Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Inmate Welfare Fund topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board to review inmate welfare fund uses after audit; public raises concerns about stipend and maintenance hiring
Summary
Board members said internal audits of the inmate welfare (MA Welfare) fund are complete and the county is studying how other counties use similar funds; the fund balance was reported at $4.5 million. A public commenter alleged maintenance hiring bias and said an incarcerated person did not receive a $25 stipend.
Delaware County officials reported on Sept. 9 that the balance of the MA Welfare Fund (also referred to in discussion as the inmate welfare/trust fund) stood at $4,500,000 and said internal audits of the fund are complete and under review.
A board member working with internal auditors said the audits — statutorily required, the member said — have been conducted in the county controller’s office and that staff are comparing other counties’ policies for permissible uses. “We do financial audits of the Inmate Welfare Fund and Trust Fund… the audits are done, they’re sitting on my desk, and I’ve gotta get them out,” the board member said. The member said they are reviewing Lancaster County and York County policies as examples and believe the fund could be used for additional items in line with law.
Board member Kitchor Hoopes (identified in the transcript) noted two requests raised in an outside report card: drinking cups and shower slippers for incarcerated people. Hoopes asked staff and the solicitor to review whether the MA Welfare Fund could finance those items and suggested the board aim for an answer by the next monthly meeting.
Executive Director (unnamed) and other staff said they are receptive and will examine purchasing and procurement implications, including whether procurement volumes would change pricing and whether any legal impediments exist. “I would think that those are items that would be appropriate for that fund, but we’ll wait to hear back,” an official said.
During the second public comment period, Kimberly Brown (Toddwin) criticized the appointment and role of Joe McCreery, who was identified earlier in the meeting as having 41 years of service and as a facility maintenance resource, and alleged the maintenance hiring and contractor arrangements show bias. Brown also alleged that an incarcerated person held for 30 days did not receive the $25 stipend and asked for an audit of how the inmate fund is administered and how stipends are distributed.
Officials told the board they will complete a legal review with the solicitor’s office and staff and will aim to report back at the next meeting with recommendations and a determination whether the requested items and any other permissible uses should be adopted.
Ending — Board members directed staff to continue the audit review, consult the solicitor, and return with a recommendation by next month on permissible purchases and any operational changes to stipend distribution.
