Former detainees and witnesses tell committee commissary, phone and property rules create hardship for people leaving custody

Public witnesses told the House Corrections and Institutions Committee on Thursday that policies and practices governing commissary profits, phone accounts and property returns create practical obstacles for people released from Vermont correctional facilities.

Jason Brosh, a resident who testified about his incarceration, told the committee the canteen — or commissary — generates profits that are supposed to flow to a recreation fund but that, in his account, much of the money is used to pay staff and a cable bill rather than organized family or prosocial programming. “The canteen, the profits off of the canteen, there's a kickback, right, to the state of Vermont,” Brosh said, and he described the rec fund being used in part to pay a rec coordinator’s salary.

Costs for telephone and video visits were repeatedly raised. Witnesses said families must deposit money into vendor accounts to allow calls and video visits; witnesses reported typical costs in facilities of about $2.70 for a 15‑minute phone call and about $5 for a 15‑minute video visit. One witness said the vendor account model and call rates are a major barrier for people whose families cannot afford repeated calls.

Property and identification practices at booking and release were another focus. Joshua Tripp, a former detainee now in treatment court, said police often keep a person’s personal property after arrest and that detainees frequently leave court without their belongings. “I was released in my prison uniform,” he told the committee, and added that multiple requests for a non‑driver ID went unanswered while he was detained. Joshua said that lack of ID and property complicated access to pharmacy prescriptions and housing immediately after release.

Laura Carter, who identified herself as a former Department of Corrections records manager, told the committee she could not speak for DOC today but recommended committee follow‑up with DOC records and property staff to clarify whether property is retained, mailed or made available to families; she suggested asking DOC officials to explain current procedures and timelines for property return.

Why it matters: witnesses said the combined effect of limited access to contacts (cell phone address books), high phone and commissary costs and withheld property places people at heightened risk on release — without money, ID or phone numbers, newly released people can struggle to reach treatment providers, housing or family support.

Process and oversight questions arose. Witnesses said commissary profits are supposed to go to a rec fund with inmate participation in a rec committee, but they reported not seeing such committees formed. They also described inconsistent practices: detained people, who may be in custody only a few days, often do not get property returned promptly because staff treat short stays as uncertain court trips.

Committee members asked DOC staff to confirm whether policies changed last year on ID issuance and to provide written procedures for property retrieval and commissary accounting. No formal action was taken during the hearing; the committee requested follow‑up information.

Quotes from witnesses summarized the practical effects: “If you don't come in with money...you just don't,” Joshua said of commissary and phone access. The committee asked DOC and contractor representatives to provide data and written policies to clarify timelines, vendor rules and whether commissary profits are being used in accord with stated rec fund purposes.