.10 at 16:55

Dave, Seriously? An "honest" mistake gets you in jail? Oh Christ, that's a freakin' hoot. It's quite simple, don't break the law and you'll stay out of jail, dumbass. And why should I pay for your Colgate or Crest while you are incarcerated? Brush with mud for all I care. I abide by the law, work for a living and consequently haven't been incarcerated at any time. I admit, weed is harmless for the most part, and should not be illlegal, but as of today, it still is. So the police will continue to enforce the law so long as it IS a law.

Posted by Deebo on 5.27.10 at 8:02

Deebo, really? Being a lawabiding person, I have never seen the inside of a jail and I also work for a living. However, God forbid, your mother or father (yes, it certainly can happen), brother or sister, a favorite cousin or a good friend make a mistake..lose his/her temper..has a momentary judgment lapse..anyone can wind up in prison. A simple act of being distracted at the wheel of a car, for instance, or having just one more drink before leaving a get-together with friends, can result in a vehicular homocide and prison time. If you think you or your loved ones are immune, think again. There but for the grace of God go you (and me). Would you like to see your loved one with rotting teeth or other examples of poor health and hygiene? These are basic tenets of good health we are talking about here. We're not talking about providing high-end products to inmates, but rather adequate articles for adequate health...not China-made toothpaste with who knows what for ingredients. Inmates are already at risk for diseases, e.g. resistant strains of TB, as a result of their close quartered living. They are confined without personal that not payment enough for you?? Incarcerated individuals should be afforded some measure of simple dignity. I feel your black or white attitude toward the convicted is grossly unrealistic in a gray world. If you haven't already guessed, I have a loved one in prison and, even though it is a short sentence, it has been a tremendously humbling experience. Count your blessings because it really could happen to you or yours.

Posted by Denise Milroy on 5.28.10 at 9:01

Anyone who honestly thinks that if you do good and 'abide by the law' you are fooling yourself. Be at the wrong place at the wrong time, guess what buddy you got yourself 48 hrs of being locked up without even having the right to know why you are being held for 48 hrs. Are you suspected of a crime? Hope you have some cash to blow on bail because if not you are sitting in jail until you are found guilty/not guilty. In that time you have lost your job.

Oh you did something wrong? Smoked a little reefer and got caught with some extra on you? Depending where you are at your going to jail buddy, you might even be slapped with a felony depending on the amount. Have fun having your time and innocense raped from you. You deserve to get abused like that after all you are in jail YOU must have done something to get yourself there.

I have never been to jail, arrested, or even seen the back of a police car. I'm not jaded enough to ever believe most people are deserving of the jail sentences they get. I do fear that I may end up in jail from something so stupid as speaking my opinion. Being in jail is no different than being a hostage in any situation. Except hostages get manhandled less and overall treated much better than your average prisoner. That should tell you something.

Posted by Vanessa on 7.14.10 at 23:17

I think that it is a smart idea to have the prisoners pay for there stay. This gives them motivation to stay away. There are so many people out there that would rather stay in jail because it is a free roof over their heads. They need to find jobs and stay out of jail. That way they can make their own payroll and not have to worry about paying the jail back for their stay.

Posted by payroll solutions on 3.7.11 at 16:01

Hi, first of all let me tell you, you have got a great site. I'm interested in looking for more of such topics and would like to have further information. Hope to see the next blog soon. This is really a great site, thanks.

Posted by no fax payday loans on 5.13.11 at 2:21

Really great post! I find that your posted tips really help me reduce stress in my life. There is no better feeling that that stress ‘weight’ being lifted off your chest. Thanks for sharing and keep it up.


Posted by gary corbett on 5.16.11 at 5:55

Great book! Very helpful. It helped me understand how to get the most out of my insurance coverage. The clever anecdotes made normally dry material come alive. After reading it I evaluated my family's coverage and made changes to fit our "profile". And I finally resolved a dispute in my favor!

Posted by pool filters on 6.21.11 at 9:05

Certainly, there are plenty of details as to take into account. That is a great spot to appear. I offer the above thoughts of inspiration in general, but clearly there are questions as to appear in the most important thing is to work in good faith sincere. I don 't know if best practices have emerged around such things, but I'm sure that their work is clearly identified as a fair game. Boys and girls feel the impact of just one moment of pleasure for the rest of their lives.

Posted by SMS Gateway on 7.27.11 at 15:27

Its my great pleasure to visit your blog and to enjoy your great posts here. I like it a lot. I can feel that you paid much attention for those articles, as all of them make sense and are very useful

Posted by ZakBady sportowe on 7.31.11 at 6:38

That actually is not much coming from an amateur editor like me, but that's all I could think after enjoying your posts. Unlike elsewhere. You really know what you're talking too much. So much that I wanted to explore more. Your blog has become a springboard for me, my friend. Thanks for the detailed trip. I really liked the messages I have read so far

Posted by mensagens de aniversario on 10.13.11 at 13:29

I could not be more proud of Sheriff Garvey! Kudo's to him for taking the time to help explain why this draconian piece of leglislation can never function as anything other than further unneeded punishment.

Posted by Homes For Rent In Sun Valley on 11.22.11 at 12:30

Brilliant! This is a really marvelous stuff for me. Must agree that you are one of the coolest blogger. I was curious to see a stuff like that. Fabulous post

Posted by Homes For Sales In Sun Valley on 11.22.11 at 12:31

this is really an exciting and informative stuff being published here, I may not be surprised to see the different kind of reactions from peoples as some may like it and some don’t ... bt it does not matter to me as I am fan of innovation and always like to see new things happening, no matter watever is the field/ industry or area of life in the world..... I appreciate it and up to some extent it has given me good knowledge as well..... thanks !!!

Posted by Westin extractors on 11.25.11 at 17:16
I love going to the tournament silver cheats allies in the duel me on top of a high pole,casting flame shock and thunderstorming them. It's just fun to punt a gnome a distance of 300 feet to his death! (Murder in the stadium tournament players do not count on this one, and it's a reliable way to get kills, without the danger!)

That is off course assumes that you are not dueling someone else tow =) happy hunting!

Ps If you want to try this method, poles are on the top of the finished coliseum. Make sure that you have got to ally with some spell it instantly (to make sure that they are dying on the landing) and the storm / typhoon / shot (LOL). Okay, I admit strike is not workingfor this goal, but we need...thanks

Posted by The Best OpenVPN Service on 12.19.11 at 8:17

Thank you for the explanation. It is really helpful.

Posted by ScotWetherington on 12.21.11 at 4:55



New User/Guest?

Find it Here:
search type:
search in:

« Previous   |   Next »
Print Email RSS feed

In Satoshi We Trust?
Outside the Cage
How solid is the case for organic and cage-free egg production?
Between the Lines: Practically Organic
Does the organic farming movement make perfect the enemy of good?
Scene Here: The Kitchen Garden Farm
From Our Readers
Profiles in Survival
Young business owners in retail-rich Northampton get along by getting along.
The Burning Question
Neighbors of a proposed wood-burning plant in Springfield cry foul air