Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Corrections Work Crew topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Department of Corrections presents community work crew program; resident urges council to reassess use of incarcerated labor
Summary
State corrections officials described the Class 4 community work crew program and its screening, re-entry goals and contract model; a resident asked the council to explore alternatives and safeguards, citing the program's $2.75/hour wage and concerns about voluntariness.
State Department of Corrections officials briefed the Snowqualami City Council on June 8 about the Class 4 community work crew (CWC) program, outlining its objectives, eligibility screening and operational constraints. The presentation prompted public comment urging the city to reassess its reliance on incarcerated labor because of wage and voluntariness concerns.
Phil (Philip) Bennett, deputy director of Parks and Public Works (who introduced DOC speakers), introduced Arban Koa ("statewide classification manager for the Department of Corrections") and Dan Allen (superintendent of the Monroe Correctional Complex). DOC presented the program's goals as supporting re-entry and community services: tailored case management, re-entry job fairs, volunteer programming, and five crews operating under regional contracts. Officials said crews support public works and nonprofit projects while offering skills and supervised outside work to incarcerated individuals approaching release.
Council members pressed on program details. DOC described strict screening filters (candidates housed in camp settings, generally six years or less to release; exclusions for sex offenses and recent violent infractions; drug-free infraction period) and said screening aims to protect community safety. DOC also said participation is considered a privilege rather than mandatory and noted some limitations on the types of jobs offered due to staffing and budget constraints.
Questions focused on wages and funding. DOC stated the hourly pay for CWC work is $2.75 per hour ("$2.75 an hour, and it's the highest they can"), and explained that hourly rates are set by legislation rather than the department and that contracts with agencies cover some program costs while state operational budgets cover overtime and other expenses. DOC officials also said that program availability and contract opportunities have diminished over time with fewer outside partners available.
Public comment: Jesse Scarupa, a Snowqualami Ridge resident and organizer, asked the council to review alternatives to relying on incarcerated workers and to explore safeguards if contracts continue. Scarupa said the current pay rate is a fraction of minimum wage and cited national reports that raise concerns about coercion in prison labor programs; he urged the council to direct staff to investigate workforce alternatives, cost-sharing, and contract protections to ensure voluntariness and tangible benefits to participants.
Why it matters: The CWC program supplies low-cost labor for municipal maintenance and nonprofit partners, which can reduce operating costs for public works. But community members and councilors must weigh those near-term gains against ethical concerns, statutory wage structures, and potential reputational or legal risks.
What's next: Council did not take formal action on the DOC presentation during the meeting. Public comment requested that staff examine alternatives and contract safeguards; the administration and council must decide whether to pursue further review or contract revisions.
