Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Prison Operations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Carbon County prison board reviews operations: work-release income, population and water-well pause
Summary
The Carbon County prison board received monthly reports on maintenance, work-release revenue and inmate population, and discussed pausing work on a proposed well after a DEP review flagged insufficient flow. The board approved the warden and personnel reports and asked staff to monitor retention-pond inspection costs.
The Carbon County Prison Board received updates on maintenance, the work-release program and inmate population during its public meeting.
Rodney (maintenance) reported calibration and inspection work, including a "3 3 4" calibration report for a machine that checks ratings, distribution and entry-point checks, and cleaning of filters at the animal shelter areas. He also noted routine plumbing repairs. No additional board action was taken on the maintenance report.
Frank presented the work-release report. He said six inmates participated during the month and five were currently on the program. Net income for the month was $11,390.60. The board heard a breakdown of disbursements: $2,675 for room and board, $400 in court costs, $8,255.60 in inmate payments and $60 to escrow. A copy of the monthly in-house work report was included with the materials.
Warden Gordon summarized population figures for September: 75 admissions (59 male, 16 female) and 66 releases (51 male, 15 female). He reported an average population for the month of 133 inmates and a snapshot count of 132 (111 male, 21 female). Gordon also reported 12 transports during the month. The board approved the warden's report by motion (mover Kayla; second Rocky).
The board accepted the personnel report by motion (mover Kellen; second Rocky).
Under new business, the board discussed a DEP report concerning "well number 2." The meeting record states the board will halt further proceeding on that well for now because the agency reported insufficient flow and recommended further study or possibly drilling another well, with no guarantee of improved results. Board members raised the potential cost of an extended shutdown, including trucking water and setting up pumps, and asked staff to look into inspection and corrosion-control requirements that had been linked to the well permit.
Board members also noted they receive a recurring $500 annual bill associated with the retention pond and questioned whether inspectors visit the site in person; the record reflects frustration with paying the fee without clarity on who inspects the facility. No formal vote was taken on the well or the retention-pond fee during the public session.
The board reported that the earlier executive session covered contracts, personnel and grants; no confidential details were disclosed in open session.
