Fayette officials hope new prison will offer more opportunities to use technology
Amy Fauth/for the Observer-Reporter
Fayette County Prison Board member Sheriff James Custer, left, and prison Warden Jeffrey Myers said the county’s existing lockup doesn’t support many technology-based programs, something they hope is remedied as county officials plan for a new facility.
Amy Fauth/For the Observer-Reporter
Westmoreland County Court of Common Pleas Judge Tim Krieger conducts a bench warrant hearing with an inmate at the Westmoreland County Prison using video technology.
The Fayette County Prison doesn’t offer its inmates the technological advantages that other county lockups do. It can’t, officials said.
“Technology-wise, the prison is not updated for it,” Warden Jeffrey Myers said.
Built in 1889, Fayette’s prison is the oldest in the state, said Myers. He believes it’s the second oldest in the country.
Sheriff James Custer, who sits on the county’s prison board, said the facility lacks adequate space, not only for technology, but also for additional programs that as he put it, “weren’t even a thought for a prison in 1900.” The facility as it stands doesn’t have adequate space for mental health and drug counseling, parenting classes and other programs, which are a necessity for today’s correctional facilities, officials said.
It’s a problem Custer and Myers are hopeful will be remedied as county officials move toward a new facility, prioritizing technology and programming.
Last year, Fayette County commissioners received the deed for the former U.S. Army Reserve Center in Uniontown as a proposed site for a new prison. Commissioner Vincent Vicites said Thursday that requests for qualifications for an architect and engineer are due by the end of this month. After interviews, officials will choose those who will design the lockup.
Custer and Myers know the process won’t happen overnight. In the meantime, however, Myers said he is committed to using as much technology as the county can afford to use in the current facility. He’s working on bringing video visitation to the prison through the use of tablets. The visitations would have similar restrictions to face-to-face visits and would be on a scheduled basis.
It’s a program that’s already in place in Westmoreland County, where inmates have access to tablets.
Soon, officials there said, inmates there will be able to share photos and send and receive messages. The hope is that continued contact will strengthen their connection to family and friends – an important factor for rehabilitation.
Westmoreland County also offers a video visitation program – a sort of Skype for Inmates. It’s something the existing Fayette County facility isn’t equipped for, Myers said.
It comes at a cost in Westmoreland – $15 for 25 minutes – and must be scheduled one day in advance in accordance with the prison’s visitation rules and hours. And those video visits, like phone calls, are recorded.
Sheriff Jonathan Held said the only complaint they have received is related to the costs.
“Some people have complained that it should be a free service,” he said.
But Dr. Holly Adair, chairwoman of the Department of Psychology at California University of Pennsylvania, said another concern should be privacy.
“(You) are now creating a permanent record of every interaction with no guarantee about how they will be used,” said Adair
In addition, Adair said that the variability of video visitation across facilities (federal, state and local) is a concern.
“Some will have it, some will not. Some will count it as part of the total allowable visits, some will not. Some will compromise confidentiality, some will not. Incarceration should be the same experience no matter where the time is served,” she said.
Most agree that video visits should be used as a supplement and not replace the face-to-face interaction. Adair agrees.
“Visitation is part of that, and face-to face visits have their advantages in that they are the most typical interactions we have with others. If video visits increase that interaction and help children avoid the potential trauma of security procedures and seeing a parent in a prison environment, then they too may help. Certainly, more research needs to be done to discover their impact.”
While there’s disparity in video visitation, one of the things both facilities offer is the ability to conduct common pleas court hearings for inmates via video. Arraignments and other types of hearings are also conducted that way, officials in both areas said.
It has realized a savings in time and money, and offers increased security because inmates don’t always have to be transported to appear in person, officials in both areas said.
“The main security advantage of video hearings is that it greatly reduces the risk of prisoner escape,” said Held. “Financially, it saves on fuel and possibly worker hours.”