On August 14, 2008, the following administrative staff were present at the Town Hall meeting in the Protestant
chapel: Warden Robert Ayers Jr., Chief Deputy Warden Max Lemon, Associate Warden John
Curzon, Community Resource Manager Laura Bowman, Captain Cahayla, Captain Dorsey, Lieutenant Luna, and Sergeant Lowe (aka, “Smokey”). The question being addressed was “how” integration is going to happen at San Quentin. Thirty questions were submitted to the administration in advance that were given to the MAC by prisoners in the general population. The questions and the administration’s answers were handed out to the
audience. MAC Chairman, Sammy Johnson, read the questions and Chief Dep. Warden Lemon was designated to read off the answers and further explain them for the purposes of clarity and for subsequent airing on SQTV.
The following is a summary of the answers to these questions:
• Progressive disciplinary action will be taken on those who refuse to comply.
• Case factors and prior prison conduct will be used, when and where verified.
• If you have a cellmate when this is implemented, you’ll keep him.
• There will be no accommodations for religious beliefs, or sexual orientation.
• A bed can be lost, even if returned to the prison the same day from the hospital.
• A bed can be lost if out to court for less than a day.
• This is not intended to ignite a racial incident.
• MAC will continue to have representatives from each race.
• Lock downs will be accommodated. Those with ADA issues will continue to be accommodated. During the Town Hall meeting, there was an opportunity given for individuals from the population to step up to an open-mic to ask more questions. Robert Beckett asked the question that was given the most applause by the audience of over
300: “Why wasn’t this begun at the Level IV Prisons where the real problems are going to be?” Warden
Ayers chose to respond to the question, saying that he agreed in substance that it is a problem. And he felt that it would have been better to begin there, rather than at a Level II prison. He spoke about those prisoners on an “Honor Yard” in Lancaster Prison, who, if they were removed from the program due to disciplinary action, were subject to retaliation for the positive choices they had made. What mostly came from the number of people who spoke was that this process didn’t make any sense to them, and that there seemed to be more being put into the policy than what the settlement indicated. Chief Dep. Warden Lemon stated that the terms of the settlement were
being followed. Warden Ayers interjected that if these terms were not acceptable, then individuals ought to appeal the decision. An interview of prisoners on the Lower Yard from differing races resulted in some interesting commentary on the issues. Most of the problems didn’t focus on the race of the individual, but more on the
issues of values and respect. A Lifer, who lives near the Lieutenant/Sergeant’s office stated: “They’ve already got enough people coming up to complain about the cellie they got.” He went on to say that the amount of problems, “With your own race,” that are already a part of trying to live in a cell the size of a closet, would be 10-times worse
if they added in another race. It was not the color of the skin which concerned most, but the values that the
person held. A Black Lifer, having served over 30 years said, “If the guy comes in my cell, of any race, bringing with him stupidity (drug & alcohol use, weapons, gang-activity), he’s coming right back out!” This was the
sentiment of a Hispanic Lifer, who, with over 20 years served, said that he understood that the integration
was not supposed to be “forced,” and that he ought to have the choice to decide whom he would cell-up with.
Of very clear concern to the many Lifers interviewed, was the issue of trust. A White Lifer explained,
“I’ve got no problem with living with another race, but if I came home to find some knuckle-head sitting on my bed, drinking my coffee, eating my food, and reading a letter from my wife (while looking at her photo), it’s going to be a problem…” Another Lifer stated that he felt that there should be some chance for guys, who at least have a lot of clean time (time without any disciplinary problems), to be able to get some sort of a “convenience move” if they have a person they simply aren’t compatible with. They are all concerned that, should they be confronted with a person from another race who lacks in respect for them, and a fight comes from it, they’ll find themselves confronted with others of the same race coming to their aid. “They want to just look at the race,” said a Black man, “and that we should get along as they do in the rest of society, but, n that society, they wouldn’t live with a person who has nothing in common with them.” The resulting problem of being confronted with a person whom we refuse to share space with, then results in disciplinary action being taken. Lifers, with decades of “clean time,” are suddenly placed in the position of having to face a Parole Board that now views them as being “anti-social.” Meanwhile, they may well already be on a baseball team, in a group, and working with that same race year after year after year. Many of North Block Lifers see that, having shown themselves to be highly responsible, they will now be forced to live shoulder to shoulder with a person who’s failed to take responsibility for his own life. From
everything in the news, integration is coming, and from it, some difficult questions have yet to be considered. Balancing the inevitable change of life, with the need for a degree of certainty in the way things will operate, isn’t yet clear.
